8 replies to this topic

[sootyco]

Hi. I am new to the site and I come with a big problem. I thought I had done my research and knew enough about mini's to be able to buy a Cooper and not get fleeced, but fear I may have failed. I know they change over the years so some 'give' has to be given. But I'm stumped with my new project and would seriously appreciate any help you can give.

 

It's meant to be a 997 Cooper. The VIN on the V5 is CA2S7 then a number over 675000. From what I've read the 997 didn't go above the 500k's. The engine number, again on the V5, is 9FD etc, but the 997 never had the positve crankcase ventilation(D), so is it a 998? That would fit in with the chassis number and engine number. But the V5 says 997.

 

There are numerous numbers cast onto the block. But most notably the fuel pump aperture is cast over. Not just a blanking plate, but no hole at all, no rivet or screw for anything, smooth. The form of the outlet is there but it's blanked/cast over as part of the casting. Now I know the Coopers had a pump at the rear of the car so is this normal? As for numbers, there is 12A467, under that WM(O,G or C, not sure), under that 23758F, then over near the "1000" aluminium plate that's rivetted to the case there is 301M sort of under the plate that juts out.

 

The gear box/sump has SM  22A363 on it and a number stamped 9F8538.

 

It has a breather cannister on the tappet cover but none on the rocker cover.

 

At a loss to explain it all. Can anyone please make sense of it, please?

 

I'm going to take the head off tomorrow, what should I look for with a 997 and 998, numbers, features?

 

Cheers all

 

[sootyco]

"There are numerous numbers cast onto the block. But most notably the fuel pump aperture is cast over. Not just a blanking plate, but no hole at all, no rivet or screw for anything, smooth. The form of the outlet is there but it's blanked/cast over as part of the casting. Now I know the Coopers had a pump at the rear of the car so is this normal?"

 

Just to clarify, I meant I know Coopers had a pump at the rear of the car and not on the rear of the engine like the standard car, where this non-hole usually is. Car registered, but not necessarily built,  early 1965

[Cooperman]

The 997 production ended in early 1964.

You need to measure the stroke of the engine as that will give you an immediate answer. The 997 has a stroke of 81,28 mm whilst the 998 has a stroke of 76.2 mm.

Just take the plugs out, put a pencil into the cylinder and bring it to TDC. Mark the pencil where it passes into the plug hole. Rotate the engine until the piston is at BDC, mark the pencil at the same position relative to the plug hole, remove the pencil and measure the distance between thee two marks. That is the stroke and thus the answer. 

By the way, the 997 was a horrible engine. Very long stroke and oil burning. The 998 is just so much better.

[sootyco]

Many thanks. I shall do that tomorrow. I hope it's a 998 then :0)

 

Is there anything to be concluded from the solid casting where the fuel pump blanking plate would normally be or any of the numbers on the case or the V5?

[Cooperman]

With a car that old the numbers on the V5 will mean little as all sorts of changes could have been made.

From memory, the early 997 & 998 engines didn't have a fuel pump access plate as they always had electric pumps.

It's a long time since I last had a 998 Cooper (1974 I think), so I can't remember too much about the engine number details.

However, if you bought a 1965 Cooper it will be a 998 with all the correct Cooper parts.

[Daz1968]

If you take the head off the 998 has d topped pistons and a 12g295 head, 997 also has different front brake calipers and smaller pads than 998 but as it's an old car many parts could of been changed, although the 997 is rarer the 998 is the better car anyway, ca2s7 is an Austin cooper chassis number,

[Cooperman]

As I said above, just measure the stroke and the answer will be there in about 2 minutes. It really is that simple.

I ordered my 998 in April 1964 and had to await delivery until the end of June. So a car registered in early 1965 will have been built in very late 1964 or very early '65, so it will have been a 998. Coopers did not sit around unsold back then, they were all on back-order. My current November 1964 registered Cooper 'S' was built in October, then straight to the dealer and delivered immediately.

It will almost certainly be a 998. In those days the DVLA didn't exist, and often cars had incorrect information on the 'log book', which later got transferred to the V5. A common error was to have a VIN number which should have been CA2S7 become CA257. There were 1275 'S's in 1964 with log books which said 1071 cc, etc.

[sootyco]

Thanks for the replies. I couldn't do the pencil test because the engine is seized. So I took the head off. It has the 12G295 head and the pistons are D shaped. The bore is around 64.5mm, so I guess it's a 998cc as you said.

 

Problem is, it's rusted and corroded to hell in two chambers, as is the head.

 

So I would be very grateful if anyone can tell me if

 

a) can it be rebored/refurbished and to what maximum bore

b) can the pistons and head be done as well

c) how much will it cost, is it worth it, or should I just get a new engine

c) can you recommend anyone to do this?

 

Again, thanks for all the advice it's greatly appreciated.

[mk3 Cooper S]

MK1 Cooper Production 997 July 1961 - Nov 1963 Chassis No. Austin from C - A2S7 138301   998 Nov 1963 - Sept 1967   Morris from K - A2S4 138311   Engine Prefixes 997 9F- Sa - H H - High compression   9F- Sa - L L - Low compression   998 9FA - Sa - H   9FA - Sa - L   9FD - Sa - H   9FD - Sa - L