|
Information |
|
wanted -165 pref auto.Views : 6469 Replies : 40Users Viewing This Thread : |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Dec 22nd, 2013, 14:05 | #21 | |
Beachcomber
Last Online: Feb 8th, 2024 13:40
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Redditch
|
Quote:
Building speciality / one off cars has been my hobby for 55 years and my buisness for 35 years [ now retired ]. It's only the cost of the sheetmetal I'd be looking at. As far as the DVLA is concerned it's a rebody [ partial ] and not subject to SVA testing and provided the work is professionally carried out to MOT standard - not an issue. As far as premium for a '73 or earlier car, it's just a case of looking around, not ALL owners consider them to be "Classics". In order to keep the tax free status - I would have to fit an estate back [ sheetmetal - NOT a cut and shut ] on a 164 saloon - doesn't fill me with dread - but is it worth it ? I COULD live with a 164 saloon and a trailer, alternatively I need to abandon ideas of that georgeous front end and look for an early 140 series estate, and just work on that. One of my hobby builds: Current Project - redesigning chassis to take supercharged Jag V8: [ stock is straight 6 Jag ] Last edited by beachcomber550; Dec 22nd, 2013 at 15:08. Reason: add pix |
|
Dec 22nd, 2013, 15:24 | #22 |
Amazoniste
|
That is correct for cars with a separate chassis, but not for monocoque vehicles. Sadly, doing such a conversion to create a 165 will definitely require a BIVA test to to the alterations to the monocoque, and also most likely result in a Q plate.
__________________
Paul - 1967 Amazon 222S B20 o/d Estate & 1961 A-H Sprite Mk2 948cc WANTED - For '67 Amazon estate - offside rear quarter, preferably new old stock. |
The Following User Says Thank You to 222s For This Useful Post: |
Dec 22nd, 2013, 17:20 | #23 |
Master Member
Last Online: May 8th, 2024 16:04
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: East Sussex
|
As Paul says, modifying the monocoque is a huge no-no. Fitting different bolt-on wings and bonnet is fine!
So a good option could be a 140 estate with 164 front panels? You clearly have some serious skills, (nice T btw ) so the labour shouldn't a problem! Good luck in your search though!! |
Dec 22nd, 2013, 18:43 | #24 |
VOC Member
Last Online: Yesterday 00:31
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
|
|
Dec 23rd, 2013, 10:32 | #25 | |
Beachcomber
Last Online: Feb 8th, 2024 13:40
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Redditch
|
Quote:
So the MLT - 145 with 164 front sheet metal would be the simple way to go on the face of it. I'll have to have a good look at both and measure up. Windscreen / scuttle area could maybe pose a problem. Last edited by beachcomber550; Dec 23rd, 2013 at 10:35. Reason: correct text |
|
Dec 23rd, 2013, 11:02 | #26 |
Trader Volvo in my veins
Last Online: Yesterday 22:20
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Anglesey
|
The 164 is a longer wheelbase with the extended area being from the bulkhead to the front crossmember. This would make grafting the front panels on to a 140 a much harder task.
I'm sure Beachcomber550 will be able to build this within the limits of regulations by doing a little reading and thinking. |
Dec 23rd, 2013, 11:05 | #27 |
Trader Volvo in my veins
Last Online: Yesterday 22:20
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Anglesey
|
I think you must be referring to the Australian built ones that were using part estate and part saloon kit.
|
Dec 23rd, 2013, 12:35 | #28 | |
Beachcomber
Last Online: Feb 8th, 2024 13:40
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Redditch
|
Quote:
Capt Jack - that Gold saloon is georgeous - but doesn't come anywhere near my budget - although I'm sure worth every penny. I may well have to resolve myself to looking whistfully at 164 /165s, whilst settling for my second choice - an early 1970 - '73 145. |
|
Dec 23rd, 2013, 14:21 | #29 | |
VOC Member
Last Online: Yesterday 00:31
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
|
Quote:
However, I do wonder if at least the front panel from a 164 would fit straight onto the 145, so that at least you could have the 164 'look'! Then again, one of the reasons why the 164 is longer is to accommodate the bigger engine - being the B30 6 cylinder it'll be half as long again as the B18 / B20 fitted to the 145. Having said all that, a lovely 145 is in no way a second-class car! That gold one is for sale not far from me. At that price it's a bit OTT in my opinion - I reckon £2500 might be nearer the mark, but then any 'classic' is worth what it's worth to the eventual buyer. I did suggest to SWMBO that we could ditch the newish Saab we have in favour of the gold 164 with an LPG conversion, but , well, as has been said before on here, somehow appreciating the beauty that a big, old, thirsty leviathan over the air-conditioned gadget-laden gizmos of a newer car is just not programmed into the DNA of the female of the species! Heigh-ho! Jack |
|
Dec 23rd, 2013, 19:23 | #30 | |
Amazoniste
|
Quote:
As others have said, the 164 has a longer wheelbase, but I'm sure with a little ingenuity, 164 outer panels could be shortened to suit a 140 front end, if that is the look that you want
__________________
Paul - 1967 Amazon 222S B20 o/d Estate & 1961 A-H Sprite Mk2 948cc WANTED - For '67 Amazon estate - offside rear quarter, preferably new old stock. |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|