This
always happens when the MkV (or project Kimber{Smart Ace}, or the Iconic and now MkVI! etc.)are mentioned. [B)]
It`s a toughy, because throughout AC`s history, there have always been 'specials', outsourcing, subcontracting, production shifts (Scottish ME, anyone?) but there has always been a link, DNA, whatever you call it, that pretty much broke after the CRS/Superblower/212SC period.
The Texan gentleman was happy to take Polish-built Kirkhams & sell them as his continuations with '
his'* chassis numbers on,
whilst taking pot-shots at anyone else who replicated '
his'# shape... oh yeah, and he makes his own fibreglass replicas too...
SO, does that mean that the MkV/VI should be embraced?
Are the AC Heritage cars, built by some guys who worked for Autokraft with some guys who built original Cobras at Thames Ditton on some of the original tooling to the correct spec & method any less of an AC than a MkIV which (
most) of the ACOC are happy to have in the fold?
We`ve not really touched on the Brooklands Ace/Aceca lines which could have been the real 'next generation' of AC`s had circumstances not dictated otherwise, and would probably have negated much of this discussion! The DNA is there too...
Although a lot of us DO agree on much of this, there will always be small areas of grey, maybe BIG areas, but the one thing we should all unite for is the identity of the club being retained for the enjoyment of those that have done so much to promote the very brand that they can no longer depict in their logo!!!
Vive La
*(but we never did get a definitive answer to the
"what does CSX stand for"? question!)
#(but who`s shape was it really? Alan Turner, John Tojeiro, Ferrari, list goes on..& on...!!)