Hummm.... . I am not trying to dispute either part, but will report what I
have. Both the VIN plate and the larger spec plate are heavily oxidized, so
are the (same) attaching rivets (you can't read ANYTHING on the larger spec
plate - most of the VIN plate has been polished out). The car has been
resprayed what appears to be three times (same color - black). A quick
scratch near the plates seemed to indicate only a single original color then
the redish/dark pink Rootes primer. There is some minor over spray (likely
what blew under the hood) on both plates indicating that with at least one
of the two paintings they were not removed (if ever).
What I find most interesting is that the rivets I have(crowned top)
appear to be smaller than the standard Rootes rivet, yet on neither plate
can I find ANY indication (as in indentation, grooves) that a larger rivet
had been previously installed, or drilled out (often they spin). Could the
rivets have been replace so long ago that the oxidation is explainable?
Sure, but the lack of any larger rivet ever being present still has me
guessing. Also four of the six rivets do not allow a wire to go through the
center hole, but two do. It may be much a'do about noth-in, but for me I
ponder.
Tom Witt B9470101
----- Original Message -----
From: DrMayf <drmayf@teknett.com>
To: Steve Laifman <SLaifman@socal.rr.com>; Tom Witt <wittsend@jps.net>
Cc: <tigers@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: "Original Rivets" Thread - $.02
> Well, another conundrum. I just went out to my very original MKI, in which
> neither the spec plate nor the vin tag has ever been removed nor has the
> cowl been painted and there staring me in the face are rivets with central
> holes. They appear to be steel and had a yellowish look to them untill I
> buffed them slightly with the dremel and small buffing wheel. The hole
does
> not go completely through, indicating that the nail or what ever it is
> called is still in the rivet. I thried to take a digital pix but my $4.99
> camera just would not focus closely enough to get any resolution. I'll
take
> one with my Nikon, scann it and place it on my web site for direct access
to
> any who wist to look for themselves. My car has been repainted twice, but
in
> both cases the engine compartment was directed to be left alone, and it
was.
> Oh, the bottomline of the spec plate says Alpine 260 V8..does every one
have
> that same info?
>
> mayf
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Laifman" <SLaifman@socal.rr.com>
> To: "Tom Witt" <wittsend@jps.net>
> Cc: <tigers@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 4:27 PM
> Subject: Re: "Original Rivets" Thread - $.02
>
>
> > Tom seems to have a rather small request. At the risk of being a
> > target, I will say what I have observed, and let those who will deal
> > with it.
> >
> > The Mk I's I have examined, and know to be original paint jobs (and worn
> > enough to prove it), or known to have been specially protected during a
> > re-spray, have rivets with tapered heads, and no central hole.
> >
> > This contrasts with the general aluminum pop rivet that has a central
> > hole where the loose pull rod has fallen back through, and a rounded
> > exposed head with a flattened top where the tool pressed. There is a
> > very small diameter broken stem in the center of the original, again
> > with an even smaller flattened area where the installation tool pressed.
> > The sides tapered back from this point as straight conical, not rounded
> > shape.
> >
> > I have seen original ROOTES Tiger VIN rivets, still in their Rootes
> > identified parts bag. They are unusual in that they are a dark, nearly
> > black, coated copper seeming material with a solid small rod out the top
> > about 1/2 the diameter of the standard steel or aluminum pop rivet. This
> > rod is solidly in place and does not rotate. It seemed one piece with
> > the rivet body, and would not twist or move in any direction. There was
> > NO head on the other (back) side of the rivet representing the loose pin
> > in the normal pop rivet. It was flat and solid, and the same diameter as
> > the undeformed shank. The unused round pull shank was straight out the
> > top of the unusual head, and appeared to be one piece with the solid
> > rivet body. The head sides were tapered to a flattened top where it
> > would press against the tool, with some slight knurling pattern around
> > the sides of the tapered top.
> >
> > That is my best recollection, and matches the rivets installed on my
> > car, including the remains of the fixed, broken off central shaft with a
> > few remaining rougher central broken edges. When I re-painted my car I
> > masked off the entire VIN tag, and personally discussed it with the body
> > shop. Only difficulty I had was removing the carefully edge trimmed
> > masking tape that can lift and bend the thin aluminum VIN tag if you are
> > not careful.
> >
> > The oil data plate was held in with ordinary aluminum pop rivets with
> > holes where the pull shaft fell back in after rivet expansion.
> >
> > Mk IA's, as I seem to recall, used these same hollow center rivets, like
> > the lubricant plate, instead of the solid ones described for the Mk I.
> > This may be a result of the selection I saw being re-riveted and not
> > original. I cannot verify.
> >
> > The JAL plate was held on with ordinary flat headed SMS (sheet metal
> > screws) with a slotted head. It was painted, along with the plate, as it
> > was mounted to the body before original painting.
> >
> > OK, those are my personal observations, which have the benefit of seeing
> > these rivets BEFORE they were used.
> >
> > For future inquiries, it is not my intent to discuss the unusual
> > circumstances of viewing the original Rootes bag. I am NOT the only one
> > on this list who has seen these, as some well regarded experts have. I
> > am sorry, you will just have to take that as the limit of what I had
> > agreed to disclose and what not to discuss about it Either believe me,
> > or not, as you choose. Use the information as you will, I cannot betray
> > a confidence. For those with a good memory, or a copy of the posting,
> > these rivets WERE being sold on E-Bay by parties unknown to me, and
> > pictures of the rivets and the original bags were on the bid offer.
> > That is public, but not in my possession. They corresponded to the
> > ones I have held in my hands, but were NOT from the same source.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > Tom Witt wrote:
> >
> > > You know, I'm not too sure that I've ever seen a Tiger with original
> > >rivets (and no, I'm not saying they are not out there). It seems that
> just
> > >about ever Tiger I've seen has different rivets on it. As best I
> understand,
> > >it has a tapered head (as opposed to the more common rounded head) with
a
> > >small, flat portion on top and a rather small hole. On the other hand I
> have
> > >"heard" (can't remember where) that Rootes used two different types
> > >rivets??? Perhaps this is just urban legend. Dose anyone have a link to
> real
> > >Rootes tag rivet pictures (and JAL screws for that matter)?
> > > I think that in most cases regarding different rivets if there is
> nothing
> > >sending up red flags (i.e. the tag # has been reported as stolen, the
car
> in
> > >question fits the description of a recently stolen Tiger) then the tag
> will
> > >be pulled and a special DMV (Calif.) tag will be intalled in it's
place.
> You
> > >might be harassed a lot and have to jump through a lot of hoops, but I
> don't
> > >think it is as black and white as rivets ok = car ok, wrong rivets =
> crushed
> > >car. Now, I'm not saying that never has happened, it's just that it
> likely
> > >doesn't happen all the time.
> > > Perhaps the one good line the Clinton Administration left us with is
> > >"Don't ask, don't tell." Don't ever pull your rivets and don't ever
even
> > >mention them in the presence of a DMV offical or law enforcment for ANY
> > >reason. Perhaps if someone wants to dip their car the plate can be
> covered
> > >with a plastic piece siliconed in place (???), though I'm not sure how
> one
> > >would protect the rivet from the back side.
> > >TomWitt B9470101
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: <CoolVT@aol.com>
> > >To: <Pirouette@uisreno.com>; <VegasLegal@aol.com>;
> <tigers@autox.team.net>
> > >Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 5:47 AM
> > >Subject: Re: spray painted vin # and crushing cars.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>It would be interesting to see if a DMV inspector could tell the
> > >>
> > >>
> > >difference
> > >
> > >
> > >>between an original, 30 year old Rootes factory rivet and say a
General
> > >>
> > >>
> > >Motors
> > >
> > >
> > >>factory rivet. I would kind of doubt that! So, I think the danger in
> > >>removing factory tags has more to do with being original for Tiger
> > >>
> > >>
> > >owners/buyers than
> > >
> > >
> > >>for DMV inspectors. For the inspectors, just rivet a tag on and how
> will
> > >>they know if it's an original Rootes rivet (of course, I don't think
> you
> > >>
> > >>
> > >would
> > >
> > >
> > >>want it to be too shiny and looking new).
> > >>
> > >>I would bet that if there are some "special" factory rivets in today's
> > >>assembly plants that there are plenty of employees sneaking them out
in
> > >>
> > >>
> > >their
> > >
> > >
> > >>pockets! Great to sell to car thieves.
> > >>Mark L.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Steve Laifman
> > Editor
> > http://www.TigersUnited.com
|