We are not in a world where Bentley Motors is still in business, and repairs are undertaken innocently to keep a car going. We are in a world where it is commercially lucrative to erode the genuineness of the historic artefact, not by simple replacement, but by extensive introduction of major developments.
So, if you want to pay ritzy money for a car that is largely a bitsa on an original chassis, then it's a free market, and a lucrative one for those involved. But don't knock those who choose to own and promote the historic virtues of the increasingly rare Bentleys that have original bodywork and matching numbers. They are much closer to being original Bentleys, and much closer in performance and behaviour to the cars that WO built and drove. Of course, the conversion trade doesn't like prospective purchasers being reminded that converted cars are much less original. Hence, the pooh-poohing of original numbers that goes on.
- David Green
Received from David Green on February 4, 2016
Dear Robert,
Thank you for your newsletter and coverage of the real Vintage Bentley issue. With the responses to HT1650, YM57, and 110, I can only say that the problems is more serious than I had thought. The three responses illustrate almost every facet of the problem I alluded to: shortening chassis, duplicating chassis, claiming fictitious chassis numbers, switching engine numbers from 3 litre blocks to new 4.5 litre blocks, changing the bodywork, and passing off by the trade. Someone needs to start clearing up this mess. I hope you get a response from Fisken's and Mann.
First, the chassis number. As I pointed out in my previous letter, this is the corner stone of the car's identity. It may just be acceptable, if a chassis has been destroyed in an accident, to substitute. However, this should always be openly acknowledged. After all, the owner should have already received recompense for the damage through their insurance, and to pass off a replica as if it were original is just that, passing off. It is fraudulent. So is the deliberate replication of a chassis with a view to passing it off as original.
I also dealt, overly delicately, with the issue of the 'special' and the 'bitsa'. Any vintage car where the chassis is retained but an alternative engine/gearbox/power train is put in place, should be regarded as a 'special'. There is currently a discussion on PreWarCar.com about a rare Mercedes that was destroyed many years ago ago but which had received a Dodge engine while it was still alive. It is regarded, quite rightly in my view, as a Mercedes 'special'. Similarly for a nice Riley 9 racing car currently for sale, fitted with a tuned Ford Model A engine that has been much changed in its rebuilding. Again, this should, in my view, be regarded as a Riley 'special', as it is in the advertisements. But this creates a serious problem for the Bentley conversion trade. Because every 3/4.5 conversion makes the recipient Bentley a 'special'. Bentley owners would have no difficulty in being discriminating if a Jaguar XK 120, say, were moved sharply away from its original specs, but seem blind to the dangers of forging new Bentleys.
The trouble starts with the passing off of a major modification onto an unsuspecting public. What would it do to prices if every 3 to 4.5 litre conversion was listed as a Bentley 'special', or, even worse, a Bentley 'bitsa'? To make my point, there is actually a very nice 3-litre Bentley 'bitsa' for auction at the moment, and it is original spec in every important detail. The expected price is considerably lower than that for an original non-'bitsa'. I, personally, would recommend it over a more modified car with a new engine to anyone looking for the original experience at a reasonable price. Indeed, once the original Bentley engine and bodywork have been thrown away from a previously original car, the car is little more than a 'bitsa' anyway.
Keep up the good work.
- David Green
END |
