Print

[angello]

I had the opportunity to peruse a barn festering Series 1 today and my S1 knowledge is not up to rivet-counting par....

I could really use a crash course education in the ways and peculiarities of a Series 1  . I know they came in 80", 86" and 88" plus the 107". This appears to be a '52 (according to DVLA), so what should I be looking for?

Next I really need some help on values... I know values have been pushing higher on all Series LRs, but what are Series 1s worth nowadays? Having queried what the plans were for it, I was informed it could be for sale..... I need to get some ideas of general values before I get too excited and start looking down the back of the sofa!
This appears to be a generally sound and original machine that has been idle at least 5 years, covered in green slime etc. so it's gonna need all brakes and fuel system going through and a good going over at least. It's a project but not a restoration - no welding needed that I can see - but easily more than a weekend's work! Trim etc. looks decent, lots of patina and engine is free.

What do we think? 

[nathanglasgow]

Nip over to the Land rover series one club and pop the question there. 
In general it looks like prices of most classics are falling but depends really on how 'motivated' the seller is to sell.

[Calum]

1952 should be a late 80", with the 'trouser ripper' external door handles. 80s are the most valuable now, if it's complete and with a log book it's probably going to be worth 5k now even needing a full recommissioning... condition is everything though. Completeness makes a massive difference to the price it'll cost you in the long run - if there are lots of bits missing and you want to make it correct, it will cost a lot to get the right bits. Being complete often adds little to the actual purchase cost, but a lot to the desirability if that makes sense.

[jkhackney]

I've had a lot of fun rebuilding and driving my 86". If I had the space, I'd have a hard time resisting an 80" barn find with good paperwork.

They steer light, accelerate quickly compared to my sixpot Dormobile, and everyone smiles when they see me in it.

I can't believe that a car is a good investment: the maintenance, insurance and storage costs, etc. So I'd only buy it to use it.

More general parts, like roof canvas, seats, used body panels, drivetrain, brakes, etc. are available like for the S2. Date-specific parts for 80" can be hard to find, but substitutes will work ... even if not "correct".

(If you start reading the S1 forum, get used to the word, "correct"!  )

It's a good excuse to get a set of BSF/Whitworth tools.
Jeremy

[2a_Lightweight]

I ran a 1950 80” for many years, for some periods as my only vehicle.

It was very original but had a replacement 1948 engine and front axle as it had been crashed into a tree in the early 50’s (I swapped them back for replacement 1950 parts as the replacement 1948 engine was completely worn out and the front axle casing bent, not due to “correctness”) everything else was there including the very expensive dip switch, pre filter etc and in original paint.

I enjoyed rebuilding it and got lucky as it needed very minimal welding to chassis and none to bulkhead.

Even at 20,000 miles from new the steering box was completely worn out.
I could never cure the tapping 1600 camshaft despite it being in excellent condition when I rebuilt engine.
Engine bits were expensive.
I couldn’t be doing with the LRSOC correctness. It’s a collection of metal parts bolted together, and they aren’t even that rare in the grand scheme of things.

I stopped using mine as I nearly smashed the valuable dip switch with a scaffold pole, and if I’m honest, series 2’s are nicer to drive, the terrible steering box used to drive me mad. It also wasn’t very practical compared to an 88.

I also actually didn’t like the attention I used to get and chancers asking to “buy it as a project to restore”, it was constantly getting notes left on it.

I sold it for £16000 five years ago, a dealer bought it who when he re-advertised it some time later for £25000 conveniently forgot all about the replacement engine and axle, plus chassis welding (although you couldn’t tell that I’d welded it). I don’t know if it sold for £25000 or where it went, but I haven’t once missed it to be honest!

If I were to own one again I would improve it with series 3 2286 petrol, axle / steering parts and 7.50 Xtragrips.

[w3526602]

Hi,

To be honest, I prefer the S1 88" to all others ... I didn't/dont see the point in adding the "barrel sides" - you just have to find a wider gap top drive through. But hey, each to his own. Most of my new chassis rebuilds have been 88" S1 bodies on S3 running chassis.

I found RAF 80s (coz the only 80"s I have driven were either painted RAF blue or red (the crash tender at RAF Sharjah was an 80", and eventually caught fire. I had little to do with it). I found the cabs were too short for my short fat hairies, (Twenty-nine and a half inside leg) and brake and clutch knees moved vertically when operating those pedals. But hey, I wouldn't kick an 80" out of bed.

If you are looking for an 86", 88", 107" or 109" S1, you need to know about ."the rivet".

The extra 2" was added between the back of the front wheel arch, and the bulk head, to accept the longer OHV diesel engine (2050cc?). That meant a longer front wing, but they retained the original strut. resulting in wheel arch being an extra 2" from rivet, Can anyone post pictures? Once you know what you are looking for, you should be able to differentiate between 86"/88"/ 107" and 109", at first glance, from 50 paces.

Frankly, I wouldn't want an 80" (although if I'd been offered a basket case, for low bucks, when I was pondering on my aborted "small wheel" Cortina/MGB engined project .... perhaps I might have stretched Barbara's purse.

An 80" has a lot less driver leg-room than later S1s, and if you find an S2 cab is too short .....

I suggest that 80" should be left to fanatics with deep pockets. The brake master cylinder is mounted under the floor (three bolts), and I have vague memories of other differences ... something to do with a big hole in the drive's side chassis rail.   I would also wish to avoid a project with a 1600 or 1997cc OISE engine.

But hey, each to his own.

602 (Who prefers an S2/3 running chassis and S1 body with an aluminium radiator  panel)

[Peter Holden]

I rebuilt 2 80"s in the late 1960s and early 70s, both scrappers, the first a 1952 that I sold due to prental pressure, I replaced it with a minivan that cost more to keep on the road in the short time I had it than the land rover ever did, the second a 1948, pre1500 in fact it was 147, I put back on teh road in the early 70s, it was my daly driver for over 10 years on a round trip of almost 40 miles.  I replaced the engine with a later spreadbore from a Rover 60 car, 4.3 diffs from the same cars and 750 tyres.  Having taper roller bearings at the top and bottom of the swivels made the steering very light.  It was wonderful to drive and I wish I still had it.  I dont even have a photograph but I do have a log book.

Peter

[Bronze Green]

Almost impossible to value without a detailed inspection. What appears to be something which could be put back together fairly quickly may be completely worn out. A lot depends on what you want from it. To put it back to original can and will cost a lot of money especially if for example the mechanicals are worn out which by the very nature of these vehicles is quite common. However if you are not overly bothered about originality, then fitting later Series parts could prove to be far more sensible and much less hard on the pocket. If you are not completely sure about inspecting it yourself, try and find someone who knows these vehicles to inspect it for you, unfortunately more difficult in the present climate.

[angello]

Excellent comments and useful advice - thank you! I've been on the S1 forum too, as suggested and they've been kind enough to share some of their opinions too - all good.
I'm pretty sure this is an 80" - it does indeed have the 'trouser ripper' door handles!
I'm just a bit out of my comfort zone as I haven't fiddled with S1s at all, having always been a fan of the Series 2. S1 values are.... eye-opening! I'm not sure whether there is enough in the piggy bank for this, but until I can talk to the owner properly I won't know.
All other advice and comments welcome.

[oilstain]

I like S1's, I have 2 1954 86", I is as original with only 60k miles from new and the other now has a 2.5 petrol engine from a Defender. They are great fun and a nice change to a S11 but not to far away

[Bronze Green]

Excellent comments and useful advice - thank you! I've been on the S1 forum too, as suggested and they've been kind enough to share some of their opinions too - all good.
I'm pretty sure this is an 80" - it does indeed have the 'trouser ripper' door handles!
I'm just a bit out of my comfort zone as I haven't fiddled with S1s at all, having always been a fan of the Series 2. S1 values are.... eye-opening! I'm not sure whether there is enough in the piggy bank for this, but until I can talk to the owner properly I won't know.
All other advice and comments welcome.

Another thing to consider if the Original mechanicals are worn out is to replace them with later Series parts and keep the original parts to refurbish as time and finances become available. Then at some point in the future you could do a rebuild to a more original spec, or you might find that you like it just as it is with the later running gear. I have a very original 1953 80in and am in the process of rebuilding a S1 109 with a much later engine and a 5 speed gearbox. I have the original running gear which one day may be rebuilt and installed but then again I might find the 2.3 5MB engine and LT77 gearbox a very useful compromise.

[Rory]

Anything shorter than 107” is pointless.

[Exile]

The unique thing about all "proper" Land Rovers is their aluminium bodies.

This means that when you discover a complete barn-find, it nearly always looks much better than it is.

Because underneath that charming body is often a collection of oily parts, worn to within an inch of their life.

And probably more rust in the chassis and bulkhead than you can see.


My tip is to look at the vehicle and imagine it disassembled into a pile of bits, many of which will need work or replacing.

How much would you pay for that pile of bits?

That figure is usually a lot less than a seller will take, so negotiate.



(I have completely rebuilt three Series Ones and partly rebuilt another).

[Peter Holden]

We have a 1951 80" with a 2,25 petrol engine and a S2 gearbox.  It goes very well.  It looks a bit  rough but that was the intention, mechanically and chassis wise it is immaculate.  We already have a restored 107 and my nephew is on with a 1949 at the moment but he does have a S2 as well

Peter

[w3526602]

The unique thing about all "proper" Land Rovers is their aluminium bodies.

Hi,

Some (all) 80" Landies had an aluminium rad panel which also fitted 86" and 107", then later the extra 2" gave 88" and 109".

Look at the photograph in the previous mail. Note the sloping back to the door, which gives an indication oh the shortened cab space. Also look at the sloping front of the tub. All that means lack of interior space ... but pretty on a sunny day.

OK, I wouldn't kick an 80" out of bed ... but I think we'd have to become a three-car household.

Hmmm! an 80" with an MGB engine and 14" wheels. That might make an interesting traffic light racer.    Very low geared.

PS.

On BABS' first return to Pendine Beach (West Wales), her trailer was pulled by an 80" powered by a Rover straight-6.

I wonder if that trailer was within the MGW?

Hi Angello,

The extra 2" was introduced in (I think) to accmodate the new diesel OHV engine, which was too long to fit into the engine bay. I understand that Rovers did not announce the change.

I think the S1 5-door estate was never supplied with a diesel, which continued as a " until the end of production of S1.

I have always understood that the LWB standard truck changed to 109" at the same time as everything else. ... but I'm happy to be corrected.

Er, you have forgotten another varient ... memory is failing ... but I think it's wheelbase was one inch longer than normal, but did that make it an 87" (or 89"?) . I think Rovers made 100 such vehicles, with 50 each of two sub-variants.

Answers on a post-card, please.



602