Chassis Numbers

[Charles Hill]

Murray,

It is not generally accepted that you own the car if you have the chassis. There are many precedents. Maybe I am drawing too much on my Morgan experience here, but it is a normal practice for a Morgan chassis to be replaced in a major restoration. The original chassis may be resurrected at a later date but the number cannot be legally reused. This is not common with MGs, but it does happen.

Regards,
Charles Hill

[Chip Old]

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 19:16 -0800, Mark Hineline wrote:
How about this: my car will be TC MMMCDIV. Anyone have a better idea?

Yes. How about your car will be an MG TC? Does it really matter what its chassis number is, especally since the bare chassis is all you have from TC 3409? A TC is the sum total of all its parts, not just the chassis. I know others here will disagree, but in my opinion it doesn't matter whether your TC is made up of every single part it originally rolled out of the factory with or with every single part scavanged from different TCs or is custom made to duplicate the original parts. It's still a TC.

--
Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC
Cub Hill, Maryland, US TC6710 XPAG7430
fold@bcpl.net NEMGTR #2271

[Mark Hineline]

On Dec 7, 2005, at 3:41 AM, Chip Old wrote:
Does it really matter what its chassis number is, especally since the bare chassis is all you have from TC 3409?

It matters a little, since I was informed by members of this list that by purchasing a bare chassis, I would have the number and therefore, in the technical sense, an MG TC.

A TC is the sum total of all its parts, not just the chassis. I know others here will disagree, but in my opinion it doesn't matter whether your TC is made up of every single part it originally rolled out of the factory with or with every single part scavanged from different TCs or is custom made to duplicate the original parts. It's still a TC.

There are indeed those who would disagree, and it was those very people who questioned my motives, my morals, called me a "ringer" and even made fun of my last name on this very list precisely because I didn't have that d---ed number.

Fortunately, my desire to put together a TC was greater than my pride, so I took responsibility for the fracas, changed the direction of my project from mostly scratch building to mostly restoring, bought a frame with a number on it, and vowed not to keep an enemies list. I don't remember who said what, and I don't want to.

I've been trying very hard to be diplomatic about this whole thing, but at the same time I know that it is illegal -- here in California, anyway -- to swap out the major part of a car to which the VIN is affixed with making a change in the VIN in title and registration. That's what Roland should have done, assuming that our assumptions are correct, although the law in Iowa may be considerably less stringent. I'm not a litigious sort in any case, and will bend over backwards not to make a legal fuss.

In the end, the best solution for me may be to purchase another frame, perhaps as part of a basket case, that has a more clear provenance. If it doesn't cost me too dearly, I'd like to have an engine, frame, and plate that match. In the meantime, I'll use this frame as a template and the number Gene provides me as my number until I find a better alternative.

But let me be explicit. There were people on this list who objected to my presence on the list because I couldn't attach a TC number to my signature. Well, now I have a number, stamped by the factory at Abingdon into 117 pounds of iron, about a dozen feet from where I'm sitting and typing this. And I have a receipt.

So I think it matters.

Mark
TC whatever

[Mark Hineline]

... and Gentlewomen. They're just cars.

Mark

[Mark Hineline]

I don't know how it is in the stable craton of North America, but here in the borderlands, the INS occasionally checks to see that all the numbers of a vehicle match. And they know where to look.

Mark
TC whatever

[viv@trax.co.za]

Good for you Mark!

This is beautifully put!!

By the way someone at Silverstone this year was claiming that there are at least 3 K3s for each known chassis number so why worry about the odd pair of TCs? After all a TC is a TC.
Viv

Mark said...

"..........But let me be explicit. There were people on this list who objected to my presence on the list because I couldn't attach a TC number to my signature. Well, now I have a number, stamped by the factory at Abingdon into 117 pounds of iron, about a dozen feet from where I'm sitting and typing this. And I have a receipt."

[ROGER FURNEAUX]

hi Mark - you really have opened a can of worms with this...

It seems from what others have said that Rolland's complete car may be other than TC3409: it might have the i.d. plate and the paperwork, but in the opinion of the M.G.C.C. T-Register here in Olde England, and many others, the identity of a T-type resides in the chassis frame with its unique (we hope!) number stamped thereon. Very rarely does a T-type chassis need replacement nowadays (the past was a different land, prior to drink-driving laws, when the cars were cheap).

To further the confusion, Rolland's car has engine XPAG 3796 (original was XPAG 4086, which seems to have disappeared), which came from TC3182. This car was owned by J.L. Camberlin in France in 1976 when he registered it with the T-Register. Now for the really wierd bit: he claimed engine no. XPAG 4109, which was never fitted to a new car !!!

As to Rolland's car's chassis no. we have several members in Iowa: Hans Goettsch, Mark Heathman, Frank Wright, & Carlyle Merritt (with six cars!). Perhaps if any of you are reading this, and are willing to finally solve this "who dunnit" we may yet have an answer.

Finally, one little thing does not ring true: how could a bang from a garage door cause enough damage to necessitate replacing the chassis frame??? And would that damage not be apparent on the frame you have?

ocTagonally
TCRoger

Mark Hineline (TC MMM CD IX) wrote (among other things:
There are really two different questions going on here. One is the legal status of my ownership of TC 3409. That's settled. I own TC 3409, and when it comes time to register it, that's how it will be registered.

[Bob Grunau]

"A data plate with a chassis number that does not show up among our members"

Geez, this is a very small number of TCs being researched for the correct chassis number. And what happens if I own the chassis that is shown on the plate that you are offering to Mark? No, NEVER. The correct solution is for Mrs Roland M. to get the chassis number off her car and register the car under its current chassis number. Mark has chassis TC-3409 and the car should be so registered if ever completed. Its very simple really. Two wrongs never make a right.

Since Mark is in a different state, he can probably register the car as TC-3409 ( which it is ) in California. One thing is SURE, if I ever buy a car from any of you guys offering the simple solution of re-stamping numbers, I'll be sure to check ALL the numbers before I get cheated. I'm sure it is illegal to switch numbers.

But then maybe its time to get back to vapour lock?
Bob Grunau

[Ron Simon]

Alright, enough already! can't we put this subject to rest? All we have here is a chassis with a number on it, so what. Here in California as well as several other states TC's were titled by their engine numbers not chassis numbers. Why not wait until there is an engine in the chassis or an old data plate has been found to use those numbers.What difference does it make?

The idea is to drive and enjoy TC's not to quibble about whether or not every part is factory original or has been replaced at some time.

Sorry for the rant,
Ron Simon

[Mark Stolzenburg]

Mark, Why don't you call Mrs. Meismer and purchase the TC that Roland put together. I believe the car is for sale or at least was for sale. I met Roland and his wife a few years back at a GOF Central in Moline, IL. They were wonderful people and the car was a beautiful example of a TC. This way when you get the car home you can swap the chassis so you will have the complete original TC 3409 and I won't have to hear any more about this topic!

Mark Stolzenburg
St. Louis, Missouri
TC 7812

[mrbadger@comcast.net]

Mark.

Many of the attitudes to which you allude here are the same ones that were, at least partially, responsible for my selling my first TC several years ago, after forty years of ownership, and quitting the club but, having said that, it should also be said that these attitudes are pretty typical of most any one marque club (not a one mark club) and that is why I generally prefer car clubs with a broader base of interest. Also, I did have other, more substantial, reasons for selling my car. However, here I am again but, this time, determined to stay above it all, keep it light, use my delete key freely, and not to be drawn into the petty bickering and snobbishness that prevail among many members. Now, having just said all that, I can't resist adding my two cents by saying that having had many, many years experience in old cars, I firmly believe that the man who owns the factory numbered chassis, owns the car, regardless of titles, paperwork, what is "fair", or anything else.

Moving on.

After attempting to deal politely and reasonably with truckers and trucking companies for several weeks, I finally resorted to yelling rude obscenities and making threats, (why didn't I think of that in the first place), but I have officially taken delivery of the Volvo-powered, sky blue, white wall attired TC that I purchased on eBay several weeks ago. It is safely locked in my storage building covered in dirt and road salt from its journey perched at the back of a large flatbed truck. As you can imagine, especially in light of the recent list brew-ha-ha regarding numbers, I have been more than somewhat interested to learn the chassis number of my own car. Well, the paperwork and previous regos give the number as #27837 which is probably not right or, if it is right, many more TCs were built than previously thought. The maker's plate on the side of the battery box which is plainly visible in the eBay pictures and which appears old, worn, and weathered, shows no numbers whatsoever. The number spaces are simply blank for both chassis and engine numbers. The confusion of bolt sizes that hold the front pan and rusty badge bar in place look pretty daunting especially in a very cold and poorly lit warehouse however, as soon as the spirit moves me, I shall venture down there with a few tools and attempt to ascertain the actual chassis number. Until then, I propose to refer to my car as TC 3409c for want of any better number.

Badger
TC3409c

[Mark Hineline]

In the past 12 hours I've been advised to:

1. Grind the number off my frame
2. Fill the number in with bondo
3. Buy Mrs. Meismer's car
4. Pick a number any number
5. Stop acting like Badger
6. Take the car to Mongolia, title it there, and then reimport it into the U.S.

And with all this advice to sift through, most of it wrong for one reason or another, I'm already getting the "enough with this thread" messages.

C'mon, folks. If Rolland had posted to the list and asked what to do when he mismatched his frame and car, and had gotten the right answer, I wouldn't have to deal with any of this and we could go back to talking about vapor locks.

Mark
TC 3409

[Chip Old]

On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 12:53 -0000, Roger Furneaux wrote:
Finally, one little thing does not ring true: how could a bang from a garage door cause enough damage to necessitate replacing the chassis frame??? And would that damage not be apparent on the frame you have?

Based on what others have said, it sounds like the frame swap (if it occurred) may have been done by a previous owner, not by Rolland. If so, it may have been a long time ago, when parts cars were plentiful and the norm was to replace rather than repair. We already know the engine isn't original, so who knows how much isn't. Rolland's TC may be a mixture of parts from a lot of long-gone TCs, just as Mark's will be when it's finished. That doesn't make either one of them any less a TC, except in the minds those at the most rarified levels of collecting the things.
--
Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC
Cub Hill, Maryland, US TC6710 XPAG7430
fold@bcpl.net NEMGTR #2271

[Mark Hineline]

And the right way in this case is to convince Mrs. Meismer that her purported "TC 3409" should be renumbered on the plate and in the paperwork to the chassis number. That makes her car more correct, and legal, and it frees up the legal status of my frame.

Anything else is a botch.

Mark
TC 3409

[Peter Roberts]

I have been chuckling over this thread about chassis numbers. What about those of us (am I the only one?) whose chassis has no number??? Gad, the poor beastie is a numberless soul that must wander it days in the limbo of lost digits. Should I drop TC 0604 and become TC NO#? It's still a hell of a lot of fun to drive, looks great, and does turn the young girls heads. What more could anyone ask?

BTW, here in Connecticut, the car is registered under its engine number (which is not on the engine itself since it is a replacement Gold Seal), The nice man at DMV simply wrote it down from the Makers Plate on the firewall. Good luck to anyone trying to match numbers on my TC!

_Peter

[SEBRING222@aol.com]

I have to agree wholeheartedly with Bob in this instance. The time now spent in correctly determining the Meismer TC chassis number and correctly registering it while correctly registering TC 3409 will be time and effort well spent in preserving and Maintaining the Breed" for future owners and enthusiasts.

Jim Dougherty

TC 4931
TC 5382

[Gene]

Bob Grunau wrote:
One thing is SURE, if I ever buy a car from any of you guys offering the simple solution of re-stamping numbers, I'll be sure to check ALL the numbers before I get cheated. I'm sure it is illegal to switch numbers.

Bob,

If someone was selling the car as "numbers matching" I might be concerned BUT there's no real way for that to be determined if all numbers match, is there ? And I haven't seen the price differential between a "numbers matching" and a "numbers not matching" TC but I don't imagine it'd be much, if anything. From necessity far too many have different engines to be worried about that. Besides, isn't there something in the archives about how to make a Wolsley engine look like a genuine XPAG by redrilling the oil level hole and gluing on a plaster/Bondo MG casting under the generator?

From Mark's postings, the last thing we'll have to worry about is Mark claiming this is a "numbers matching" car - it's going to be a 'special' if anything.

And lastly, 10 years down the road who among us in this group is going to remember these posts? Without Gingko and Focus Factor I can barely remember what I did yesterday (very little, I'm sure).

Gene

P.S. - Is it illegal to have an engine in the car that doesn't match the one listed on the manufacturer's plate?

[Bob McKarney]

Mark, the fun has just begun! My car and many others are registered with the California DMV using the engine number, not the chassis number, so that potential problem is solved.

I look forward to the day, however, that you find a duplicate XPAG block and inform this list.

My only request is that you don't find XPAG 5920...that's my car, which, incidentally, traveled for several 100+ degree days from Barstow, California to Park City Utah in company with 4 other TC's. The only vapor lock experienced occurred in the brain of each of the drivers when they made the decision to take this tour of the desert in August.

Bob McKarney
TC 5443 - XPAG 5920
Cambria, CA

[D&J Edgar]

Just 2 cents from the distaff side (of David Edgar, TC5108). I don't want to get into the emotional aspects of car history, but I've been a cop for over 25 years and just wanted to pass on some procedural points.

It was mentioned that California used numbers other than what was stamped on the frame as a VIN in years past. That was many years ago. Current VIN verification standards (in California at least) require the VIN from the FRAME to be used.

If you went down to DMV to register your frame now they would require VIN verification since it is not currently in the California system. It would have to be physically inspected, and the inspector would be required to inspect the frame stamping and not go by a plate on the chassis. DMV would also run that number through their system to see if there is a conflict. It could pick up a car in Iowa, but may not as the process to link all states data bases from other states is still developing.

If the car in Iowa comes to California to be registered, then one of two things will happen. They may just let you register it with whatever VIN is on the Iowa registration (be it TC# or engine# as they wouldn't know one from the other on paper). More probably they will require VIN verification and go through description above using number stamped in frame rather than the ID plate. If all ownership paperwork was accepted, the car would be put in California's system under whatever VIN is on the frame.

If there is any problem with a VIN, such as one removed, ground off (and there are chemicals that can restore some of these--used in auto theft investigations), California Highway Patrol will issue a VIN to the vehicle for registration purposes...that would have nothing at all to do with the automotive history of that particular vehicle.

Mark, keep complete records of receipts...and register it as soon as it has some semblance of a car. Contact us if you have any question about this or go to the DMV web site and search on VIN verification...you can read from their registration manual what the clerks will be asking for and what is required if "normal" documents are missing.

Hopefully these cars will never be real theft targets, but if anyone grinds the number off the frame, fills it in with bondo, or stamps new numbers that someone could prove were not done at the factory... AND this came to the attention of law enforcement, the car could be impounded. If you could prove it was yours and the VIN was tampered with without criminal intent, it would probably be released to you, BUT CHP would be issuing it a new VIN.

Joyce Edgar
TC5108

[LuckyFloridaLin@aol.com]

Well Done;

O good and faithful Badger. My neighbor Larry has restored the Triumph Renown you got for him. Truly a work of art.

Tally Ho!
Thom Collins