[Healeys] Recent 100M on BAT

Fri Dec 15 15:16:06 MST 2023

I'm not an "M" guy really because as someone mentioned there isn't that
much to hanging the "modification " parts on any 100.
If the "M" designation involved significant performance modifications,  say
like an "M" series BMW, which could not be easily copied, then I would
consider them be very special.
I understand that Mr Meade has now sold his "M" so would not be surprised
to see the "Registry" fade away.
Just my opinion.

M

On Fri., Dec. 15, 2023, 1:59 p.m. josef-eckert--- via Healeys, <
healeys at autox.team.net> wrote:

> What makes a 100M?
> Very good question and not easy to answer.
>
> In my opinion, an Austin-Healey 100M, especially as the price category is significantly higher than the normal 100,
> is a car that any modification reduces its value. A heavily modified 100M is nothing special. It's a modified 100 and
> no longer an M. But this is my personal opinion. A new chassis would be such a major modification for me, as would a
> conversion to disc brakes at the front or a conversion to a Weber carburettors, etc. This would be simply no longer a
> Genuine 100M. I would then rather buy an original Austin-Healey 100 for the same money. But I have to admit, for me
> the hype surrounding the 100M is far exaggerated for what the car is. It's a special model with a little more
> horsepower, but not anything particularly special. Its like an Alpina BMW or a AMG Mercedes.
>
> Josef Eckert
> Germany
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original-Nachricht-----
>
> Betreff: Re: [Healeys] Recent 100M on BAT
>
> Datum: 2023-12-15T18:07:16+0100
>
> Von: "Bob Spidell" <bspidell at comcast.net>
>
> An: "HealeyRick" <healeyrik at gmail.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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?  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 1:05 PM Bob Spidell <bspidell at 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,  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 at autox.team.net
>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
>>
>> Unsubscribe/Manage:
>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/healeyrik@gmail.com
>>
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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 at autox.team.net
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
>
> Unsubscribe/Manage:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/michaelsalter@gmail.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://autox.team.net/pipermail/healeys/attachments/20231215/4837d81f/attachment.htm>