Forum menu
This is a 1725 also, if I’m correct
I don't think you are. I believe the convertible was only produced 1962-3, the 1725 only appeared in 1965 in the mk 4. I think it would be a 1600, I'll have to hit Wikipedia to check. Don't have time to look now, it'll suck me into a rabbit hole as usual and I've things to do!
I have the benefit of knowing the registration number (unless my brain scrambled it in the five minutes it took to walk home, which isn't wholly impossible). 1725 is what it comes back with on gov.uk's lookup.
Like @scruffythefirst said my first thought was an early ish Lotus Europa possibly S2
But I can't quite match the sill line
1725cc In that case its not a Lotus & would make it a Roots group product or based on such?
I had to google "root(e)s group" and yes, you would seemingly be correct.
1725 is what it comes back with on gov.uk’s lookup
It's certainly possible, I think the 1725 was essentially just a bored out 1600 so probably a simple drop in swap. 1600 will be what it left the factory with but there's a lot can change in 61 years!
“root(e)s group”
Rootes it is, Sunbeam was the sporty marque, Humber the posh one and Hillman was the boggo cooking variant.
One of those is correct.
Lotus Esprit S3 or Unimog. Can’t decide.
Could quite easily be an Esprit S2, and what's under the tarp is what hasn't fallen off yet.
One of those is correct
My money's on it being a Hillman Super Minx then, I thought you'd said it was a Super Minx a while back? The other Rootes equivalents to the Super Minx are the Sunbeam Rapier and the Humber Sceptre and I've never seen either of them as convertibles in the wild, I'm not even sure they made them, as convertible was already a bit of a niche market.
66 Sunbeam Alpine?
Tasvan -- aka TVR Tasmin as per MrTricky
A Super Minx I think. I’ll swing back over and ask them at some point, and report back. I could, of course, be wildly incorrect.
So, was it?
A Super Minx I think. I’ll swing back over and ask them at some point, and report back. I could, of course, be wildly incorrect.
Like this one?
