Discussion
firefox1712 said:
Chimaera + Griff body would be a Chimaera with a Griff body.
This is getting reallt obscure now but given that a Chimp is a Griff with a Chimp body you would then have a Griff without a Chimp body but with a Griff body, just like all the other Griffs.
I don';t know what this means, it's getting like those what's at the end of the universe questions.
Well Johnathan -
I agree with your comments re Rolls Royces. If a 20HP with saloon body by Barker is then rebodied with touring coachwork by Gurney Nutting then it becomes a 20HP with touring bodywork by Gurney Nutting - similarly if it were to be given (as has happend) at a later date, Speedster bodywork by Bish Bash and Sons of Greater Wallop!
Therefore my car when it left the factory as a 420 SEAC with SEAC bodywork would have simply been known as a 420 SEAC. As it has had a bodywork change it has become a 420 SEAC with 420 SE body.
The identity of a car does not derive from the body but from the chassis. Note rebodied Ferraris etc..
The above is convention and generally accepted throughout the motoring world - and has been used in court cases where the identity of a vehicle has been in dispute.
I will therefore say - in quotation marks:-
"Without prejudice - the TVR 420 SEAC registration number D659 YLP, identified as a TVR 420 SEAC by TVR Engineering Limited and the TVR Car Club via information obtained from the factory, with the aforementioned chassis number and engine number is a TVR 420 SEAC with TVR 420 SE body, the latter described body having been fitted for reasons unknown."
There - I have had to think hard about how to make a statement about the car without prejudicing any action I may wish to take.
That is the position. Some of you may not like it. I suggest you learn a little more about cars and chassis numbers, and brush up on English Law.
JJ
I agree with your comments re Rolls Royces. If a 20HP with saloon body by Barker is then rebodied with touring coachwork by Gurney Nutting then it becomes a 20HP with touring bodywork by Gurney Nutting - similarly if it were to be given (as has happend) at a later date, Speedster bodywork by Bish Bash and Sons of Greater Wallop!
Therefore my car when it left the factory as a 420 SEAC with SEAC bodywork would have simply been known as a 420 SEAC. As it has had a bodywork change it has become a 420 SEAC with 420 SE body.
The identity of a car does not derive from the body but from the chassis. Note rebodied Ferraris etc..
The above is convention and generally accepted throughout the motoring world - and has been used in court cases where the identity of a vehicle has been in dispute.
I will therefore say - in quotation marks:-
"Without prejudice - the TVR 420 SEAC registration number D659 YLP, identified as a TVR 420 SEAC by TVR Engineering Limited and the TVR Car Club via information obtained from the factory, with the aforementioned chassis number and engine number is a TVR 420 SEAC with TVR 420 SE body, the latter described body having been fitted for reasons unknown."
There - I have had to think hard about how to make a statement about the car without prejudicing any action I may wish to take.
That is the position. Some of you may not like it. I suggest you learn a little more about cars and chassis numbers, and brush up on English Law.
JJ
JJ,
If you want to prove your car is legally a 420seac it sound like your there. I can't see how or why you'd want to take any legal action against anyone.
I'm assuming you saw it before you bought it so you realised the body was different to the other seacs.
TVR's are often different from car to car, I'm sure like you say, its not out of the question that it left the factory with that body on, someone in a hurry for it no seac bodies available, some one specced the seac engine with the 390/420se body etc..
I think you got a great car there at a very good price.
All I was saying is that from a common sense perspective it doesn't / no longer looks like the other seacs, people are never going to look at the shape of your car and think 'Thats a SEAC'. A lot of what the ultimate wedge is for me is the outrageous looks.
I'm sure a lawyer could prove that your car is what a seac is supposed to look like and its the others that arn't seacs, if they were good enough. Geting everyone else to accept the ruling would be the problem.
Your car carries its original registration so I would assume that if it had been crashed it does contain the majority of its original parts. You've proved its got the original engine which is a seac 4.2, the factory say it was manufactured as a seac.
I havn't ever seen a chassis number stamped on the chassis of my 350i, I have sanded and repainted 80% of it so if it, so I would have expected to see one if it was there, doesn't mean it isn't hidden somewhere though. Chim one is easily spotted. My 350i has its vin plate on the body and a partial chassis number hand written on every single bit of fibreglass on it.
With TVR's I thought that a chassis could be changed and it still be the same car, lots have had a new chassis due to corrosion, although if the body is changed at the same time I'm guessing that would cause a problem.
Good luck with your investigations, sorry I couldn't be of any help.
GF.
>> Edited by gf350 on Sunday 10th October 19:35
>> Edited by gf350 on Sunday 10th October 19:54
If you want to prove your car is legally a 420seac it sound like your there. I can't see how or why you'd want to take any legal action against anyone.
I'm assuming you saw it before you bought it so you realised the body was different to the other seacs.
TVR's are often different from car to car, I'm sure like you say, its not out of the question that it left the factory with that body on, someone in a hurry for it no seac bodies available, some one specced the seac engine with the 390/420se body etc..
I think you got a great car there at a very good price.
All I was saying is that from a common sense perspective it doesn't / no longer looks like the other seacs, people are never going to look at the shape of your car and think 'Thats a SEAC'. A lot of what the ultimate wedge is for me is the outrageous looks.
I'm sure a lawyer could prove that your car is what a seac is supposed to look like and its the others that arn't seacs, if they were good enough. Geting everyone else to accept the ruling would be the problem.
Your car carries its original registration so I would assume that if it had been crashed it does contain the majority of its original parts. You've proved its got the original engine which is a seac 4.2, the factory say it was manufactured as a seac.
I havn't ever seen a chassis number stamped on the chassis of my 350i, I have sanded and repainted 80% of it so if it, so I would have expected to see one if it was there, doesn't mean it isn't hidden somewhere though. Chim one is easily spotted. My 350i has its vin plate on the body and a partial chassis number hand written on every single bit of fibreglass on it.
With TVR's I thought that a chassis could be changed and it still be the same car, lots have had a new chassis due to corrosion, although if the body is changed at the same time I'm guessing that would cause a problem.
Good luck with your investigations, sorry I couldn't be of any help.
GF.
>> Edited by gf350 on Sunday 10th October 19:35
>> Edited by gf350 on Sunday 10th October 19:54
Hi gf350 -
Thanks for your comments.
I have no desire to get any lawyer to say the car is something it isn't. I phrased the above statement in 'legalese' in order to basically state what the car is and to protect my position in case information comes to light that may require me to take legal action against the seller.
I know that the car does not look like an SEAC, and I also know that a number of people will not accept it as an SEAC, albeit with a different body. That is something that I am prepared to tolerate and have done so far. Similarly those that accept the car as an SEAC with 420 SE bodywork can put up with the intransigence of others who refuse to recognise the car for what it is.
I think we have had all the '...it's not an SEAC because......' opinions by now, and we need to look for facts. Of course, I cannot prevent, not would I wish to prevent, the dissemination of opinion - this is a discussion forum after all. However hard facts will get us closer to the detailed history of the car - which I think might just be interesting to know.
Do please continue to contribute - all of you.
JJ
>> Edited by firefox1712 on Sunday 10th October 21:21
Thanks for your comments.
I have no desire to get any lawyer to say the car is something it isn't. I phrased the above statement in 'legalese' in order to basically state what the car is and to protect my position in case information comes to light that may require me to take legal action against the seller.
I know that the car does not look like an SEAC, and I also know that a number of people will not accept it as an SEAC, albeit with a different body. That is something that I am prepared to tolerate and have done so far. Similarly those that accept the car as an SEAC with 420 SE bodywork can put up with the intransigence of others who refuse to recognise the car for what it is.
I think we have had all the '...it's not an SEAC because......' opinions by now, and we need to look for facts. Of course, I cannot prevent, not would I wish to prevent, the dissemination of opinion - this is a discussion forum after all. However hard facts will get us closer to the detailed history of the car - which I think might just be interesting to know.
Do please continue to contribute - all of you.
JJ
>> Edited by firefox1712 on Sunday 10th October 21:21
mate
Firefox, ALL wedges are truely bonkers!
Had to laugh today, changed the plugs, air filter, coil and leads on the 450 today. Decided to take the car out for a test drive type blat (and to blow the spiders and cobwebs off).
Stopped at some lights in town, and this Maxpower lowered corsa type thingy stopped in front of me, the three spotty boys all jumped out and took pics of the 450 with their camera phones before carrying on
Made my day.
All Wedges are bonkers SEAC body or not, fox old boy have a pint and chill fella.
MikeB
>> Edited by mikeb on Sunday 10th October 23:49
Had to laugh today, changed the plugs, air filter, coil and leads on the 450 today. Decided to take the car out for a test drive type blat (and to blow the spiders and cobwebs off).
Stopped at some lights in town, and this Maxpower lowered corsa type thingy stopped in front of me, the three spotty boys all jumped out and took pics of the 450 with their camera phones before carrying on
Made my day.
All Wedges are bonkers SEAC body or not, fox old boy have a pint and chill fella.
MikeB
>> Edited by mikeb on Sunday 10th October 23:49
Cheers Mike!
Well chilled, though no pints consumed. May have to stay in for several days, so please email several pints of Abbot, Directors, Old Peculier, Owd Roger, Deuchars, Youngs Special and any others I've missed out. All will be lovingly consumed.
Good to hear you're enjoying Wedge motoring with your new toy.
JJ
Well chilled, though no pints consumed. May have to stay in for several days, so please email several pints of Abbot, Directors, Old Peculier, Owd Roger, Deuchars, Youngs Special and any others I've missed out. All will be lovingly consumed.
Good to hear you're enjoying Wedge motoring with your new toy.
JJ
As a wild stab in the dark, is it not possible that this whole debacle stems from a clerical error? Perhaps in the heat of the moment, instead of writing '420SE' on a form, someone at the factory added 'AC' to the end...?
My car no longer has a 3905cc engine, but a 3948, per the 400SE. Can I get away with calling it a 400SE? Or should I go the whole hog, have it taken out to 4.2 and call it a 420SE...? Is it any less valuable because of the 'non-standard' engine? Who cares?
Personally I'd be more p155ed-off if I'd bought what I thought was a 420SEAC and found it was only a 3.5L, than the other way round...
My car no longer has a 3905cc engine, but a 3948, per the 400SE. Can I get away with calling it a 400SE? Or should I go the whole hog, have it taken out to 4.2 and call it a 420SE...? Is it any less valuable because of the 'non-standard' engine? Who cares?
Personally I'd be more p155ed-off if I'd bought what I thought was a 420SEAC and found it was only a 3.5L, than the other way round... wedg1e said:
As a wild stab in the dark, is it not possible that this whole debacle stems from a clerical error? Perhaps in the heat of the moment, instead of writing '420SE' on a form, someone at the factory added 'AC' to the end...?
Well seeing as they put the engine size down as 3498cc they obviously can make mistakes. How would this fit in with what you know about it Firefox?
Do the seac engines have different bits in them like solid lifters or different pistons and rods? Only asking as solid lifters would be easily spotted.
It seems to me that we need to consentrate on the two years of its life where it would have had the SEAC body between '86 and '88. I'm going to take the chim into the TVR Centre when I get a chance for a couple of Jobs, I'll ask them if they have any record of it, if you don't mind Firefox?
Where else might it have been serviced in the London area and who sold it originally? (sorry if we have already covered this)
Any joy with the Bank Firefox?
GF.
>> Edited by gf350 on Tuesday 12th October 21:48
gf350 said:
wedg1e said:
As a wild stab in the dark, is it not possible that this whole debacle stems from a clerical error? Perhaps in the heat of the moment, instead of writing '420SE' on a form, someone at the factory added 'AC' to the end...?
Well seeing as they put the engine size down as 3498cc they obviously can make mistakes.
I've been wondering about wedg1e's theory, I think that a photo of the top of the front suspension would be helpful. The trouble (reason that we bought them?) is that TVR refused to follow any rules and it's hard to find any consistency.
IMHO the 3498 was one of the biggest cock ups of all. The standard 350i was type approved with the standard cc of 3528 but most of the forms say 3498
My V5 said 34985 when I bought the car! As I understand it many of the larger cc cars went down as 3498 as a type approval thing. 
Good old TVR 
>> Edited by 19560 on Monday 11th October 09:10
My Wedge does not have any model description on the registration document - yes that's right - it says Make "TVR" and the model bit is blank - so it could be "anything". Lots of things about my wedge are different to others of the same year, model or whatever.
I suspect that in firefox's case it is most likely that the person who said someone forgot to put the AC on the end of the SE is probably right.
I also warned firefox when he got his car that some of the people on this forum get arsey about modified or non standard wedges that are not to their taste (usually cos they paid 3 times as much for one with the right credentials).
Personally i don't care what they are called - its obvious that there is no standard for wedges you would be hard pressed to find two that are identical - I don't care what you call em or how much u paid for it - they are all wedges to me and all of em feckin cool
anyway - long lost seac development car anyone?
I'll get me coat
I suspect that in firefox's case it is most likely that the person who said someone forgot to put the AC on the end of the SE is probably right.
I also warned firefox when he got his car that some of the people on this forum get arsey about modified or non standard wedges that are not to their taste (usually cos they paid 3 times as much for one with the right credentials).
Personally i don't care what they are called - its obvious that there is no standard for wedges you would be hard pressed to find two that are identical - I don't care what you call em or how much u paid for it - they are all wedges to me and all of em feckin cool
anyway - long lost seac development car anyone?
2 sheds said:
The development SEAC was C reg, i presume an early 86 car, white and is still about.
The first 10 cars were pure Kevlar and some were very rippled and looked quite rough so this may be the reason the body was changed. ???????
Tim
I'll get me coat
Did they all come with the cat on the roof ?
As my black and white seems to be attached to roofs whenever car out of garage.
You just added the tea tray to pretend !!! Jest
I agree, a wedge is a wedge what ever it may look like. They still say TVR somewhere and sound awsome (well the V8's anyway)
I'm now going to call mine a 4?0 SE AC BV as it was a 400SE that has a 4.5 big valve engine ala SEAC spec !!
Just looking for someone to make up the stickies
As my black and white seems to be attached to roofs whenever car out of garage.
You just added the tea tray to pretend !!! Jest
I agree, a wedge is a wedge what ever it may look like. They still say TVR somewhere and sound awsome (well the V8's anyway)
I'm now going to call mine a 4?0 SE AC BV as it was a 400SE that has a 4.5 big valve engine ala SEAC spec !!
Just looking for someone to make up the stickies
blah blah blah!
chatter chatter chatter!
whinge whinge whinge!
Any more juicy snippets?
Any actual factual information?
Any more thoughts along the lines of typographical errors?
Did you know -
In A J Ayer's book 'An Introduction to Philosophy' he puts forward the theory that as we are all dependent upon the information provided by our senses, we could all well be just the figment of our own imagination.
Now the desk I am writing this on is there because I can see it, touch it, hear it if I knock it, taste it if I put my tonge to it, and possibly smell it if I scratch the wood and put my nose to it.
However - the perception that it is there is merely an interpretation of the information as perceived by my senses - so it could in fact NOT be there at all but my senses are telling me something!
So, it could be that the great almighty (if there is such a being or presence) might just have made a typographical error and we all don't exist at all. Maybe HE was having a Monday morning experience - we all know HE had Sunday off so He probably had a blast! Six days non-stop work would make anyone thirsty! On the other hand, HE could have made a typographical error and managed to omit the engines we should all have been fitted with in the first place - in which case we should all be TVR 420 SEACs with the larger of us being TVR 450 SEACs.
The only problem here is that in reality HE has equipped us with an enquiring mind; a mind that disputes that which is not obvious on first sight and disputes that which is different from what is programmed to be normal.
But then we don't actually know that HE exists - but it has been said it is better to accept that HE does exist because you stand a better chance of going to heaven if you do.
Thinking about the typographical error - it could be that there was a typographical error on the build instruction sheet for Firefox, and the letters 'AC' were left off so a standard 390/420 SE body was fitted to a 420 SEAC chassis!
Wow! - If we carry on thinking like this it could have had a Chevrolet 6.6 engine fitted - but there was a typo on the build instruction sheet. What a shame! Alternatively, it was Peter Wheeler's birthday and he took all the staff out on a Friday - with the result that everyone got pissed, and when they set about finishing this car they just said - 'Oh bang that on and then throw this in. - They'll never know the difference.' On the other hand, they may have run out of certain items and couldn't be bothered to make those bits. Clearly, they didn't account for the keen analytical minds and investigative terrier-like instincts of some of the TVRwedgepages subscribers that might come along in the future!
Actually - I just thought I'd bring this to the top again in case some new information comes forward - so I may just delete the above! Felt I should make it a little entertaining for you.
Felicitations and Jollifications!
chin chin!
JJ
>> Edited by firefox1712 on Friday 15th October 13:18
chatter chatter chatter!
whinge whinge whinge!
Any more juicy snippets?
Any actual factual information?
Any more thoughts along the lines of typographical errors?
Did you know -
In A J Ayer's book 'An Introduction to Philosophy' he puts forward the theory that as we are all dependent upon the information provided by our senses, we could all well be just the figment of our own imagination.
Now the desk I am writing this on is there because I can see it, touch it, hear it if I knock it, taste it if I put my tonge to it, and possibly smell it if I scratch the wood and put my nose to it.
However - the perception that it is there is merely an interpretation of the information as perceived by my senses - so it could in fact NOT be there at all but my senses are telling me something!
So, it could be that the great almighty (if there is such a being or presence) might just have made a typographical error and we all don't exist at all. Maybe HE was having a Monday morning experience - we all know HE had Sunday off so He probably had a blast! Six days non-stop work would make anyone thirsty! On the other hand, HE could have made a typographical error and managed to omit the engines we should all have been fitted with in the first place - in which case we should all be TVR 420 SEACs with the larger of us being TVR 450 SEACs.
The only problem here is that in reality HE has equipped us with an enquiring mind; a mind that disputes that which is not obvious on first sight and disputes that which is different from what is programmed to be normal.
But then we don't actually know that HE exists - but it has been said it is better to accept that HE does exist because you stand a better chance of going to heaven if you do.
Thinking about the typographical error - it could be that there was a typographical error on the build instruction sheet for Firefox, and the letters 'AC' were left off so a standard 390/420 SE body was fitted to a 420 SEAC chassis!
Wow! - If we carry on thinking like this it could have had a Chevrolet 6.6 engine fitted - but there was a typo on the build instruction sheet. What a shame! Alternatively, it was Peter Wheeler's birthday and he took all the staff out on a Friday - with the result that everyone got pissed, and when they set about finishing this car they just said - 'Oh bang that on and then throw this in. - They'll never know the difference.' On the other hand, they may have run out of certain items and couldn't be bothered to make those bits. Clearly, they didn't account for the keen analytical minds and investigative terrier-like instincts of some of the TVRwedgepages subscribers that might come along in the future!
Actually - I just thought I'd bring this to the top again in case some new information comes forward - so I may just delete the above! Felt I should make it a little entertaining for you.
Felicitations and Jollifications!
chin chin!
JJ
>> Edited by firefox1712 on Friday 15th October 13:18
Aw - c'mon yoose guys!
It's not the same with none of you taking potshots at me and my Wedge anymore!
Let's hear the latest daft suggestion! Can you see tyre tracks on the moon? Perhaps it went to the moon and back before it was registered?
For chrissake! - I'm getting withdrawal symptoms!
firefox
>> Edited by firefox1712 on Friday 15th October 20:23
It's not the same with none of you taking potshots at me and my Wedge anymore!
Let's hear the latest daft suggestion! Can you see tyre tracks on the moon? Perhaps it went to the moon and back before it was registered?
For chrissake! - I'm getting withdrawal symptoms!
firefox
>> Edited by firefox1712 on Friday 15th October 20:23
Gassing Station | Wedges | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff