New York Times Article on Convertible

Discuss the infamous Tucker "Convertible" and the whereabouts of other Tucker oddities

Moderators: Tuckerfan1053, TuckerCar, Phantomrig

Forum rules
The views expressed by users of this forum are their own and do not reflect the position of the Tucker Automobile Club of America, Inc., its members, officers or directors. Each user is responsible for the content of his/her own posts.

By utilizing these boards you are agreeing to these terms and agree to hold harmless Tucker Automobile Club of America, Inc. and its members, officers or directors from any part in the outcome of your use of these boards.

The Tucker Automobile Club of America, Inc. reserves the right to delete, edit or otherwise modify posts as it deems necessary for the organization or primary purpose of the site. Please report any activity which is libelous, inflammatory, or in violation of common decency to the forum administrator immediately.

New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby MrOldie » Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:27 am

Here is the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/autom ... r.html?hpw

I will let others comment
MrOldie
Newbie
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:29 am

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby NewFederalist » Sat Jul 25, 2009 8:16 am

Interesting article. Thanks for posting it. I am new to the saga so I have no clue if this is bogus or not.
Big Three? What Big Three?? Toyota, Honda and Nissan???
User avatar
NewFederalist
Newbie
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 8:30 am
Location: Hershey, PA

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby Randy Earle » Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:35 pm

A hunter took a duck to a taxidermist. The Taxidermist asked "what will it be?" and the astonished hunter asked "WHAT?" to which the taxidermist said, "I can do it as an eagle, a hawk, or a duck, what is your choice?". Justin will do it that way also. :lol:
Randy Earle
 

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby Phantomrig » Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:53 pm

Randy Earle wrote:A hunter took a duck to a taxidermist. The Taxidermist asked "what will it be?" and the astonished hunter asked "WHAT?" to which the taxidermist said, "I can do it as an eagle, a hawk, or a duck, what is your choice?". Justin will do it that way also. :lol:


:lol: I dont care who you are, that's funny right there :lol:

we know it's was and still is a real Tucker, it just isnt in it's original configuration. we know this because Tucker never made a factory convertable.
Image
User avatar
Phantomrig
Moderator
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Brook Park, Ohio

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby TuckerCar » Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:01 pm

Hey, we got our site mentioned in the New York Times!

What was the article about again??
Vice President
Tucker Automobile Club of America, Inc.
User avatar
TuckerCar
Administrator
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2001 7:05 am
Location: Chicagoland

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby john » Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:23 pm

Hey guys,
I mentioned, maybe about 5 weeks ago, that this article was being written by the NY times.

They called me 3 times for an interview, quite a nice reporter actually.

Staying out of it until the new topic area is complete and ready to rock and roll again.

TuckerCar, I knew it would take some doings to organize all that has been written in the forums.

Tucker, I see that you have been out of it also, kind of nice to take a break from it, huh?

Till the next time,
John :roll:
john
Tucker Fan
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:22 pm

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby TUCKER » Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:02 am

Hi, I also had questions by the reporter some time ago.
On being out of it it aint because I want to. Wished I could go on but some people out there don't like my finds. I believe I found out 99% of the blue easter egg and they don't like that.
"The Convertible is 1027 made into a convertible"
-TUCKER
User avatar
TUCKER
Tucker Fan
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 6:55 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby Randy Earle » Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:17 pm

TUCKER wrote:Hi, I also had questions by the reporter some time ago.
On being out of it it aint because I want to. Wished I could go on but some people out there don't like my finds. I believe I found out 99% of the blue easter egg and they don't like that.
"The Convertible is 1027 made into a convertible"
-TUCKER


And a Duck is a Duck. 8)
Randy Earle
 

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby Tuckeroo » Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:30 pm

I'm still disputing the claim that the final 13-16 cars (depending on the source) were NOT completed at the factory, but into the 1950s or later. Perhaps the last few were not 100% complete, it seems at least the last two or three were sans transmission, but still had a greater deal of "completion" at the factory than is claimed by Reinert and Cole. What backgrounds do we have on those final cars?
Tuckeroo
TACA Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:57 pm

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby Phantomrig » Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:33 pm

TUCKER wrote:Hi, I also had questions by the reporter some time ago.
On being out of it it aint because I want to. Wished I could go on but some people out there don't like my finds. I believe I found out 99% of the blue easter egg and they don't like that.
"The Convertible is 1027 made into a convertible"
-TUCKER


I personally enjoyed reading your findings, simply because I could understand what you were saying. Im have adult ADD and dyslexia, so with my short attention span it is hard to keep on task some times, but you post were always easy for me to read and understand. :D
Image
User avatar
Phantomrig
Moderator
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Brook Park, Ohio

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby TuckerCar » Mon Jul 27, 2009 7:31 pm

Tuckeroo wrote:I'm still disputing the claim that the final 13-16 cars (depending on the source) were NOT completed at the factory, but into the 1950s or later. Perhaps the last few were not 100% complete, it seems at least the last two or three were sans transmission, but still had a greater deal of "completion" at the factory than is claimed by Reinert and Cole. What backgrounds do we have on those final cars?


Gilmore has Tucker corporate documents showing that 1047 was considered complete at the factory. So I am forced to believe the not-completed theory is a bust.

Tucker Corporation Documents - plural noun - Paperwork and provenance used to authenticate or substantiate that such a car exists. Not to be confused with heresay or passing comments in [TACA] Tucker Topics.
Vice President
Tucker Automobile Club of America, Inc.
User avatar
TuckerCar
Administrator
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2001 7:05 am
Location: Chicagoland

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby TUCKER » Mon Jul 27, 2009 7:54 pm

Here is something for all of you to think about. Read this list and what is here is that most of the cars had engines and sold for high cash since they were almost complete. The bodies were complete and painted at this time with engines but the new "Tucker" transmissions were not ready. Not much was needed to complete them so they have started 1050 and 1051 at that time when the plant closed. The price on the cars tell you a lot here. 1028 1033 1036 are the same condition so have the same price! Just need a transmision so go for $2000 as the last few cars without transmisions. That tells you they have to be in same condition. Only 1050 is low in price sice it was complete but no engine or tranny. Just go thrue the price list of the inventory and it tells a lot on the cars!

1050 was the last body completed at the factory. Then 1051 was left incomplete far from being completed but had been started being put together at that time.

OK, Maybe the last cars also needed a small part here and there but that did not make a big diference and they were still close to being completed.

1042 needed more than just an engine or tranny so it was used for parts by Al Reinart/Gilliland and he sold the frame later as 1018 along with outher parts to George Esch.
Attachments
img196.jpg
img196.jpg (48.22 KiB) Viewed 3640 times
User avatar
TUCKER
Tucker Fan
 
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 6:55 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby Phantomrig » Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:38 pm

Was there something special about 1011 and 1028, according to the list they were both in the experimintal garage, or were they just there for no reason?
Image
User avatar
Phantomrig
Moderator
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Brook Park, Ohio

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby Tuckerfan1053 » Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:07 pm

Phantomrig wrote:Was there something special about 1011 and 1028, according to the list they were both in the experimintal garage, or were they just there for no reason?

I might be misremembering, but I think that 1028 got a different version of the transmission than the cars that came before it.
User avatar
Tuckerfan1053
Moderator
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 1:00 am
Location: Gallatin, TN

Re: New York Times Article on Convertible

Postby Tucker Fan 48 » Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:40 am

Wait a second here. It appears engine # 33539 was in car #1044 and is documented on the list above. Isn't that the same engine
that Cole claims is the brand new, never used, engine in his convertible and doesn't he say that engine and correct sourced
transmission somehow prove his car is real, even though Reinhart said it had no engine and transmission when he bought it?
User avatar
Tucker Fan 48
Tucker Fan
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:34 pm
Location: Maui

Next

Return to Tucker Fact or Fiction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest