The convertible?

[leadleader]

Does anyone know if the convertible is still available? I remember some talk of it hitting the auctions by the owner, or his representative, but that was a while ago now.
If it's not still available does anyone have any information on the car?

Thanks

[john]

Leadleader,

More than happy to converse in private email or personal conversation about the above referenced Tucker.
Thank you,
John

[tin goose]

the two door convertible does exist. the stamps on it are #57. It is undergoing a full completion at a location I will not disclose at this time. I have many pictures as it sits today. the plan is to have it completed late spring/early summer.... stay tuned

[john]

We are curious, what documents do you have that document this car as a convertible?

Please be careful as having a Title issued on this car MEANS nothing in a court of law to a line of people from 1950 on.
We would recommend that you check with an attorney to find out what implications and serious problems might follow this car after titling.
John

[Tuckerfan1053]

Previous threads on the convertable:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=489

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=901

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=367

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=145

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=121

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=57

This topic comes up with some regularity, and promises are always made that the car will be revealed "soon" yet it never is. Nor have those claiming to have proof of the car's validity ever shown it (would be interesting to see, since Alex Tremulis stated that no such car was ever built). There is, however, a body shell which was bought at the sherriff's auction by a former employee who attempted to turn the car into a convertable, but never completed the work for some reason. Here are photos of the car:

[john]

An offer to Tucker authorities had been made in these forums, numerous times, to privatly discuss #57.

We have no dog in this fight>>>>>>> but did 100's of hours in costly and valuable research to get to the bottom line of what #57 is.

The only real question is; does it totally destroy the myth of it being a convertible or does it substantiate it ???

Our in depth History and research on #57 is available.
John

[Tuckerfan1053]

Why discuss it privately? The only way this matter stands a chance of being fully resolved is by an open discussion in a public forum. As long as one party (or more) keeps things out of the public eye, its going to be subject to rumor and speculation (and worse).

[john]

Tuckerfan 1053,
Most of the material would not be comprehensive unless it was told in it's entirety.

Really do not care to condense, write and post roughly 19 pages of our research.
Also do not really want to divulge names of persons that provided information and facts.

One funny thing, a real important key to the whole puzzle has never talked with anyone from the Club, this really surprised me, especially with the wealth of information and original documents they possess.

Posting what we have would only anger and totally contradict what many have writen about #57, deceased persons would also come under fire, we are gentleman and will not get into an open forum debate, let alone all the extra time to post all the pages noted above.

We would caution the new owner to check with an attorney on the car though, a horror story could present itself and we want no part of it, we walked from the car because of it, 58 years is a long time, do your research carefully !!!!!
John

[Tuckerfan1053]

Tuckerfan 1053,
Most of the material would not be comprehensive unless it was told in it's entirety.

Most of the material anyone has on Tuckers is not comprehensive, the only way this can be corrected is if folks share what they have.

Really do not care to condense, write and post roughly 19 pages of our research.

Yet you're more than happy to post that you "do" have material and participate in a thread discussing the car.

Also do not really want to divulge names of persons that provided information and facts.

So, you're saying you've got no documentation, only that person(s) of unknown credibility has told you "something." Hmmm.

One funny thing, a real important key to the whole puzzle has never talked with anyone from the Club, this really surprised me, especially with the wealth of information and original documents they possess.

Yeah, that's "odd." Wonder what they're afraid of. Getting the experts at the Club to look over them and pronounce them as legit would add to the value (or reveal them to be fraudulent).

Posting what we have would only anger and totally contradict what many have writen about #57,

And saying, "I know you're wrong but I'm not going to tell you how I know" won't?

deceased persons would also come under fire,

One of the advantages of being dead is you no longer care if someone sullies your reputation.

we are gentleman and will not get into an open forum debate,

Yet this is somehow different than the "Neener, neener, neener! I know something you don't!" you're doing now. Seems to me, that a "gentleman" if he felt he could not divulge the information he had, would refrain from mentioning that he had any information at all, less he cause "distress" in other persons, and subject himself, or others, to pointless injury.

let alone all the extra time to post all the pages noted above.

Yet you managed to find the time to trackdown all this information, and then come here and state that you have it. Bit odd that. Sort of like buying an expensive piece of art and then locking it away in a vault somewhere so that no one, not even yourself, can see and enjoy it.

We would caution the new owner to check with an attorney on the car though, a horror story could present itself and we want no part of it, we walked from the car because of it, 58 years is a long time, do your research carefully !!!!!
John

This would seem to indicate that your information amounts to nothing more than what has already been posted on these boards, that the car in question is not an unknown prototype produced by the company, but merely a bodyshell bought at auction that someone attempted to turn into a convertable and never finished. Were it really authentic, you would not have walked away, nor would you be advising the new owner to speak to a lawyer about the car.

So, now all we're left is to wonder why you're here, being so enigmatic about things.

[john]

Tuckerfan 1053,
You are correct sir, most material is not comprehensive.

"Getting the experts to look over the material"
Please, just read the posts, we as much had begged to be heard!!
We made several valid attempts to bring forth the material, if the experts could not reply, why should we care?

Yeah, the persons we spoke with are not credible and our informational history amounts to nothing, wonder if roughly 60% of it came from the club's written forums ?

The club, to our best knowledge and comprehension, has labeled the car a "body shell that someone attempted to turn into something else", the verdict is in and any distress or injury, as you termed it, lays upon the shoulders, not us, of the ones who labeled it with comprehensive material ?
By the way, whatever the car is judged to be in your or others opinion, had nothing to do with our decision to walk away from it !
John

[Tuckerfan1053]

Tuckerfan 1053,
You are correct sir, most material is not comprehensive.

"Getting the experts to look over the material"
Please, just read the posts, we as much had begged to be heard!!

Really? Saying you:

Really do not care to condense, write and post roughly 19 pages of our research.

Is "begging"? This must be some use of the word "begging" that I am unfamiliar with.

We made several valid attempts to bring forth the material,

Define "valid." Remember, some people might consider having to travel a considerable distance to look at something that they're told (but have never even seen photocopies of) is valuable to be an unreasonable request.

if the experts could not reply,

Such curious phrasing. One would expect you to use the words "would not" reply. This leaves four possible interpretations:
1.) An obscure club, with fewer than 2,000 members is threatening the expert members with death if they dare respond to your inquiries.

2.) You failed to give them contact information, so they could respond to you.

3.) You are unfamiliar with the English language.

4.) You are being less than honest with us.

why should we care?

Good question. One would think that a normal person would just label the club "a bunch of jerks" and refuse to have anything more to do with anything connected to them.

Yeah, the persons we spoke with are not credible and our informational history amounts to nothing, wonder if roughly 60% of it came from the club's written forums ?

Of course, we've no way of knowing this, since you have stated:

Really do not care to condense, write and post roughly 19 pages of our research.

Having been on the club's message boards (in their various incarnations) since the late 90s, I can honestly state that I have never seen anything credible posted on these boards to indicate that the convertable was built by the Tucker Corporation. I have seen a number of statements where people have promised to provide proof "soon," yet nothing ever materializes. Nothing.

The club, to our best knowledge and comprehension, has labeled the car a "body shell that someone attempted to turn into something else", the verdict is in and any distress or injury, as you termed it, lays upon the shoulders, not us, of the ones who labeled it with comprehensive material ?

Sorry, but that is not how things work, with anything. The experts associated with the club have stated that the car is the product of someone outside of the Tucker Corporation reworking a 4-door body shell. If you do not think that this is the case, then the burden of proof lies upon you. I should note that it would be a very good thing if a previously unknown Tucker car surfaced. With fully restored Tuckers now selling for around $1 million at auction, an absolutely unique model would cause the automotive press to be a twitter with stories about the newly discovered car, and this would cause the other models to rise in value.

By the way, whatever the car is judged to be in your or others opinion, had nothing to do with our decision to walk away from it !
John

You expect me to believe that? If you thought that the car was legit, then why did you state:

Please be careful as having a Title issued on this car MEANS nothing in a court of law to a line of people from 1950 on.
We would recommend that you check with an attorney to find out what implications and serious problems might follow this car after titling.

We would caution the new owner to check with an attorney on the car though, a horror story could present itself and we want no part of it, we walked from the car because of it, 58 years is a long time, do your research carefully !!!!!

Clearly, you must think that there is something fishy about the car. So fishy that you felt you had to walk away from the deal. It is highly unlikely to be a question of ownership, since in all the years I've been hearing about the convertable, no one has ever stated that the car's owner came by the vehicle by anything other legal means. So that leaves the provenance of the vehicle. Either it is a Tucker that someone outside of the Tucker Corporation decided to turn into a convertable or the car is not a Tucker, but merely a vehicle which someone has built to look like a Tucker. Both of those instances, it should be noted, would be what's known of as "fraud." I'm not sure, but I think that if someone has evidence that another person is attempting to commit (or has committed) fraud and fails to come forward to the authorities, they, themselves can be charged with being an accessory, if not worse. Have to check with the legal beagles I know about this.

[john]

Tuckerfan 1053,

We find your words and statements "quite distorted and assuming", can you read the English language properly?
Yes, authorities "could or would, whatever buddy, bottom line, they could have called at any time!
Never once did we ask anyone to come look at anything, where do you get your info?
We wanted to personally speak with an authority sir, anything wrong with that?

Phone numbers and e-mail addresses were left each time when messages were left together with the same through private e-mails through the clubs e-mail, where do you get your info?
A Club member told us he contacted one of the authorities, maybe he was just pulling our legs though.

Never once brought up anything about questionable ownership, where do you get your info?

Never once brought up or stated fraud, where do you get your info?

Clearly, we have met with hostility, just as we did when we were making valid attempts in our research regarding one post when an authority became upset, why ?

You ask why we do not forward our research !

1-We found it amusing that no special development cars were built, thanks to whomever posted the picture of the modified tucker,
2-We found it amusing that in a club post, a Tucker factory representative was quoted as saying no special vehicles were being worked on,
3-We found it amusing when the same picture displayed a body and frame all built together without paint,
4-We found it amusing when no one knew why the Tucker engine plant did not get auctioned and nobody seemed to know why,
5-We found it amusing when the production numbers of Tucker serial numbered bodies and chassis changed,
6-We found it amusing that the special body never turned up, oh yeah, we forgot, the stylist and Tucker Jr said one was never made,
These sir, are 6 out of 24 club matters from comprehensive material apparently the club has and you have read for almost 10 years or more.

We ask you this, why haven't you researched ?
We find it amusing that "you" have based your expertise and opinion, in part, in the above.
Our research has been vast and deep sir, you can nitt pick and criticize all you want with your comprehensive material, oh yeah, forgot, you stated almost all material brought forth was not comprehensive, the above is quite comprehensive, wouldn't you say?

John

[TuckerCar]

The club has no documentation to support the claim that the Tucker convertible was commissioned by the Tucker Corporation. Therefore, the onus is on those claiming that it is a genuine Tucker convertible to provide proof. As no one has been able to provide such proof for the last 60 years (I repeat), the club has no documentation to support the claim that the Tucker convertible was commissioned by the Tucker Corporation. It's a circular topic that comes up every 5 years or so and never fails to draw strong opinions.