Print

[2DieselMan]

Hi All,

I have seen lots of discussion on Series II/IIA Land Rovers Described as Bitsa's and it got me thinking is there an actual definition of what a Bitsa Land Rover is?

Reason for the question is that over the years many Series Land Rovers have probably quite genuinely had some/many parts changed for more modern equivalents, due to both availability and cost, everything from Engines, Gear/Transfer Boxes, Axles, Diffs, Bulkheads even SIII Chassis (as they were cheaper), Radiators, Headlights in Wings, Black Seats, Narrow Sills, etc. all possibly to keep the Land Rover on the road. 
- How many of theses changes, are ok before a Land Rover becomes defined as a Bitsa?

I am also assuming that if a 'Period correct replacement has been done, eg. 58 SII fitted with correct engine type, 2 litre Petrol, but not the exact engine it left the factory with or a Land Rover standard reconditioned unit, engine or Gear Box was fitted probably under warranty, then these are ok and don't make the Series Land Rover defined as a Bitsa?

[AlexB]

(my) life is too short for this  !!

But, while you are on, howabout defining "purist"  as in "not one for the purist"

and rivet counter  as in "rivet counters look away"   

Although, to be fair, I look at the term rivet counter as acknowledgement that said person knows shed loads more than most

[Wittsend]

  

[genocache]

   I don't have a Bitsa, I have a resto-mod......

[Peter Holden]

To me a bisa is a land rover built from bits here and bits there.

I have a triggers broom (it is not a bitsa) during its 650000+ miles parets have been treplaced and upgraded as necessary and I am responsible for some such as the TLS brakes and servo but the PO went through several engines and it ended up with a late S£/early defender engine and gearbox.  However  It will be going back to a 2L petrol engine and associated gearbox, not because I am a rivet counter but because I like the 2L petrol engine, the one I have aquired is the right year and somewhere naer the original engine number.

Peter

[22900013A]

(my) life is too short for this  !!

But, while you are on, howabout defining "purist"  as in "not one for the purist"

and rivet counter  as in "rivet counters look away"   

Although, to be fair, I look at the term rivet counter as acknowledgement that said person knows shed loads more than most

Lets face it, both terms are pejorative now.

[A-Ro]

Surely a bitsa is a vehicle that has had to be re-registered because not enough of the original vehicle remains, everything else is a combination of repairs, replacements and upgrades.

[Old Hywel]

Bitsa: one that has even less original parts than one’s own.

[Supercal2007]

In my opinion, a "bitsa" is a vehicle that has been kept on the road or brought back from the dead using replacement parts (either new or second hand) which have replaced the majority of its original worn out or missing major components. . Second hand chassis are obviously excluded, cos then its technically a ringer. I hasten to add that there is nothing wrong with having a 'bitsa', that's what most of mine are in my eyes. But what makes a vehicle special in my opinion is to find one that is "original". To me that's one that has all the major components still fitted that it left the factory with, on its original chassis and hasn't been messed about with. The other class of vehicle I refer to is a "restoration". For me, the main pointer for a restoration is a new galv chassis. It's not a "bitsa" if everything else on the vehicle pretty much correct, it's not a "ringer" because the chassis is new, and it's not "original" because its got a new chassis. Ringer, bitsa, restoration, original. That's the 4 types for me.

Oh, and Dan, I do not find the term rivet counter offensive at all. As mentioned above, I see that term applicable to people who are very knowledgeable on a particular topic. Let's face it, when it cones to 1 tonnes, you are a rivet counter Dan. 

[Peter Holden]

We have 2S2s one is a triggers broom (not a bitsa) the other is as original except for the engine and radiator (we do have the original engine).  We also have 3 S1s, a 1951 Bitsa, un unfinished rivet counter resto 107 that has been unfinished but on the road in regular use since 2010 and a 1949 in the middle of a rivet counter resto.

That means that I have a foot in all the camps, a bit difficult with only 2 feet.

Peter

[agg221]

Everyone will have their own opinion of where precisely the boundary lines lie between 'original', 'restored' 'modified' and 'bitsa'.

For me, original means as it left the factory. There is probably no perfectly original vehicle left, but there are degrees of loss of originality as things wear out or corrode and are replaced.

There is then 'modified'. This is not the DVLA legal definition, rather a descriptive term for a vehicle which has had conscious and obvious changes made. This could include adding power steering, uprating the brakes, fitting a different type of engine etc. It spans the full range from minor modifications such as converting from a Series petrol to a Series diesel, through to radical enough that it would need a DVLA single vehicle inspection.

'Restored' means it has been put back to essentially as it left the factory. This could be anywhere from using what is available as a specified later alternative (see Sunny Jim's comment on voltage regulators) and could quite legitimately include a Series 3 chassis if that was what was available at the time, through to date-matched parts at the opposite extreme. The outcome is a useable vehicle which is functionally as it left the factory with some period upgrades.

Then there is 'Bitsa'. A Bitsa to me has a lot of obvious non-original parts. However it has been done with a degree of care and need. It is a radical version of 'Restored', usually on a needs must basis to keep it on the road. Unlike the restored vehicle, the non-original parts are large and obvious components, from donor vehicles, often in not much better condition than the original, and there are quite a few of them so the vehicle looks and feels substantially different from how it left the factory.

A 1958 S2 on a Richards chassis with its original or original type axles, a S2 bulkhead (maybe original repaired, maybe Robert Owen) and a 2.25 engine and gearbox would be restored. If it had a S3 bulkhead, engine and gearbox and lights in wings it would be a Bitsa.

Note, there is nothing derogatory about the term Bitsa. These are often some of the vehicles which have been most cherished and have the most interesting history and character. They have often given the longest continuous service and are to be valued for what they are. Long may they continue!

Alec

[Sunny Jim]

We could actually define 'Bitsa Spectrum Disorder' or BSD: at one end we have a vehicle that is pure, containing only original non-consumable parts with which it left the factory or new/reconditioned correct or succession replacement parts, at the other end the 'ultimate' bitsa is a vehicle built in one go out of parts of two or more vehicles with the idea of simply making something that works, using new consumable parts only where absolutely necessary, and wearing the identity of one of the component donors. You will find that all our vehicles are somewhere in this spectrum! This would not include 'hybrid' vehicles nor anything done for purposes of defrauding tax or MOT exemptions, they should have a category of their own.

Sunny Jim

[Genem]

Many of us would count as "Bitsa" I suspect. My front teeth were replaced with pattern parts at age 20, after the vehicle I was in rolled. My vision has required multiple pairs of non-original enhancements over the years, I'm required to take a number of additives every morning to keep my motor running.... and as for the exterior, the factory finish has long gone and whats left would be illegal to display in public anyway.

 

[crumbly65]

Many of us would count as "Bitsa" I suspect. My front teeth were replaced with pattern parts at age 20, after the vehicle I was in rolled. My vision has required multiple pairs of non-original enhancements over the years, I'm required to take a number of additives every morning to keep my motor running.... and as for the exterior, the factory finish has long gone and whats left would be illegal to display in public anyway.

 

Ditto, ditto, ditto......

[Exile]

I really don't think we need to worry too much about a definition of bitsa.

Because it doesn't really matter.

What does matter is "original" - as far too many unscrupulous sellers use the term to try to mislead buyers, and inflate the price.

Over the decades these debates have gone round and round.

Does a vehicle have to have the brake shoes it left the factory with, to be "original"?  Etc, etc....

"Factory original".

Means original (as new) condition, but with a hundred new replacement parts?

Or old and worn, but totally original specification?

Patina.

Something rare and lovely?

Or just tatty?


All we need now is "Which is best, petrol or diesel?" and we could be here all next week....