mk1-forum.net

8th off the line apparently... what happened to the 7 before it then?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... h-15k.html

ChrisB wrote:8th off the line apparently... what happened to the 7 before it then?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... h-15k.html

a rusty stain.......

ChrisB wrote:8th off the line apparently... what happened to the 7 before it then?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... h-15k.html

621AOK (which has been messed about with a lot), 2 in Japan (one converted to a cabriolet) and that's it. A very significant car, but £15k? Didn't some hack buy this the other year for £10k?

steve1071 wrote:

ChrisB wrote:8th off the line apparently... what happened to the 7 before it then?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... h-15k.html

621AOK (which has been messed about with a lot), 2 in Japan (one converted to a cabriolet) and that's it. A very significant car, but £15k? Didn't some hack buy this the other year for £10k?

yep


and looking at the starte of the floor in the photos in the bonhams catalogue they have had a serious reality check!!!


its ripe, very very ripe

As it is it does indeed have a claim to the 'world's oldest unrestored Mini'. Historically important but an expensive exhibit ? So... you spend £15K and a further £15K restoring it (and don't even think about reshelling it !!) and you end up with ' The world's nearly oldest restored Mini that used to be the world's oldest unrestored Mini ! " That's the trouble with unrestored barn finds or even at the other end of the scale expensive uber low mileage minters...as soon as you do anything with 'em they kind of lose their appeal !?

Still at least it's the real thing so unlike all the works Minis or recreated..I mean restored Mk1 S's nobody's gonna roll their eyes at it when it's eventually restored and it may seem mega bucks now but in ten years time I'm sure that'll seem like a bargain !

The seller has advertised the auction on Ebay aswell, I bet that pleases Ebay.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Mini-Mk-1-Aus ... 43af0ae192

Has it been much of an investment in the last year! The seller reportedly purchased it for £11,500 last year.

http://uk.autoblog.com/2011/01/12/autob ... -he-crazy/

does anyone have the photos from when this car appeared on ebay last year?


the ones that show it sat in the soaking wet roofless single garge it had been left in for years......

Pete is right. If you bought it, WHAT would you DO with it??

There are really only three options as I see it. 1. You leave it exactly as it is. 2. You do a mechanical overhaul and the MOT repairs to a decent standard, clean it, and use it as it is. 3. You completely dismantle it and carry out a full and thorough detailed restoration to the highest standard and correct specification, spending I would estimate, a good bit more than the purchase price. There isn't really a "middle ground" is there? So many good and interesting cars have been ruined by poor/unsympathetic restorations.

I guess the current owner, having bought it with great enthusiasm has realised the above and just can't decide what to do with it? Wasn't it bought by a syndicate? At least they have had the sense to leave it alone. It would have been a great shame if it had been dismantled and the restoration not completed.

If the car is as rotten as it looks, option number 2 seems pretty impossible.
Structurally the car is probably very very weak, and will require loads of new panels that will destroy the "patina".

I was sent this today from a good friend who happens to be a Gallimore, not sure of the connection, if any yet, but that is not the same car.....

http://co118w.col118.mail.live.com/defa ... 1806614704

Buy it

scrap the shell and stick the chassis plate on a 82 mayfair = tax free

add some nice 13" rims and carlos fan dango arches or even better a body kit

paint it in a lovely shade of "something that changes colour as you drive past it"

add a large speaker covered in mdf to the boot area (sod the spare)

add custom interior with led lighting

squeeze a totally different vehicle engine in the front

then you have a even more unique mini!

i havent seen that done yet - much

ahhh


google is my friend







i didnt realise that a 8x10 roofless suburban garage could be described as a barn......

I'm confused now. So at what stage did this untouched car have its engine etc removed/replaced?

He he, the story "unfolds"

I'm confused now. So at what stage did this untouched car have its engine etc removed/replaced?

Who said it was untouched?

Wild speculation, misquotes and misrepresentation can be dangerous.

bill773mini wrote:

I'm confused now. So at what stage did this untouched car have its engine etc removed/replaced?

Who said it was untouched?

Wild speculation, misquotes and misrepresentation can be dangerous.

I was reading the news link in the original post.....

Quote "The engine has done a grand total of 30,000miles but now doesn't work and it has never been touched....."

Wild speculation, misquotes and misrepresentation can be dangerous.

True,

But they do give us a good laugh

bill773mini wrote:

I'm confused now. So at what stage did this untouched car have its engine etc removed/replaced?

Who said it was untouched?

Wild speculation, misquotes and misrepresentation can be dangerous.

its funny, the words that Bonhams have used to describe the car and its 'situation' are far more conservative that the over egged puff piece that seems to have been circulated to all the media - i wonder who was responsible for that? - the motoring journalists who are the current owners possibly?????

I was reading the news link in the original post.....

Quote "The engine has done a grand total of 30,000miles but now doesn't work and it has never been touched....."

Arr the world renowned accurate reporting of The Sun news paper who can't even get the month it was built correct.

If you read that quote again it states the the engine hasn't been touched (not the car), it's not a literal definition that in 53 year no hand has touched it, it's just never been rebuilt. When it failed it's MOT in 1986 it failed on rusty inner wings at the joint between the front panel. The engine & subframe were dropped to facilitate the repairs. The garage owner bought the car for £40 so his Son could learn to weld. Thankfully his Son never started the welding and it just sat in the garage. It was dropped on to it's subframe to remove it from the garage then the engine was put back in when the decision had been made not to restore it.

Hope that helps.

Wild speculation, misquotes and misrepresentation can be dangerous.

True,

But they do give us a good laugh

True.

its funny, the words that Bonhams have used to describe the car and its 'situation' are far more conservative that the over egged puff piece that seems to have been circulated to all the media - i wonder who was responsible for that? - the motoring journalists who are the current owners possibly?????

I know one of journalists wrote the Bonhams piece but who knows about the others.

We were given the wording at the same time as Bonhams

http://www.1959miniregister.com/

bill773mini wrote:
I know one of journalists wrote the Bonhams piece but who knows about the others.

We were given the wording at the same time as Bonhams

http://www.1959miniregister.com/

Bonhams never stand any messing with the descriptions they use in the catalogues and on the website, and will correct and amend stuff very quickly, even to the point where a list is handed out on the day of the sale with stuff they may have found - i would say that they are the best of all the classic auction houses for the way they conduct themselves.

its very rare that glaring errors can be found in any of their catalogues, though of course, they can often only work with what the seller tells them!!!!