Something of an odd-ball - interested in your views...

[Steve_mcmaster]

Hi All - new boy here and, in relative terms, completely inexperienced with early minis having to date only owned a later Rover car.

So, i've been presented with a possible opportunity to purchase what I believe to be a Mk1 Austin Cooper and I'd greatly appreciate your insight, views, opinions etc not on value but whether my own thoughts are correct.

Having read the ESAS post on here, I believe the car to be something similar - a 1965 South African 1071 Cooper S, albeit, no way to tell at the moment whether it's benefited from the BMC ST parts which the other car has. Likely build in SA from a Knock Down Kit.

It's obviously been messed around with - later grill and tail lights, interior has been removed and replaced with lovely (!!) quilted black seats, door cards etc etc.

The engine has been replaced with a non-original unit - not quite sure what it is as the engine number doesn't match anything in the regular number sequences. However, has obviously been breathed upon with the Weber Carb etc.

So - appreciate your views please - am I barking up the right tree - is this "original", pretending to be something it's not etc. To be honest, I'm interested in it as much for it's history and story as much as the car itself, albeit, with a little graft, I think it could be a beautiful car.

Thanks all in advance
Steve

[Steve_mcmaster]

Pics...

[Steve_mcmaster]

Some more...

[Steve_mcmaster]

Outside views

[LarryLebel]

I've owned 3 English Cooper S's and an English Cooper. There looks to be a lot of 'red flags' on this one. A few are the large single tank, mis-applied rear badges, no brake servo and tandem brake master cylinder. Nobody in their right mind would make these changes on purpose.

[Steve_mcmaster]

Hi Larry,

All of the points i'd picked up, so thanks for confirming my thoughts.

On the single tank, I found that the Mk1 Austin 1070s was supplied with a single LH Tank with the RH tank being an option.

The servo and master cylinder changes were more confusing to your points, albeit, I myself have removed the servo from cars moving in conversion to track cars to provide better pedal feel, albeit, with a larger shove of the leg....

Thanks again for taking the time to respond...
Steve

[bwaminispeed]

The dash rails both appear to have their original vinyl covering (as per Cooper/S), and, are MKI style.......So, I would believe the body to be a MKI Cooper, or, S......

Steering column drop bracket is also Cooper style chrome one......

Shame about the tail lights, but, it was a bit of a fad to update MKI to MKII back in the day, funny that we are all doing the opposite now......Unfortunately any of the MKI tail light pannels are not very good........

Hydrolastic appears missing, but, that, and, the rest of the odd stuff are easily changed/put right.......

So, yeah, looks like an oppertunity to save/restore a genuine Cooper.......

[bwaminispeed]

Second tank didn't become standard factory fittment till 67/MKII, so, not an issue.......

[Steve_mcmaster]

BWA - thanks for the response.

Ref the real light fad - agreed - I myself have done the retro change to my rover cooper and yes, shame about the need to change back, but sure it could be made to be work, despite the panels being less than perfect.

That was my general feeling as well - it's complete enough to be worthy of saving before it becomes too late. Again - not interested in the profit, but the history of the car and saving from possible doom!

Thanks again
Steve

[GraemeC]

Larry's comments weren't in respect of it being single tank, but that the tank is a later 7.5 gallon not a 5.5 gallon. However as it is still fitted with a two piece strap it probably is a later 'improvement' by a previous owner.

Someone has gone to a lot of work to change the braking system to a later twin circuit master and bulkhead PDWA valve - they look like factory pipes too.

I suspect there has been a lot of a later 'donor' car gone into this.

[Steve_mcmaster]

Hi Graeme..

Ah - understood - thank you / thanks Larry for spotting that too..

I'm also interested in the unit on the right of the drivers side lower dash panel, which has a wire which seems to lead into the canister on the drivers side inner wing, plus, the choke appears to have been replaced with a switch?!

Thanks again
Steve

[360gts]

Second tank didn't become standard factory fittment till 67/MKII, so, not an issue.......

RH tank was installed as standard on the MK 1 .... along with an oil cooler in Jan. 66.....

[bwaminispeed]

OK, earlier than I thought.....

[Spider]

Larry's comments weren't in respect of it being single tank, but that the tank is a later 7.5 gallon not a 5.5 gallon. However as it is still fitted with a two piece strap it probably is a later 'improvement' by a previous owner.

Someone has gone to a lot of work to change the braking system to a later twin circuit master and bulkhead PDWA valve - they look like factory pipes too.

I suspect there has been a lot of a later 'donor' car gone into this.

My thoughts too. It wouldn't surprise me if it's had the front end cut and shut from a late car. The Brake and Clutch pipework look too factory not to be.

The heater is also missing and it's got a small bore engine fitted (yes, that was flagged up in the OP).

The body prefix looks to be UK of origin, did the South African Cars follow the same system ? Our locally made cars (Australia) had a system quite different that used in the UK. If it is a 65 UK car, it would have been on Hydro and there should be some evidence of that, with at the very least, clips under the floor for the pipes. If it is truly of South African origins, then they may not had adopted Hydro until a little later. If I recall, we didn't get it here until March or April 65.

It does present OK, but I wouldn't commit too much money towards a purchase of it, there's too many clouds and red flags in it.

[Steve_mcmaster]

Hi Spider...

Thanks for the response.

Ref the body pre-fix etc I've got in touch with Ryno Verster, the SA Mini guru to see if he can shed any light on the production process and some of the other details.

Ref the heater, I understand that these were optional in warmer climates, so, may be that this was never fitted. I've also read conflicting details about the engine and whether the engine number can be trusted to determine it's internals given it may have been locally produced!

I've also requested some pictures of the front and rear underbody to see if that can help shed any more light to your other points...

Thanks again
Steve

[Hipwell]

Have you checked/confirmed the chassis number, to see what details that relates to?

[Steve_mcmaster]

Hi Hipwell..

Yes - the code points to a Mk1 Austin Cooper / S and the sequence number would align to a 1071 S.

Thanks
Steve

[finchy533]

I'm also interested in the unit on the right of the drivers side lower dash panel, which has a wire which seems to lead into the canister on the drivers side inner wing, plus, the choke appears to have been replaced with a switch?!

By canister, I think you mean just above the black plastic horns, with some blue wiring - that's the starter solenoid (not in its usual place), which suggests the thing on the dash is a starter push button. Looking at the central switch panel, the key switch doesn't have the spacer, which suggests it's an early floor-start one (pre-64 and never on Coopers/Supers I think). This fits with having a separate starter button. The toggle switches are also all faded clear - the early ones did this and later ones stayed black (not sure when they changed - 64ish maybe?).

I wonder if it's an early 850 shell and an 80s 998 donor car?

[Steve_mcmaster]

Ahh - of course - the push button start would make sense. Thanks.

The other SA 64/65 Coopers and S cars I have seen are all floor start. Agreed on the switches however, the others I have seen are black, not clear.

Thanks
Steve

[ricardo]

Looks like a 64 998 Cooper to me.

What are the dates stamped in the electrical parts?
What is the engine number and FE?

Photo of the sun visors and gearbox remote extension cut out?