tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: TAC, and the rebuilt Tiger story

To: "Bob Palmer" <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
Subject: Re: TAC, and the rebuilt Tiger story
From: "Rich Atherton" <gumby@connectexpress.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 22:10:37 +1000
    Well these were my own opinions, and how "I" would consider the cars.  I
wasn't infering how TAC or anyone else should consider the cars.  The idea of a
"re-bodied Tiger" hasn't come up that I am aware of.  It's common in the MGB
community, but they aren't borrowing parts from a separate car built to be a
separate car model such as the Alpine and Tiger.  Obviously buying a rebodied
TAC failing Tiger would be better than buying converted Alger..  Again, this is
MY OPINION.....

Rich


>Again, I can't claim to offer "official" TAC policy, but first off, they
>only consider two categories of car; those that are authenticated and those
>that aren't. No "Re-Bodied Tiger" label, no scarlet "A", etc. for those who
>tried and failed


>>
>>    - - -  or if some of the secret Jensen welds, or overlaps or
>>whatever are now missing due to the Alpine parts being used extensively, then
>>the Tiger should be considered a Re-Bodied Tiger.  If all of the secret parts
>>are intact (in-Tac'ed), then it would be a normal restored Tiger.
>>
>>    That's how I would see it.  But then again, I'm not a member of TAC, and
>>won't be buying a Tiger anyway...
>>
>>Rich
>>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>