Just joined the forum...

[Piglet]

I've found another and it's local to me too.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/185387589799

I've sent him a message about the car. Do the stickers peel off (they are hideous) why has it got a 1500 lump and what carbs are on it (I seem to recall the 1500 had smaller SU's on it to meet US emissions, though I may be wrong) does the chassis and engine match the V5 and is it registered as historic? Regardless I'm going to look at it. Pretty sure this was listed last year with no takers so maybe a bit of haggling and I can drive home with it.  We shall see! Wish me luck (I'm going to need it lol).

Alex

[NonMember]

1 hour ago, Piglet said:

what carbs are on it (I seem to recall the 1500 had smaller SU's on it to meet US emissions, though I may be wrong)

The ones in the photo look like HS4s - standard for a UK 1500. The US cars were on single Stromberg with loads of emissions gear by the time they went to 1500.

I'm intrigued by the statement that it's been "upgraded to disc brakes" - does the seller really think Triumph fitted front drums on any Spitfires?

I agree with you about the stickers!

[Clive]

10 hours ago, Piglet said:

I've found another and it's local to me too.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/185387589799

I've sent him a message about the car. Do the stickers peel off (they are hideous) why has it got a 1500 lump and what carbs are on it (I seem to recall the 1500 had smaller SU's on it to meet US emissions, though I may be wrong) does the chassis and engine match the V5 and is it registered as historic? Regardless I'm going to look at it. Pretty sure this was listed last year with no takers so maybe a bit of haggling and I can drive home with it.  We shall see! Wish me luck (I'm going to need it lol).

Alex

Looks a sound car, stickers aside.

Can be picky, it has later spit seats (so won't appeal to the purists, but more comfy/adjustable and look to be refurbished)

It has the ridiculously long seatbelt stalks that are often (for some onknown reason) sold for spitfires. Easily sorted.

It may not have a chassis commission plate at all. But easy enough to get a new one stamped up. Engine number/size again may not yet have been changed, and is easy enough to do later. Same as historic tax class, just paperwork.

1500 engine/box is not issue, overdrive very welcome. Diff may not have been changed, so it may feel undergeared and remarkably nippy off the line.

My biggest concern is how it has been put together. Nearly finished, but a lack of genuine knowledge. Ask who built it up. And get an MoT ASAP to check it is safely built, plus budget for full (proper Hunter/optiflex) wheel alignement, it may have odd handling until that is done. 

Budget £500 for hood/doorcards and other trims etc, and the time to ask lots of questions here (though the search function will sort most issues)

The stripes may peel off with a hairdrier....

 

[Josef]

10 hours ago, Piglet said:

I've found another and it's local to me too.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/185387589799

I've sent him a message about the car. Do the stickers peel off (they are hideous) why has it got a 1500 lump and what carbs are on it (I seem to recall the 1500 had smaller SU's on it to meet US emissions, though I may be wrong) does the chassis and engine match the V5 and is it registered as historic? Regardless I'm going to look at it. Pretty sure this was listed last year with no takers so maybe a bit of haggling and I can drive home with it.  We shall see! Wish me luck (I'm going to need it lol).

Alex

That’s not a Mk3 body! It’s a Mk2 body with Mk3 bumpers by the light positions, front and rear, and the hole-filling bolts on the rear valance where the earlier style bumpers would fit. It could even actually be a Mk2 with a 1968 Reg, have a look for an FC commission number. Not trying to put you off  but wouldn’t want you to figure that out after buying!

The boot badging is incorrectly positioned too, and the fuel filler fitted 90 degrees out. I also don’t like the rust bloom through the paint in several areas. So I’d echo Clive’s comment about possible build quality / knowledge. Though if the  body really is good, then doing a pass over the mechanical bits along with the trim can’t be too ginormous a job.

[PeteH]

On 13/04/2022 at 20:51, clive said:

We don't expect 18K, as said 2/3rd of insurance valuation is about right. But appreciate there are some good usable cars around for half that. 

Keep your eyes peeled and ear to teh ground. Ebay is probably not teh best place, but you never know. Plenty of people expect a figure, but eventually settle for rather less. A local chap bought a vitesse for a good deal less than the advertised price, and it is a pretty good car. 

I would humbly suggest that you are correct, especially IF you cannot get to see it before bidding!. I bid blind, back in 2015, and it`s still a work in progress!!. BUT the final price was a surprise even to me. Daft bid, Went to Pub for Sunday Lunch, came back and, out of curiosity had a look to see who had got it. Then had to tell "er indoors" that I was the owner of a 13/60 C-V!!😂. Collected on a Borrowed Trailer, towed behind the Motorhome. But it was definitely a "Kit of Parts", even now I am not entirely sure what is actually in some of the boxes!.😂.

Pete

[Clive]

9 minutes ago, Josef said:

That’s not a Mk3 body! It’s a Mk2 body with Mk3 bumpers by the light positions, front and rear, and the hole-filling bolts on the rear valance where the earlier style bumpers would fit. It could even actually be a Mk2 with a 1968 Reg, have a look for an FC commission number. Not trying to put you off  but wouldn’t want you to figure that out after buying!

The boot badging is incorrectly positioned too, and the fuel filler fitted 90 degrees out. I also don’t like the rust bloom through the paint in several areas. So I’d echo Clive’s comment about possible build quality / knowledge. Though if the  body really is good, then doing a pass over the mechanical bits along with the trim can’t be too ginormous a job.

Good spot, but it does have mk3 hood frame and associated fixings (and the chap does not know how to fold s spitfire hood down...probably the reason for the holes)

I am wondering if it had a early rear valance fitted? Quite possible, I would have done so if buying panels and found one at say an autojumble/show. Front lights, it could be the builder just preferred teh earlier lights, but I have an inkling that mk3 panels were hard to find at one point, or there was a glut of early panels available? and remember the first mk3 spits used a mk2 bonnet with a plinth for the new lights. 

None of that would put me off. It isn't a 15k car. But agreed, careful inspection required. Luckily it is all pretty clean so easy to check. And be prepared to lift carpets, crawl underneath etc to check the welding.

[NonMember]

35 minutes ago, Josef said:

That’s not a Mk3 body! It’s a Mk2 body with Mk3 bumpers by the light positions, front and rear, and the hole-filling bolts on the rear valance where the earlier style bumpers would fit. It could even actually be a Mk2 with a 1968 Reg,

I don't think so - the filled holes in the rear don't look to be in the right place for the Mk2 overriders (my Mk3 had the rear end of a Mk2 grafted on early in its life). It does look like a Mk2 bonnet but, as Clive points out, it has the Mk3 hood fixings, which are a decided challenge to fit on a Mk2. And a '68 G plate would be very late for a Mk2 - fine for a Mk1 GT6 but the Spitfire facelift was a couple of years before that.

[Josef]

The rear light positions are wrong for a Mk3 (photos attached for comparison), too far inboard. Didn’t know about the difficulty of retro fitting the folding hood! And yeah it could be a really early Mk3 bonnet that has lost its cover plinths for the newer style front lights. Anyway, there are details that are ‘wrong’ however they came about. Whether or not Alex cares is of course up to him  

[Colin Lindsay]

2 hours ago, Josef said:

That’s not a Mk3 body! It’s a Mk2 body with Mk3 bumpers by the light positions, front and rear, and the hole-filling bolts on the rear valance where the earlier style bumpers would fit. It could even actually be a Mk2 with a 1968 Reg, have a look for an FC commission number. Not trying to put you off  but wouldn’t want you to figure that out after buying!

The boot badging is incorrectly positioned too, and the fuel filler fitted 90 degrees out. I also don’t like the rust bloom through the paint in several areas. So I’d echo Clive’s comment about possible build quality / knowledge. Though if the  body really is good, then doing a pass over the mechanical bits along with the trim can’t be too ginormous a job.

Mk3 had rectangular front sidelight units, not the twin round versions of earlier cars, but very early Mk3s used Mk2 bonnets with a light 'adaptor' panel, so this may have been removed, but the wipers are very far apart, which points to a late Mk3, not a Mk2. Late car with an early bonnet? It's also possible the rear valence panel has been replaced using what was available eg a Mk2 pressing?  

[NonMember]

8 hours ago, Josef said:

The rear light positions are wrong for a Mk3

Yes, but they're also wrong for a Mk2, and the holes filled with bolts are not where the Mk2 overriders bolt to. In fact, having taken a closer look, the rear bumpers are on the wrong way round, which means none of the mounting holes will line up, and those bolts may even be where the bumpers are supposed to attach. It does not look like a Mk2 rear valance, it looks like a badly bodged restoration by someone who didn't know how it was supposed to go together.

[Josef]

35 minutes ago, NonMember said:

Yes, but they're also wrong for a Mk2, and the holes filled with bolts are not where the Mk2 overriders bolt to. In fact, having taken a closer look, the rear bumpers are on the wrong way round, which means none of the mounting holes will line up, and those bolts may even be where the bumpers are supposed to attach. It does not look like a Mk2 rear valance, it looks like a badly bodged restoration by someone who didn't know how it was supposed to go together.

Oh, yeah, I can see the bumper brackets and you’re right, they’re fitted on the wrong sides. You can see the irons have been moved inboard in the shot of the boot too. Amazing… It doesn’t even look like it can be a modified late Mk3 valance where someone had tried to fit earlier style reverse lights. The indicators stayed in the same position, and the reverse lamps were moved. 

[Piglet]

Thanks everyone for some very helpful pointers. I did wonder about the rear over riders but the rear lights I didn't spot! Seats and belts are both wrong for sure. The rear end of the car seems oddly high, as if it's just been lifted up on a jack.  But there is a more serious problem...I did some checking.  The car was registered on December 1968 (MK2?) but the tax is due on July 1983. Huh? Has it been dormant since then and why? Plus the new owner has only had the car for about 18 months and I'm positive a year ago it was for sale on eBay with no takers. I presume potential buyers viewed it and walked away. Plus he hasn't replied to my email so draw your own conclusions. I was going to go and see this but if I don't even know where the seller lives I'm a bit stuck. I'll let you all know if he DOES respond but I have a sneaking feeling he won't. 

Alex

[DanMi]

More likely that the rear valance has been replaced and the ones available are generic ie you make the holes and mk2 never had reverse lights. The bonnet certainly looks mk3 (full width grill mk2 has separate cut outs for the grill and bonnet irons, very hard to see the lights but again not unlikely that during a restore the light panels have been replaced with mk2 repair panels as a choice, the fuse box is in the correct place for mk3 and it has the hood attachments.

[Piglet]

To my amazement he's just replied to my email. Stickers are 'wrapped' so will peel off. 1500 lump was in the car when he bought it and on twin SU's. Registered as historic. I'll make an appointment with him and go have a looksie!

Alex

[Josef]

4 minutes ago, Piglet said:

To my amazement he's just replied to my email. Stickers are 'wrapped' so will peel off. 1500 lump was in the car when he bought it and on twin SU's. Registered as historic. I'll make an appointment with him and go have a looksie!

Alex

One thing I did spot when looking at the DVLA’s online info is that the car is still showing as 1296cc. So the engine change might not have been reported  properly. That might cause you some difficulties if the engine number on the V5 doesn’t match the one on the car. Another thing on the list of things to check!

[Colin Lindsay]

59 minutes ago, Piglet said:

To my amazement he's just replied to my email. Stickers are 'wrapped' so will peel off. 1500 lump was in the car when he bought it and on twin SU's. Registered as historic. I'll make an appointment with him and go have a looksie!

Alex

Take plenty of photos if you still want opinions, but there should be room to move on the price, unless he sees pound signs as it's a sports car regardless of originality.

Be sure to find out why the side window requires alignment; it could be a sign of incorrectly-fitted sills.

[DanMi]

If you do buy it, get a pair of door check straps (pretty cheap) or the doors will open too far and get damaged along with the bonnet and do take a fridge magnet as a nice looking body may be hiding filler.

[Badwolf]

Just noticed the "cash on pickup" bit. Obviously you will get no support from PayPal, fleabay or your credit card company if it goes pearshaped, so take extra care. If you have doubts about anything, walk away.

[Piglet]

All wise words. I have my magnet at the ready! Going to see it tomorrow but I am expecting to walk away. However, it could be better than I thought. Fingers xxd.

Alex

[Piglet]

So...I've just been to see the car. I'm trying to think of one word to describe it. Awful sums it up. I didn't need my magnet as I could clearly see plod coming through the £200 respray. Various 'new' parts were pointed out. My fave were the front calipers, clearly ancient but with a respray, rusty banjo bolts etc. It didn't start at first then finally did and sounded rough. Leaking fuel pump didn't help. Someone mentioned a MK2 front end and yes the lights were MK2 ones. Roof was awful, but a spare in the boot that was even worse. Left hand window glued into place with mastik I think. Overdrive consisted of 2 identical red wires not connected to anything. Dash lacquer peeling off, dash top had a bit of old carpet stuck on it. Boot lid was entirely filler.  Seats had no runners, just bolted to the floor. I could carryon like this. Amusing thing is someone offered him £2K for it. Even at that price it's too expensive.  Sigh.

The hunt continues!

Alex

[Chris A]

Keep looking, things can only get better 🤔

You'll find the right one for you sooner or later

[DanMi]

I did suspect that the boot lid was full of filler just by looking at the lower edge and could not see the switch for od

[Colin Lindsay]

1 hour ago, Piglet said:

The hunt continues!

Alex

Well done! You didn't let your heart rule your head, which can be so easy with a 'bid now' button in front of you...     More will come along no doubt.

I went to view a Fiat Stilo that was for sale locally on Gumtree about 2014, "Absolutely mint! No damage at all!"... It was a mass of dents and scratches which the seller told me was only to be expected on a car like that. When he told me that the power steering was faulty but only needed fluid topping up I walked away - it's an electric system... but it remained on sale for months with the same description. 

 

[Josef]

Gave us all a fun game of ‘spot the bodge’ I suppose though

[Piglet]

So many bodges I can't list them all! He did confirm that the car was on eBay last year, BIN price even higher! His reasons for selling were that he'd had enough of it and his wife wants it gone. I'm expecting the next listing will be an actual auction with a 99p start.  I will not be bidding...😁

Alex