Just wanted to compliment both of you on the contributions you make to our collective knowledge and enjoyment. Different sides of the same coin is pretty much how I see it. With the concerns about clones out there, its good to to be able to spot anomalies. It is good to know what supposedly should have been the case as a part of any baseline. Then if one wants to change or improve, based on ones personal tastes, it can be done with the knowledge that it is different by choice, not through inadvertance.
For example, I bought my Mark 1A car with a mid 1000's vin number in October 1967. It came with Tiger II seats. Why, I have no idea. Dealer change, factory change, car really not new but sold as new and seats swapped because originals showed wear...? I always get people at car shows pointing out to me that the seats are wrong or they see I changed them. Then I tell them my story.
Someday I will put in my 347 stroker motor. I will be doing everything I can to make it look like an updated 260, for originality look purposes. Granted, when I turn the key, people will know there is something different! I am torn right now about upgrading the brakes to a dual master cylinder. Again original appearance versus functional improvement. At some point the improvements can get to the point that it is no longer really a Tiger. The original shortcomings are a part of its character. We all have the choice of where on that continuum we want to be, once it is our car. But when buying something from someone else, it is nice to be knowledgable about what one is getting.
My two cents. Gene