On Thu, 12 Nov 1998 DLMAssoc@aol.com wrote:
> Actually, when I originally brought up the subject of "new" Triumphs, I was
> trying to get some opinions on judging cars that were built using a completely
> new body and other parts (is a new TR6 frame available yet?). If I build a
> "reproduction" TR6, which I then drive around a lot and then enter a show, is
> it reasonable to judge it in the same class are "real" TR6s?
Purely my own opinion follows, Don. Yes, it is reasonable. It's at least
as reasonable to judge that car as it would be a TR6 that is restored
from the ground up, one that has had every bit of trim and paint replaced
along with most body panels, chrome, etc., etc. When you get right down
to it, it's just one more rather big piece of sheet metal that was
replaced rather than repaired.
(I wonder: do the "new TR6" bodies come with their own unique body
number? Does anyone know?)
And to me it's no different than any of hundreds of TR3s, Spitfires and
the like that are built (and I use that term very literally) around a
clean title and not much else of the original car -- often including a
reproduction Commission number plate stamped with the number on that clean
title. ;-)
And I have no problem with either type of car, so long as the car is done
well (be that "correct and to original specification" or "personalized
and updated"). Me? I still prefer a nice unrestored original, but they're
few and far between.
--Andy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Andrew Mace, President and *
* 10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant *
* Vintage Triumph Register <www.vtr.org> *
* amace@unix2.nysed.gov *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|