22 replies to this topic

[songshan]

Hi,

I've just got hold of a 96 shell that's been fully restored and sprayed in white. Its had all new front panels put on and from what I can see there's no dents anywhere. Some patch work plating where the sills meet the bulkhead, and a floor panel has been replaced but other than that its pretty mint. Straight white paint all over. I'm thinking of putting up for sale but I have no idea on an even ball park figure? I know new shells are silly money and there are some buckets on ebay for a few hundred quid, so I can pick a figure out of thin air and say £750?

That sound ok? cheers.

[ANON]

all depends on the standard of the work and the panels used. i'd want a minter with v5 and invisible patching and heritage panels spotted on for that price.

stick it in the valuations with some pics

[songshan]

Cool will do. Picking it up Sat so will get some pics done then. Ta

[roofless]

if its fully restored and without fault, with V5 and a cosha receipt- I'd go £750.00

[songshan]

Hmm not sure that it has the V5 as it was a replacement shell for the original MaryQuant mini. Will find out. What's the implications of not having a V5 doc for the shell?

[Cooperman]

To be blunt, don't ask that question on here. Since the law changed a few years ago it is technically illegal to use a 2nd hand shell in a restoration or re-build.
However, if done properly...........................................!

[roofless]

as above.....without a V5 its technically best considered as scrap......unless you're happy to take the risks of doing an illegal re-shell.

[songshan]

Oh ok, well was not aware of that law, but them my cars been garaged for the last 8 years.

I've only asked about the docs for the original car, not the replacement donor so they may have the docs for the shell too. So if the shell has a doc then I should register it as that car rather than the old original one? Even thought all the parts etc are from the old 88 Quant? So the Quant should have had its papers registered as scrapped then yeah?

[Cooperman]

There is a petition to the gov't to make these re-shells of classic cars legal.
Take a Mk.1 Cooper 'S' as an example. Such a car is worth a lot of money and if a replacement shell is needed, then a 2nd hand restored one will be sourced. Fully restored into a replacement shell it will be undetectable from the original and, under the old rules would have been totally legal.
The stamped-in ident for the shell is in the drain channel in the screen scuttle panel and when that panel is replaced, as it usually has to be due to 'rust worm', then the shell ident disappears.
No-one seems to know for sure what you are supposed to do then. I asked my MoT station owning friend who is a Mini enthusiast and he said the no-one ever checks. A friend who is a senior police officer said that you could buy a set of number stamps the correct size and re-stamp the number into the new scuttle panel. The entire thing is ridiculous. If you look at any Mini rally car it will almost certainly have been re-shelled. I sold a fully restored 1966 850 shell with a V5 and a front sub-frame a while back for £3000 and I know that it is being re-built as the basis of a 1965 Cooper 'S' which was a barn find with a very rotted shell.
Do what you want, but don't advertise the fact on here or anywhere else.
Also, and as an example, don't take a standard 1986 Mayfair 998 and re-shell it with wide wheels, a 1275 engine, a different colour, etc, and expect all to be well. Re-shell it as original and it's extremely unlikely that there will even be any questions if it's existance has been continuous.
I hope this makes sense.

[mk3 Cooper S]

There is a petition to the gov't to make these re-shells of classic cars legal.
Take a Mk.1 Cooper 'S' as an example. Such a car is worth a lot of money and if a replacement shell is needed, then a 2nd hand restored one will be sourced. Fully restored into a replacement shell it will be undetectable from the original and, under the old rules would have been totally legal.
The stamped-in ident for the shell is in the drain channel in the screen scuttle panel and when that panel is replaced, as it usually has to be due to 'rust worm', then the shell ident disappears.
No-one seems to know for sure what you are supposed to do then. I asked my MoT station owning friend who is a Mini enthusiast and he said the no-one ever checks. A friend who is a senior police officer said that you could buy a set of number stamps the correct size and re-stamp the number into the new scuttle panel. The entire thing is ridiculous. If you look at any Mini rally car it will almost certainly have been re-shelled. I sold a fully restored 1966 850 shell with a V5 and a front sub-frame a while back for £3000 and I know that it is being re-built as the basis of a 1965 Cooper 'S' which was a barn find with a very rotted shell.
Do what you want, but don't advertise the fact on here or anywhere else.
Also, and as an example, don't take a standard 1986 Mayfair 998 and re-shell it with wide wheels, a 1275 engine, a different colour, etc, and expect all to be well. Re-shell it as original and it's extremely unlikely that there will even be any questions if it's existance has been continuous.
I hope this makes sense.

A bit ridiculous for a mini agreed but the rule was made for all marks/vehicles and it just appears ridiculous for a mini

[MR J]

A short walk around any of the Mini shows around the country will reveal lots of Minis with incorrect bodyshells for their corresponding registration plates. As Cooperman says, if you choose the correct shell for the correct car then no one would really know the difference.

Though that rusty front scuttle may need replacing.

[Cooperman]

The law was not really intended to have this effect on the true classic car movement, but it was introduced to prevent 'ringing' of modern cars, hence the current petition.
It could have a disproportionate effect on classic cars and if anyone really took any notice of it would see a real reduction in true classics like the Mk.1 Cortina, MGB, Mini, Escort Mk.1 and other significant cars, which would be sad. It would also mean that people like me who compete in their classics would not dare to risk them in competition due to the inability to re-build them if we crashed.
However, most people are pragmatic about it all and it does seem as though no-one is really looking too closely. How, for example, anyone could prove a Mini had been re-shelled since the current legislation came in is hard to see.

[Bungle]

with out the V5 it would be difficult to prove it wasn't a stolen car striped to a bare shell, is the vin number still stamped in the shell

[songshan]

Ok so I've got a few things to look for on saturday.

MR J, yeah that front end is my old one currently being restored. My wife had a altercation with next doors fence post, much to my dismay.

[mab01uk]

Like Cooperman I support the petition for Reshell or Die. Many older Mini enthusiasts have been re-shelling Mini's for years for many reasons and without stealing anything, long before new laws which are practically impossible to apply on old cars, as said just don't shout about it on internet forums because some enthusiasts seem to prefer seeing perfectly good Mini bodyshells (with proof of not being stolen) weighed in for scrap because a few years ago some faceless bureaucrats decided to apply the same rules for modern cars also to old and diminishing classic cars like the Mini, because they neither care nor understand anything about classic cars and their owners.........

Please sign the Classic Cars Monthly Petition below:
DVLA to include Reshell or Die proposal as part of a major review of INF26 legislation.
http://www.classicsm...n-our-petition/

Edited by mab01uk, 12 March 2012 - 07:43 PM.