| Author |
 Topic  |
|
George Eagle
United Kingdom
3240 Posts |
 Posted - 23/08/2019 : 11:48:14
|
I also fully support the current method of describing the cars, as Kevin notes :-
"My take is that chassis is king."
George
Registrar F/L/N types. |
 |
|
|
leafrancis14
United Kingdom
323 Posts |
Posted - 23/08/2019 : 12:28:42
|
Moi aussi. Looking through the earlier paper register record cards, they don't mention body type/style. For the basic aims of the register it isn't that relevant.
Barny Creaser
(Wellingborough) |
|
|
|
Cathelijne
Netherlands
744 Posts |
Posted - 23/08/2019 : 14:22:57
|
| I thought the whole point of this discussion was to come up with some sort of word we could use in daily conversations with people who don’t know their Ks from their P-types (yet) and not an official term, because the ‘in the style of’ which the Register came up with a few years ago seems to work just fine?! I am in full agreement with the ‘in the style of’ but use ‘lookalike’ in daily conversations. |
|
|
|
Richard Hardy
United Kingdom
2159 Posts |
Posted - 24/08/2019 : 11:57:24
|
George, I respect your view to uphold the committee’s way to record a car’s identity and this cannot be faulted in terms of how cars are recorded. However, the original topic I raised focuses specifically on how our cars are described when they are not is the same guise as how they left the factory. In this respect, photos are annotated poorly through a system which is fit for the register but not necessarily fit for describing what we are actually looking at. The committee in my mind could do far better in this respect if they are willing to listen
As this topic has progressed, I have convinced myself that the term ‘replica’ may not be right, certainly not for my car even though like Chris, I too have been meticulous in factory spec detail to the point I think my car will take some beating out of all J4 recreations on the planet! My reference to the word replica’ has nothing to do with the 12/12 argument but more, that it possibly gives a false impression that the whole car may be a replica possibly including a reproduction chassis etc and for this I suspect there are no non-factory absolute replicas in the sense of the word.
So far, I cannot see anybody has been able to come up with a better definition than those offered by Alan Whitham and Terry Holden, simply, say a K3 styled K1 where the car represents a reasonably accurate copy specification of another model or, a ‘special’ where it does not follow an obvious factory style.
Does this not seem to represent a helpful way forward in addressing the issue I have raised for the Committee’s consideration in doing things better?
Vintage MG Parts |
Edited by - Richard Hardy on 24/08/2019 12:06:34 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
