My apology to anyone in the TAC community if my words appeared to
misrepresented the group.
>>>In the end it could be possible that they may not issue a TAC sticker yet
>>>not define the car as an "Alger."<<<
I did not intend to imply that TAC declared cars as Algers. I was merely
trying to differentiate a real Tiger that might not show enough evidence (if
even possible) to receive a TAC sticker from an Alpine with Tiger parts that
is commonly known by the term "Alger." To that end I had initially used the
word "declare" in place of "define." On my second read through before I hit
Send, I changed it to "define" in hopes of not giving the wrong impression.
>>>I believe their primary intention is to disqualify cars that are
>>>obviously Alpines with transferred Tiger parts.<<<
In the same way the inverse of "disqualify cars that are obviously Alpines
with transferred Tiger parts" means that only Tigers received the TAC
sticker.
We all have different ways of saying the same thing. I'm married. Ask the
man who knows. :-)
Tom W.
I believe their primary intention is to disqualify cars that are
obviously Alpines with transferred Tiger parts. In the end it could be
possible that they may not issue a TAC sticker yet not define the car as an
"Alger."
For the umpteenth time, No one in the TAC community ever labels anything
with it's certification other than Tigers. The failing of a TAC inspection
in no way brands the vehicle as an "Alger" or any other "thing". There are
other considerations, but body panels, floor panels, etc. are not normally
reasons for TAC rejection. Be aware that attempting to convert an early
Tiger into a MkII for its potential increase in value, is also not viewed as
an appropriate "repair".
Tom Hall
ModTiger Engineering LLC
www.tigerengineering.net
_______________________________________________
Tigers@autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
|