73 replies to this topic

[86mayfair]

Yeah I saw a statistic the other day but I can't remember what it was about how many of the works cars were reshelled. Lot's of the famous ones like GRX 5D were reshelled into later bodies

[Bungle]

but wouldn't a works car be reshelled into a new shell rather than a good second hand shell ?

[86mayfair]

but wouldn't a works car be reshelled into a new shell rather than a good second hand shell ?

Oh yeah I didn't mean it like that, it was very different to this example, I was just sort of adding on to Cooperman's post

Interestingly a lot of the last Mk1 works cars were updated to the later Mk2 grilles and lights but kept their original small rear window, such as OBL 48F to promote the new MK2

Edited by 86mayfair, 20 May 2012 - 10:11 PM.

[Cooperman]

It's always been a contentious issue in respect of real rally cars, not just 'works & 'ex-works' ones. Back in the 60's it was easy to find slightly damaged 850's either as complete cars or as just second-hand shells and if a private owner badly bent his 'S' in competition he would find a decent easily repairable shell and do the work. As for the 'works', they did all sorts of things like changing plates and numbers to suit. They even had one car with a Morris badge on the front & an Austin on the back. Often they would need, say, a 970 'S' for a rally, but the 970 had a damaged shell, so they just fitted the 970 engine into a 1275 and changed the number plates and VIN plate, plus swapped the tax disc.
Even in the 80's it was common to swap shells as they are all identical except for a few small brackets.
The problem was caused by the legislation which prohibits the use of a 2nd-hand shell on a restoration. In fact with an early car there is no way of stopping this as it could have been done at any time since the car was produced.
The real issue has come because of the pre-'73 road tax exemption and the re-registering of later cars using early V5's to evade tax - and that's illegal of course.
There is a petition to allow re-shelling of classic cars with identical period 2nd hand shells to enable early classics to survive. Many support this, jot just for minis, but for other true classic cars.

Edited by Cooperman, 20 May 2012 - 11:15 PM.

[tommypope]

It's always been a contentious issue in respect of real rally cars, not just 'works & 'ex-works' ones. Back in the 60's it was easy to find slightly damaged 850's either as complete cars or as just second-hand shells and if a private owner badly bent his 'S' in competition he would find a decent easily repairable shell and do the work. As for the 'works', they did all sorts of things like changing plates and numbers to suit. They even had one car with a Morris badge on the front & an Austin on the back. Often they would need, say, a 970 'S' for a rally, but the 970 had a damaged shell, so they just fitted the 970 engine into a 1275 and changed the number plates and VIN plate, plus swapped the tax disc.
Even in the 80's it was common to swap shells as they are all identical except for a few small brackets.
The problem was caused by the legislation which prohibits the use of a 2nd-hand shell on a restoration. In fact with an early car there is no way of stopping this as it could have been done at any time since the car was produced.
The real issue has come because of the pre-'73 road tax exemption and the re-registering of later cars using early V5's to evade tax - and that's illegal of course.
There is a petition to allow re-shelling of classic cars with identical period 2nd hand shells to enable early classics to survive. Many support this, jot just for minis, but for other true classic cars.

i dont see the problem with it if your using the same gen shell and both parts have the log book but turning a mk1 into a mk3 annoys me or buying a shell and v5 when you have no v5 anoys me too

[Cooperman]

To be honest, if I crashed my Mk.1 Cooper 'S' on a rally where it would not be insured for damage I would have to use another Mk.1 shell to re-build it into as I couldn't afford to lose its value (c.£25000). Of course, no-one would ever know as it would look exactly the same and this procedure has been going on ever since the Mini was first used in competition. It used to be totally acceptable and did not need to be done in secret, but the rules have changed for other reasons and this has made it different for us in motorsport.
You see all these famous rally Minis at shows and on historic events and virtually every one has been re-shelled at least once.

[frog998]

Reading through this thread it seems that opinion's are split.
If i crashed mine and thought it needed re-shelling would i use a new heritage shell or a good used shell at a fraction of the price??? Would i inform the DVLA of the new chassis numbers or just play ignorant. How many people inform the DVLA of an engine change, anyone sent there V5 away to show a 1275 engine fitted instead of a 998, or update the engine number (how can you do this when some companies grind off the engine number?) The previous owner of mine did update the V5 which caused all sorts of issues with my then insurance company and led to my insurance being cancelled or as they called it your car is un-insurable

People do what ever people do for there own reasons and whilst i dont condone it, to be honest if you dont like it then dont buy it. Theres way more important stuff to concentrate on in life than whether a poor unsuspecting person has bought a ringer, might sound selfish but if it doesn't effect me i dont actually care what other people do

Edited by frog998, 21 May 2012 - 01:49 PM.

[Cooperman]

I like to think I'm charitable and human enought that if I can help a young person, who may want to buy a Mini but who may not know as much as some of us, from buying a 'ringer' or a car which has had an identity change to avoid tax I'll do so. Imagine your son or daughter buying such a car after saving a long time to afford it, then along come DVLA who snatch it and crush it and prosecute for tax evasion (ignorance being no excuse in law).
Having once bought a 'ringer' (an almost new Cortina 1600E) and having had the old bill take it away I know first hand how it feels.

[Sausage]

Useful thread thanks...

 

Any thoughts on this one? :http://www.ebay.co.u...=item46114d74d8

 

What would I need to look out for?

 

Basically to be safe I have to buy one that has grown into a field and needs to be reshelled, but I am not allowed to do that and would have to restore it?   Like this one: http://www.ebay.co.u...984.m1423.l2649

 

Edit: Just noticed this thread is 18 months old LOL.. 

Edited by Sausage, 28 July 2013 - 07:16 PM.

[Bungle]

 

Basically to be safe I have to buy one that has grown into a field and needs to be reshelled, but I am not allowed to do that and would have to restore it?   Like this one: http://www.ebay.co.u...984.m1423.l2649

 

. 

 

you could buy a new unused shell for that one and keep the v5

[Jase]

Another shell related question. I have almost finished with my donor car and rather than 'scrap it' I was going to sell it as a rolling shell with no id, just parts. I have taken all the bits I need but I have not touched the running gear and subby's which are in very good condition including the full 1275GT front setup with denovos. Can I sell this? I obviously have ID which I am using on my new car so the car would not have a V%, guess I shouldn't call it a car. It is completely unrestortable but does have some very useful parts left on it for someone.

[adampat84]

I have this issue to a point with my latest mini.. it come with a 1966 on a "D", though It was reshelled in the 80's when this was not such a contentious issue!

 

it has the original VIN, logbook and engine and that is about it.

 

I don't like the fact that it is a MK1 in a MK3/4 suit but then plan is to restore ans many original features as possible though this will take time..

Edited by adampat84, 29 July 2013 - 08:05 AM.

[MINI MAD RKH]

So, does it have the Mk1 rear light mouldings or Mk3/4 ones? That's the easy bit - I was reading a thread on here about converting a Mk3 shell to a Mk1 & the changes are by no means easy. Rear window is smaller, doors & jambs are a whole different shape.

 

I had an easier job of converting mine back to a Mk1 Mini Minor SD (sorta) as the previous owner (read idiot) had converted a '66 car to look like a Mk4 including chopping the rear light mouldings out

[mab01uk]

So, does it have the Mk1 rear light mouldings or Mk3/4 ones? That's the easy bit - I was reading a thread on here about converting a Mk3 shell to a Mk1 & the changes are by no means easy. Rear window is smaller, doors & jambs are a whole different shape.

 

I had an easier job of converting mine back to a Mk1 Mini Minor SD (sorta) as the previous owner (read idiot) had converted a '66 car to look like a Mk4 including chopping the rear light mouldings out

 

Back in the 1970's we often updated our MK1 Mini's by chopping out the rear light apertures to fit Mk2/3 rear lights......there was a guide in Triple C magazine on how to do it!

 

BMH will eventually be launching a Mk1 lookalike bodyshell if all goes to plan based on the Mk4/5......there is a prototype already built according to some sources.

 

 

Edited by mab01uk, 29 July 2013 - 11:54 AM.

[MINI MAD RKH]

To the OP:

 

Yes, it's illegal, yes it's wrong. But so are many other things that go on. I'm not condoning it by the way, just saying it happens & people do get away with it

 

you say you would feel cheated if you bought say a 1972 car that turned out to be a newer car but would that not also be the case if it was re-shelled with a Mk3 shell, there are plenty about

 

The fact of the matter is the buyer needs to do their homework (not just for Mini's but all cars) - things like HP not cleared or ringered cars do sell to unsuspecting buyers

 

if you wanted a Mk1 or Mk2 there would be lots of ways to check if it was genuine