'Maybe there is definitions available to the TAC inspectors that
should not be promulgated to the masses on the off chance that some of
the more unscrupulous types will use this
information to deliberately build a "Tiger" to sell for Thousands more
than it is worth.'
Do you really think that the TAC 'secrets' are so obtuse that no one can
figure it out? We are not talking about the secrets of the universe here.
Maybe some of the 'real' documented Tigers are rebodies. Think about it.
Jeff
______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Re: Conversion Conversation
Author: Larry Allbritton <larryall@pacbell.net> at INTERNET
Date: 10/25/97 10:15 AM
HW200 wrote:
>
> Jeff at TT believes that after his post that there is "an end to this issue".
> In fact this thread keeps unraveling throughout the list, arising in several
> different forms at least on a monthly basis.
>
> Point 1: Norm makes mistakes. So does his book. So do we all. So before you
> start a witch hunt or ride someone out of town, all the correct information
> should be in place. Questions like: "Can the current owner tell the difference
> between an assembly line Tiger and an Alger" should be asked. If unknowingly
> someone is selling a rebody or an Alpine V8, how can they be truly guilty. If
> they can't tell the difference now they couldn't when they bought it, and
> chances are they are in denial of it being a "fake" anyway. It's hard to point
> fingers without having all the correct info. "I dont think fingers
are being pointed here, Hank. We have a car being represented as a MKII
for $19500. That is a lot of money for an Alpine. It is also possible
that the current owner got burned when he bought it and paid way too
much for it. So now perhaps he is trying to recoup his cost by passing
it on to the next unsuspecting soul. STOA's TAC program is simply
labeling cars submitted voluntarily to the program as authentic. It
they are not authentic then NOTHING happens; the owner goes on his
way and that is the end of it. TAC is one way for a potential buyer
to get what he thinks he is paying for. Norm's book is another way.
I know that you would not want to go out and buy something for thousands
of dollars and find out later that you had been screwed either
deliberatley or unintentionally. You want to get what you are paying
for, right? So any information we can get out there in Tigerdom is
in everyone's interest and maybe especially for the potential new
owners.
>
> Secondly what constitutes a "fake"? When does a total restoration become a
> rebody? If you are using Alpine body panels(manufactured at the same time the
> Tiger was by the same company) to replace rusted Tiger panels, that can
> create suspicion too. Definitions need to be outlined, and I agree awareness
> is good when it is based on correct info. Incorrect information exists, and
> it is destructive, as are witch hunts and driving unknowing individuals out of
> town over a car, even a Tiger. Hank, did the car originally come
down the Jensen Assembly line? And was it originally registerd as
a Tiger? I mean, come on, having the script from an original Tiger
on a Alpine body obviously does not make it a Tiger. Use some
common sense here. Maybe there is definitions available to the TAC
inspectors that should not be promulgated to the masses on the off
chance that some of the more unscrupulous types will use this
information to deliberately build a "Tiger" to sell for Thousands more
than it is worth.
I wouldn't mind having an Alger to kick around in but I sure as hell
am not going to pay some guy $19500 and have him tell me it is a MKII
when I could have bought an Alger for say $6000.
> Hank
--
Larry Allbritton
B9472723
|