TRExp

Spitfire & GT6 Forum

My first Spit

Moss Motors
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor

Mark Jones Avatar
Close to Sarnia, Ontario, Canada   CAN
1995 MG MGF "Barney"
1996 Land Rover Discovery
I have a bunch of tail lights lenses and everyone is L672, not one of the correct L847.





MOWOG Garage serving the needs of all Post Abingdon MG owners in Lambton Co. since 2011.

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
Spitnut64 Avatar
Spitnut64 Gold Member John Mills
Milwaukee, WI, USA   USA
1970 Triumph Spitfire MkIII "Sarah Jane"
In reply to a post by Mark Jones I have a bunch of tail lights lenses and everyone is L672, not one of the correct L847.



I hear you Mark, and while I can’t claim any certain knowledge here, I have a hard time believing that so many ’70’s had their original 847’s lost, broken, or stolen; hence my comment about Triumph just using the available 672’s if/when the 847’s were out of stock.

As for the other question from the previous page - I don’t think it’s possible to put the words rational and govenment in the same sentence while using the former as a modifier for the latter.

Spitnut64 Avatar
Spitnut64 Gold Member John Mills
Milwaukee, WI, USA   USA
1970 Triumph Spitfire MkIII "Sarah Jane"
By the way Amy, you’re not alone here; join the club:

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <

Attachments:
DSCN7309.JPG    53.8 KB
DSCN7309.JPG

Yellowhawk Valley Avatar
walla walla, washington, USA   USA
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Walla Walla"
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Portland"
1972 Triumph Spitfire MkIV "Spokane"
1975 Triumph Spitfire 1500 "Dayton"    & more
John, your job looks like the one I'm working on now, except your seats are in lot better condition.
Dan

1970MKIII Avatar
1970MKIII Mathieu Poirier
North Windham, CT, USA   USA
Consider yourself lucky that you even have seats! Amanda's car doesn't have floor pans, seats or any carpeting whatsoever. It makes repairs easier because nothing has to be moved, but there will be some serious fabrication/hunting for parts/tempers flaring over the next few months! Luckily we have my car which has an impeccable interior to go off of in terms of how things should look. Might change it up and go with low back seats though, we both prefer that look and I think she's going to keep and refinish the wood dash. In my opinion it makes the car look far more British, plus wood dash kits sell for big bucks so we might as well cut out the middle man and restore it. It's going to be a project though, but we're both looking forward to it. The most we've had to do to mine was change the differential, so this is a whole different ballgame.

Yellowhawk Valley Avatar
walla walla, washington, USA   USA
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Walla Walla"
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Portland"
1972 Triumph Spitfire MkIV "Spokane"
1975 Triumph Spitfire 1500 "Dayton"    & more
Good luck finding all the pieces, I know it can be difficult for some of it, especially the seats. I have to say I continue to be puzzled by your comment, and others comments, about going back to the low back seats. I've had two cars with the highback 69 seats and to me they are way beyond any of the others in terms of comfort, especially lower back support. The 78 and 79 style seats that I have used are not too bad as they do have a small bit of lumbar support but nothing like the 69 seats. I have considered putting a set of those into the 79 car if I can find a good set.
Dan

Spitnut64 Avatar
Spitnut64 Gold Member John Mills
Milwaukee, WI, USA   USA
1970 Triumph Spitfire MkIII "Sarah Jane"
Mathieu, when I saw your posted interior photo I presumed that you had already removed the seats to work on the car - I didn’t realize that you lacked them altogether! (seeing Amanda sitting in the car, I presumed she was sitting on something other than the floor) Actually my comment was more ordered to the point of the need for major body work (read welding). I also ultimately agree about the dash, it just doesn’t seem to be a proper British car without a wood dash. Again, best of luck to you both!

Mathieu and Dan, all things considered, the seats on my car may indeed prove quite useable, God only knows the condition of the foam interiors, but the passenger exterior is near perfect. The driver seat has issues though, you can see the misalignment of the headrest with the seat base in the photo above - I believe the frame is broken and will need some welding; the seat cover itself is not too bad except for a bit of a tear in the back of the lower seat, a couple inches of torn piping, and blown seams along the back and sides. Still I think it can be worked with (again if I decide to go with Laurel, Brooklands, or BRG for the exterior color, I may change the interior to tan) - we’ll see.

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
Dino V Avatar
Chicago, USA   USA
Welcome and enjoy your new project!

Yellowhawk Valley Avatar
walla walla, washington, USA   USA
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Walla Walla"
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Portland"
1972 Triumph Spitfire MkIV "Spokane"
1975 Triumph Spitfire 1500 "Dayton"    & more
Well, both of you, welcome to the disease, it will only get worse-but what fun it can be along the way. I thought my projects were going to be a lot of work but I have to really appreciate what you are facing and can only encourage you to continue. Mine will be simple compared to yours.
Dan

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
M, CT, USA   USA
John, I was actually sitting on the back parcel shelf (or whatever you call it) to try to pretend that my interior was somewhat intact, as my parents haven't seeen my car yet in person...

Dan, I dont have any seats at all and have been having trouble finding any highbacks, and we (Mathieu and I) have some British car connections in RI so we contacted him and he has near perfect Austin Healey lowback seats with a nice gold trim, so I was thinking those would look good once the car is painted back to its original color (Jasmine yellow). However, I can't find any highback seats that are worth it! Most of them have to be totally re-done.

carChips Avatar
carChips Victor Harnish
Kelowna, BC, Canada   CAN
1933 MG Magnette
1973 Triumph Spitfire 1500 "Chip"
1989 GMC Sierra 1500 "Bush Truck"
Amanda, I particularly like the pic with you and Fred, and your feet on the driveway. Great sense of humor, LOL.



'S all for now
Vic

Yellowhawk Valley Avatar
walla walla, washington, USA   USA
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Walla Walla"
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Portland"
1972 Triumph Spitfire MkIV "Spokane"
1975 Triumph Spitfire 1500 "Dayton"    & more
Hey, when you dont have any, any work just fine, as long as they sorta fit. Good luck with it and have fun. We'll be around her to help out when needed.
Dan

SexyBeast Avatar
SexyBeast Greg N
Charleston, South Carolins, USA   USA
So when is the big race?

My money is on Amanda, she could win on that smile alone winking smiley

M, CT, USA   USA
In reply to # 850078 by Spitnut64 Tim, if you're referring to the L847 taillights used on the '70 Mk3 Spits (and I presume GT6+’s), then yes - while the L847's were the proper lights for the North American market cars, the UK and Euro cars still used the old standard L672 taillights (and lacked the RER31 reflectors); and i agree, that for all of the US market 1970 cars I've seen pictured with the L672, I have no doubt that if Triumph, on any given production day, had run out of the L847's then they just slapped L672's on the tails of those US bound '70's and sent them on their way. Of course, I have no proof of that statement, it’s just my speculation.

L672’s had a large reflective area on their bottom half that the L847’s lacked (or at least had reduced), since the RER31’s satisfied the Federal reflector requirement for those US market ’70’s. (See Dave’s photo attached in post #30)

The Spitfire was moved into my garage yesterday, now its time to get her started (or attempt too). She was turning over but I suspect either the points or the coil is bad so I will check that out and post back about that!

As for the lights, I do have the L847 taillights, I also have the clear round lights which are L594s and I have red round lights L760s. My reverse light is cracked and fixed with silicone so I would like a new one (L595). Also, I have red markers on the back of the car and amber markers on the front, both are L841. A lot of the lights actually have 69 on them, does that mean that they are from a 69 spit?

Spitnut64 Avatar
Spitnut64 Gold Member John Mills
Milwaukee, WI, USA   USA
1970 Triumph Spitfire MkIII "Sarah Jane"
In reply to a post by 1971-MkIII As for the lights, I do have the L847 taillights,

thumbs up smiley

In reply to a post by 1971-MkIII I also have the clear round lights which are L594s and I have red round lights L760s.

Those don’t belong back there, you should have amber L794, and an RER31 red reflector (reference what Matt has on the back of his car); I usually see amber outboard and reflector inboard (see attached photo), but both ways are out there. I don’t doubt if you unscrew those clear and red round lights lenses, you’ll find that one set have no light bulbs/sockets/wiring behind them - that’s where the reflectors were. Again, I’m sure someone just replaced the missing and/or broken pieces with whatever they could find; probably before the advent of the internet made finding such pieces easier. Amber L794’s should be available from the usual suspects. No repros are there for the RER31’s but I do see them on ebay with fair frequency, be ready to pay though (another item that I found on ebay UK, although they have popped-up on US ebay as well - keep your eye’s open, they’re out there).
The amber and red side markers should be correct, although you might note whether the bezels all match (I found three chrome and one later black paint bezel on my car: the chrome should be correct; I certainly like it better).
Not sure if the 69 on the lights is significant or not, but as I stated in a previous post here your cars commission number puts it in 1969 for its year of production; you might post a picture of your comm plate for people here to comment as to whether it looks original or restored. You can still obtain blank commission plates, and punch the serial numbers and such yourself; and I suspect that someone misprinted 1970 for the production year - probably they figured that the car was a 1970 model year (which it is) and assumed that the production date should reflect as much.

Upon further thought, if indeed the vehicle title declares it to be a 1971 (and others on this forum have already pointed-out that back in those days, vehicle titles often reflected the year in which the dealer first sold the vehicle, rather than the year in which the vehicle was produced, or it’s correct model year - that’s just how things were done back then), then it may be that someone who later restored the comm plate (with our current way of thinking about these things) punched-in a 1970 date thinking that that must be correct for a 1971 model (as per the title) with an October production date. Then again, this is all assuming that the original dealer didn’t adjust the plate back in the day to conceal the fact that the car had sat on his lot for over a year - legal, no; but I’m sure that that didn’t/wouldn't stop some dealers from doing something like that.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-09 12:34 AM by Spitnut64.


Attachments:
DSCN7301.JPG    32.5 KB
DSCN7301.JPG

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <

To add your reply, or post your own questions

Members Sign In   or   Create an Account

Registration is FREE and takes less than a minute!


Having trouble posting or changing forum settings?
Read the Forum Help (FAQ) or contact the webmaster