Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Re-Shelled 1968 Mini. No Major Rust..


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 CCBG

CCBG

    One Carb Or Two?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 898 posts
  • Location: Teesside
  • Local Club: No

Posted 14 February 2020 - 11:14 AM

Normally, when someone mentions re-shelling, I immediately think of Trigger's broom: had it for years, had new brush heads and handles, but still the same brush..

But at least this one has the original-style rear lights. I know I rant on about this, but I hate it when they get replaced by the later, massive ones.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This car is nearly as old as me.. and probably in better nick.

 

I have just noticed it ends tonight! 14 Feb, 2020 20:26:26 GMT


Edited by CCBG, 07 December 2023 - 10:02 PM.


#2 johnv

johnv

    Speeding Along Now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • Location: Surrey
  • Local Club: FDMC

Posted 14 February 2020 - 11:48 AM

Sorry, but I'd say that was a re-log booked mini

#3 Magic jason

Magic jason

    Super Mini Mad

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 522 posts
  • Location: Plymouth

Posted 14 February 2020 - 12:11 PM

That just screams ringer to me..



#4 Itsaminithing

Itsaminithing

    One Carb Or Two?

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 849 posts
  • Location: Berkshire
  • Local Club: Not One Worth Mentioning

Posted 14 February 2020 - 03:24 PM

A ringer is technically a stolen vehicle with a different cars ID.

A clone is a vehicle (stolen or not) with the ID of an existing vehicle.

 

This is just yet another vehicle with a fake ID.

The only 1968 parts are the VIN plate & the rear lights!



#5 nicklouse

nicklouse

    Moved Into The Garage

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,899 posts
  • Location: Not Yorkshire
  • Local Club: Anonyme Miniholiker

Posted 14 February 2020 - 03:41 PM

an ringer. Only real if it had had a brand new 80 shell in the 80s. The ID of the car is the 80s one.



#6 beardylondon

beardylondon

    One Carb Or Two?

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,305 posts
  • Location: London

Posted 14 February 2020 - 06:04 PM

Around 20 years ago is when tax free status was introduced, this happened quite a lot, legally using a later shell and obviously dodgy ones too. We have all seen them!

As everyone says quite rightly it looks like a later (80s?) shell with a 1968 ID, yes not strictly legit, but hopefully (for the new buyer) not an actual ringer.

Something else doesn't add up, it comes back as registered on 3 Feb 1967, so it should be on a E reg, not G. Not unheard of for the DVLA to mess it up, maybe when going from old style log book to digital, an E could look like a G!

Buyer beware!


Edited by beardylondon, 15 February 2020 - 10:29 PM.


#7 62S

62S

    One Carb Or Two?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,242 posts
  • Local Club: You must be joking!

Posted 26 February 2020 - 07:09 PM

Something else doesn't add up, it comes back as registered on 3 Feb 1967, so it should be on a E reg, not G. Not unheard of for the DVLA to mess it up, maybe when going from old style log book to digital, an E could look like a G!

Nothing dodgy about the registration date and not a DVLA mess up just different rules for re-registrations in the past



#8 beardylondon

beardylondon

    One Carb Or Two?

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,305 posts
  • Location: London

Posted 27 February 2020 - 01:37 PM

So on the 3rd Feb 1967 they decided to issue a G registration that wasn't available until 1st Aug 1968? I think not.

 

 

Something else doesn't add up, it comes back as registered on 3 Feb 1967, so it should be on a E reg, not G. Not unheard of for the DVLA to mess it up, maybe when going from old style log book to digital, an E could look like a G!

Nothing dodgy about the registration date and not a DVLA mess up just different rules for re-registrations in the past

 



#9 62S

62S

    One Carb Or Two?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,242 posts
  • Local Club: You must be joking!

Posted 04 March 2020 - 08:31 AM

So on the 3rd Feb 1967 they decided to issue a G registration that wasn't available until 1st Aug 1968? I think not.
 

Something else doesn't add up, it comes back as registered on 3 Feb 1967, so it should be on a E reg, not G. Not unheard of for the DVLA to mess it up, maybe when going from old style log book to digital, an E could look like a G!

Nothing dodgy about the registration date and not a DVLA mess up just different rules for re-registrations in the past
When the car was registered on 3rd February 1967 it would have had either an 'E' suffix registration or a personal/private plate. Back in a time before what is now known as an age related registration existed, when the original registration was transferred off a vehicle it would be replaced by one from the current sequence being issued. A friend of mine had a 1966 registered Vanden Plas 1100 with an 'H' suffix registration because the original private plate registration was removed in late 1969.

#10 Homersimpson

Homersimpson

    One Carb Or Two?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 797 posts
  • Location: Redditch

Posted 04 March 2020 - 03:04 PM

You do occassionaly see some odd things, there was a MK2 Jag for sale on ebay a year or so back that was on a T plate which was at least 10 years newer than the car.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users