"37-year owned" 72 coupe on BaT

autokunst

autokunst

Well-Known Member
Site Donor $
Site Donor $$
Messages
3,804
Reaction score
2,897
Location
Milwaukee, WI
bringatrailer.com

No Reserve: 37-Years-Owned 1972 BMW 3.0CS 5-Speed

Bid for the chance to own a No Reserve: 37-Years-Owned 1972 BMW 3.0CS 5-Speed at auction with Bring a Trailer, the home of the best vintage and classic cars online. Lot #229,704.
bringatrailer.com bringatrailer.com

Is this anyone from the forum's car? It is interesting that it is getting some quick, early bids. I'm interested in talking about what's going on with the back of the frame rails and the floor (clearly part of the same repair, and curious). But I don't want to step on any toes.
 
The floors aren't factory or even repop replacement panels, they're done from scratch. That's not a horrible thing if it's done right and this looks to be pretty well done. It all depends on what was done inside, and what gage material was used. A lot of the stiffness of those panels comes from the fact that they are shaped and these are not. But, if you use material that's a few thousandths thicker then it will be plenty stiff. And yes the frame rails should go further back, but if they are tied into cross frames under the seats you aren't giving up much stiffness. They're supposed to go back to the rear seat bulkhead and that's how they help the stiffness, but in reality they don't do much as they are getting to a small cross section at the back end.. Also it depends on what was done to install the seat rails and what stiffening structure was put under the seats. Without seeing what was done inside there I'm not ok with it, but if it's done properly, then it's no issue at all. Some pics of the work during restoration would clear things up. As I said above, the work appears to be done by a competent sheet metal guy and that's a big positive. Lastly it wouldn't take much to fix it, some properly bent sheet and some welding would make it as good as new or better.
 
Listings like these irk me. I get the appeal of a car that has been in the same ownership for this long of an amount of time with repair history etc. But the lack of effort when listing for sale is as lame as can be. Couldn't even be bothered to empty the glovebox out..
 
Lots of work done underneath and apparently not done well. Jack point missing to accommodate a sunroof drain? Flat plate used to strengthen rear subframe strap? At least it is No Reserve.
 
@ElGrecko so, your car then? That was a lot of words in defense of some questionable work. The frame rails do not extend to the rear bulkhead. Rather, they should terminate at the front of the rear footwell - which has profile to give it more stiffness. They should terminate without an opening into the rail itself. More strength does, in fact, come from the front seat frame. The issue with this car is that none of this is evident behind all of the stone-guard spray on the underside, not to mention the same on the inner front fenders which can tell a much less rosy story. My fear, with listings like this, is that the words "37-year owned" will somehow outweigh the apparent condition of the car. As @Pittraider18 notes, the lack of preparation for the sale is shocking. Crooked headlights, no documentation of the work under the stone guard, cluttered interior. The car (or the potential buyer) deserves better, in my opinion.
 
Looks like the resto was $83k in 2014 if I am reading the receipt right.

If you go to the wayback machine, you can find the website of the shop that did the work.

Gallery - AMP Automotive Restorations | Williamsport, MD

See how Auto Motive Precision has helped individuals achieve the dreams they have for their car.
web.archive.org web.archive.org

I would say it’s *possible* the work was done nicely, this is not a spray bomb and quick flip we sometimes see.

But the work is soooo far from original in execution…why, why, why?
 
autokunst said:
@ElGrecko so, your car then? That was a lot of words in defense of some questionable work. The frame rails do not extend to the rear bulkhead. Rather, they should terminate at the front of the rear footwell - which has profile to give it more stiffness. They should terminate without an opening into the rail itself. More strength does, in fact, come from the front seat frame. The issue with this car is that none of this is evident behind all of the stone-guard spray on the underside, not to mention the same on the inner front fenders which can tell a much less rosy story. My fear, with listings like this, is that the words "37-year owned" will somehow outweigh the apparent condition of the car. As @Pittraider18 notes, the lack of preparation for the sale is shocking. Crooked headlights, no documentation of the work under the stone guard, cluttered interior. The car (or the potential buyer) deserves better, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Not my car and as I said someone needs to look carefully as to what was done since it isn't the same as the factory design. That doesn't mean it can't work, but it has to be done properly to transfer the torsional loads from the longerons to the tunnel and side structure. That requires structure under the front seats and we don't know what is under there. As I said restoration pics would be a big help in deciding what was done to replace the structure that was removed. I also said that unless I saw that the structure under the seats was done properly I was not OK with it. I don't know why the chassis was done this way, perhaps at that time those parts weren't available, or the person doing it felt he could do it better. It doesn't matter, it is what it is and before I'd consider it I'd want to know what it looks like structurally.
 
HB Chris said:
It was in the original paper Registry, Scott must have the history.
Click to expand...
I do not have any ownership names, just that it was in Washington, DC. i think i talked to this guy at some point in time 15 years ago ... but i couldn't pin down potential rust issues and ran away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top