FF 119-102 at Silverstone Auctions

[Peter Rothery]

https://www.silverstoneauctions.com/sa0 ... n=2&pp=100

119-102.jpg (99.89 KiB) Viewed 1589 times

[Martin R]

I'll be very interested in seeing how this goes at auction, with my own car being just 2 cars earlier.

[kenny38]

That's it then, Martin. Your vague connection to this car no matter how tenous will have stuffed it. kenny38

[johnw]

I'll be very interested in seeing how this goes at auction, with my own car being just 2 cars earlier.

I think your car looks much better Martin.

I don't see this one selling for a decent price. It might be a very nice car with potential, but a useless description with bad photos. Arty shots with blurred details, strange angled engine bay shots hiding who knows what. No shots of the underside, no decent engine bay shots at all really, can't see if it has a Dunlop servo, let alone if it is an FF one. No shots of the Maxaret. It has the wrong window switches, painted wrong? wheels, missing wheel centre, it is described as a nice early two tone 1966 car, the best, etc, yet it is clearly a later Mk1, 1969 last full year of Mk1 production only 3 years off. I wonder what a two tone Stratosphere Blue Crystal Blue FF would look like. Sounds delicious.

[Martin R]

Thanks John.
Maxaret is showing in one of the photos but I do know what you mean about it not be particularly well presented generally. However, just because the engine bay isn’t totally clean and sparkling, doesn’t detract from the fact it is described as very original, which I take it means engine bay included.
2 wheel centres missing amongst other bits and pieces that would only cost a few pennies to rectify does seem a bit odd.
Various versions of window switches were fitted on these cars and looking at the pictures, I believe these are original.

Thank you Kenny for sealing the cars fate !!!

[kenny38]

For Gawd's sake, John you are so bleeding picky. Yes I agree little things such as wheel inserts could/should be there. First look at a car is so important like buying a house with rubbish bins out front little things are easy to put off a less than determined buyer. Martin is less picky as he wants a good sale so his partner stops needling him about value. He has some skin in the game. Hope it goes well. Martin, you could always buy it under an assumed name. Kenny38

[Peter Rothery]

Still on the Car and classic website with Cropredy as the vendor at just short of £105k.
https://www.carandclassic.com/car/C1205686

[johnw]

"This is a 1966 Jensen Mk1 FF" Not it isn't. Off by 3 years. I like early Vignale 1966 and 1967 cars. Am I being picky?
If the auctioneer, who is trying to establish credibility, some rapport with the buyer, had been 1 year off i might have accepted this. 3 years off is incompetent.

"Due to #119/102 being undoubtedly one of the best and most original examples of a Mk1 FF" I call twaddle on that in the absence of proof, due to crappy photos and the Faux Pas in what we can see and the description. It would need to have oval mild steel silencers and original hangers to pull back from previous mistakes on description and originality. The Jensen Museum: is this the online one or the 24/7 TW open air one? The highly respected online one has sold (or at least stopped advertising) a fantastic press car that really did look very original, the sort of pictures you look at for originality questions. They didn't make any over hyped claims, just photos.

Why has it got a guide of only £80k to £100k if it is really the best on the planet?

Why only pictures of 2/3rds (being generous) of the car? If that were true, you should jack up the price range and expect to do more publicity, and/or a couple of runs through the auction in a depressed market, knowing that "the best" Mk1 FFs have historically changed hands for more, quite a lot more it is said than £100k.

There are so many good things to like about a late Mk1 with Girling brakes that this car might well be. only a later car can claim such as standard. It has onl been slightly tweaked in practical terms. A late car in traffic, with a gazillion pad flavours to choose from, dead easy to maintain and cheap calliper rebuilding services coming out of your ears, acceptable hand brake mechanism, less brake fade with normal brake fluid, etc. You don't need to hunt for dot 5.1 fluid and special Dunlop sized Kevlar pads which make an early car totally superb brake wise if you want to actually drive it in the alps and in towns. It has the special leather steering wheel that only later cars can correctly claim as in period but I will defer to Grant on this. Couple that with Mk2? wheels that look very period but give even more grip, Jensen wheels options from just a few months later than this car, who wouldn't want those on a mountain pass. An early cassette player, for my C30. C60, C90, Bow Wow Wow tape to Go Wild in the Country with, and it is just about my favourite colour.

It has a nice registration number from 1969. Is that original? Come on, we want to spend our money on a nice car. Credible excuses please. Your market is not DIY restorers or proffessional car historians. Sell it to an enthusiast.

The auctioneer is underselling this car and doing it a disservice.

[johnw]

Still on the Car and classic website with Cropredy as the vendor at just short of £105k.
https://www.carandclassic.com/car/C1205686

Interesting that Cropredy have one really nice picture of the car, no verbage, with fog lights, and the missing wheel centre in place. It doesn't look fake or unduly expensive the way they present it compared to other adverts on C&C.

What a coincidence! my first Jensen was advertised in multiple places, including CBG Still on the hunt for a better car, no luck so far. Our latest muse is an ex Earls Court Show Car, ex Jensen Museum (no, the other, TW one ). Very original as they say...

[Peter Rothery]

The auctioneer claims the car has an MOT which is also incorrect as of today..it hasn't passed a test since 2014. It was submitted 13 miles after the pictures were taken and FAILED on 1st August 2022 on a defective servo and reports of corrosion around the seat belt anchorages.

If I had spent £6k on brakes and suspension less than a year ago, I would expect it to still be functioning correctly by now. It has only done 300 miles in the last 8 years though. All very well past owners fannying about with paint colours and at least it will look nice in the pictures when it is planted in the nearest hedge following brake failure. Let's hope the unlucky occupants survive intact!

I doubt the auctioneer is under-selling the car but covering their back in the face of potential mis-representation claims. Kenny38 is probably right on the auction strategy for this one. Get rid of it quick...no test drives....all before it costs any more cash. I doubt it will fetch anywhere near the estimates but a fool and his money are soon parted......

[johnw]

The auctioneer claims the car has an MOT which is also incorrect as of today..it hasn't passed a test since 2014. It was submitted 13 miles after the pictures were taken and FAILED on 1st August 2022 on a defective servo and reports of corrosion around the seat belt anchorages.

If I had spent £6k on brakes and suspension less than a year ago, I would expect it to still be functioning correctly by now. It has only done 300 miles in the last 8 years though. All very well past owners fannying about with paint colours and at least it will look nice in the pictures when it is planted in the nearest hedge following brake failure. Let's hope the unlucky occupants survive intact!

I doubt the auctioneer is under-selling the car but covering their back in the face of potential mis-representation claims. Kenny38 is probably right on the auction strategy for this one. Get rid of it quick...no test drives....all before it costs any more cash. I doubt it will fetch anywhere near the estimates but a fool and his money are soon parted......

Good point. Publicly available information before the auction shows the representation is OBVIOUSLY false and not credible. Caveat Emptor. [Edit: OMG no new servo please, assuming it is the original, which we can't actually see due to lack of acceptable photos.]

[Peter Rothery]

There are still 3 weeks to fix it and re-submit for an MOT before auction day. It may be a failed servo or a vacuum leak elsewhere....hopefully not through the chassis tube where the seatbelt anchorage points are reported to be rusty. DPP may soon have another customer for his soon-to-be newly remanufactured FF servo seal?

[kenny38]

Looks like Croperdy knows a car that is going to rely on being a S1 FF to lure buyers who are NOT reading this forum. For all we know Croperdy are selling on commission basis. Cannot see Croperdy buying this to resell without subjecting car to extensive examination.They have a top reputation to protect. Owner/vendor will have to stump up the not inconsiderable cash to fix rust matters. Have heard these are the more expensive to fix. Will have to get a new servo. Doubt if existing one can be fixed to MOT satisfaction. On top of 105K allow another 5-6K. Rust in all Jensens is like peeling an onion. If interested insist on independent evaluation and pay for it yourself. All in all despite silly faults that should have been fixed before sale if taken to (Croperdys?) and given a good look will be a very nice FF.

[Mark1Stu]

Great detective work Peter. Helps put the car and it’s history into better perspective.

Silverstone auction state the single picture of the car in the advert is not that of the actual car (I believe the picture they used is of another well known FF offered for sale by a dealer last year).

[johnw]

Silverstone auction state the single picture of the car in the advert is not that of the actual car (I believe the picture they used is of another well known FF offered for sale by a dealer last year).

Have you been on the phone to them? The link in the first post from Peter currently has about 30 pictures including chassis plate in glovebox, all pictures seem to be of 102, a 1969 car.
(edit: comment removed about a 1966 car to avoid confusion, the auctioneer still describes the car as a 1966 car which 102 is not.)