Dodgy car?

[bravonovember]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1963-Austin-Mini-/251045...

Im pretty dam sure it's not a 1963 mini, or am i wrong? Shells wrong, engines wrong, wheels etc.

[forsure]

Agreed, apart from the grille and bumpers (and reg.no.) it all looks at least twenty years younger.

[Checkmate]

This is a mid 80's to early 90's 998 car, shell and A+ engine. Later seats, wheels and dash panel. A '63 would be a mark 1, whilst this has the grille, that is about it. It's been ringed. By someone with no attention to detail.

[james280779]

Checkmate said:

This is a mid 80's to early 90's 998 car, shell and A+ engine. Later seats, wheels and dash panel. A '63 would be a mark 1, whilst this has the grille, that is about it. It's been ringed. By someone with no attention to detail.

or far more likely rebuilt using readily available parts rather than the expensive original hard to source parts. Either way it cannot be classed as a 1963 and is not worth half the asking price. I sold my 1989 racing green a few years back for under a grand and it looked pretty much identical except obviously green, with a decent set of minilights and minus those awful headlight things.

[Checkmate]

james280779 said:

or far more likely rebuilt using readily available parts rather than the expensive original hard to source parts.

It's a whole new car! To maintain the original identity of a car when reshelling, many original components from the "donor" must be kept. Nothing on this car is 1963 vintage.

[james280779]

Checkmate said:

It's a whole new car! To maintain the original identity of a car when reshelling, many original components from the "donor" must be kept. Nothing on this car is 1963 vintage.

no different from a kit car that uses a classic car chassis. still registered as an oldie but 90-98% new. I know its not right but it happens alot.
Nobody is disputing its a newer car on an old plate.

[bravonovember]

Might be a dealer that's not up on his minis. I mean most people think all minis are the same.