128 replies to this topic

[Black.Ghost]

I don't have a FB account any longer. What's the gist of the conversation on there? 

[mab01uk]

Long Mk1 thread on it here:-

http://mk1-forum.net...start=20#p84736

Edited by mab01uk, 27 December 2014 - 07:50 PM.

[Bubblebobble]

I see the seller is hiding behind the ' thats what used to go back then ' umbrella ' so its allright ' .

 

He does say its been reshelled  but his initial words are implying its  the best thing since sliced bread .

[Black.Ghost]

Long Mk1 thread on it here:-

http://mk1-forum.net...start=20#p84736

I have just read all through that thread. It seems it all started some time before the eBay ad!

 

It appears that it will never actually be accepted as a 59 car, and therefore the best thing to do seems to be to revert it to a genuine 1960 car. 

 

Just out of interest, how many actual 1959 cars are thought to have been produced? And how many still exist, to the best knowledge of the register? Does a car registered in 1960 that was produced in 1959 hold anywhere near the same value as one built and registered in 59? I think this might be the next area to read up on. 

[mab01uk]

 

Long Mk1 thread on it here:-

http://mk1-forum.net...start=20#p84736

I have just read all through that thread. It seems it all started some time before the eBay ad!

 

It appears that it will never actually be accepted as a 59 car, and therefore the best thing to do seems to be to revert it to a genuine 1960 car. 

 

Just out of interest, how many actual 1959 cars are thought to have been produced? And how many still exist, to the best knowledge of the register? Does a car registered in 1960 that was produced in 1959 hold anywhere near the same value as one built and registered in 59? I think this might be the next area to read up on. 

 

 

 

 

The fact is buyers on the open market will pay more for a December 31st 1959 registered Mini-Minor/Austin 7 than for an identical model registered 1st January 1960.......even though many early 1960 Mini's were of course built in 1959.

 

 

1959 Mini's were only on the market for less than 6 months from August '59 and sales were not great to begin with....

 

Edited by mab01uk, 27 December 2014 - 10:42 PM.

[Cooperman]

Would this still be regarded as a 1960 car and not a true 1959 car if it had suffered an accident in, say, mid 1960, and been re-shelled by a main dealer with a new 1960 shell paid for by the insurance company together with a lot of other 'new' 1960 parts?

[evosal]

I have been doing some research on the first mini 621AOK, and have found that very little of that car is still original, maybe even the shell has been changed as it was pictured in 1965 with a full length fabric sunroof that it no longer has, the interior is from a late 60 car and much of the under bonnet detail is incorrect.
It even has a later engine and two hole glass !
At the very minimum it's had a roof, wings, front panel, full interior, doors and complete rear subframe assembly, engine and glass, it also has a plastic washer bottle and incorrect air filter assembly.

Edited by evosal, 28 December 2014 - 04:14 AM.

[Shifty]

Its still more original than the triggers broom on ebay though.  

 

At least 621aok is from the same decade as its log book.

 

Also, lets be clear on the fact that the ebay car is yours and you have a vested interest in it.

[evosal]

Lol, yes it's mine, I'm not trying to hide that fact, just noting the double standards of some people posting nonsense, if 621AOK was an unknown car that had just come to light on ebay all the anoraks would be denouncing that as a fake as we'll especially if they had a photo of it with the different roof on it.
Mines had a shell 25 years ago, big deal I've not tried to hide that, 621 is far from original as we'll, in fact if that too has had a re shell at some point (as looks more than likely) then it's probably less original than mine.

[CityEPete]

In reality I cant see a point where any mini would have been legitimately reshelled, bought off the insurance company as spares or repairs and bunged into a stolen shell like loads of cars we still see maybe. Even as a fairly new car the insurance would have been better off to just pay the owner out and crush it, it was nothing more than a cheap runabout in the 60s, would they reshell a 2 year old KA now that was totally wrecked? Same thing. Heritage shells for minis and MGs have only become viable as values have risen. I'm not a massive fan of people selling 'tubs' on this very site, they are not tubs they are cars with no engine, vin number or V5! Every single mini left its factory with its own identification or a receipt as a replacement body, heritage didnt supply 1990s bodies in mettalic blue as direct replacements in the 1970s that so many tax exempt cars we see 'reshelled 30 years ago' appear to claim, where has that new good condition body come from, a fecking time machine or some poor buggers driveway?

[Shifty]

I don't claim to be an expert on early stuff, but as an early1960  mini owner myself I can appreciate the differences

 

 

 

The other issue is that 621aok is not the one on sale here and I'm sure if it were for sale all of the (very well documented) alterations would be declared.  Your car is being marketed as a car of historical significance and therefore an investment.

 

The problem is that buyers are getting more and more fussy and originality is key, what was acceptable in the '70s/80's wouldn't be now,

 

It's for this reason that I don't see your car as an investment, it's got an interesting history but there is nothing left of the original car(not even the reg number)

 

There are a few 59 bits there to dress it up but it's like selling a fake diamond in a Tiffenys box.  Its a shame really as the original cherry red car looks nice.

 

Good luck with the sale and I hope it doesn't come back to bite you.

[olosteve]

Just looked at the bidding history, 13.5K. At least it's not on Private Listing, I do not bid on eBay if Private Listing. Looks like the Dealers have dropped out.

[Bubblebobble]

Its a bit much to say its the 6th oldest mini though . That is like triggers broom . And i wouldnt say its a great investment , more talk to hoodwink someone with more money than knowledge .

 

 Sneaky beaky  .

[CityEPete]

I don't claim to be an expert on early stuff, but as an early1960  mini owner myself I can appreciate the differences
 

 
 
The other issue is that 621aok is not the one on sale here and I'm sure if it were for sale all of the (very well documented) alterations would be declared.  Your car is being marketed as a car of historical significance and therefore an investment.
 
The problem is that buyers are getting more and more fussy and originality is key, what was acceptable in the '70s/80's wouldn't be now,
 
It's for this reason that I don't see your car as an investment, it's got an interesting history but there is nothing left of the original car(not even the reg number)
 
There are a few 59 bits there to dress it up but it's like selling a fake diamond in a Tiffenys box.  Its a shame really as the original cherry red car looks nice.
 
Good luck with the sale and I hope it doesn't come back to bite you.

I was going to make that point but forgot, it's ok comparing it to aok but that isnt for sale is it?

[CityEPete]

Its a bit much to say its the 6th oldest mini though . That is like triggers broom . And i wouldnt say its a great investment , more talk to hoodwink someone with more money than knowledge .
 
 Sneaky beaky  .

At the same time the reshell is declared so I dont think its sneaky beaky either, just another ringer mini like loads around, ringed in the 70s just upsets people less than it would if I take someones CooperSport500 without asking and "reshell" the "tub" to "keep another mini on the road" using my cityE V5c