On Tue, 14 Oct 1997, John Baker wrote:
> Hello,
> I just acquired a Spitfire MKII the title says it is a 1966, the owner
> said that it was a 1965. The comm number is FC61896A. Here are my
> questions:
> 1. Is it a 66 or a 65
Probably built in 1965, but late enough (or actually sold late enough) to
have been called a 1966 by the dealer. That was not at all uncommon back
then.
> 2. The body and Engine are in bad shape (Hey its at least 31 years old)
> is it rare enough to spend the time to restore it or part it, most of
> the parts are there (and MANY extras) as far as I can tell (the car is
> in boxes) and the frame looks like new.
Tough call. Early cars are beginning to get scarce. And there is a
simplicity to them that holds a charm all its own. But from what you're
hinting at, it's very unlikely to be a money-making proposition; more like
a labor of love.
> 3. How many of the parts will fit on a 1978 Spit which I also own.
Many of them will fit, but I wouldn't look at the '65 as much of a parts
source for the '78. Assuming all is original with each car, about the only
parts from the earlier car that would be a direct, exact replacement on
the later car would be front suspension upper and lower A-arms and much of
the rear brakes, maybe the clutch hydraulics. Beyond that, much of it will
bolt in, but so many items were "upgraded" in the intervening 12-13 years.
If the situation were reversed, a 1971 or later Spitfire makes a nice
organ donor for an earlier Spitfire in several respects (although you face
the inevitable originality debates, etc.).
--Andy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Andrew Mace, President and *
* 10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant *
* Vintage Triumph Register *
* amace@unix2.nysed.gov *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|