Project roadster on eBay.

[HairyDave]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Just a touch pricey for an unregistered Roadster. A real barn find!

[meverett]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

I did see that one and it’s about 70miles up the road from me but didn’t want to encourage myself to think about it :-)

[stevejgreen]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Returning briefly to A Frames.
They are certainly frowned upon in the EU. Normally in the EU27, the UK being stubbornly different your insurance company covers, not roadside assistance, where someone attempts to repair your broken down vehicle at the roadside, which is generally frowned upon, but a recovery service to a local repairer. Local is an important word, it will not necessarily cover you if you are on a long trip or get you home.

But as with many things, the UK has found some wriggle room in the EU legislation, the details of which are detailed.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-frames-and-dollies/a-frames-and-dollies

Don't expect to show this to a French police officer as justification for using an a frame abroad.

[David]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Love the music attribution Tony
No one picked up on this yet ?? eBay item number:143353019419

"Uncompleted" and DVLA says it's a black Morris

And in black gel coat? Which PKK was by request from me at the time as I couldn't afford paint, don't see many like that.

[b_caswell]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Just a touch pricey for an unregistered Roadster. A real barn find!

The last MOT expired in 2009 but had an interesting list of previous fails and advisories
that were resolved within two days!!

GOV.UK

Check MOT history





CMA601K MORRIS

Colour Black


Fuel type Petrol


Date registered 1 July 1971





MOT expired on 17 March 2009


Date tested 18 March 2008

Pass


Mileage 62,365 miles


MOT test number 9922 4857 8071



Test location

View test location
Expiry date 17 March 2009





Advisory notice item(s)

• Nearside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
• Brakes imbalanced requirements only just met. It would appear that the braking system requires adjustment or repair. (3.7.B.5b)
• no seat belts fitted

Date tested 16 March 2008

Fail


Mileage 62,365 miles


MOT test number 4300 1627 8025



Test location

View test location



Reason(s) for failure

• Front registration plate missing (6.3.1a)
• Offside Registration plate lamp not working (1.1.C.1d)
• Nearside Headlamp aim too low (1.8)
• Offside Headlamp aim too low (1.8)
• Front Windscreen wiper not operating automatically when switched on (8.2.1b)
• Nearside Rear Braking system leaking (3.6.A.1) Dangerous
• Offside Rear Braking system leaking (3.6.A.1) Dangerous
• Nearside rear parking brake recording little or no effort (3.7.B.6a) Dangerous
• Offside rear parking brake recording little or no effort (3.7.B.6a) Dangerous
• Parking brake: efficiency below requirements (3.7.B.7) Dangerous

Advisory notice item(s)

• Nearside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
• Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
• Brakes imbalanced requirements only just met. It would appear that the braking system requires adjustment or repair. (3.7.B.5b)
• no seat belts fitted

What are failures and advisories?









Check if MORRIS CMA601K has outstanding recalls






Support links

• Cookies
• Terms and conditions
• Privacy notice
• MOT history API
• Built by the Driver & Vehicle Standards Agency

Open Government Licence
All content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0, except where otherwise stated


© Crown copyright





Good going by any standard.

However one has to question a 1971 registered car passing its MOT with no seat belts fitted.

The original 1971 Marina would have had seat belts as they were compulsory since 1967.

Bearing this in mind it would seem the car has been a Marlin for quite some time but probably
without any proof, unless the description on the V5 has been amended.

[marlin1984]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Anyone got a B-series that big?

"Nearly finished" seems a long way off the mark > split seat/incomplete wiring/no paint/hacked-about bodywork/ etc. etc. Looks like a huge amount of hard work and £££s ...

[marlin1984]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Steve Green's Gov. info is interesting - particularly the bit about a number plate requirement on the 'unit'.
Quote "There are also requirements for the display of the appropriate number plate on the rear of the towed ‘unit’".

Strange. Farmer's round here are allowed to flout this - and many have no visible number plate on the trailer.

[HairyDave]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Thanks for that Steve, saved me looking.
Marlin1984 Ithink you can bore a B out to that. Might it b a 2l O series? Farmers are a law unto themselves. Some using a tractor and trailer as as a road vehicle on agricultural tax and fuel.

[HairyDave]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

meverett, of course you did but it is not interesting enough. No I'm not, at all at all not!

[marlin1984]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Details suggest the origin was a 1971 Morris Marina. B-series bored out to 1950cc ? Seems a bit unlikely looking at it in general.

Mind you it would not be the first car to have major tuning - even though quite poor in other areas ..

I always thought the 2.0 O-series was actually 1994cc. ?


Could it just be that the seller hasn't a clue? OR - is the seller 'flying a kite' ?

[meverett]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Typo? instead of 1978cc could be 1798?

[HairyDave]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

No engine pictures. Not properly registered could be a big problem. It does look like a barn find maybe a relative's old car. I wonder if the seller is reading this?

[marlin1984]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Seller has confirmed it is an '1800 cc' engine.

[stevejgreen]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Seller has confirmed it is an '1800 cc' engine.

I can’t see the point of boring out a ‘B’ series to 1950, the max that I understand is possible, unless you want to retain MG heritage, but it’s power output is always going to be limited bu by the three port exhaust manifold. An engine/transmission swap seems to be much more sensible for a kit car, if you want more power.

There is a more interesting alternative, a Marina owner bolted a Zetec head onto a ‘B’ series block, I will let you search for that, but it seems to work.

[meverett]

Re: Project roadster on eBay.

Going back to the project roadster at the Lizard. If the buyer is or becomes a MOC member and local to me and needs some body panels, I have a spare used rear tub, some running boards and rear arches.