sunbeamtiger.co.uk

Follow on? Not sure what your getting at there?

If by that i think you mean that that flood gates will be open and everyone and their dog will be in the shed faking up Tigers then i think thats nonsense. Not so.

To carry out a re-shell there would have to be a REAL Tiger to begin with, no one's talking about sticking a Chevy and a three speed in a series 3 and calling it a Tiger.

If all of us could get past this bickering and doubt i'm sure that the CLUB could set down a full set of identifiers that would serve to put this issue to bed once and for all.

We've all got the marque at heart, work together.

It's a pointless argument to be honest Paul as we all know that apart from a few examples, no-one is going to declare a reshell as it would instantly halve the value of their Tiger.

On the other hand, if things and attitudes do change, there will be several people who will be rubbing their hands together as it will give them a green light to resurrect that envelope Tiger that they have in a drawer somewhere.

Given the actual acquisition and man-hour labour costs (assuming not free labors), would there be a more accurate cost benefit to re-shell or correct factory pattern metal restoration? Keeping in mind that a shell still requires more than a bit of alterations.

martin172 wrote:It's a pointless argument to be honest Paul as we all know that apart from a few examples, no-one is going to declare a reshell as it would instantly halve the value of their Tiger.

On the other hand, if things and attitudes do change, there will be several people who will be rubbing their hands together as it will give them a green light to resurrect that envelope Tiger that they have in a drawer somewhere.

My sentiments exactly Martin. Unfortunately we live in a world of greed and deception and these activities are occurring too often. This is why I have doubt about the DVLA recommendations. Making it legal to swap ID's isn't the answer in my eyes.

That is where the follow on will stem from.

After 37 pages, one item can be agreed, there will always be owners that have there opinions on what is genuine and what is not. Over time, the cars will change hands and the new owners will have there own viewpoints. So why don't we enjoy our cars and, because we care, inform the buyer what they are getting. I also think in 10 to 20 years, the new owners will take the information as its given, they will then need a road to drive it on with all but emmision free cars banned in 2020.

PS my Mk 1 is progressing, my V with the holbray engine gets a run on the weekend. enjoy.

you do need more than just a couple of id tags to make the car correct .the top hats and tunnel are the hardest bits to find

alpine5gt wrote:After 37 pages, one item can be agreed, there will always be owners that have there opinions on what is genuine and what is not. Over time, the cars will change hands and the new owners will have there own viewpoints. So why don't we enjoy our cars and, because we care, inform the buyer what they are getting. I also think in 10 to 20 years, the new owners will take the information as its given, they will then need a road to drive it on with all but emmision free cars banned in 2020.

PS my Mk 1 is progressing, my V with the holbray engine gets a run on the weekend. enjoy.

I don't think there is any questioning all of our enthusiasm when it comes to our Tiger's. For me personally, I have this gut feeling things may get out of hand (as I said, that's just me).

garyv8tiger wrote:You do need more than just a couple of id tags to make the car correct .the top hats and tunnel are the hardest bits to find

Only problem with that, a decent panel man could probably knock some up. I guess it comes down to prospective owners doing their homework.

gtsmrt wrote:I don't think there is any questioning all of our enthusiasm when it comes to our Tiger's. For me personally, I have this gut feeling things may get out of hand (as I said, that's just me).

I agree, however the true believers have their pride and joy and also pride themselves that they have a good example of the marque.

That I have!!

0neoffive wrote:Given the actual acquisition and man-hour labour costs (assuming not free labors), would there be a more accurate cost benefit to re-shell or correct factory pattern metal restoration? Keeping in mind that a shell still requires more than a bit of alterations.

I would depend on how bad the car is. Part of the arguement here is that all the 'correct factory pattern' parts are already part of an Alpine shell.

What your touching on here is, what my big question way back was. What constitutes a Reshell. What is the definition of reshell. Ive tried give my opinion which has not been discussed. I also would like to know what you would be left with if you cut off all the rusty parts such as wings, wheel arches, sills, floors, crucifix etc, all the usual stuff that is repaired/replaced. I can tell you you wouldnt be left with much! Then whats the problem in cutting out the corresponding good parts of an Alpine shell and welding the two together.

To my mind the later would be more authentic than a reshell, or a car that has been heavily restored with after market or OEM panels. My big problem with this discussion is there is a lot of talk about morality but no specifics. Without that I cant see a diffinitive answer.

I would depend on how bad the car is. Part of the arguement here is that all the 'correct factory pattern' parts are already part of an Alpine shell.

To my mind the later would be more authentic than a reshell, or a car that has been heavily restored with after market or OEM panels. My big problem with this discussion is there is a lot of talk about morality but no specifics. Without that I cant see a diffinitive answer.[/quote]

Morality is in the declarations: Our original personal Tiger has been raced/wrecked/rusted/rebuilt/restored several times. We've owned it since new, but more things have been repaired/replaced over the decades than ever came from Jensen. It currently sits with all new metal waiting to be put back together. I could not call it an "original" car.

0neoffive wrote:I would depend on how bad the car is. Part of the arguement here is that all the 'correct factory pattern' parts are already part of an Alpine shell.

To my mind the later would be more authentic than a reshell, or a car that has been heavily restored with after market or OEM panels. My big problem with this discussion is there is a lot of talk about morality but no specifics. Without that I cant see a diffinitive answer.

Morality is in the declarations: Our original personal Tiger has been raced/wrecked/rusted/rebuilt/restored several times. We've owned it since new, but more things have been repaired/replaced over the decades than ever came from Jensen. It currently sits with all new metal waiting to be put back together. I could not call it an "original" car.[/quote]

This is precisely my point, you talk about morality which has been done to death, I bet even Robins bored of it but what I have been trying to get across is the hard facts, the desriptive part, the part that says this is where a Tiger starts and this is where an Alpine stops. Unfortunately there seems to be 3-4 of us that can see this and we are the only people that
are fighting the save the Tiger corner because we have specialist experience / skills in knowing the difference between the cars.

Everyone else seems to be paying someone to fix their cars , presumably because the car is more----blur blur (I dont want to presme!??) Are you scared you may be fooled by someone with better skills than you? (thats the general 'you' nothing personal).

I want:

'this is a reshell------------------' and
'this is a rebuild-------------------

Is there anybody out there apart fro Paul and my self that would to have a stab at a description without morality?

meadowhog wrote:I want:

'this is a reshell------------------' and
'this is a rebuild-------------------

Is there anybody out there apart fro Paul and my self that would to have a stab at a description without morality?

Isn't it plainly obvious the difference between the two? One you are replacing the complete uni-body (re-shell), the other repairing the uni-body. What people need to realise with re-shells is that you effectively no longer have a Tiger (As the modifications to the Alpine, weren't undertaken by Rootes/Jensen). The rebuild would be the preference to ensure originality. Now this is a fairly broad statement as the degree of the repairs would vary depending upon the body condition.

gtsmrt wrote:

meadowhog wrote:I want:

'this is a reshell------------------' and
'this is a rebuild-------------------

Is there anybody out there apart fro Paul and my self that would to have a stab at a description without morality?

Isn't it plainly obvious the difference between the two? One you are talking replacing the complete uni-body (re-shell), the other repairing the uni-body. What people need to realise with re-shells is that you effectively no longer have a Tiger (As the modifications to the Alpine, weren't undertaken by Rootes/Jensen). The rebuild would be the preference to ensure originality. Now this is a fairly broad statement as the degree of the repairs would vary depending upon the body condition.

Weve moved on from whether a reshell is acceptable but would a front bulkhead including front chasis legs, wheel arches, top hats, kept as one unit and then planted into an Alpine shell be classed as a rebuild. None of the Jensen work would be un-done/re-done