BPH 492B

General Chat with an emphasis on BMC Minis & Other iconic cars of the 1960's. Includes information on MK1 Action days.
Jasonking
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2024 2:22 am

BPH 492B

Post by Jasonking »

Hi all, I’m a complete newcomer to mini motoring etc, so please excuse any further dumb questions! I’ve just got a 1964 850 in Almond green/Old English roof, does anybody know/can tell me anything at all about this car please? Thanks!
User avatar
mk1
Site Admin
Posts: 19592
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 11:30 am
Location: York-ish
Contact:

Re: BPH 492B

Post by mk1 »

Welcome to the forum.

A few pictures or a bit of description about the car could be helpful.

From the DVLA MOT database, I can see that the MOT was last carried out in 2018, when it passed. The link here tells you more.

https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk/re ... calls=true

The vehicle details are as follows;

Vehicle Details

Vehicle make
AUSTIN
Date of first registration
April 1964
Year of manufacture
1964
Cylinder capacity
848 cc
CO₂ emissions
Not available
Fuel type
PETROL
Euro status
Not available
Real Driving Emissions (RDE)
Not available
Export marker
No
Vehicle status
Taxed
Vehicle colour
GREEN
Vehicle type approval
Not available
Wheelplan
2 AXLE RIGID BODY
Revenue weight
Not available
Date of last V5C (logbook) issued
10 March 2023

So, it looks like it still has its original size 850 engine, but other than that, without any further details we are a bit stuck.

M
User avatar
Peter Laidler
Posts: 5495
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 5:35 pm
Location: Abingdon Oxfordshire

Re: BPH 492B

Post by Peter Laidler »

With a white roof...... Is his a leter addition - OR - could it be a super-rare SUPER? Or is it too late to be a rare Super? Anyone?
coopersean
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:41 pm
Location: Derbyshire

Re: BPH 492B

Post by coopersean »

Peter Laidler wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 10:35 am With a white roof...... Is his a leter addition - OR - could it be a super-rare SUPER? Or is it too late to be a rare Super? Anyone?
A 64 car would be too late to be a Super unfortunately, as these were only produced from mid 61 to Sept 62.
User avatar
Peter Laidler
Posts: 5495
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 5:35 pm
Location: Abingdon Oxfordshire

Re: BPH 492B

Post by Peter Laidler »

Thanks. Just a thought that there might be another unknown survivor.
Jasonking
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2024 2:22 am

Re: BPH 492B

Post by Jasonking »

Hi, think it still has its original 848 engine. It’s Green with white roof, not sure how much is original or not, reckon there’s been some restoration work done maybe 6-7 years ago, but hasn’t done many miles since, youngest tyre on car is 2009! Thought initially it was a base model but I’m leaning towards it being a Deluxe with my limited knowledge of these things!
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Old English White
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 5:07 pm
Location: Southern England

Re: BPH 492B

Post by Old English White »

The chassis number (or the prefix anyway) will tell you whether is is a standard or deluxe car from new. Many old Minis have had lots of alterations to their specification over the years. You can also contact the motor museum at Gaydon and get a copy of the build information known as a Heritage Certificate which will tell you quite a bit.
That early in 1964 I assume it has no courtesy lights, the hard sun visors and metal interior mirror, dry suspension and full skirt front valance. There were quite a few changes during 1964.
User avatar
Peter Laidler
Posts: 5495
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 5:35 pm
Location: Abingdon Oxfordshire

Re: BPH 492B

Post by Peter Laidler »

No need for a heritage certificate I'd say. I would say that the furry dice definitely date the car to much later...., probably into the 70's. A 1964 car would have them stick-on bullet holes across the back screen
Jasonking
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2024 2:22 am

Re: BPH 492B

Post by Jasonking »

Good idea cheers, isn’t the registration prefix letter wrong as well? Or did they start in January back then?
User avatar
mab01uk
Posts: 7699
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 7:08 pm
Location: S.E. England

Re: BPH 492B

Post by mab01uk »

Jasonking wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 11:37 am Good idea cheers, isn’t the registration prefix letter wrong as well? Or did they start in January back then?
In an attempt to even out sales the motor industry lobbied to move the month in which the car registration suffix changed from January to August. This change was adopted in 1967. The registration year then ran from 1st August to 31st July until 1999, when biannual changes were introduced. 1967 was the first year to have two suffixes. “E” was used from January, with “F” introduced in August, so E suffix reg numbers issued were much fewer in number...
Post Reply