Tucker Frames

[streamliner]

TUCKER,

Do you have any other photos of the "Test Chassis #2" frame or can you re-scan at a higher resolution and give a closeup of the rear of the frame? I also see two close-together vertical lines (maybe weld lines?) on the frame about 10 inches back from the front fender-door junction. Can you zoom in on that area, as well?




John,

You had said:

You had previously, in a post, asked about what happened to the 4 dr 1949 prototype Tucker.
Our conclusions in tracing back is that it was cut up so the new ( body ) style would not be sold at auction.
Did some parts to it end up in Roscoe?

Why would they not want the new body style (#57, according to Alex Tremulis) sold at auction when they let the special "Test Chassis #2" get sold?
Also, do you think that there are other parts/cars/people involved other than #'s 18, 27, 55, and 57?

[Tucker Fan 48]

Streamliner,

Where was that photo taken? The picture certainly shows a frame under the car and most of the parts that made up Lot # 684 at the Kughn Collection auction that was held November 17th, 2002. The photos recently taken by Justin Cole of the same parts in Roscoe don't show the frame anywhere.

As I posted earlier, The entire basis for the "convertible" story being real is the "special frame". Every story that they release about the car talks about the "special frame" that proves it is real. The "special frame" that was reinforced at Lencki's. The "special frame" that was at Jerry Renner's Harley shop to be restored. The "special frame" that Al Prueitt saw in the mid-60s. The "special frame" that is pictured all over their website.

WHY then if Justin Cole went to Roscoe IL., to take pictures of the parts there, did he not take a picture of Frame #52 which was sold with parts lot #684 of the Kughn Collection by RM Auctions on November 17th, 2002 to Historic Auto Attractions? Certainly he would want pictures of as many Tucker frames as he could get to show that he has the one and only "special frame".

Could it be that frame #52 is also reinforced?

Where is the frame that was with parts lot #684?

Could it be that frame #52 is under the convertible?

Why did he not take a picture of frame #52?

What is Justin Cole trying to hide from the world?

[Tucker Fan 48]

The cowl from Lot #684 sure appears to be from body #52 according to the pictures Cole took.

#1052 cowl.jpg (43.14 KiB) Viewed 1297 times

#1052 cowl 2.jpg (23.53 KiB) Viewed 1294 times

#1052 cowl 3.jpg (42.38 KiB) Viewed 1291 times

[Tucker Fan 48]

I've read several places where #1027 was blue, but every picture of the doors from #1027 sure looks green. Anyone care to comment?
According to the stories at the time, the rollover at Indy was caused while Eddie Offett was driving and one of the doors opened up on a
curve causing it to spike into the track and flip the car over. The damage on the pictures would seem to confirm that.

#1027 door.jpg (51.52 KiB) Viewed 1279 times

[TuckerCar]

1027 was blue. You can see it in the Man and His Car video on youtube... 1:50 in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG8vU1fs7_s

[cicero]

I've read several places where #1027 was blue, but every picture of the doors from #1027 sure looks green. Anyone care to comment?
According to the stories at the time, the rollover at Indy was caused while Eddie Offett was driving and one of the doors opened up on a
curve causing it to spike into the track and flip the car over. The damage on the pictures would seem to confirm that.

I am not completely convinced that 1027 was blue when it rolled.
Color film dyes fade over time and if not stored in a cool environment. We don't know if lucusfilm did any color correction when they transferred it for the dvd.

I have always seen green when I see pictures of the doors as they appear today.

The attachment #1027 door.jpg is no longer available

If you look at this close up of one of the doors taken at the 2002 auction, I see green but I see what looks like light blue where some of the green was scratched off in the accident. You can see the same thing on the pictures on the convertible site as well

[TUCKER]

Hi, I have many more pictures of the test chassis #2. Hi Streamliner, what parts will you like in very hight resolution? Also do anyone know what that part of a frame could be for?? It was at the place where the convertible was started being built??

[streamliner]

TUCKER,

Any photos you have that may conclusively show whether or not "Test Chassis #2" was reinforced with the strengthening insert. Also, if you can show unique details to show if the 1948(+/-) frame with the 7 people in it is the same frame as the "Kughn Collection" #52 frame.

I'm obviously no expert on Tucker frames, but the piece of frame in your first picture looks to be the front end of another Tucker frame. In the photo I copied from one of your earlier posts (at the top of this page), it also appears that there are possibly extra frame rails sitting upright directly behind the front end of the car. Do you know what those are, or if they're at all related to the Tucker? And when/where was that photo taken (Tucker Fan 48's question)? Thanks...

[TUCKER]

it is the same frame the one with the 7 people and the one in the Kughn collection. Yes they are the same. I will post pictures with detail later today so you can see they are the same.

[TUCKER]

As you can see the test car #2 and the one on the Kughn collection were the same. the both have the same cuts to the front windshield frame to where the front windshield frame was cut and rewelded together

[streamliner]

That front end is a new one. Are you thinking that it's the same one as on the convertible?



Details like the weld lines, hole cuts, extra drilled holes, or anything else that makes them unique, would be great to see. Do you have a clearer, sharper image of the photo on the right?

[streamliner]

If there were only 58 frames built, and Test Chassis #2 was one of those, it just comes down to accounting for which frames went with which cars. TUCKER, you seem to have the most comprehensive collection of photos of the parts and cars anywhere. So it may just come down to matching up the frames to the known cars. While I agree with you that the windshields of "Test Chassis #2" and the "Kughn Collection" car are the same, I'm still trying to pinpoint the differences or similarities in the frames. As you mentioned, the cowl was just bolted on, so it is plausible that cowls were removed from special frames and placed on different cars. I still don't yet see conclusively that the frame in the 1948 photo is the same frame in the Kughn Collection.

At this point, I don't think anyone is saying that the convertible was much more than a frame and a cowl to begin with, so what other parts ended up on it doesn't really matter too much, UNLESS the parts you've shown that came from #27 (like the fenders) are now stamped #57, but I don't think this is the case.

The frame documentation is there,and you've probably got it. It's just finding it and fitting the right piece in the right place. I still think the key is in the unique features of each frame.

Anyway, could you zoom in on the following areas of the following pic? When/where was it taken? Were any other photos taken at the same time from other angles?

[Tucker Fan 48]

That's a mighty green looking door and it sure seems to have come from #1027.
I don't know of many other wrecked Tuckers. What color was #1018?

[streamliner]

. . . . . . . . . . . Kughn Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tucker: Man and Car #1027

[Tucker Fan 48]

That is without a doubt the same door. Even Justin Cole couldn't fake that one.
Why does it look so green now when it looked blue in the older photos?
Seems like the newer photos would be more accurate as to the real color.

There were six original colors:
100 – Black
200 – Waltz Blue
300 – Green
400 – Beige
500 – Grey (Silver)
600 – Maroon

The door looks more like #300 - Green than #200- Waltz Blue.

Any thoughts on what color #1027 was?