mk1-forum.net

I see the Mini Cooper Forum has just started a section to record the history of as many as possible of the Ex-works Minis whilst passing through the competition department at Abingdon between 1959 - 1970? All Mini Cooper Forum users can view the information and are encouraged to participate in building up the data on each car. Already it makes interesting reading. I plan to help with information on the ex-Abingdon cars over here on this side of the Irish Sea

Alan

https://www.minicooperforum.org/viewforum.php?f=129

Are they going to record & publish all the registration numbers, chassis numbers & engine numbers, like in the 1st edition of the Works Minis?

I think it’s a good idea to stick with the Abingdon works period for each car registration. I think forgetting about what happened to these cars after they left Abingdon is also a very good idea because most know their stories are fictional bullshit simply because a large percent of these cars are now only replicas

mk1 wrote:Are they going to record & publish all the registration numbers, chassis numbers & engine numbers, like in the 1st edition of the Works Minis?

Mark, I suppose in due course the information on registration numbers, chassis numbers, engines numbers, etc. will gradually be added. It's one of the joys of having it online in that information can be added or even changed as and when necessary. New information might even come to light. When it's all published in a book it's cast in stone and can't ever be added to or changed until a new edition is printed. Even worse if no new edition is printed.

Alan

Fair point Alan. I'm 29 years old and like you want the truth recorded. I take my hat of to genuine people who want nothing more than honesty

Turbo88 wrote:Fair point Alan. I'm 29 years old and like you want the truth recorded. I take my hat of to genuine people who want nothing more than honesty

That's a fair comment from a relatively young enthusiast

Most of the lists and databases of works cars use the vehicle's registration plate as the primary identifier. As we now know there was a lot of swapping of registration plates, body shells and mechanical components to suit the specific needs at the time. As a result we seem to have this never-ending debate over which is the real or authentic car that used a particular registration.

To present an accurate picture and avoid some of the unnecessary debate I think it would be better to describe the components that made up a particular vehicle on a specific event.

For example (using simplified dummy data) it may look like this:

1. Body number A1234 with engine number 9FSAY6789 and rego ABC789 competed in the 1965 Mini Rally.

2. Body A1234 with the same engine but now with rego DEF456 competed in the 1965 Winter Rally.

3. Body A1234 was written off and disposed of after the car crashed in the 1965 Winter Rally. Mechanical components and rego DEF456 transferred to body B5678. This configuration competed in the 1965 Xmas Rally.

4. ... etc. etc.

Of course some of this data will have been lost, so it's unlikely the history will ever be complete and accurate. But at least we can avoid having conflicting claims on who has the genuine DEF456 car.

winabbey wrote:Most of the lists and databases of works cars use the vehicle's registration plate as the primary identifier. As we now know there was a lot of swapping of registration plates, body shells and mechanical components to suit the specific needs at the time. As a result we seem to have this never-ending debate over which is the real or authentic car that used a particular registration.

I disagree. In my experience I'd say people generally seem to get the number plate swapping activities at Abingdon in the 60s (which has happened ever since in motorsport) and the fact that several cars wore the same plate. What tends to get most people irked is when they see others using that as an excuse to create their own "works car" from a few old photos and a V5 application with the justification that "well Abingdon reshelled cars all the time" . Any Mini that came out of the gates of Abingdon that was built by the lads in the workshop was a works Mini in my book no matter which number plate it wore or whether it had one at all.
Yes once the cars left Abingdon they were often thrashed and reshelled several times, JMO is good example of that, but it's not a lie is it?. If you make one yourself, apply for a logbook and tell people it's a works Mini that's a different story.

There are cases of cars that genuinely did wear the same number plate, GRX 309D being a good case in poiint where there's two genuine cars still in existance, one in the UK and one in the U.S, both of who's owners are in agreement about that. Ironically though the car that's wearing that number plate is the one that most believe was magic'd up from nothing with a V5 application and is far from being alone in that respect.

Shame that just a few numpties have virtually ruined the reputation of the ex works car scene by creating fakes. Everyone loves a nice replica put, skillfully together using rare parts, but nobody really enjoys being told aload of old bollox about some of the so called works Minis.

I've not really looked at the pages on the Mini Cooper Forum but maybe they'll shed some light on some of the huge black holes that seem to be prevelant in some of these famous cars' histories.

Pete wrote:

winabbey wrote:Most of the lists and databases of works cars use the vehicle's registration plate as the primary identifier. As we now know there was a lot of swapping of registration plates, body shells and mechanical components to suit the specific needs at the time. As a result we seem to have this never-ending debate over which is the real or authentic car that used a particular registration.

Shame that just a few numpties have virtually ruined the reputation of the ex works car scene by creating fakes. Everyone loves a nice replica put, skillfully together using rare parts, but nobody really enjoys being told aload of old bollox about some of the so called works Minis.

Exactly.........a replica needs to be known...and appreciated as A REPLICA...or re-creation ( if that sounds better )....
I don't want to cover old ground, but if I look at an ex works car, I want to know that what I am sharing space with, looking at, touching, smelling .....is the real thing. Anything else can be appreciated in a different way

What goes without saying surely is that this information has to be documented. We have a poster born 18 years after the last works mini, soon there will be no one around who really knows, then the scams will really start. I have some knowledge of these cars but I really wish I could help more. Anyone who can contribute (post works owners) please do. The more correct information recorded now will help tremendously in the future. Just my twopennyworth. Cheers. Brian

Strange how this idea's come from non works Mini owners. If this was about Unipowers say, it'd be us that would be pushing it (in fact we are producing a data base). The only other online database for works Minis was very selective with info and full of huge holes.

I suspect the output will, sadly, result in as many arguments as it resolves.

It'll be like reading one side's account of a war - Vietnam: Our Glorious victory, by 'Uncle Sam'? - hardly the full (complex) picture.

Too much money and personal pride / 'expertise' at stake for a clear picture to emerge now, I fear. And is there anything left to debate that hasn't been covered already in the pages of books or on-line? though there are still more cars to be 'discovered'?

If I were in the market for an 'Ex works' car I would be doing my own research, not trusting anything on the web anymore than basing it on any one book. Caveat Emptor.

Al

Pandora wrote:I suspect the output will, sadly, result in as many arguments as it resolves.

It'll be like reading one side's account of a war - Vietnam: Our Glorious victory, by 'Uncle Sam'? - hardly the full (complex) picture.

Too much money and personal pride / 'expertise' at stake for a clear picture to emerge now, I fear. And is there anything left to debate that hasn't been covered already in the pages of books or on-line? though there are still more cars to be 'discovered'?

If I were in the market for an 'Ex works' car I would be doing my own research, not trusting anything on the web anymore than basing it on any one book. Caveat Emptor.

Al

And I think there is a phrase, that covers it "Due diligence"

I'm not sure the gathering of info on famous works Minis is just about informing any potential buyer, they very rarely ever come up for sale anyway. Quite a few marques have chassis data bases on competition cars, especially single seaters and sports cars but maybe it's because they're not so easy to fabricate?? Not that faking is exclusive to famous Minis, as I'm sure we all know. I don't see anything wrong with trying to build a history timeline for the works cars but I wish 'em good luck cos it seems to be a subject alot do not want to talk about.

I think the database on Abingdon cars is an excellent idea. From what I’ve seen already it is mainly the competition life of these cars whilst at Abingdon that is documented. I can’t see documenting that history being contentious at all. It is cars that have came out of nowhere having been missing for years that is a touchy subject and very controversial is my thinking. But I believe the Mini world is very small and practically everyone interested in ex-works cars know the true genuine cars and the ones that are fakes. I for one would not have the nerve to take a logbook job to a show over here in Ulster and claim it was an ex-works car, I know you would be laughed at as one person has already found to their cost

Alan

Pete wrote:I'm not sure the gathering of info on famous works Minis is just about informing any potential buyer, they very rarely ever come up for sale anyway. Quite a few marques have chassis data bases on competition cars, especially single seaters and sports cars but maybe it's because they're not so easy to fabricate?? Not that faking is exclusive to famous Minis, as I'm sure we all know. I don't see anything wrong with trying to build a history timeline for the works cars but I wish 'em good luck cos it seems to be a subject alot do not want to talk about.

ooft! you should see the fun that goes on with Jaguars and Ferraris, GT40s etc - all exactly the same, just more expensive lawyers

I agree, it shouldn't be about value / buyers, but historical facts, but of course there IS a lot of money involved, both now, in the past and in the future, so the 2 can never be seperated, whether it came from Abingdon or Maranello!

Still, there is no doubt that a reliable, impartial data base would be a good thing. Just don't let the likes of Mr Olzyak do it........

Al

Supersonic wrote:I see the Mini Cooper Forum has just started a section to record the history of as many as possible of the Ex-works Minis whilst passing through the competition department at Abingdon between 1959 - 1970? All Mini Cooper Forum users can view the information and are encouraged to participate in building up the data on each car. Already it makes interesting reading. I plan to help with information on the ex-Abingdon cars over here on this side of the Irish Sea

Alan

Any one got a link to this ?, or has it not happened yet ?

You need to sign up to the Mini Cooper Forum

http://www.minicooperforum.org/

and log-in to view the register.

surfblue63 wrote:You need to sign up to the Mini Cooper Forum

http://www.minicooperforum.org/

and log-in to view the register.

cheers Stu

Pete wrote:I'm not sure the gathering of info on famous works Minis is just about informing any potential buyer, they very rarely ever come up for sale anyway. Quite a few marques have chassis data bases on competition cars, especially single seaters and sports cars but maybe it's because they're not so easy to fabricate?? Not that faking is exclusive to famous Minis, as I'm sure we all know. I don't see anything wrong with trying to build a history timeline for the works cars but I wish 'em good luck cos it seems to be a subject alot do not want to talk about.

Pete's honest comments ring so true and should be used as a yardstick for assessment when viewing old Minis by people my age. My opinion is less than 10% of old Minis are original. When I say old Minis, I mean 1959 to 1971