Morris Minor Owners Club

"One Piece at a Time"...

Taker a look at this Van for sale on Fleabay.http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/morris-minor- ... 0012.m1985

'71 Registration and DVLA recon it's a '71 build with 1098 engine.
It's got a single piece screen, but has MM Lowlight front grill/wings.
Interior looks like a late build

Does it belong to anyone in MMOC?
What's the story behind it?

The engine compartment is a later one with the elephant hose and wiper motor yet brass radiator - does not look high tank version. Fuse box appears later too. later solenoid but earlier heater tap. Later wipers on the one piece windscreen an no evidence on the roof of a different shape screen.

Interior has later indicator, dashboard and column mounted starter / key . Gearbox is clearly 948/1098 judging by the position of the gear lever

The front bumper does not fit at all on the offside.

Why would someone go to all the trouble of modifying the later inner wings to take a low light grille on a 1970 'ish van?

Yep, it's no wonder the Seller states

receives more attention than any other classic i have driven,

It's because nobody can quite believe their eyes!

I wonder if they realise it's like some strange Cut n'Shut with around 20 years between.....

At least one other similar conversion around. A low-light 4-door saloon at the David Manners open day in Oldbury last year.

firedrake1942 wrote: Why would someone go to all the trouble of modifying the later inner wings to take a low light grille on a 1970 'ish van?

Well......why wouldn't they? Countless Minors have been modified in one way or another, sometimes quite brutally. Guess they just fancied the look.

Someone not bothered about originality will love it, and why not if it makes them happy.
But,unlike the old song, a bit more than the dime he didn't pay.

It wouldn't be THAT much work would it? Surely it is simply a late Minor van with bolt-on wings and front panel of an earlier design bolted on and the front of the inner wings cut away?? I think the "lowlight" panels are available in glassfibre aren't they?
Lots of owners like their MInor to look a little "different" don't they. It looks as if larger headlamps have been used than the standard and hard to find lowlight type - more like Minor 1000 ones.

Listing says halogen headlamps so must be larger. Not sure that they comply with construction and use regulations for a '71. Light-centres possibly too near to the ground...?

First registered September 1965. Interesting mot history.

les wrote:First registered September 1965. Interesting mot history.

Very interesting MOT History. It seems to have significant structural issues one moment and fixed within a few days.

But what's really confusing is that the MOT page says its first reg is Sep '65, while basic page says its April '71, which is what the reg Suffix indicates.

Possibly a 2nd hand imported (even from somewhere nearby like Channel Islands or Isle of Man) and hence needing a UK mainland re-reg. Until 1974/75 when the DVLA came into being, re-reg's were handled by local councils and given a year letter relating to the date of re-registration, not the actual age of the vehicle.

palacebear wrote:Probably a re-reg. Until 1974 re-reg's were given a year letter relating to the date of re-registration, not the actual age of the vehicle.

I din't know that. I thought that a Reg was for always life and if a car 'vanished' for a while, it got given it's original number when/if it resurfaced (selling of historic numbers excepted - my car is on it's 3rd reg and I'm currently awaiting if DVLA can tell me what it started as in '55).

Used to be very haphazard. Over the years I've known of three. A 1968 Austin A60 shipped from Barbados when its owner immigrated to London in 1972. Run on Barbados plates for a year (which was then allowed) and registered here in 1973 as PJD***L. He was still driving it around Brixton in 2014. Another Austin in my street dating from around 1955 got a 1964 'B' reg on its return from Guernsey that year.

I've seen and heard enough to give me doubts, and for that reason 'I'm out'!

les wrote:I've seen and heard enough to give me doubts, and for that reason 'I'm out'!

From the looks of it, it's a 1971 van.

Understand about 20% of that.

Plus ça change !

Sentences constructed without adequate recourse to adjectives, adverbs and conjunctions can become extremely difficult to comprehend clearly

Well I understand it all, sort of. You can become President of the United States without having a clue what an adjective, adverb or a conjunction is.