Prof Rich will know the answer to that one.Don't know the dates myself.
But it is the one dislike of mine in the whole car.It does rather look like it was made using a George Melley suit.

'50 Karmann wrote:

Anyone we know? Is it going to make an appearance this year...Sandown Park perhaps?

55Kab wrote:

Prof Rich will know the answer to that one.Don't know the dates myself.
But it is the one dislike of mine in the whole car.It does rather look like it was made using a George Melley suit.

'50 Karmann wrote:

I think the interior fabric is correct.

Rich Oakley wrote:

I spoke to the owner in November. I think it needed some work to make it roadworthy when it entered the UK, nothing serious. It should be registered and on the road soon.

Rich Oakley wrote:

Still slammed and on 'Earlies':?:

Rattletrap wrote:

Agree – its far too sharp :thumbdn:



I'm 90% certain the interior is wrong. I've seen pics of a really well restored '48 in Germany, and the cloth is salt 'n' pepper :wink:
Also found remenants of the org cloth in my '47 – salt 'n' pepper too.:mellow:

Rattletrap wrote:

Think I can hear that already being said about my car :rofl:

55Kab wrote:

No I think blinging up a deluxe anything is entirely different.
A 40's car is so industrial, to me it just looks like some kids stole their grandads car and f****d about with it because they didnt have a clue :d

From that kcw thread it was/is clearly an amazing super solid 40's car. I dont know a carrot about 40's cars, but I didnt know that beetles had biscuit carpet in the 40's? not keen on the stripey interior but it actually looks so well padded and comfy ( unlike my og seats :lol: so does'nt put me off.

On page 50, it looked absolutely stunning stock height.
I dont mean to offend anyone with the term, but the lowering makes it just look.. spasticated.

mrsherbie wrote:

Sorry, you're right, should be salt and pepper cloth. Might get 'round to sorting mine out one day!

Rich Oakley wrote:

Carpeting doesn't look exact either:roll:

Sorry, its a lovely car, but for top money it all has to be correct.

I'd have to have the interior re-done. :omg:

Rattletrap wrote:

I would agree John. There's actually quite a few incorrect parts on the car: headlights are Euro Spec 56-60 Beetle, engine is a 48 unit with all 48 and later parts, heater boxes are 52 and later, dizzy is 49 and later, fan housing is 48 and later, carb is 49 and later, coil appears not to be a Star coil, horn is 50 and later, carpets are wrong etc.

It is a lovely car, but for that $$ I would want 'correct' with a capital 'C' (plus the fact that all those hard-to-find correct parts are going to cost you a few $G's!)

Rich Oakley wrote:

Sorry, its a lovely car, but for top money it all has to be correct.

Rattletrap wrote:

You know John,just occasionally,we can find something to agree on.:thumbup:

'50 Karmann wrote:

It had to happen sometime George…:thumbup:

Rattletrap wrote:

Oooo! Group hug.:wink:

lifeintheslowlane wrote:

Oooo! Group hug.:wink:

lifeintheslowlane wrote:

A 40's car is so industrial, to me……

mrsherbie wrote:

Yeah Right! Don't you push it, Lowlight John:p

'50 Karmann wrote:

I would agree John. There's actually quite a few incorrect parts on the car: headlights are Euro Spec 56-60 Beetle, engine is a 48 unit with all 48 and later parts, heater boxes are 52 and later, dizzy is 49 and later, fan housing is 48 and later, carb is 49 and later, coil appears not to be a Star coil, horn is 50 and later, hubcaps are 'run of the mill' 43-early '46 and not the rare 47 ones,carpets are wrong etc

Rich Oakley wrote:

Oooo! Group hug.:wink:

lifeintheslowlane wrote:

even Ovaltine :?: :d

55Kab wrote:

Oh you tart... :rofl:

You'll be joining that anal bunch on RW next :wink: :beer:

55Kab wrote: