Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Mk1 Vs Later Minis Reliability And Usability


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 Mini madness

Mini madness

    Starting My Mini Up

  • Noobies
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Location: Auckland

Posted 20 September 2018 - 12:06 PM

Hi all, sorry if this is in the wrong section
I have the option to buy either a mk3 or a 1964 mk1, both 998cc.
The mk1 is rod change and pre-hydrolastic if that makes any difference.
It’ll be my only car, but I walk to work.
Is the mk1 likely to be harder to maintain than the mk3? Will it rust easier?
Will it be any less reliable than the mk3?
Also what is a gold seal motor?
Thanks for any help

#2 nicklouse

nicklouse

    Moved Into The Garage

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,900 posts
  • Location: Not Yorkshire
  • Local Club: Anonyme Miniholiker

Posted 20 September 2018 - 12:12 PM

sounds like the MK1 is not all MK1 and has had newer powertrain added.

 

mechanically they are all basically the same other than parts do wear out. the main issue is rust.



#3 Twincam

Twincam

    Camshaft & Stage Two Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,742 posts
  • Location: Londinium
  • Local Club: SMAG

Posted 20 September 2018 - 12:15 PM

sounds like the MK1 is not all MK1 and has had newer powertrain added.


Could be a later body wearing an earlier ID.

Anything is reliable if you look after it and service it well (depending if the previous owners have looked after them properly before) - what's the price differences?

#4 Mini madness

Mini madness

    Starting My Mini Up

  • Noobies
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Location: Auckland

Posted 20 September 2018 - 12:19 PM

sounds like the MK1 is not all MK1 and has had newer powertrain added.


Could be a later body wearing an earlier ID.

Anything is reliable if you look after it and service it well (depending if the previous owners have looked after them properly before) - what's the price differences?
Price difference is $500nzd, so about £300.

#5 mab01uk

mab01uk

    Moved Into The Garage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,779 posts
  • Local Club: Mini Cooper Register

Posted 20 September 2018 - 12:35 PM

Hi all, sorry if this is in the wrong section
I have the option to buy either a mk3 or a 1964 mk1, both 998cc.
The mk1 is rod change and pre-hydrolastic if that makes any difference.
It’ll be my only car, but I walk to work.
Is the mk1 likely to be harder to maintain than the mk3? Will it rust easier?
Will it be any less reliable than the mk3?
Also what is a gold seal motor?
Thanks for any help

 

1964 Mk1 would have been 850cc originally.

Rod change gearbox was fitted to later Mk3 onwards Minis.

Gold Seal motor is a reconditioned unit, BMC/BL used to call full recon engines Gold Seal (painted gold) and recon short blocks Silver Seal (painted silver) if I remember right.

All Minis rust and are reliable/unreliable to similar degrees but it mostly depends on how it was looked after, mileage and the enviroment it was used/kept in rather than the year of manufacture.


Edited by mab01uk, 20 September 2018 - 12:35 PM.


#6 Ethel

Ethel

    ..is NOT a girl!

  • TMF Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,379 posts
  • Local Club: none

Posted 20 September 2018 - 12:38 PM

Whatever they are, they're both old cars so go by what you can see of their condition. 

 

The Mk3 might have the advantage of an alternator and a mechanical fuel pump, neither are that hard to work round to swing your choice.



#7 surfblue

surfblue

    Camshaft & Stage Two Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,826 posts
  • Location: Stuck in the 1980's

Posted 20 September 2018 - 04:52 PM

A Mk1 is probably more desirable and valuable, if in like for like condition, dare I say it?

(And not biased because Ive got one, Ive had most varieties and Mk's of mini over the years, except a Mk2!).

The 998 though not original will give the Mk1 a little more go, helping it keep up more easily in modern traffic.

Id not want to drive one exclusively now a days but if you can walk to work well why not, using it for pleasure rather than necessity.

Both will need regular maintenance, more so than a modern car but its all relatively simple and DIY friendly. If you have a local garage with 'older mechanics' they will be well up to keeping it in top shape. 'Younger component changers' may wonder where to plug their diagnostic laptop into!

Keeping it clean and protected against the ravages of rust are your top priority.

Enjoy whichever you choose.



#8 Cooperman

Cooperman

    Uncle Cooperman, Voted Mr TMF 2011

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,014 posts
  • Location: Cambs.
  • Local Club: MCR, HAMOC, Chelmsford M.C.

Posted 20 September 2018 - 05:28 PM

If the '1964 Mk1' has a remote gear change it may well not be a Mk.1. Does it have external door hinges? The only genuine original Mk.1 998's are all Coopers with rod-change gear selection.

A genuine Mk.1 is a fast-appreciating asset and not really ideal as a daily driver.

The Mk.3 998 is just a nice classic car, but is becoming more collectable as time goes by.

Personally I would not use a old classic as a daily driver for a variety of reasons such as high maintenance needs, ease of being stolen, lack of comfort, safety in modern traffic and spares availability. But if a classic is chosen as a daily then a Mini will work so long as you are prepared to do a lot of maintenance. Many of us used them in the 1960's on a daily basis but I wouldn't want to now.



#9 mk1leg

mk1leg

    Crazy About Mini's

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,341 posts
  • Location: Jersey
  • Local Club: Mini Club Jersey, MCR

Posted 20 September 2018 - 07:58 PM

if you were to fit a electronic dizzy and pointless fuel pump then a mk1 would be very reliable



#10 CityEPete

CityEPete

    Up Into Fourth

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,920 posts
  • Location: On my soapbox....

Posted 20 September 2018 - 08:38 PM

I've been driving my 1957 Morris minor all year round since 2009, it's been less trouble than my modern cars!

#11 CityEPete

CityEPete

    Up Into Fourth

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,920 posts
  • Location: On my soapbox....

Posted 20 September 2018 - 08:40 PM

if you were to fit a electronic dizzy and pointless fuel pump then a mk1 would be very reliable


I've got an electronic ignition, su pump and alternator conversion on my Morris, other than that it's just a matter of keeping an eye on things.

#12 Minigman

Minigman

    One Carb Or Two?

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 779 posts
  • Location: Barnstaple

Posted 20 September 2018 - 11:01 PM

If the '1964 Mk1' has a remote gear change it may well not be a Mk.1. Does it have external door hinges? The only genuine original Mk.1 998's are all Coopers with rod-change gear selection.
A genuine Mk.1 is a fast-appreciating asset and not really ideal as a daily driver.
The Mk.3 998 is just a nice classic car, but is becoming more collectable as time goes by.
Personally I would not use a old classic as a daily driver for a variety of reasons such as high maintenance needs, ease of being stolen, lack of comfort, safety in modern traffic and spares availability. But if a classic is chosen as a daily then a Mini will work so long as you are prepared to do a lot of maintenance. Many of us used them in the 1960's on a daily basis but I wouldn't want to now.


I think you have the remote / rod info the wrong way round Peter.

#13 Cooperman

Cooperman

    Uncle Cooperman, Voted Mr TMF 2011

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,014 posts
  • Location: Cambs.
  • Local Club: MCR, HAMOC, Chelmsford M.C.

Posted 20 September 2018 - 11:16 PM

 

If the '1964 Mk1' has a remote gear change it may well not be a Mk.1. Does it have external door hinges? The only genuine original Mk.1 998's are all Coopers with rod-change gear selection.
A genuine Mk.1 is a fast-appreciating asset and not really ideal as a daily driver.
The Mk.3 998 is just a nice classic car, but is becoming more collectable as time goes by.
Personally I would not use a old classic as a daily driver for a variety of reasons such as high maintenance needs, ease of being stolen, lack of comfort, safety in modern traffic and spares availability. But if a classic is chosen as a daily then a Mini will work so long as you are prepared to do a lot of maintenance. Many of us used them in the 1960's on a daily basis but I wouldn't want to now.


I think you have the remote / rod info the wrong way round Peter.

 

Yes, you are quite right. The Cooper & Cooper 'S' had the remote change using the cast aluminium casing.



#14 InnoCooperExport

InnoCooperExport

    Speeding Along Now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 371 posts
  • Location: Netherlands
  • Local Club: Mini Seven Club Nederland

Posted 21 September 2018 - 08:47 AM

if you were to fit a electronic dizzy and pointless fuel pump then a mk1 would be very reliable

 

I had to think about this one for a bit. I was wondering why on earth a fuel pump would be pointless to fit... 



#15 mk1leg

mk1leg

    Crazy About Mini's

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,341 posts
  • Location: Jersey
  • Local Club: Mini Club Jersey, MCR

Posted 21 September 2018 - 08:04 PM

 

if you were to fit a electronic dizzy and pointless fuel pump then a mk1 would be very reliable

 

I had to think about this one for a bit. I was wondering why on earth a fuel pump would be pointless to fit... 

 

the original SU fuel pump uses points ti activate it but you can buy a electronic PC board to replace the points 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users