Bill,
I'd be very interested in your step-by-step documentation. My MK I didn't
come with any soft top. I've acquired two broken and incomplete soft top
frames, one early style and one later style, from which I'm hoping to make
one serviceable soft top. Your documentation will be just the thing to get
me off my arse and finally have a soft top for my Tiger.
Thanks,
Darrell
--original message-----
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 17:10:44 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Bill Waite <fordlandia@sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: [Tigers] Soft Top Replacement Questions
> To: tigers@autox.team.net
> Message-ID: <299912.98930.qm@web82708.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Tiger Listers:
>
> I'm finally getting around to installing a soft top on my Mark II Tiger.
> I
> purchased the top and associated hardware from Sunbeam Specialties.
> Having a
> good time doing the restoration, which has included bead blasting the soft
> top
> frame and having it powder coated (Tiger Drylac RAL-7001 Light Gray). I
> am
> documenting every step of this process, as I find that no one seems to
> have
> done that for the entire project (e.g. dis-assembly of the old frame
> through
> installation of the top).
>
> As you all probably know, there are differences between the early (Tiger
> Mark
> I) top and the later Tigers (e.g. my Mark II). I am wanting some feedback
> on
> one item, however.
>
> My Mark I Tiger's soft top frame has three (3) "belts" that affix by
> rivets to
> the rear most "hoop" on the frame and extend all the way to the front soft
> top
> metal "bar" that attaches to the front widnshield area (for lack of a
> better
> term). I use the term "belts" because the fabric is not unlike that used
> for
> seat belts. These three belts more or less tie the front soft top metal
> piece
> to the middle and rear frame "hoops."
>
> But... on my Mark II, their is just one such "belt" (and a short one at
> that). It mearly ties the rear most (fixed) hoop with the middle
> (movable)
> hoop. This belt does not extend to the to the front metal frame "bar" and
> the
> outer two belts are not part of the design.
>
> Because my Mark II was missing a soft top (have a hardtop) except for the
> frame when I purchased it in 1978... I am questioning if this apparent
> difference between the Mark I and the Mark II is correct. Seems to me
> that
> the Mark I design (with the three "belts") is a better design: providing
> more
> support for the soft top and "tieing" everything together better.
>
> Any of you guys care to comment on the Mark I versus Mark II differences
> in
> the soft top frame hardware (specifically the "support belts")? Is the
> difference I'm describing "accurate" and if so, why did they drop the
> extra
> suport straps?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill Waite
> Garnd Rapids, MI
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Tigers@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/tigers
http://www.team.net/archive
|