mk1-forum.net

Some pics taken this week.

Thats looking fantastic Dave! Cant wait to see GRX at Blyton next year, its going to make a stunning original car.

Tim

brilliant to see the updates Dave

Hi Dave
Great progress.

How much of the original paint are you planning to leave ?
Serious question, as I am at the same stage with this Vita Car and finding it difficult to make a decision.
My bodywork appears to be about the same as yours.
I really don't want to repaint the whole shell, as there are some details worth keeping, but not sure how much patching and blending will result in an acceptable finish.
Any comments welcome
Trevor

My mate Handpaints GP Bugattis as part of his business he finishes by rubbing the final paint surface with scotchbright to take off the shine and then gives a through polish to the paint surface .. The finished hand paint job looks correct to period and these cars are worth very serious money + his clients want to get that period look.

Two pack high gloss paint does not suit any 60,s car in my opinion... but who cares about my opinion .. "Paint it just as it suits you".

Hi Trevor.....Paul's car will be fully repainted externally, as it has been resprayed in the 70's anyway. All visible internal paintwork will be left as this is original. Like yourself, Paul is trying to keep as much original as possible. It may be good for you to talk with Paul if you want.....PM me if so and I'll arrange contact.
Looking forward to seeing more of your fantastic Vita car.....as you say, it looks similar condition.

Regards
Dave

spoon.450 wrote:Hi Trevor.....Paul's car will be fully repainted externally, as it has been resprayed in the 70's anyway. All visible internal paintwork will be left as this is original. Like yourself, Paul is trying to keep as much original as possible. It may be good for you to talk with Paul if you want.....PM me if so and I'll arrange contact.
Looking forward to seeing more of your fantastic Vita car.....as you say, it looks similar condition.

Regards
Dave

HI Dave
Thanks for the insight and the offer
A little further down the road and I will get back to you.
Trevor

I'd be tempted to leave original paint under the back seat (not that you have one Trev!! ), or the bulkheads where not eaily seen if you can. I still have some original Janspeed Tartan Red on mine and some original factory white in certain areas.

Pete wrote:I'd be tempted to leave original paint under the back seat (not that you have one Trev!! ), or the bulkheads where not eaily seen if you can. I still have some original Janspeed Tartan Red on mine and some original factory white in certain areas.

Yes back seat support is a bit thin
Most of the interior paint can be left as is, its pretty amazing that any of it survived.
Trev

That car wears its history well, I hope you can save the patina on the bonnet in particular, with the years of different broken strap brackets and screw holes - that tells a story, and is something you can’t easily replicate once it’s gone. i.e. preservation, not restoration.

I know I’m in the minority, but in my opinion just the repaired areas should be cellulose painted as close a match to the 70s respray as you can get, with the rest of the panels left as they currently are.

I found old some photos I took at the (92?) Earls Court motor show, with 33EJB before the restoration. I much preferred it with the ‘as used’ look, rather than shiny and new.

Nice to see the pictures of the rebuild, just wonder why a standard rear sub-frame is being fitted?

COOPERCO wrote:Nice to see the pictures of the rebuild, just wonder why a standard rear sub-frame is being fitted?

Hi Mike,
Thanks for your interest. The subframe is ( to the best of my knowledge ) the same spec as the one that was removed, and believed to be original but corroded beyond repair ( this is being saved ). The radius arms and hydro units are from the car. If you (or anyone ) has any info to confirm a different spec subframe was fitted to Paul's car, this would be greatly appreciated. Paul's intention is to get the car usable, and appreciates that it will be an ongoing project as more detail is discovered.
Thanks in advance
Dave

Already raised in PMs.
It is not impossible that the original car had no double skinning of the top of the rear sub frame but by then it would have been normal for a rough event car to have it? We have to remember that this was one of the first 4 cars built under the new for 66 Group 2. There were no major changes in Gp 2 but there seems to have been some caution in respect of "body strengthening" at that stage. (There were no major technical changes in Gp 1 either, just the minimum production quantity). I'm sure they were not yet clear what they could get away with under the new regime and the Monte saga in Gp 1 cannot have helped. A recent photo in this thread shows no "skidding" (ie. strengthening) of the tie bar mountings on the front frame and you would normally expect to see that on a rough road Gp 2 car. The outer brackets for the rear arms would be double skinned too? (although the "official" method of welding two brackets together is well nigh impossible to do...).
You would expect to see every sub frame joint welded. Brian Moylan is specific that they were arc welded as part of preparation and that the rear sub frame was much more prone to breaking than the front. Having gone on to do the Acropolis recce, I would expect the original rear sub frame to have been pretty well battered and I would not be surprised if it was changed soon after sale from Abingdon. I cannot recall exactly when rear brake pipe protectors were first used. They were only available off the shelf via Special Tuning much later on but may well have been fitted in some form to works cars much earlier (they were a bolt on bracket so not subject to the body strengthening reg.). None of the available photos are clear enough to see a battery box protection plate but I would expect to see an original sub frame showing evidence of holes for fixing bolts.
Hydrolastic units would be red/double red. Testing was carried out around then (Price's book) to check trumpets jumping out and photos in Dudley Pike's recent book suggest the ex-Monte Gp1 GRX55D may have been used.

I just asked because I remember seeing the front subframe having the 'beefed up' caps above the hydro' units & assumed the rear would have been a modified unit of some sort?

COOPERCO wrote:I just asked because I remember seeing the front subframe having the 'beefed up' caps above the hydro' units & assumed the rear would have been a modified unit of some sort?

Thanks Mike, yes, the front has had some work, but not sure if this was post Abingdon or not ? The build sheet specifies ' no additional strengthening to subframe '.

Cheers
Dave

Not sure the double skinning of the front sub frame "caps" was done on hydrolastic cars.
Brian Moylan is clear that dry cars had the caps but doesn't mention wet cars. He also implies all sub frame seams were arc welded ie front and rear frames.
Much the same applies to rear arch "turrets" in the body. I don't think they were welded/reinforced on wet cars as the helper springs were not punching upwards in the way dampers do on dry cars.
On the question of dampers, I'm sure you already have in hand removal of the front "auxiliary damper kit" (a post works mod to a car that old) before painting. I was interested to see from photos of the ORX cars that, once homologated, the brackets were standard ones rather than the double pin support that came to be used on dry works cars. On obscure detail, the lower bracket tapped mounting blocks on the inside of the inner wing were not on hydrolastic cars (but the drilled holes for the small bolts were?) but I can't remember whether the top tapped mounting was present on wet shells (but not used until the aux damper kit came along much later).
On an unrelated note, have you found a rust free hinged rear number plate mounting plate? (Gp1 and 2 regs considered it part of the bodywork and stick on rear plates were only on Gp 3 cars to 31.12.65. and Gp 6 cars from 1.1.66.)

Keith....spoken to Paul today and yes, the shock absorber mounting brackets have been removed. He also has the rear number plate mount that came with the car and this will be refitted. We would like to think that this is the one that originally carried GRX 309D registration number
Regarding your question about front shock mounting blocks with the 1/4 UNF threaded holes, my '69 S has the top ones fitted standard but not the bottom ones ( although the holes in the inner wing are there ).

Cheers
Dave

New to this site and just spent my lunch time reading this post and found it absolutely fascinating!
I've had an interest in the works cars for many years and thought i knew abit about the subject but after reading this thread i realise i don't!
can wait to see the updates.

Photo from Paul today......he's finding that the missing works parts he's researched and manged to obtain are bolting directly to the holes in the body. More detailed pics to follow....

Same view....53 years apart. The Healey reversing lamp was one of the Works used parts that bolted straight back on to the original holes....along with the 6RA relays, 4TR Alternator controller, quick jack brackets, front spot lamp bracket.....
As Paul's car would have originally ( from the production line ) been a single tank car, the right hand tank fitting was also interesting and retained.....