Where do we stand on this - replica, recreation, fake....
Where do we stand on this - replica, recreation, fake....
Author
Discussion

john2443

Original Poster:

6,540 posts

240 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
Jowett Jupiter Mk2, designed by the factory but never built. This one built from the original plans on a Jowett chassis.

I was on side until I got to Pinto gearbox and the original reg not being sold with the car.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Jowett-Jupiter-1953-Mark...

aeropilot

40,535 posts

256 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
john2443 said:
Jowett Jupiter Mk2, designed by the factory but never built. This one built from the original plans on a Jowett chassis.

I was on side until I got to Pinto gearbox and the original reg not being sold with the car.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Jowett-Jupiter-1953-Mark...
Well, gearbox is no big deal in the scheme of things, it wouldn't be a huge undertaking to put a Jowett box back in if the chassis and engine is all otherwise 53 Jowett...?
I'd be more worried that the gearbox is referred to as a Pinto 5 speed gearbox rather than a Ford Type 9 which is what I'd expect if this had been built by someone with a such a reasonable grasp of detail...?
I suspect that that 'original' number plate isn't original to a '53 car anyway, that single letter plate is surely a much earlier issue number plate than 1953...so again not a big deal tbh?


The Surveyor

7,624 posts

266 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
The way the advert reads suggests there is no intention to deceive, he's not claiming that it is an original factory car so it would be harsh to describe it as a fake, 'recreation' would be more appropriate.

As for the gearbox, its common for later gearboxes to be used on classics, so again that would be a positive rather than a negative, although I does start to dilute any claims for historic status if it was subject to a DVLA probe.

Nice looking car though.

GoodOlBoy

607 posts

132 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
The advert couldn't be clearer as to what it is.

Someone has had the passion and enthusiasm to complete his project. Good for him and good for our hobby. That's where I stand.


Slidingpillar

761 posts

165 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
Ditto. The seller obviously bought the car as a numberplate rapist. 2258 E could be original, and is a quite rare plate as only a few places issued reversed plates. Middlesex comes to mind, but E is Staffordshire I think so perhaps not original, I'd have expected this plate to have been issued a bit later.

added, plate was issued before the ABC 123A format in 1963, but not much before. Such plates are not as old as most folk think. E 2258 though, yes that is old.

Edited by Slidingpillar on Monday 28th September 09:45

aeropilot

40,535 posts

256 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
Slidingpillar said:
Ditto. The seller obviously bought the car as a numberplate rapist. 2258 E could be original, and is a quite rare plate as only a few places issued reversed plates. Middlesex comes to mind, but E is Staffordshire I think so perhaps not original, I'd have expected this plate to have been issued a bit later.
A bit of digging suggests you are probably on the money.
Yes, E is a Staffs issued plate, and the reversed number/single letter format was issued from 1953 to 1962, so yes, very likely that the plate could be the original '53 Jowett plate.


Roy C

4,213 posts

313 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
The car that Jowett designed to replace the original Jupiter Mk1 & Mk1a was known as the Jupiter R4.
It had a lighter chassis than before and a fibreglass body. Three R4 prototypes were built before the company folded and two survive (one shown below):


john2443

Original Poster:

6,540 posts

240 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
GoodOlBoy said:
The advert couldn't be clearer as to what it is.

Someone has had the passion and enthusiasm to complete his project. Good for him and good for our hobby. That's where I stand.
I wasn't doubting the accuracy of the ad, agreed it says exactly what it is, it was what category it fell into seeing that there was never an original one.

crostonian

2,427 posts

201 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
To add to the possible descriptions, could it be classed as a 'continuation'?

Andrew Gray

4,974 posts

178 months

Monday 28th September 2015
quotequote all
For the money pound per smile it looks a nice regardless of its heritage or lack of and a credit to the engineer that did the Build would be an interesting one to own in comparison to what 16k can buy with other Marques
Andrew

Keep it stiff

1,850 posts

202 months

Tuesday 29th September 2015
quotequote all
For me this fits the bill perfectly, the fitting of new bodies to old chassis is a tried and tested formula that goes back for almost as long as cars have existed. This one is prettier from the front than the rear. Hints of Healey, AC and Aston in that and hats off to the guy who built it, very many hours will have gone into that body. Reasonably priced and the sort of car I would love to own.