I hate to admit (but must stand for what I believe) I place this issue in the same basic category with the "Is it a tiger" or "Oh, it's not a tiger" comment many Alpine owners have to endure (ok, warning, soapbox time). The issue with the french car is the second most annoying question/mistaken identity a long time Alpine owner (and person of English ancestry) gets. A tiger does not technically qualify to be a different model because all tigers are simply modified Alpines and should have been called Alpine V8's. To be another model or different designation, the car should "be" a different car. There aren't rules or regulations to delineate or provide guidelines for this, but there is common sense, something all too long forgotten in modern value challenged society. A Porsche 911 turbo is after all, a Porsche 911, an MGBGT is after all, an MGB, a Volvo P1800 ES is after all a Volvo P1800, a Mustang GT500KR or GT 350H is still a Mustang, and a Lotus Esprit V8 is still a Lotus Esprit, etc etc. I'm sure I'll get ripped on with examples to the contrary of how many others have taken "a" car and simply modified it a bit and called it something else but it isn't going to change that the principle is dodgy at the very least.
We have Sunbeam Alpines. Predating and supplying the basis for the (cutting torched) tiger and also predating the 'ren-alt' that took our cars name. In the annals of automotive history, it may occupy a small bit on a page, and be a little known car, but I sure am proud of my under-rated Sunbeam Alpine.
It is odd how the ren-alt (I know, I dig at them too much but I'll blame it on my Brit heritage) is most often referred to as an Alpine A310 or just an Alpine and rarely includes the manufacturers name. It probably stems from the same public misnomer as beemer rather than Bimmer for BMW's or poorsh instead of Porsch-a for the Stuttgart marque.