other 1972 BMW 2000tii Touring Alpina on BaT

[Conserv]

7 hours ago, NickVyse said:

I'd be checking very carefully that the chassis number hasn't been cut and welded in, line is a little wave for my liking. For me this would only effect the value and not the desirability. 

 

http://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/DSC_0103.jpg

 

But, Nick, given the documentation of this chassis number coming to the U.S. in 1972, as a new vehicle, we'd then have to conclude the the original chassis rusted out (possible) or was wrecked badly (also possible, I suppose), and the 2006 re-paint was actually a complete re-body with VIN 3423293's engine, interior, and all the Alpina goodies being transferred to a better touring body -- along with the chassis numbers.  And then the original owner, after 40 years of ownership, sold it at auction in 2013, concealing the re-body.  Things happen, but I find it really hard to believe that someone who owned this car for 40 years -- a very special car at that -- fits the profile of a VIN fraud perpetrator.  The chassis VIN was obviously incorrectly overpainted in what was a good, but certainly not great, repaint, but I believe the variations you see are well within the range of 1972 VIN stamp quality, made perhaps worse by the new paint being applied where only primer appeared originally. I'd not question this chassis's authenticity unless, of course, my correction of the VIN overpaint revealed a welded-in chassis number!

 

Below is my '76's chassis VIN, in a photo I took in August 1983.  It looks pretty sloppy to me.  But I'll swear on The Bible that that's how it came to me in July 1976, and I'm betting BMW didn't re-body it before I took delivery!

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

 

 

Edited September 14, 2016 by Conserv

[NickVyse]

12 minutes ago, Conserv said:

 

But, Nick, given the documentation of this chassis number coming to the U.S. in 1972, as a new vehicle, we'd then have to conclude the the original chassis rusted out (possible) or was wrecked badly (also possible, I suppose), and the 2006 re-paint was actually a complete re-body with VIN 3423293's engine, interior, and all the Alpina goodies being transferred to a better touring body -- along with the chassis numbers.  And then the original owner, after 40 years of ownership, sold it at auction in 2013, concealing the re-body.  Things happen, but I find it hard to believe that someone who owned a car for 40 years -- and a very special car at that -- fits the profile of a VIN defrauder.  The chassis VIN was obviously incorrectly overpainted in what was a good, but certainly not great, repaint, but I believe the variations you see are well within the range of 1972 VIN stamp quality, made perhaps worse by the new paint being applied where only primer appeared originally.  I'd not question this chassis's authenticity unless, of course, my correction of the VIN overpaint revealed a welded-in chassis number!

 

Below is my '76's chassis VIN, in a photo I took in August 1983.  It looks pretty sloppy to me.  But I'll swear on The Bible that that's how it came to me in July 1976!

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

 

Caveat emptor only becomes more valid the more you're spending! I'm not saying it's dodgy, I'm just saying I would be triple checking if I were a buyer. Wrong VIN plate, chamonix sticker and wavey line on the chassis stamp just get the radar beeping on what is otherwise a lovely looking and rare car with documentation. Shame about the 2 tone though :-)

 

[tim355]

Very cool car but I think the best part of Alpina modified cars are the engine upgrades (including the fuel injection set-up with the red air horns)

[Conserv]

4 hours ago, 02Les said:

Steve,

The weights are incorrect for a Touring. The weights on that "replacement" VIN plate are for a tii sedan.

The 3 Touring weights are 1450, 700 & 780.

 

Thank you, Les,

 

So definitely a replacement VIN tag to go along with the new underhood stickers.  Details handled by someone who was neither a perfectionist nor an '02 specialist!

 

Best regards,

 

Steve

 

 

Edited September 14, 2016 by Conserv

[Preyupy]

I looked at this car very carefully in 2013 when it was at the Bonham's auction.  I was in on the bidding but got out before it got to $35k.  The car is in very nice condition but not a concours winner.  The repaint was not a full disassembly repaint and there are a number of things that are not perfect (decals that are incorrect or in the wrong place etc) but it is not a rebody!  It was a driver and taken care of but not by a 2002 expert.  All of the important Touring, Tii, and Alpina bits are there and with some elbow grease this could be a really cool car for someone.  I have not seen the car since the auction but I do know who bought it and I am sure he has spent some time cleaning up some of the small issues (the pictures show me that much).  The car is worth what ever someone is willing to pay for it.  In 2013 I was willing to go to $32k after looking at it for a few hours, someone wanted it more than I did at that time.  I expect it to go well past $40k on this sale,  I'll make a guess at $48k. 

Edited September 14, 2016 by Preyupy

[TobyB]

Funny, as the guy who usually says "it's not worth that much"  

I'm with you on this one, Byron, and that was before I knew you'd looked at it.

 

Yes, there are a number of things that aren't perfect

 

Quote

Left control arm is slightly bent – not enough to affect the alignment

 

If the pictures are good enough to tell by, BOTH look bent to me, but for $250, who cares?  Or did Alpina do that?

There is rust, certainly.  How much is just part of the fun, right?

 

But this car is stupid cool, and assuming that the papers are all real (no reason not to, until it's 'big check' time)

it'd be really really neat to own, be able to fix up cosmetically without worrying about 'patina'  (pain-in-my-ass-tina, but I was younger then)

and drive.

And not feel particularly bad about paying a big chunk of change (for me) for.

 

And I'm not a touring guy either.

 

t

[saaron]

There are some quirky things about this one.  

 

Who would buy the quick steering, the suspension upgrades, the brake upgrade (with REAR DISCS no less), the sporty steering wheel, then say "the stock seats are fine for my '70s G Machine I just spent a fortune spec'ing out.  And I don't need more power."  Just seems sort of...incomplete.  

 

Also, who says "can you paint my brand new white car silver, too?"

 

When the POs brought my car over they had to put the crazy 120mph speedo in it, and get this, they had to take the little vin plate (the one on the steering wheel pad/cover) and glue it up on the dash, like where cars have it today.  The Federalization thing probably lacked some consistency state to state, and probably changed over the years, too.  The '72 rules and the '84 rules might have been different.  My car has the original vin plate, FWIW.  They weren't made to change that, I guess.  

 

But super cool car, and I'm not a Touring guy, either.  (Except for Randy's and Bill's for some reason.)

 

Scott

 

 

[Conserv]

On September 14, 2016 at 4:49 PM, saaron said:

 

....Also, who says "can you paint my brand new white car silver, too?"...

 

Scott, I'm really not trying to pick on you, but I want to "un-pack" this Chamonix-car-repainted-Polaris myth (mostly because this comment ranked high among some pretty "un-informed" comments on the BAT site):

 

1.  Examine the letter, dated October 12, 1972, from the broker (Brad) to the original owner (Phil).  After the first paragraph, he summarizes the costs.  But clearly, in my opinion, he separates the BMW factory costs from the Alpina costs.  The base car is DM 12,987.00.  He adds the factory options of tinted glass, sunroof, black interior, silver paint, and the five speed and comes to a subtotal of DM 15,157.00.  Excuse me for reiterating:  there is a subtotal (of DM 15,157) because that is the suggested retail price for the car with its BMW factory options.  That is the "factory sticker".  After the BMW options and this subtotal of DM 15,157.00 come the items for which Alpina is responsible, starting with "Alpina options" for DM 6,635.00.  It doesn't say "Other options", it clearly says "Alpina options".  "Silver paint" is clearly one of the BMW factory options, not one of the Alpina options.  So what is "Silver paint" for DM 442.00?

 

2.  On the summary cost sheet accompanying the October 12 letter, but which appears to pre-date that October 12 letter, you can see "Silver special paint" for USD 128.11, which at a .2898 conversion rate applied to DM 442.00 is quite close to the conversion rates of .3002 and .29987 Brad quotes in his October 12 letter.  So...what silver paint does $128.11 buy in 1972?  Well, the metallic colors were ALWAYS an extra cost option on '02's.  I paid USD 244.00 extra in July 1976.  The window sticker below from tii VIN 2761838 (probably May 1972) shows metallic paint as a USD 175.00 option on U.S.-delivery cars.  The touring that is the subject of this thread probably pre-dates June 1972.  Why?  The Alpina Rechnung, the preliminary cost estimate, appears to have a June 8th date, and the car already had a VIN assigned and thus appears to be in existence as a "Demonstration Car".   Pre-June 8th is also generally consistent with the lack of a firewall notch -- and I won't even mention the aluminum intake runners!

 

3.  I believe it is adequately clear reading our posts above that the Chamonix paint sticker is not original to this car.  It is a brand new sticker applied by someone who didn't know what it meant.  For heaven sake, even the riveted-on VIN tag was replaced for the re-paint: they certainly didn't find and preserve an absolutely mint Chamonix paint sticker while they replaced every other sticker and the VIN tag.

 

4.  I have two personal paint job comparables from this era.  In 1975, I took my '67 1600-2 to Earl Scheib for an exterior paint following an accident -- not my fault, I swear!  The body work was done by a good body shop (i.e., not Earl Scheib) and paid by insurance but I wanted the entire exterior painted to avoid mis-matching and because the 8-year-old finish was looking tired: the insurance company obviously wouldn't pay for that.  I don't recall the estimate for the exterior repaint by that good body shop but I absolutely couldn't afford it (it was a LOT more than $350).  So...I stripped off all the trim, lights, bumpers, etc., and took the car to Earl Scheib.  Taking them a car stripped of trim, lights, bumpers, etc., I got solely the exterior re-painted in the existing and original Sahara -- no jambs, nothing under the hood, nothing in the trunk or wheel wells -- with an Earl Scheib medium-level paint job for $350.  If I had only known that Alpina would do a spectacular ground-up, engine-out repaint and color change on an '02 for $128.11, I might have made different decisions!  And I wouldn't have had to strip the car myself.  Second, when my '76's Polaris metallic paint went south in 1980, estimates for a complete exterior repaint by better body shops ranged from $1,500 to $2,500.  Again, those were exterior-only re-paints, no underhood or trunk areas, and certainly not a color change.

 

Given these points, does anyone think it is remotely possible that Alpina was willing to re-paint and color-change a new 2000tii in 1972 for $128.11?  Is it possible that metallic paint, which was ALWAYS an extra-cost option on '02's in EVERY market is the simple explanation for this $128.11 BMW factory charge for a Polaris metallic tii?  Indeed, who is willing to argue that Alpina would do a complete car re-paint, including a color change, in a metallic paint, for $128.12, less than the amount BMW charged U.S. customers for the metallic paint upgrade, $175.00?

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 24, 2016 by Conserv

[djminkin]

Read the Alpina build sheet. They painted the car for the customer. This is a well documented car with rare build sheet. The only thing is its all suspension and cosmetics no engine work?  What a pity, but a nice car nonetheless.  

[JohnS]

I love the wheels.  Borrani alloys or just alloys with a Borrani sticker?

[Conserv]

34 minutes ago, JohnS said:

I love the wheels.  Borrani alloys or just alloys with a Borrani sticker?

 

John,

 

It's all in the database!

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

[tomphot]

21 hours ago, Conserv said:

I am not a "touring guy".  Never have been.  But this is first touring I wouldn't kick out of bed.  The Alpina equipment WITH documentation makes the world of difference to me.

 

GLWS,

 

Steve

 

I agree with the first half of Steve's comment.  I just don't like how the lines of the vehicle are interrupted.  I also have this same feeling for the Porsche 911 Targa - it totally interfers with the natural perfect lines (IMHO) of the 911. 

[JohnH]

8 hours ago, saaron said:

There are some quirky things about this one.  

 

Who would buy the quick steering, the suspension upgrades, the brake upgrade (with REAR DISCS no less), the sporty steering wheel, then say "the stock seats are fine for my '70s G Machine I just spent a fortune spec'ing out.  And I don't need more power."  Just seems sort of...incomplete.  

 

 

I also thought that. Maybe the OO was a stout fellow who couldnt fit into arse clenching Recaros. The thing I do find strange is that having decided to keep the standard seats he didnt opt for the "cloth" inserts, which were de rigueur at the time.

 

I'm not a touring guy from a more practical view point. The tailgate is too low at the back, restricting the height of the load. Fords Capri of that era suffered from the same problem, but worse. I once popped the rear screen out of one when I closed it onto a non-conforming suitcase. Maybe a touring option was fitted luggage. 

[NickVyse]

I love tourings, but then I'm biased ('72 Polaris tii waiting to get refreshed) . But you're right about the practicality - the boot (trunk) floor is about 2-3 inches higher than the saloon and quite a bit shorter too, which means they are actually less practical than the saloon unless your drop the seats and use the whole rear space. The touring sport packet recaros aren't too arse clenching and his build sheet would suggest money wasn't too much of an issue - if this had those seats with the matching rears piped in white, and a hot alpina engine then it would be just about perfect.

 

Glad someone else noted the aluminium intake runners - Preyupy, do you remember checking the engine matched the chassis vin?

[saaron]

Sorry Steve, I took BAT at their word.  I didn't dig into the images of the docs at all.  I figured BAT would have the story straight since they are auctioning the car.  

 

via the BAT description:  "Chamonix is believed to have been the original color as evidenced by the paint sticker under the chassis tag. The car was repainted silver metallic by Alpina as shown on the invoice, which was a 442 deutsche mark line item."

 

One of the BAT commenters said that the spare tire well showed signs of being white, but it looks Polaris to me.  But it's a picture on the internet, so who really knows.  

 

It takes a team of people in real life to fact-check all the things I say.  I don't feel picked on at all.  

 

Scott