Re: Ever optimistic

[leadleader]

I have pondered the matter of finding tucker parts and cars since I was probabally 7 years old. Thankfully this site has given people such as myself an opertunity to see a portion of what is definitively known about existing Tuckers and related components.

Growing up, I have had the same notions that I have seen mentioned, and sometimes scoffed at, on this forum; such as building "the new tucker," finding one sitting in derelict condition, and other such blissful ideas. Fortunately, your site has given a good grounding for my Tucker persuasion. I am sure that there are other people in my position believing that despite the presented information there may still be some Tucker artifact that will lead them to an enjoyable fullfillment that they have some true connection to a tucker. This is more likely something that those of us born after the creation and demise of the Tucker Corp because our memories of the car are limited to a movie, some articles, tv show, and as many museum trips as possible.

I believe that what I am trying to get to is the fact that there are many of us Tucker enthusiasts that are curious to the existance of parts, including, but not limited to: body shells (as mentioned in forum post 1985, and others), frames, body panels, and the ever eternal question of the fate of 1042.

As for body shells it seems that of the "extra" body shells have become: the one that has become "51" in NJ, "57" (the supposed convertible), experimental cowl "52", body shell "55." as for the others it is said that four of them were beyond repair. The only frame that has arisen of late has been a portion of that from 1018. Some other sheet metal came up a while back.

Seeing that some of these parts are definately out there and others have been presumed destroyed due to their condition, would it be helpful, as a means of answering the questions that appear on the site, to post a copy of original auction list to see what things were originally available, and as questions come up, cross out things such that the same questions do not continually arise? I would think this would work since, a part that's current state is accounted for is one that cannot be questioned.

Also in regards to 1042, to quench the desire of people hoping to find the last unaccounted for Tucker, could some form of closure be presented that could secure its position as a blue tucker with an x through it?

Please forgive me if this seems out of line, but it would be a great tool in asking and answering questions, once. This would keep people such as the owner of 1023 from being continually bothered with the questions of its restorability.

Richard