Not quite original..
Discussion
It's the reshelling thing that gets me. There's an Escort 'Twin cam' for sale at the moment for £30K. It's not a twin cam, it's a 1300 sport that has a Lotus engine in it. Nice car but it's not a TC
The rest of it I can live with really, engines blow up, seats wear out, suspension gets worn.
The rest of it I can live with really, engines blow up, seats wear out, suspension gets worn.
Tasmin200 said:
It's the reshelling thing that gets me. There's an Escort 'Twin cam' for sale at the moment for £30K. It's not a twin cam, it's a 1300 sport that has a Lotus engine in it. Nice car but it's not a TC
The rest of it I can live with really, engines blow up, seats wear out, suspension gets worn.
This is it exactly.The rest of it I can live with really, engines blow up, seats wear out, suspension gets worn.
There's nothing left of the original vehicle.
Different shell, replacement engine, box, drivetrain and diff from a different (about 10 years newer model, not the same model but the same manufacturer)
Not sure why they didn't rebuild the replacement shell unless it hadn't got an ID.
Things got reshelled in the "old days" of rallying, I knew folk with two cars on the same ID back in the 70's never mind a re shelled crashed car.
With the one I've enquired about today the original car has effectively disappeared. Well maybe apart from the registration.
Anyway just thought I'd say my two pennyworth.
GAjon said:
Had my first TVR over forty years, different engine, box, diff, brakes, suspension, wheels, tyres, paint, bonnet, interior etc , etc, etc.
Still the same car as far as I’m concerned!
I think it is really about time. If the car has an engine change, then later a gearbox change, then later a back axle it is still the same car. If that all gets put in a new shell years later, then it still retains its identity. Still the same car as far as I’m concerned!
If however you get a new shell and put all new bits in then it has no originality - there is no continuity.
Skyedriver said:
Enquired about a very tidy looking classic currently for sale..
Engine and gearbox out of a more recent model,, suspension and back axle upgrade, new interior and has been reshelled.
Talk about Triggers broom. Lovely looking car, great spec but I'm out..
It might still have the original 'dealer' plates, though, for that authentic look Engine and gearbox out of a more recent model,, suspension and back axle upgrade, new interior and has been reshelled.
Talk about Triggers broom. Lovely looking car, great spec but I'm out..
Skyedriver said:
Tasmin200 said:
It's the reshelling thing that gets me. There's an Escort 'Twin cam' for sale at the moment for £30K. It's not a twin cam, it's a 1300 sport that has a Lotus engine in it. Nice car but it's not a TC
The rest of it I can live with really, engines blow up, seats wear out, suspension gets worn.
This is it exactly.The rest of it I can live with really, engines blow up, seats wear out, suspension gets worn.
There's nothing left of the original vehicle.
Different shell, replacement engine, box, drivetrain and diff from a different (about 10 years newer model, not the same model but the same manufacturer)
Not sure why they didn't rebuild the replacement shell unless it hadn't got an ID.
Things got reshelled in the "old days" of rallying, I knew folk with two cars on the same ID back in the 70's never mind a re shelled crashed car.
With the one I've enquired about today the original car has effectively disappeared. Well maybe apart from the registration.
Anyway just thought I'd say my two pennyworth.
Reminds me of a scene in the film The World's End where Gary King is asked if his Granada is the same car his friend sold him in 1989. His reply is "I had to replace the brakes, suspension, exhaust, seats, paneling, carburetor, manifold, whole engine really, mirrors, headlamps. Other than that she is the same old motor."
A car, old or new is an assemble of parts with an ID. ALL parts are replaceable, including the body shell. So, if a car has had a replacement body, whether NOS or from a donor car, it IS still the same car as the ID is identical.
Now, of course a "valuable" classic is always going to be worth more if its all original, but so long as the replacement parts are declared if for sale, i don't see a problem with it and naturally the price should be adjusted for this.
Its when someone acquires a valuable Reg no/ID then claims its the original, that's a deffo no no in my book, what with the tinternet these days though, and places like here that is very difficult, thankfully, to get away with.
Now, of course a "valuable" classic is always going to be worth more if its all original, but so long as the replacement parts are declared if for sale, i don't see a problem with it and naturally the price should be adjusted for this.
Its when someone acquires a valuable Reg no/ID then claims its the original, that's a deffo no no in my book, what with the tinternet these days though, and places like here that is very difficult, thankfully, to get away with.
Mark A S said:
A car, old or new is an assemble of parts with an ID. ALL parts are replaceable, including the body shell. So, if a car has had a replacement body, whether NOS or from a donor car, it IS still the same car as the ID is identical.
Now, of course a "valuable" classic is always going to be worth more if its all original, but so long as the replacement parts are declared if for sale, i don't see a problem with it and naturally the price should be adjusted for this.
Its when someone acquires a valuable Reg no/ID then claims its the original, that's a deffo no no in my book, what with the tinternet these days though, and places like here that is very difficult, thankfully, to get away with.
Now, of course a "valuable" classic is always going to be worth more if its all original, but so long as the replacement parts are declared if for sale, i don't see a problem with it and naturally the price should be adjusted for this.
Its when someone acquires a valuable Reg no/ID then claims its the original, that's a deffo no no in my book, what with the tinternet these days though, and places like here that is very difficult, thankfully, to get away with.
Skyedriver said:
Enquired about a very tidy looking classic currently for sale..
Engine and gearbox out of a more recent model,, suspension and back axle upgrade, new interior and has been reshelled.
Talk about Triggers broom. Lovely looking car, great spec but I'm out..
It would depend on the car from my perspective. You've got to treat each one as what it is. I've seen a couple of Triumph Spitfires recently that are running Ford engines / gearboxes, uprated brakes & suspension etc. Done well, this makes for a nice usable car. Done badly, it makes for an ongoing expensive nightmare car. Engine and gearbox out of a more recent model,, suspension and back axle upgrade, new interior and has been reshelled.
Talk about Triggers broom. Lovely looking car, great spec but I'm out..
I've done these things myself a few times in the past (Dolomite Sprint engine in a Spitfire, Chevy 357 in a Stag etc), and they can make for great fun and enjoyable projects.
If I was buying a converted car, I'd need to convince myself of the quality of the conversion and that I wasn't taking on something that hadn't been done perfectly.
Mark A S said:
A car, old or new is an assemble of parts with an ID. ALL parts are replaceable, including the body shell. So, if a car has had a replacement body, whether NOS or from a donor car, it IS still the same car as the ID is identical.
Now, of course a "valuable" classic is always going to be worth more if its all original, but so long as the replacement parts are declared if for sale, i don't see a problem with it and naturally the price should be adjusted for this.
Its when someone acquires a valuable Reg no/ID then claims its the original, that's a deffo no no in my book, what with the tinternet these days though, and places like here that is very difficult, thankfully, to get away with.
I suspect the original manufacturer would argue that if it has had a new body shell, which is what carries all the ID numbers, that it is definitely not the same car that left the factory.Now, of course a "valuable" classic is always going to be worth more if its all original, but so long as the replacement parts are declared if for sale, i don't see a problem with it and naturally the price should be adjusted for this.
Its when someone acquires a valuable Reg no/ID then claims its the original, that's a deffo no no in my book, what with the tinternet these days though, and places like here that is very difficult, thankfully, to get away with.
I expect the owners of re-shelled cars would disagree, and that transplanting the ID tags to a new body isn’t effectively ringing, but then they would argue that, wouldn’t they?
Jader1973 said:
Mark A S said:
A car, old or new is an assemble of parts with an ID. ALL parts are replaceable, including the body shell. So, if a car has had a replacement body, whether NOS or from a donor car, it IS still the same car as the ID is identical.
Now, of course a "valuable" classic is always going to be worth more if its all original, but so long as the replacement parts are declared if for sale, i don't see a problem with it and naturally the price should be adjusted for this.
Its when someone acquires a valuable Reg no/ID then claims its the original, that's a deffo no no in my book, what with the tinternet these days though, and places like here that is very difficult, thankfully, to get away with.
I suspect the original manufacturer would argue that if it has had a new body shell, which is what carries all the ID numbers, that it is definitely not the same car that left the factory.Now, of course a "valuable" classic is always going to be worth more if its all original, but so long as the replacement parts are declared if for sale, i don't see a problem with it and naturally the price should be adjusted for this.
Its when someone acquires a valuable Reg no/ID then claims its the original, that's a deffo no no in my book, what with the tinternet these days though, and places like here that is very difficult, thankfully, to get away with.
I expect the owners of re-shelled cars would disagree, and that transplanting the ID tags to a new body isn’t effectively ringing, but then they would argue that, wouldn’t they?
But, it was taken out in an accident when it was only about 18 month old, and it was reshelled into an AVO service shell supplied by Ford.......which also meant a new back axle assembly, fuel tank and a lot of the glass.
Years later, by the time he was attending owners club shows, he'd replaced the block after putting a rod through it, replaced the diff again, and most of the suspension etc.
About the only parts that were the same as what came from the factory when he drove the car off the dealer forecourt was all the interior. All of that was part of its intrinsic history, and it didn't look any different to the photo he had of him with it when he bought it new.
The problem is how the object (or car in this case) is described.
'Original' is the wrong word and shouldn't be used imo.
Imagine an old oil painting, you can call that 'original' as nothing would/should alter, bar perhaps the frame (if there is one) it's within.
If a vehicle is described as 'original' (present or existing from the beginning) and major stuff has been altered, replaced or changed, it can't be 'original'.
Can it?
My (1967) classic is truthfully close to its original guise, but that's it. It's a car, it's unavoidable, stuff get's changed, wears out etc.
Mind you, it still has its 1967 dynamo fitted though (proven by it's stamped on the casing somewhere, the brushes not so!).
'Original' is the wrong word and shouldn't be used imo.
Imagine an old oil painting, you can call that 'original' as nothing would/should alter, bar perhaps the frame (if there is one) it's within.
If a vehicle is described as 'original' (present or existing from the beginning) and major stuff has been altered, replaced or changed, it can't be 'original'.
Can it?
My (1967) classic is truthfully close to its original guise, but that's it. It's a car, it's unavoidable, stuff get's changed, wears out etc.
Mind you, it still has its 1967 dynamo fitted though (proven by it's stamped on the casing somewhere, the brushes not so!).
dandarez said:
If a vehicle is described as 'original' (present or existing from the beginning) and major stuff has been altered, replaced or changed, it can't be 'original'.
Can it?
Well, it can still be original specification from when it left the factory......just not neccessarily containing all the exact same bits that it was originally assembled with....Can it?
As Eric Morcambe said, "I'm playing all the right notes, just not neccessarily in the right order"
All this nerdiness about originality and stuff has only come about with the stupid investment s
t to do with classic cars - and people trying to make money on something that people just used to use, abuse, & repair and enjoy.In a way, its a shame, as the time for enjoying old cars is diminishing and enjoying them for what they are now while you can is better than some anorak arguing about the wrong widget clamp being fitted......
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff