Greg, as always you are most helpful and I agree with the sentiment of what you say.
I went on the same assumptions that you did Greg, that the number is correct and the model is not. It certainly would be more convenient if it was a British vessel, built by a British builder.
However, looking at the images of the different boats and, again assuming that they are correct enough to be representative of the breed, looking at my boat, it is clear that my boat could not be a Higgins 78.
It is going to be far easier for me to change the number to one that fits the boat than change the boat to fit the number! If you see what I mean?
Several thoughts come to mind re the numbering of my boat.
1; It was a kit or plan build of an Elco 80 that had just been numbered with a British number to suit a British builders sensibilities.
2; It was intended to be a model of PT201 but plans were not available of the exact type and so was compromised.
3; It was built from plans that were less than precise about the type and model and were more generic.
4; Parts from some or all of the above.
I'm tending to favour either number 1 or 3 at the moment.
At the end of the day it looks more like an Elco 80' than any other type, so that is what I am going to restore it as.
After finding out so much about PT201 I may be inclined to build another boat at a later date to commemorate it. We shall see!
I do have a KD Perkasa and 3 tugs to get around to as well.
Terry