Tiger/Alpine re-shelling discussion thread.

Post general questions relating to Tigers
meadowhog
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: South Bucks

Post by meadowhog » Tue Dec 27, 2011 12:06 am

Dear Red Racer and Micheal

I dont think you are different in your reasons for a common desscription of waht entails a Tiger.

Can I suggest you both agree on what that desciption entails so that the club can vote on what a legal description should be. Should that be from rad mounts and exhaust mounts (subjective but physical) to body tags and paperwork, again subjective as I have a JAL plate and green logbook to which the owner cannot be traced of af good body but modified everything else.

Best Regards Happy Xmas and new year
AKA Sunbeam Simon

gtsmrt
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Post by gtsmrt » Tue Dec 27, 2011 12:18 am

I wasn't aware that this was being voted on by the STOC members. Has there been some debate within the club as well?
Robin O'Dell
Tiger MK 1a
ENJOYING THE EXPERIENCE AS DAD WOULD HAVE

michael-king
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:35 am
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Post by michael-king » Tue Dec 27, 2011 12:22 am

Red Race Tiger wrote:If a Tiger retain's it's original paperwork (Logbook) Vin Plate, and has been rebodied to a recognised standard how can it be anything other than a Tiger by name.....although one clearly not built by Jenson we'd all agree.
I should write a book..... :lol:
Paul,

The way i look at it is that if the original car is to far gone then you scrap the VIN's.. the body you transplant parts into should not loose its ID, it wasnt beyond salvage, it still exists but with new running gear and a couple of different panels.

As for my responses to you.. on several occasions in this thread you have attributed things to me I have NEVER said implied or even believe in, you also cut and edited posts to create different contentions.... i do take issue with that and wont stand for it.
Michael King
63 Alpine SII - 65 Alpine SIVGT
65 Tiger MKI - 66 Tiger MKIA
Image

michael-king
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:35 am
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Post by michael-king » Tue Dec 27, 2011 12:27 am

meadowhog wrote:Dear Red Racer and Micheal

I dont think you are different in your reasons for a common desscription of waht entails a Tiger.

Can I suggest you both agree on what that desciption entails so that the club can vote on what a legal description should be. Should that be from rad mounts and exhaust mounts (subjective but physical) to body tags and paperwork, again subjective as I have a JAL plate and green logbook to which the owner cannot be traced of af good body but modified everything else.

Best Regards Happy Xmas and new year
AKA Sunbeam Simon
Simon, It's not for Paul or I to determine.. and as far as i understand the STOC already has a description/definition of what determines a Tiger in that they support the TAC system.. so think that is not in question.

This discussion is that several people here do not agree with the TAC system and believe that transplanting things into an Alpine and switching VIN's allows the car to represented as that Tiger. Again.. i have no issue with transplants.. but believe that swapping the VIN is simply a matter of deception. There is no reason i can see to do that unless you want to represent the car as something it is not.
Michael King
63 Alpine SII - 65 Alpine SIVGT
65 Tiger MKI - 66 Tiger MKIA
Image

meadowhog
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: South Bucks

Post by meadowhog » Tue Dec 27, 2011 12:48 am

Which is why I believe you are strongest placed to put a definition of what constitutuse a Tiger. Your belief is one end of the spectrum which is valued. As in my 1st post a rotten Tiger documented as bit by bit restoration is classed as something different to an all rust cut away in one go Tiger to a replaced/restored with Original Alpine parts or hand made unorthentic parts.

From what I can see the TAC is open to improvement from people like yourself to prevent desception.

Simon

meadowhog
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: South Bucks

Post by meadowhog » Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:01 am

Hi gtsmart

I dont believe there is a vote just yet, but for those that think it is very important maybe there sould be?

Simon

gtsmrt
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Post by gtsmrt » Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:15 am

Hi Simon,

Rust repair in my opinion is a different kettle of fish, but does raise some other questions in itself as you stated. As has been stated by Michael, certain areas are prone to rusting out and are quite often replaced, but the majority of the monocoque remains so there is no question about its authenticity. In regards to a heavily rusted Tiger and you choose to repair it by manufacturing your own parts is a difficult one, but essentially saving it is what you are doing, not re-shelling it.

Regards, Robin.
Robin O'Dell
Tiger MK 1a
ENJOYING THE EXPERIENCE AS DAD WOULD HAVE

gtsmrt
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Post by gtsmrt » Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 am

meadowhog wrote:Hi gtsmart

I dont believe there is a vote just yet, but for those that think it is very important maybe there sould be?

Simon
Unless there are some questionable models around the club, I don't think there is any need for a vote on what constitutes an authentic Tiger. In my opinion that is clear cut. I don't think a vote would change anyone's views as seen by this forum topic (always going to be differing views).
Robin O'Dell
Tiger MK 1a
ENJOYING THE EXPERIENCE AS DAD WOULD HAVE

65beam
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:46 pm

tiger

Post by 65beam » Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:01 am

michael,
just out of curiosity, do you think that a rebodied tiger could never be tac'd? and if so,why?

michael-king
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:35 am
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Re: tiger

Post by michael-king » Tue Dec 27, 2011 9:09 am

65beam wrote:michael,
just out of curiosity, do you think that a rebodied tiger could never be tac'd? and if so,why?
Bob, If someone knew enough about the production process and used the same methods to modify the body on the key TAC points of inspection, then in theory sure, someone could get a rebody through the TAC process.

As to how many people can do this.. probably not many (yes i know your body man is probably one of them).. as to how many people would be prepared to pay to have such a thing done.. not sure either.

Why BHB you thinking about having a fake made, TAC'ing it and having a big coming out party afterwards.. you could probably make that a dual occasion.
Michael King
63 Alpine SII - 65 Alpine SIVGT
65 Tiger MKI - 66 Tiger MKIA
Image

gtsmrt
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: tiger

Post by gtsmrt » Tue Dec 27, 2011 9:32 am

65beam wrote:just out of curiosity, do you think that a rebodied tiger could never be tac'd? and if so,why?
So is it curiosity, or do you know of a re-bodied Tiger passing a TAC inspection?
Robin O'Dell
Tiger MK 1a
ENJOYING THE EXPERIENCE AS DAD WOULD HAVE

65beam
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:46 pm

tiger

Post by 65beam » Wed Dec 28, 2011 3:09 am

robin,
i've made the statement before that a few of you need to see an alpine and a tiger side by side after they have been totally stripped of all paint,primer,etc.

gtsmrt
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: tiger

Post by gtsmrt » Wed Dec 28, 2011 3:19 am

That will be difficult, but I'm not sure what point are you trying to make? Sure there are similarities, but there are also differences which will also be noticed. We all know that without the Alpine there would have been no Tiger. Even an untrained eye could probably pick them out.
Robin O'Dell
Tiger MK 1a
ENJOYING THE EXPERIENCE AS DAD WOULD HAVE

User avatar
gvickery
Site Admin
Posts: 904
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Surrey

Post by gvickery » Wed Dec 28, 2011 9:08 am

I too am unclear why 65beam is repeating this mantra. I would suggest that the participants in this thread set about trying to find what we can agree upon, so that we may move the debate forward.

The STOC newsletter No 86 (Sept 2011) published original Pressed Steel factory photographs of Tiger and Alpine 'Body in White' (bare metal) shells. The photos were taken in early 1964 as part of a study by Pressed Steel of torsional rigidity after Jensen had gone to work. The two shells are seen hanging side by side and are of course very similar. i.e. one is derived from the other.

However, it has also been said in this thread that the Tiger body was assembled by Pressed Steel differently and separately from the Alpine assemblies. Does anyone need to be reassured about this point?

So, can we all try to agree this much:

1. The Tiger body design is derived from the Alpine.
2. The Tiger body was assembled separately from the Alpine
3. The Pressed Steel Tiger body differs from the Alpine assembly in several ways i.e. Tiger bodies could not be sent to Ryton to be built up as Alpines.

If we get the historical bits sorted we can then pick up the thread and among other things address Paul's views as well.

Graham
STOC Editor

P.S. 15"x10" and upwards copies of these photographs will soon be available via STOC Regalia from £10 each plus P+P

gtsmrt
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Post by gtsmrt » Wed Dec 28, 2011 10:42 am

gvickery wrote:I too am unclear why 65beam is repeating this mantra. I would suggest that the participants in this thread set about trying to find what we can agree upon, so that we may move the debate forward.

The STOC newsletter No 86 (Sept 2011) published original Pressed Steel factory photographs of Tiger and Alpine 'Body in White' (bare metal) shells. The photos were taken in early 1964 as part of a study by Pressed Steel of torsional rigidity after Jensen had gone to work. The two shells are seen hanging side by side and are of course very similar. i.e. one is derived from the other.

However, it has also been said in this thread that the Tiger body was assembled by Pressed Steel differently and separately from the Alpine assemblies. Does anyone need to be reassured about this point?

So, can we all try to agree this much:

1. The Tiger body design is derived from the Alpine.
2. The Tiger body was assembled separately from the Alpine
3. The Pressed Steel Tiger body differs from the Alpine assembly in several ways i.e. Tiger bodies could not be sent to Ryton to be built up as Alpines.

If we get the historical bits sorted we can then pick up the thread and among other things address Paul's views as well.

Graham
STOC Editor

P.S. 15"x10" and upwards copies of these photographs will soon be available via STOC Regalia from £10 each plus P+P
Hi Graham,

I'm absolutely 100% with you and there can be no dispute with your points. What I think should also be the forth point is that an authentic Tiger is only from the Pressed Steel production line or 'special' Tigers (works, prototypes, etc).
The other issues regarding re-shelling in my opinion will always leave us divided, but as I said your three point certainly can't be questioned. I would love to see the pictures when you have them as well.

Regards, Robin.
Robin O'Dell
Tiger MK 1a
ENJOYING THE EXPERIENCE AS DAD WOULD HAVE

Post Reply