Morris Minor Owners Club

T

nice looking car , but are you sure its a 57. i thought they stopped producing splittys in 56

the rear bumper looks like a front bumper and good buy for £400

Rear bumper appears to have normal blade (er, black part), but the chrome part is definitely from a front bumper. Also, the front flashers are anachronistic -- from a 1098 -- but the rear ones seem okay, I think. I'm somewhat unfamiliar with "splitties." Ah, and is that a locking fuel cap I see? And it's also had a radio antenna installed on the forehead. You mentioned the indics and the bumper, so no worries. Do the semaphores work?

Hope you won't have to replace that engine, but if you do, do you intend to fit the existing-sized one? I presume that it's got a 948, but I imagine they were still fitting a few 803's by '57.

All in all -- for 400 pounds -- that's an insanely fantastic purchase! Egor looks a treat anyway, and I can't wait to see photos of his insides!

something strange with the wipers,and the usual no chrome screen filler,but looks pretty good to me for that price.

it seems to be a 1958

Date of Liability 01 12 2010
Date of First Registration 18 10 1958
Year of Manufacture 1958
Cylinder Capacity (cc) 1098CC
CO2 Emissions Not Available
Fuel Type Petrol
Export Marker Not Applicable
Vehicle Status Licence Not Due
Vehicle Colour BLACK
Vehicle Type Approval

kennatt wrote:something strange with the wipers,and the usual no chrome screen filler,but looks pretty good to me for that price.

Looks like someone has set them up to work like 'normal' wipers when they are the claphand sort.

The 'logbook' may well be 1958 - but the car itself is earlier! Check if the numbers match up............

H

have you got any pics of the dash and interior

I

thesae things happen it will keep you busy for a while and was a good buy to

Looks very nice and wow what a price.

Nice!

When I picked mine up it had virtually no brakes. I drove around 35km. It was a quiet back road but quite hilly and windy in parts. Gripping the steering wheel and standing on the brake pedal produced a slight lean to one side and a graceful coast to a stop a kilometer or so down the road. I think there was one wheel cylinder which wasn't completely seized. It made for an interesting trip...

I

there were crossover models, althogh not many, that had the remaining split bodies fitted with 948 engines i believe. yours oviously has a thou' engine and gearbox. the price seems good. could it be that this s a very late split that was registerd late? ( sat in a dealers for a year?)

i am however going to start using it from mon as the machanic said the brakes are down to lack of use and should improve the more i drive it , told me just to push the pedal harder ...

I really wouldn't drive a car with ineffective brakes (you described them as scary!) in the hope that they will improve. Not to mention the 'butchered' erratic electrics. I would recommend getting everything properly inspected before using the car on the road. Think of your own safety and that of other road users.

marcusthemoose wrote: could it be that this s a very late split that was registerd late? ( sat in a dealers for a year?)

The last split screen was manufactured on 27th September 1956. Cammy - if you send me details of the chassis number via pm I'll be able to let you know exactly what year car the chassis number relates to.

I seem to have caused a bit of a stir with this car being a split screen and it being registerd as a 58 model , its getting a few people thinking the worst on here for poor "Egor" !!! ....
As far as im aware all is as stated ,all is above board regarding him , his paper work all matches up with his chassis num it was in fact the first thing i did when i went to view him was to check all numbers matched him and his paper work , which they did ...
The gent i got the car from is just a regular fellow and business man , not some dodgy looking car wringer , as it seems some people on here appear to be thinking ...
I myself wasent aware in fact of when the last splitty was produced , i have since been told it was 56 , this however does not mean that a car of that type couldent be late registerd , it wouldent be the first time this has happend with certain old cars in the past ...
I in fact remember a article regarding late registerd MG which were 75 but in fact build prior to 73 ......

It may have been exported, then re imported, hence the year on log book. Disc brakes without a servo do require a firm push, so lack of use may be correct, but worth checking everything is working as it should - or fit a servo.

Pete

Cheers for that pete , yea the brakes have in fact got much better today with its 60 mile trip and 3 break downs later , think the rod / shaft is worn on the brake and clutch pedal , its moving about a bit ..
Im kinda taken aback by it all , the year seems to be a major issue , i think till i know whats what regarding the car and its past , i.e date in which it was built im not doing anything else to it , its being checked out as we speak , so fingers crossed its all ok ....