| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Christian Cottes
France
114 Posts |
 Posted - 06/11/2015 : 18:43:51
|
There has been some hesitation when I bought my J2 some years ago. The car was produced in september 1932. Chassis, engine, gearbox and all running gear, as well as body tub are all original.
A car of this period should be fitted with cycle wings, but this particular one came with flared wings and a P type front apron (funnily, the p.o. claimed it was an "Airline" limited series, mixing things up in MG's history...).
On first examination, it appeared that the flared wings and apron where in some significant details different from the P type, or any other MG type. On even closer examination, I found that all the fixings (bolts, rivets, etc) where definitely pre-war. So I came to the obvious conclusion that, sometime before WW2, the car had been "modernized" by the current owner so it may look up to date. In France, we have similar examples with some Amilcar, Bugatti and others. This was common practice.
Now, the question : when basics are original, what is authenciticy ? Should it be defined as the exact state in which was the car when it rolled out from the production line ? Or can we accept a longtime ago modification which is, after all, part of the car's history ? ?
(This is an open question...)
Christian
|
|
|
DickMorbey
United Kingdom
3678 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2015 : 20:41:40
|
....... and if you read the EU Charter of Turin, it exhorts custodians of historic cars to 'keep the history in the vehicle', i.e. accept the fact that over the years cars have been subjected to changes - some out of necessity, others out of a desire to keep up with the latest ideas and trends - and urges owners retain these historical changes.
By contrast, over here when applying to get a car re-licensed for road use after a period of non-licence, the DVLA may increasingly refuse to issue cars with an original or age-related registration mark if they have have been modified either bodily or with major component changes over the years, so as to bear little resemblance to their original form. A 'Q' plate may result, along with all the regulatory requirements that would apply to a 'modern new' registration!
How odd that these two regulatory bodies seem to be diametically opposed on basic principles!
Dick Morbey
PA/PB 0743
Frieth, Oxon, UK |
 |
|
|
Christian Cottes
France
114 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2015 : 21:14:38
|
Dick,
Oh yes, oddities and contradictory rules or regulations are so common these days !
Christian
J2 2195
|
|
|
|
LewPalmer
USA
3244 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2015 : 21:30:30
|
And, to those Originality Police: "The factory was never concerned about originality."
Lew Palmer
PA1169, PB0560 |
|
|
|
MG Maverick
United Kingdom
1045 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2015 : 21:52:13
|
If I may reply using my Rover hat. I own a Rover 10hp 1934 that was repainted white from its original blue in 1936. the reasons is I am told by the first owners grandson was when he retired in 1934 it was his intention to buy a white Rolls Royce, but could not afford it so he bought the Rover instead ( which was then called the poor mans R/R ). I have kept the car white because this was intentional by the owner for his personal reasons and I am happy to maintain this, the car was only blue for two years. So I am of the opinion that a long time modification is acceptable if there is a valid reason for doing so.
Chris ( J2353 ) & ( J4129 )
Brighton, East Sussex & Paphos, Cyprus. |
|
|
|
rodb
New Zealand
260 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2015 : 23:45:13
|
hello Dick
Is the charter of Turin you refer to the FIVA version with 11 Articles and appendix 1?
I have a current FIVA version that I received in Krakow last month in PDF format if you want to include it in this website.
RodB NZ |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
