Works car found

[Pete]

Here's a few questions from my layman's point of view. Would the fuel tanks have had ply on them in period ? What were the holes in the rear pockets for ? Would the works have sealed the rear floor drain holes , I presume they did ? Would the works have left the hydro pipes that were visible (ie in the back) unpainted or painted 'em ?

[LMM76C]

Ply was applied when studded tyres were likely to be carried in the boot. I was not previously aware of it but there is a reference to potential need for studs on the Flowers in one of the Autosport articles posted above. Thinking about it, of course they would have anticipated a need for studs in February with part of route in the mountains.
If you mean holes in the floor in the front part of the 2 rear pockets, it would be roll(over) bar mountings (which could be post-works period but if works period we have to start thinking about the shell having continued through to later).
Holes filled (welded metal pieces?). Pipes unpainted originally (pretty sure, unless there was an attempt to disguise running them inside in the early days of 66 and the new Appendix J.)

[Pete]

Sorry, I mean the small drilled holes in the actual rear bin panels.

[LMM76C]

One other bit of data. The new for 66 Appendix J Gp2 did not allow fuel pipes to be run inside the "habitacle" (passenger compartment) and this never changed until that version of Appendix J ended in 81.
In his book "Anatomy of the Works Minis", Brian Moylan describes having metal channels made in a press to screw over the brake and fuel lines. That may have been for Gp1 cars.

Laterly that regulation was ignored and not enforced. I never even considered it when I built my Gp2 Cooper S - just ran the brake and fuel lines inside. There were a few cases on some events of someone trying to enforce it. It was a subject often discussed by private entrants on Internationals (it didn't apply to UK club and National events) and I recall when I first built my Escort I, like some others, ran a plastic fuel line all along the underside top of the transmission tunnel in case a scrutineer ever objected to the steel lines inside the car.
When we are considering early 66 (Flowers), I'm not sure what Abingdon would have done right then with the rules likely to be enforced to the letter. Hydrolastic pipes were not even covered/envisaged by the FIA rules, so they were free to run them inside. Seeing the photos of 309, it is re-assuring to be reminded what a messy job Abingdon made of it. Lots of private owners had Abingdon do their cars then because few could find anyone else even prepared to attempt it!

[LMM76C]

Sorry, I mean the small drilled holes in the actual rear bin panels.

I should have looked at the photos!
Are the same holes on each side bin? Seem to recall some stamped holes as standard? I also drilled similar holes to mount a large washer bottle there - but one side only.

[Ronnie]

I cant have a good look at the pictures, (limited bandwidth) But it most certainly looks every bit a works car great find!!

[251 ENG]

Can you put pictures up again ?

[Pete]

You should be able to view them OK here....

http://s9.photobucket.com/user/martincr ... t=4&page=1

[spoon.450]

You should be able to view them OK here....

http://s9.photobucket.com/user/martincr ... t=4&page=1

Thanks Pete.

[AustinSuperSeven]

Hello everyone..
Just been looking through the wonderful pictures and found myself questioning a few things with the car......
Is it me or is the quality of the wiring, relay positioning and pipe work locations/bending not to works standards?
I also thought that works cars had access holes in the rear seat panel, so they could get to the shock absorber mount without taking out the fuel tanks?
Not knocking this amazing find but i suppose we are seeing years of modifications on top of the original setup...
Well done guys... keep up the good work

[Pete]

Is it me or is the quality of the wiring, relay positioning and pipe work locations/bending not to works standards?
I also thought that works cars had access holes in the rear seat panel, so they could get to the shock absorber mount without taking out the fuel tanks?

Fairly sure it's not the original wiring and not all works Minis had access holes for the shockers, this one obviously didn't. Shame the people who know all about these cars, are passionate about the subject matter and know these cars in detail are seemingly not prepared to talk about this one, it's become the Elephant In The Room of works Minis. The Macbeth of rally cars. Other well known ex works Minis have surfaced over the years and were also sold out the gates of Abingdon in period sans original paperwork , usually going on to be rallied privately as this one was on a new ID. This one's not unique in that respect but in terms of the wall of silence that seems to surround it, it probably is.

[LMM76C]

As I think I mentioned earlier, I don't think neatness was very high on the agenda when even the works put them inside. I knew someone who had the hydrolastic units changed to (by then) blue comp ones by Abingdon for the 66 RAC and they really didn 't want to put the pipes inside because it was a b*stard of a job to do at all, leave alone neatly.
Later I asked Special Tuning about doing mine and I got the feeling they would do anything except putting those pipes inside. It was just so labour intensive they daren't charge what it really cost. Plating over them externally is what a lot did (me included). I remember asking Rod Cooper at Supersport about it and his reaction was "funny you should mention that, Tony Pond was in here last week asking the same thing".

[1ely]

Shame the people who know all about these cars, are passionate about the subject matter and know these cars in detail are seemingly not prepared to talk about this one, it's become the Elephant In The Room of works Minis. The Macbeth of rally cars. Other well known ex works Minis have surfaced over the years and were also sold out the gates of Abingdon in period sans original paperwork , usually going on to be rallied privately as this one was on a new ID. This one's not unique in that respect but in terms of the wall of silence that seems to surround it, it probably is.

I was waiting for the cooper register forum to light up, but 5 posts and nothing!!! whats going on

[cookie1071]

To be fair the story broke on here first, when the new forum was having difficulties, and anyone keen to post about it is more likely to do it here rather than there now that the thread is well established. Niall.

[spoon.450]

Some rare pics. thanks to simon776 of the (what we now believe to be) second 309D on the Polish on the GRX 309D thread.

[LMM76C]

I cannot use the "other" forum - it takes minutes to scroll down a page and freezes my PC.
I'm therefore answering the question posed there using this forum/thread: what happened to original GRX309D?
Some of the following is fact: some is guesswork. Shoot it down if possible as that will get us closer to the facts.
The (new) reg no GRX309D was not used on a rally between Feb and Aug. Since it was eventually reincarnated, the likelihood is it stayed on the original car until it was robbed from it to attach to a newly-completed car (for the Polish). A similar situation exists with the Monte Gp2 car, new reg no GRX195D. That did not appear on a rally from Jan to Sept. The most likely scenario is that both were practice cars in the interim.
When the GRX195D plate reappeared on a rally (with arches) it was the Coupe des Alpes, then the RAC. That is a logical progression for a new car - the tarmac Alpine then the rough RAC.
We tend to think of GRX309D and 195D initially appearing unarched because of concern about the wording of the new for 66 Appendix J. Fact is there was no arch option early on. That was driven first by the Cooper race programme (Gp5, new to BSCC for 66, was much the same as Gp2 in that respect). By the time of the first BSCC race (Easter 66) arched rally cars also appeared on the Circuit of Ireland. For the Monte and the Flowers it was probably as much about wheel stadardisation with the Gp1 cars also entered in both, especially the Monte. Both rallies needed studs available so the wheel numbers/tyre mix was already large, without the complication of different widths.
I assume the Swedish cars (Feb) were also unarched - but I can't find photos, despite asking a couple of likely sources. These cars, GRX310D and DJB92B both had a logical rally programme after the Sedish, gaining arches, suggesting they did not immediately become practice cars. Both retired (transmission) on the Swedish so were probably relatively good structurally. GRX310D must have been new. If Aaltonen had a new car, would Makinen accept an old nail? So DJB92B was probably also a new car on this now old reg no. It had just done the whole RAC and was probably the same car for that as the two earlier rallies it did in 65.
We then have photos of an unarched car testing at Strata Florida. (Bill Price book page 168 and the Browning book too). Caption implies 1965 but there is a 4-across lamp bar, late type sumpguard 4.5" wheels and a roll over bar. No reg no but evidence of glue from rally numbers. Must surely be 66 or even 67 (but would a non-arched Gp2 car still be around in 67?). Original 309 it seems not, as the studs for the lamp protectors are at the top of the wing. Original 195 prior to its reincarnation for the CdeA in Sept?
Recce cars would have been used between Feb and Aug for the Tulip, Austrian Alpine, Acropolis, Geneva, Vltava and German. As far as I can establish, all except the Acropolis were smooth(ish) rallies (a bit of loose on the Austrian Alpine but tarmac too). Chances are a car used as a practice hack on an Acropolis would have been a strong candidate for scrap/other disposal. Was that 309s fate? (or 195's). Interestingly, one of the few occasions where we have evidence of the identity of a practice car is that 66 Acropolis. DJB 92B had been one of the practice cars and was then used by the Press crew (Wilson McComb) and was robbed of a rear arm bracket during the rally to keep one of the competing cars going. DJB 92B was then disposed of (to John Sprinzel, who was dealing in used rally cars at that time - but had his own white/black rally S - and it eventually turns up with Cresdee).

[Smithmaps]

The event does not have to be 'Rough' to break a Mini shell.
A tarmac event, can exert severe stress on a Mini, and they try do an 'Egg job'. Bending the crossmember underneath the handbrake. If the regs allowed it, and sometimes even if they didn't, the cross member was double skinned in this area. Some were, and some weren't, as I have seen both.

BMC could not sit a world class driver on the next event in a shell with such damage, so would replace it.
A shell could therefore be rendered unuseable after almost any event if it has been unlucky and or gruelling enough.

Abingdon therefore never knew if a shell would be serviceable post event, and a full rebuild was therefore a probablility.

Serviceable shells were swapped about without thought in order to meet the next events entry often which had been made as vehicle identities some six months before.

There is nothing illegal about changing a vehicle bodyshell, as long as you 'own' the bits, especially if you are the manufacturer! The only stigma it has, is more latterly through ringing and aundering of stolen vehicles. Clearly not the case in rallying. (Usually)
I remember chatting with 'Bill Longshaw' (Old Drummer Longshaw) who personally cut up about 30 or so on the Abingdon scrap heap. I think only a very few were handed on to 'special employees or privateers', and probably most were damaged sufficiently that they would be deemed unfit to even convert to road cars. So in essense good ones were in short supply.
In hindsight, probably a blessing.

Ex rally shells were not easy to acquire, even for those who worked there. I was lucky enough to meet Terry Mitchell, MG's chief chassis designer many years ago, and he used to accompany the Comps boys on the Alpine each year as a bit of a jolly/fact finding mission. Despite being in the right place at the right time, he actually acquired a complete mini from stores as brand new panels. I actually saw it, many years ago and raped it for the boot lid off GRX 5D, its only works part, which I still have! It was an assembled floor pan in the black, and had a Mini Moke front panel, and it was eventually sold to Dave Gilbert.

So even though he worked only yards from Comps, and new all the team, it seems that acquiring a shell was not an option.

Guy

[Pete]

When a car was damaged / unfit for purpose to be presented for a rally (as we presume this first GRX 309D was) was it really always a matter of reshelling as you put it Guy or did the mechs just remove the expensive/important bits and stick the reg number on a complete new car wheeled in from Longbridge (or indeed another built up rally car?). The reason I ask is that people often describe the process of tyransferring numbers as a reshell but yet one rarely sees stripped bare shells pictured in period inside Abingdon. Lots of seemingly brand new complete cars being stripped/prepared and some incomplete previously used rally cars, sometimes being rapaired, very rare have I seen a stripped bare shell so to speak.

Considering this are we to presume that the recently discovered GRX 309D was more or less complete when it was released from Abingdon surplus to requirements ? A trimmed rolling car with all glass, panels , brakes and suspension with an engine is quite alot more than a shell ?

[davidnutland]

This topic is really stirring things up, there are works cars and works cars, we all know of the works cars that twenty years ago were MK1's dressed as Clubman's mk2's or mk3's, of cars that precious little of the original (ex-works guise as out of the factory gates) remain in a tartan red and old English white painted shell, if this is an ex-works car celebrate it. We are all aware that there are just a handful of genuine as the left the factory ex-works cars, and that some are copies of a car and just happen to have an ex-works registration, some of course have rather more of a genetic thread to a number plate than others just being a collection of ex-works parts, indeed this also applies to period race and rally cars that are built around an ex-works sump plug or wheel nut (OK I am being sarcastic).

Just be happy you have a nice car that is a representation of what it would have been on a particular rally/race at a particular time, try not to be fooled, fool your self or others that this is the car that did x, y, and z rallies/races.

The trouble of course is that they are worth big money!

[Pete]

try not to be fooled, fool your self or others that this is the car that did x, y, and z rallies/races.

..and there lies the rub. If you ever read the auction description for DJB 93B for example it was an exercise in just that and still fetched massive money for what was always transparently a works replica built from scratch around a logbook. On the contrary this discovered car actually IS the car that Paddy drove on the Flowers and that's what makes it so unusual.

Always a complex conversation topic is this and to some may seem non productive (understandably) but it's always so refreshing (and so unusual) to see an honest car like this 'as discovered' without a secretive backdrop and I'm sure the owner will find it interesting to uncover it's history.