53 replies to this topic

[surfblue63]

Another thread that is just fanning the flames of the rights and wrongs of reshelling.

 

My opinion is passing off a £5,000 Mk1 Super Delux as an original £20,000 Mk1S is Fraud. But when selling your Mk1S if you are honest as to the history and provenance of the components then that is fine. 

[Cooperman]

Where the stupidity of this becomes clear is that If I crash my Mk.1 Cooper 'S' and it needs re-shelling I can legally buy a Mk.4 shell brand new and 'adapt' the Cooper 'S' parts to fit by modifying the front sub-frame mountings to take the Mk.1 sub-frame, modifying the tunnel to take the 'S' gearbox rear mounting, cutting for twin tanks and boot bracket boards and 'bingo' I have a1964 Cooper 'S' with a new, but significantly different, bodyshell.

 

However, if I take my crashed Mk.1, get another Mk.1 shell (I currently have 2 spare Mk.1 shells in reasonable condition), add the 'S' boot brackets and the holes for the gear change bracket, re-build the shell to be completely rust free and as original, then restore my 'S' with all its as-original parts so that it is truly a Mk.1 Cooper 'S' to the correct and original specification and as homologated for rallying in 1964 with the shell having additional seam welding and strengthening for rallying, I have somehow offended the 'body-shell police'.

 

To me that is nonsense as it's what has been happening ever since about 1961 when the 997 Cooper arrived.

Let's get a bit more real here folks.

[surfblue63]

 

However, if I take my crashed Mk.1, get another Mk.1 shell (I currently have 2 spare Mk.1 shells in reasonable condition), add the 'S' boot brackets and the holes for the gear change bracket, re-build the shell to be completely rust free and as original, then restore my 'S' with all its as-original parts so that it is truly a Mk.1 Cooper 'S' to the correct and original specification and as homologated for rallying in 1964 with the shell having additional seam welding and strengthening for rallying, I have somehow offended the 'body-shell police'.

 

.

___________________________________________________________

 

Then your car would be a recreation and should be known as such. It is not an original car and should not be passed off as one. It maybe to original specification, whatever that is, but it is not an original car.

[hunterg30]

so any car that as been reshelled/fully rebuilt,is a recreation no matter if its a new car that's been repaired

[surfblue63]

Ask yourself this question

 

Three cars are for sale for £25000.

 

One is a one owner car with full history, all MOT's certificates and service records. It is in good usable condition but has a few minor imperfections and has had some replacement parts fitted during it's life.

 

The second is a restored car that has full documented restoration which shows the original shell and components were restored and used where possible. It is correct in every detail and looks showroom fresh.

 

The third is also restored and correct in every detail but there is no evidence as to the originallity of the components or shell.

 

 

Which do you buy, and hence, which is actually the most desierable?

[mk1coopers]

Number 1

[mab01uk]

Would not bother me which one to choose if I liked what I saw and was happy with the price asked........I am a mechanical engineer and like Cooperman to me a steel Mk1 bodyshell original or replacement but correct in nearly every detail worth worrying about is just the same steel body component whether it came down the production line at a different time or not. It is not a living organism it is a lifeless steel bodyshell, a component part of a car and I personally think there really are far more important things to worry about even if you are a complete classic car nut or Mini anorak like me........but as ever each to their own opinion.

Edited by mab01uk, 01 May 2013 - 07:05 PM.

[Cooperman]

Would not bother me which one to choose if I liked what I saw and was happy with the price asked........I am a mechanical engineer and like Cooperman to me a steel Mk1 bodyshell original or replacement but correct in nearly every detail worth worrying about is just the same steel body component whether it came down the production line at a different time or not. It is not a living organism it is a lifeless steel bodyshell, a component part of a car and I personally think there really are far more important things to worry about even if you are a complete classic car nut or Mini anorak like me........but as ever each to their own opinion.

So that is someone else who thinks like me.
I think my problem is that I was around the Mini since 1961 and have rallied them, prepared them, repaired them and re-shelled them going right back to about 1964. When rallying in top-level events in the 60's and there was a crash the comment "Oh dear, that means I'll have to find a new shell then" was commonly heard and not only in respect of Minis. I had a huge accident on the 1969 Scottish Rally in a Mk.1 Lotus-Cortina. The driver, who owned the car got a used 2-door body-shell from a Ford dealer, had the shell re-prepped and the Cortina was re-built and used again. It is an ex-works car and is still about today and is worth a fortune.
Virtually every competition Mini was re-shelled. Take the famous Mini 24PK. That was re-shelled after the 1964 Manx Rally using a used 850 shell. In fact, can you actually find an ex-works Mini which was not re-shelled.
It's a lot of fuss about nothing and re-shelling is widely accepted within the classic car movement. Get used to it. These cars are not recreations, they are simply comprehensively restored to original mechanical specification.
My own Cooper 'S' rally car was re-shelled with a 1965 shell from an 850 when I restored it in 1991. In fact the original shell was later jig-re-built and used in a 998 Cooper restoration then turned into a rally 970 'S'.
The shells are all identical, so what is the issue. Is it OK to change the sub-frames, fit a different block, crank and gearbox, fit different wheels, change the seats for competition ones, fit plastic windows, but not OK to fit a replacement identical shell? That makes no sense at all.

[The Matt]

The issue is that what you've done is currently against the law. Just because something has been ok to do historically, doesn't mean that it's ok to do it now.

The laws regarding reshelling a car are clear. They've been that way for years and years. The thread is questioning whether those laws should be reconsidered and possibly changed. As Dan has said, it's difficult to see a way of passing the use of second hand shells whilst still protecting against the risk of people using stolen shells to reshell.

Keeping something to yourself doesn't make it any less illegal. I would never use a second hand shell to reshell a Mini unless I was willing to get it Q plated. Using a mk4 to reshell a MK1/2/3 would also mean the car would lose its ID as you need to use a shell that meets the OE specification of the donor car.

Edited by The Matt, 01 May 2013 - 08:32 PM.

[The Matt]

I'm all for a petition too. Classic cars need to be preserved and there needs to be a practical way of doing it legally.

[1984mini25]

Goes off searching for a pre 72 mini in need of a 'reshell' as I've always wanted a tax exempt mpi.

[mk1coopers]

Using a BMH shell to reshell a MK1 is legal as its still considered a factory replacement shell, we all know that Minis have been reshelled right from the start, the problem comes when you use an 850 to recreate a Cooper S, which can be worth 3 or 4 times more than the 850, then sell it on without telling the new owner. There are subtle differences in the shells and the new owner could find themselves very disappointed if their totally original car turns out not to be what they paid for

[Cooperman]

Hands up those who never have or ever will break the law. I broke the law yesterday by cruising my BMW at over 90 mph on the A14 at midnight. I also dropped a piece of paper in the street when it was raining last month and didn't pick it up as it fell into a big puddle.
As I have said and keep on saying, "Do what you need to do to keep your classic car original and in existence - just DON'T KEEP TALKING ABOUT IT ON HERE" or the 'body-shell politzei' will be self-righteously after you.

Edited by Cooperman, 01 May 2013 - 08:39 PM.

[The Matt]

I've always been told that the new replacement shell has to be to the original specifications of the donor car. And that the use of a BMH shell to reshell a MK1/2/3 didn't comply with that due to the differences in specifications (subby mounts etc).

That really does prove that the regulations need reviewing by the classic car fraternity, rather than just being ignored.

[Cooperman]

There are a lot of re-shelled early cars which use the BMH new shell and which have kept their original identity.
The entire situation is 'Mickey Mouse' in the extreme.
It is completely impossible to identify between Mk.1 shells after so many years. All have had replacement panels including wings, floors, sills, doors, front panels. And they are structurally identical too. How would anyone know when a Mk.1 had been re-shelled? In 1968, 1988 or 2008? Who would know and, unless a repairer came on here and said "Guess what, I've just re-shelled my Mk.1 with a shell I bought from a friend" how would anyone tell when a re-shell had been done.
I recently saw a Mk.1 in a body jig at a friend's workshop. He had just the bulkhead and a bit of the floor and one door frame and the rest was to be new Heritage panels. This, he said, made it legal as the original shell was 'repaired'. Oh yeah, like 95% 'repaired'. If that is how the law works then, to paraphrase Dickens, "The law is an ass".
Just do what you need to do to keep your classic on the road and, again, don't talk about it!