Spotted at North Weald

[nikbj68]

Duplicate post deleted.

[nikbj68]

Duplicate post deleted

[nikbj68]

No worse than this “1967 delivered” car……
https://www.pistonheads.com/buy/listing/12093027

Simon, yes, it is VERY much worse than COB6116, which is a genuine, well known, and original AC 289!

Surely that one is worse, Half a million and it's on an electric invalid cars registration?

SirrahBRA, it is not on an ‘electric invalid cars registration’.

The DVLC(which it was at the time...now of course, DVLA) for some unclear reason, decided that “AC” was related to “DC”, and therefore registered most cars that started life in Thames Ditton as ‘AC(Electric)’.

I know of many Aces, Acecas and Greyhounds which have “AC(Electric)” on the V5.(and used to have it on their tax discs!)
My father battled with the DVLA to get ‘(Electric)’ removed from his AC Greyhound’s logbook, and was ultimately successful!

I CANNOT STRESS IN STRONG ENOUGH TERMS that COB6116, Reg no. PPD567E is a correctly registered and legitimate, period AC289, with fully documented history, and CANNOT be compared with suspect vehicles on bogus identities or questionable registration.

[simonjrwinter]

I don’t think the two cars are being compared, rather that they both have “anomalies “ in their registration with the DVLA. The car for sale is clearly NOT electric and while declared manufactured in 1967, was not registered until 1978…not illegal of course, but unusual (probably used just as a racing car for its first 11 years maybe?)
I’m not going to comment further on the registration of the car this topic is about.
Simon

[peterc]

One thing is certain it’s made for some interesting debate and we learn something along the way.
Peter C