This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============5537642476724882131==
boundary="------------P0g88ZY66q4C7gq0NcKAp9YQ"
Content-Language: en-US
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------P0g88ZY66q4C7gq0NcKAp9YQ
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Note the Registry will also certify 'Le Mans Conversions,' which may be
what Kent's nasty is/was. Some have noted you can build a 'better M'
with aftermarket parts (Isky cam, alloy head, SBC, etc.).
I don't think either Kilmartin or Jules makes a 100 chassis, but I'd be
somewhat more sympathetic to that, but not so much hanging an M body and
parts on a BN1 (a BN2, /maybe/). The main problem I see is an earnest
owner may sell a conversion (aka 'counterfeit') with full disclosure,
but an owner or two down the road the 'Tribute' tag has been
conveniently forgotten (I'm not all in on 'tribute' anything, be they
cars or rock bands).
On 12/15/2023 7:17 AM, HealeyRick wrote:
> This is all hypothesis based on speculation so take it with that
> caveat. Let's say one had a rusty factory 100M that was so bad it
> needed a new frame. How hard would it be to transfer the 100M body
> parts over to a solid BN1 chassis along with the oh-so-valuable
> chassis plate? The 100M Registry seems to focus mostly on the original
> body parts and cockpit surrounds to certify a car. Even cars with
> non-original engines have been registered. I'm pretty certain Kent
> Lacy's Nasty M was on the registry. So is the BaT car still an M?Â
> Some pretty valuable race cars have been crashed and fitted with new
> chassis and still bring big money at auction.
>
> To me, what makes an M an M is the motor. If an M no longer has its
> original motor, or equal replacement, it has lost its character as an
> M. Otherwise, it's a BN2 with a louvered hood. It's almost like if a
> Sunbeam Tiger blew its motor and it was replaced with an Alpine motor.
> Sure, it's got the right serial number on the unibody, but it's not
> much of a Tiger anymore. The BaT car with what appears to be
> non-original carbs and distributor caused me concern. Who would remove
> those from an original M motor? C'mon 100M sellers, pop the valve
> cover, remove the rockers and put a dial indicator on the pushrods so
> we can see if there is still a 100M cam in the lump!
>
> Happy Healeydays,
> Rick Neville
>
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 1:05â?¯PM Bob Spidell <bspidell@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Excellent report, thank you.
>
> I was one of the commenters on BaT--I joined BaT to comment--but,
> since I have a BN2/100M I'm not familiar with BN1 differences and
> could only point out obvious differences with my car (which was
> completely original as far as I can tell, except for extensive
> body work). One thing that was somewhat disturbing to me is that
> the Registry certified this car, while noting some major anomalies
> (the carbs, for instance, looked to be new and didn't have the
> hand scribing like my car).
>
> The other thing that interested me is, how do you value this car?
> Yes, it's a very nice car, probably a good driver but, IMO, its
> value /should/ be less than a comparably restored, original BN1 or
> BN2. And, what did the previous owner know, or should have known
> about this car? How do you present it for sale; as a BN1 with 'M
> bits?' It would need the proverbial asterisk alongside the page title.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> On 12/14/2023 8:15 AM, S and T Miller wrote:
>> If you were following it recently, you might find my
>> observations interesting. So I went down to Michael's motor cars
>> to help him determine if the 100m indeed has a BN1 chassis. Here
>> is what I found.
>>
>> It has the BN1 inner fenders with the rolled pressings. It has
>> the BN1 front brake hose frame mount the is less pronounced
>> welded BN1 bracket, as the later cars have a bolted on bracket.
>> The front shock towers have no evidence of being replaced and
>> show the factory welds. The gearbox mount shows
>> non-original/factory welds as if it were replaced to accommodate
>> the BN2 mount.
>>
>> What I found most interesting is that where a BN1 has two OD
>> relays mounted under the dash, it took shining a light it
>> different directions to just make out the slight evidence of
>> filled holes (4 of then for the two relays). And I was able to
>> reach inside the vent just below that area with my fingers and
>> feel the welds and welding wire that was used to fill those 4
>> holes. I can tell you someone took great care to try and make
>> those holes seem as they never existed. Along with that, where a
>> BN2 would have the single OD relay attached to the firewall with
>> machine screws screwed into welded captive nuts on the firewall,Â
>> you can see plain sheet screws were used to mount it in what
>> would be a BN2 relay position.
>>
>> I also feel the engine tag is a repo because of the lighter
>> stamping. Originals tend to have the numbers/ letters stamped
>> with a deeper end result. I took my repo engine tag along to
>> compare, and they appeared identical in the stampings. The body/
>> bath tag and VIN plate appear original. Now that doesn't mean
>> that the engine isn't the correct M engine, because there could
>> be many reasons why the engine tag was replaced. Anyone who drove
>> a stock 100 compared to a 100M can attest to the difference in
>> power, and Mike stated that it indeed has that M power.
>>
>> The boot lid shows no evidence of the stay bracket being swapped
>> off another lid, and if you look closely you can see that the
>> boot shows some previous age/life. I'd believe it to be original.
>> I could not make out any evidence of the bonnet number being
>> sliced in from a M bonnet, but I will say that the underside of
>> the bonnet seemed suspiciously clean and prestine. I couldn't
>> detect any age like the boot, but that would be for someone else
>> to decide.
>>
>> Mike had asked me if the cold air box was original, and I simply
>> don't have that experience to know. I have anyways heard if it
>> looks old, it's original. It does indeed look to have some age, so?
>>
>> I feel at some point in this car's life someone went to some
>> effort to try and conceal that these 100M parts were reinstalled
>> on a BN1 chassis. Another interesting note is that there was an
>> attempt to fill the holes where a BN1 chassis plate is fitted on
>> the frame rail. Perhaps the person didn't realize that the holes
>> continued over to the BN2's, and thought they were erasing
>> evidence of a BN1 chassis?
>>
>> With all that said, Mike is simply trying to represent the car
>> correctly. The car is a very nice car! Paint is very nice, car is
>> straight, and gaps look good. Interior is very nice, and looks to
>> be a very good car all around. I didn't drive the car, but Mike
>> has years of experience under his belt, so I'd trust his opinions
>> on that. With the quality of the restoration, it is surprising
>> that the front frame to shroud brackets were not welded to the
>> frame. Chrome looks good, and I'd think winning some trophies at
>> a popular vote car would not be an issue.
>>
>>
>> The Millers
>>
>> "Always drive them, but remember each drive in an antique car is
>> a test drive."
>
> _______________________________________________
> Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation $12.75
>
> Archive: http://www.team.net/pipermail/healeys
> http://autox.team.net/archive/healeys
>
> Healeys@autox.team.net
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
>
> Unsubscribe/Manage:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/healeyrik@gmail.com
>
--------------P0g88ZY66q4C7gq0NcKAp9YQ
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Note the Registry will also certify 'Le Mans Conversions,' which may
be what Kent's nasty is/was. Some have noted you can build a 'better
M' with aftermarket parts (Isky cam, alloy head, SBC, etc.). <br>
<br>
I don't think either Kilmartin or Jules makes a 100 chassis, but I'd
be somewhat more sympathetic to that, but not so much hanging an M
body and parts on a BN1 (a BN2, <i>maybe</i>). The main problem I
see is an earnest owner may sell a conversion (aka 'counterfeit')
with full disclosure, but an owner or two down the road the
'Tribute' tag has been conveniently forgotten (I'm not all in on
'tribute' anything, be they cars or rock bands).<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/15/2023 7:17 AM, HealeyRick
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAGfzsZdUxjxb4Z3aPT5RgKzxT7tRj435g_nHJQ2z3Vq19sFZ4g@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">This is all hypothesis based on speculation so take
it with that caveat. Let's say one had a rusty factory 100M
that was so bad it needed a new frame. How hard would it be to
transfer the 100M body parts over to a solid BN1 chassis along
with the oh-so-valuable chassis plate? The 100M Registry seems
to focus mostly on the original body parts and cockpit surrounds
to certify a car. Even cars with non-original engines have been
registered. I'm pretty certain Kent Lacy's Nasty M was on the
registry. So is the BaT car still an M? Some pretty valuable
race cars have been crashed and fitted with new chassis and
still bring big money at auction.Â
<div><br>
</div>
<div>To me, what makes an M an M is the motor. If an M no
longer has its original motor, or equal replacement, it has
lost its character as an M. Otherwise, it's a BN2 with a
louvered hood. It's almost like if a Sunbeam Tiger blew its
motor and it was replaced with an Alpine motor. Sure, it's got
the right serial number on the unibody, but it's not much of a
Tiger anymore. The BaT car with what appears to be
non-original carbs and distributor caused me concern. Who
would remove those from an original M motor? C'mon 100M
sellers, pop the valve cover, remove the rockers and put a
dial indicator on the pushrods so we can see if there is still
a 100M cam in the lump!</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Happy Healeydays,</div>
<div>Rick Neville</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at
1:05â?¯PM Bob Spidell <<a href="mailto:bspidell@comcast.net";
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">bspidell@comcast.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div> Excellent report, thank you. <br>
<br>
I was one of the commenters on BaT--I joined BaT to
comment--but, since I have a BN2/100M I'm not familiar with
BN1 differences and could only point out obvious differences
with my car (which was completely original as far as I can
tell, except for extensive body work). One thing that was
somewhat disturbing to me is that the Registry certified
this car, while noting some major anomalies (the carbs, for
instance, looked to be new and didn't have the hand scribing
like my car). <br>
<br>
The other thing that interested me is, how do you value this
car? Yes, it's a very nice car, probably a good driver but,
IMO, its value <i>should</i> be less than a comparably
restored, original BN1 or BN2. And, what did the previous
owner know, or should have known about this car? How do you
present it for sale; as a BN1 with 'M bits?' It would need
the proverbial asterisk alongside the page title.<br>
<br>
Bob<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>On 12/14/2023 8:15 AM, S and T Miller wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div
style="font-family:inherit;font-size:inherit;color:inherit;background-color:transparent">
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px">If you
were following it recently, you might find my
observations interesting. So I went down to Michael's
motor cars to help him determine if the 100m indeed
has a BN1 chassis. Here is what I found.</div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px"><br
style="box-sizing:content-box">
</div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px">It has
the BN1 inner fenders with the rolled pressings. It
has the BN1 front brake hose frame mount the is less
pronounced welded BN1 bracket, as the later cars have
a bolted on bracket. The front shock towers have no
evidence of being replaced and show the factory welds.
The gearbox mount shows non-original/factory welds as
if it were replaced to accommodate the BN2 mount. </div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px"><br
style="box-sizing:content-box">
</div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px">What I
found most interesting is that where a BN1 has two OD
relays mounted under the dash, it took shining a light
it different directions to just make out the slight
evidence of filled holes (4 of then for the two
relays). And I was able to reach inside the vent just
below that area with my fingers and feel the welds and
welding wire that was used to fill those 4 holes. I
can tell you someone took great care to try and make
those holes seem as they never existed. Along with
that, where a BN2 would have the single OD relay
attached to the firewall with machine screws screwed
into welded captive nuts on the firewall, you can see
plain sheet screws were used to mount it in what would
be a BN2 relay position. </div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px"><br
style="box-sizing:content-box">
</div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px">I also
feel the engine tag is a repo because of the lighter
stamping. Originals tend to have the numbers/ letters
stamped with a deeper end result. I took my repo
engine tag along to compare, and they appeared
identical in the stampings. The body/ bath tag and VIN
plate appear original. Now that doesn't mean that the
engine isn't the correct M engine, because there could
be many reasons why the engine tag was replaced.
Anyone who drove a stock 100 compared to a 100M can
attest to the difference in power, and Mike stated
that it indeed has that M power. </div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px"><br
style="box-sizing:content-box">
</div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px">The boot
lid shows no evidence of the stay bracket being
swapped off another lid, and if you look closely you
can see that the boot shows some previous age/life.
I'd believe it to be original. I could not make out
any evidence of the bonnet number being sliced in from
a M bonnet, but I will say that the underside of the
bonnet seemed suspiciously clean and prestine. I
couldn't detect any age like the boot, but that would
be for someone else to decide. </div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px"><br
style="box-sizing:content-box">
</div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px">Mike had
asked me if the cold air box was original, and I
simply don't have that experience to know. I have
anyways heard if it looks old, it's original. It does
indeed look to have some age, so?</div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px"><br
style="box-sizing:content-box">
</div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px">I feel at
some point in this car's life someone went to some
effort to try and conceal that these 100M parts were
reinstalled on a BN1 chassis. Another interesting note
is that there was an attempt to fill the holes where a
BN1 chassis plate is fitted on the frame rail. Perhaps
the person didn't realize that the holes continued
over to the BN2's, and thought they were erasing
evidence of a BN1 chassis? </div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px"><br
style="box-sizing:content-box">
</div>
<div style="box-sizing:content-box;margin:0px">With all
that said, Mike is simply trying to represent the car
correctly. The car is a very nice car! Paint is very
nice, car is straight, and gaps look good. Interior is
very nice, and looks to be a very good car all around.
I didn't drive the car, but Mike has years of
experience under his belt, so I'd trust his opinions
on that. With the quality of the restoration, it is
surprising that the front frame to shroud brackets
were not welded to the frame. Chrome looks good, and
I'd think winning some trophies at a popular vote car
would not be an issue. </div>
<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The Millers<br>
 <br>
"Always drive them, but remember each drive in an
antique car is a test drive."<br>
</div>
<span style="white-space:pre-wrap">
</span> </blockquote>
<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Support Team.Net <a href="http://www.team.net/donate.html";
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.team.net/donate.html</a><br>
Suggested annual donation $12.75<br>
<br>
Archive: <a href="http://www.team.net/pipermail/healeys";
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.team.net/pipermail/healeys</a>
<a href="http://autox.team.net/archive/healeys";
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://autox.team.net/archive/healeys</a><br>
<br>
<a href="mailto:Healeys@autox.team.net"; target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Healeys@autox.team.net</a><br>
<a href="http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys";
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys</a><br>
<br>
Unsubscribe/Manage: <a
href="http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/healeyrik@gmail.com";
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/healeyrik@gmail.com</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------P0g88ZY66q4C7gq0NcKAp9YQ--
--===============5537642476724882131==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/pipermail/healeys
http://autox.team.net/archive/healeys
Healeys@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
--===============5537642476724882131==--
|