Mongrel +2

[JJDraper]

I seem to have a +2 that doesn?t know what it is?. The chassis number is 50/0328 which indicates a 1967/8 +2 and the engine number matches the plate. The head is a big valve unit and also has the engine number stamped on it, but I understand this was carried out by some people to ensure they got back the same head they sent off for reconditioning??. The body has a transverse exhaust, but the nose has spotlight recesses of the later models. The top has gold metalflake in the gel coat, which several people who should know these things, assure me is original. The interior is totally non-original, or to any spec issued by the factory. The only items interchangeable with other +2s are the crash pad, gear lever, instruments and lever type door handles. Everything else is custom made ? even the tunnel(fibreglass) and dash, which is in light teak, like the baby Elans. The switchgear is all sourced from 60?s parts bins, and wired to a ?sort of? +2S loom. The overall impression is that it is an earlier car ?tarted up? to look like a later car! But.. it seems to have been that way all its life. Factory records of the car are a bit vague, other than it was a factory car, and was sold off to a member of staff at some point. My suspicion is that it may have been used as a rolling development hack by the factory as surely it would have been cheaper for someone ?tarting up? a +2 to later spec to use real parts! The dash layout is the same as the later car, but none of the dimensions match, and all new switches would be required, making it impossible to replace it with a ?correct? one, of any type! Over my five years of ownership, I have been considering a body off restoration, but my quandary is that there seems to be no evidence that it has ever been anything other than what it is now?.. a mongrel! What do I restore it as? Perhaps I should go the whole hog & Spyderise it?.

Any advice?

Jeremy

[john.p.clegg]

Sounds like you need to post some pictures!
John

[elanman999]

Jeremy,
I think you will find all the heads have the number stamped on the back. It could just have had big valves fitted like most have now. More telling is what cams and carb bits are fitted? The spot light recesses in the front just means it's had a new front fitted. My +2 of similar age has and that's because when I bought the new front I could not get one without the lights in. As it's over 35 years old you will never know the complete history.
The way people break +2's now I would have thought you could have got hold of a complete interior if needed.
What should you do with it? I would put it back to standard with a few mods but if you want to Spyderise it thats fine by me.
Get busy and you can fix it for the summer!
Above all else just enjoy it and use it thats what they were made for.
John

[1964 S1]

I would research it as best you can, tracing owners/repair shops if possible. Maybe the front is original and the rear replaced! Maybe it's a +2 Inbetween. Can you post a picture of the dash?

[1964 S1]

And while we're on the subject, where's the +2 Jimmy Clark was going to drive???

[Elanintheforest]

The metalflake in the roof gelcoat confuses me...I thought that only 'S' types had that, and they were late 69 onwards. Gold metalflake was used on the JPS only. Could it be a re-shell? What was the original colour of the car (on the chassis plate) and what is the original colour on the shell? I would have thought that if the factory had tried out the 'S' instrument layout on an earlier car, they would have made it look as good as possible and not used a teak dash...the purpose of the enhancement I guess was to bring the car more 'upmarket'....hacking it together wouldn't persuade the board to change anything.
My tendency would be to put it back to original as far as possible. A new '67 dash and loom from Mattys married to a set of instruments and switchgear from ebay...and an original interior. But keep all the old stuff just in case further research turns up with anything! The only non-original bit then would be the fog lights, and many early cars have that nose fitted.

[JJDraper]

Thanks for your replies - more food for thought. Some pictures are already posted in my gallery.

The big valve head was a mystery to QED who were a bit puzzled by it as they said it looked odd, but the big valve implementation seemed original, but was not in production at the time of the car. Cams had no markings but were very worn on the journals, hence new Q360s. PS they didn't spot the un-machined crankcase to head breather hole... (see pictures), I found out during re-assembly! Block is on +60, so must have done serious mileage or abuse! Head shows no damage and was not skimmed; QED gave it a light 'facing'.

I have several interiors now, and am at the stage of deciding which to go for, hence the post. The seats in the car are odd, possibly cortina GT (I know zilch about Cortinas) with reclining action (chrome lever) and their backs tilt forward using a lever with a black knob. Feeling through the covers there is possibly a fitting for headrests. Very comfortable, practical and to the passing eye, original. Most of the original seat bases I have seen have a serious flaw in the design causing them to bend and crack. As a result I might keep the existing seats..

Metalflake roof has intrigued a few, but three 'experts' have said it is in the original gel coat - one said the factory experimented with the finish - if it came out of the mould OK, they left it, but if not they painted it! The distribution of the flake is not brilliant, and the clear gel layer has suffered from the sun - still looks good from a distance. I don't know enough about colour codes to understand what the plate tells me(?)

Same experts looked at the nose and couldn't see a join - may have been done too well... Body as a whole is structurally really good - few stress cracks despite a good hammering round the poor roads locally and elswhere. One on the boot lid, and around the bottom of the door hinges, two small (5-10mm) ones at the edges of the headlamp apertures, but nowhere else. I would guess it hasn't seen a body shop for at least 20 years.

As I have had the car nearly 5 years (has it really been that long?!) I have taken time to asses the car, but it still puzzles me..! Reg no. has changed a few times and is now on an age related one issued a few years ago.

I have no pictures of the interior yet, as it looks so shabby! I'll see what I can do.

Again thanks for the interest.

Jeremy

PS the pictures of the car are flattering - they don't show micro blistering and paint worn down to the primer on the wings!