[Healeys] 100M Back on BaT

[S and T Miller]

The car on offer does have some valid M parts. Vin tag, cockpit trim, boot. The engine I'd put a question mark next to because of the repro tag, possibly incorrect carbs and incorrect distributor. I'm not really familiar with original cold air boxes, but it did appear old.
I also felt IMO that the bonnet looked suspiciously clean and fresh. The boot showed no evidence of the prop mount being removed and the boot itself showed some signs of aging prior to restoration (namely some pitting). I can't say that same about the bonnet in terms of the aging. The area where the numbers are stamped has a support behind it. So in theory the number could be cut out of an original bonnet and grafted into another new bonnet, but this is just speculation and would take carefully scutiny to determine.


The Millers

"Always drive them, but remember each drive in an antique car is a test drive."
________________________________
From: josef-eckert at t-online.de <josef-eckert at t-online.de>
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2023 2:58 PM
To: S and T Miller <stmiller96 at hotmail.com>; HealeyRick <healeyrik at gmail.com>
Cc: healeys at autox.team.net <healeys at autox.team.net>
Subject: AW: [Healeys] 100M Back on BaT


To understand it. What is the difference between this 100M car on offer and a 100 BN1 modified with a 100 Le Mans kit, which has been given a different identity through a swapped chassis number?

For me both cars are very similar.



Josef Eckert

Germany







-----Original-Nachricht-----

Betreff: Re: [Healeys] 100M Back on BaT

Datum: 2023-12-27T20:48:57+0100

Von: "S and T Miller" <stmiller96 at hotmail.com>

An: "HealeyRick" <healeyrik at gmail.com>








Very true. From talking with Mike, I really don't think he initially knew about the chassis and possible motor/ carb questions. He really doesn't have a good understanding of Healeys. And I even can understand to a point that he might be trying to even convince himself that it might be more than it actually is. But how he has represented it after receiving a good assessment,  just sits a bit wrong with me.

Anyway it may never be known who or when the "conversion" took place. But the idea that the front cross bracing was bent to look like a M cam was installed, and the two under the dash BN1 OD relay holes (4) being so carefully concealed, tells me someone was trying to make it look legit.

And I quess it just will be determined by the hammer price how much of it really matters. It is a sharp looking car.


The Millers

"Always drive them, but remember each drive in an antique car is a test drive."
________________________________
From: HealeyRick <healeyrik at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2023 11:57 AM
To: S and T Miller <stmiller96 at hotmail.com>
Cc: bspidell at comcast.net <bspidell at comcast.net>; healeys at autox.team.net <healeys at autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: [Healeys] 100M Back on BaT

Interesting question about misrepresentation. Who misrepresented what to whom? Did the restorer misrepresent a 100M with a BN1 frame and possible replacement motor to the original buyer who was clueless or was it the original buyer that was doing the misrepresenting? There's probably some grist for a lawyer's mill in all this. (retired lawyer, I can't help thinking this way) Maybe I should start one of those "The Healey Lawyer" columns in the Marque?

Rick Neville, aka "HealeyRick"

On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 8:41 AM S and T Miller <stmiller96 at hotmail.com<mailto:stmiller96 at hotmail.com>> wrote:
Bob, I agree with you. And it seems he is trying to cast some doubt on it being a BN1 chassis. Saying the firewall is a combination of both BN1 and BN2 is plain false. Since I was the one who showed him in person why it was a BN1 chassis he wanted to use my name saying we "believe" its a BN1 chassis,  and I replied that "believe" doesn't categorize my opinion. That everything points to being a BN1 chassis and nothing to a BN2.
Intesting note on the added restoration photos, #311 clearly shows the cut out BN1 gearbox mount in the restoration photo. Odd it is on a painted frame, but the BN2 one must have been welded in later. I'd thought maybe it was of a different frame, but the front frame extensions are missing in the pictured one as we'll, so probably not.

I realize he is trying to sell a car that he bought that someone misrepresented to him,  but I kinda feel not so great about his representation of the car on BAT. Again it is a nice car overall.

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2023 03:45:57 -0800
From: Bob Spidell <bspidell at comcast.net<mailto:bspidell at comcast.net>>
To: healeys at autox.team.net<mailto:healeys at autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: [Healeys] 100M Back on BaT
Message-ID: <229b7fa6-3b3a-4221-b587-227de3ae0c2b at comcast.net<mailto:229b7fa6-3b3a-4221-b587-227de3ae0c2b at comcast.net>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

The expos? of the incorrect frame isn't stated in the text, but buried
in the video according to a commenter (I didn't watch it). It appears to
me the seller is attempting to straddle an ethical fence, apparently
with BaT's blessing

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<mailto:Healeys at autox.team.net>
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys

Unsubscribe/Manage: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/healeyrik@gmail.com


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://autox.team.net/pipermail/healeys/attachments/20231228/6a662775/attachment.htm>