GTHO Phase 3 lovers..will cry

[Chopped]

Australian Classic Car Magazine July 2011

[XAllent]

That's just madness. Even if you didn't want to restore it, but wanted to keep it, wouldn't you at least keep it under cover!

[Trevor 57]

It must be well and truly rooted I would say, maybe too much hard work

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by XAllent

That's just madness. Even if you didn't want to restore it, but wanted to keep it, wouldn't you at least keep it under cover!

you would think so, just because of it's value - the better the condition, the higher the "offer i couldn't refuse" amount is

it seems it is destined for parts and scrap

[galaxy xr8]

Those pic's look like the bushman GT when it was discovered down Gippsland way and bought then by a Holden man and his son ??.
If so it was a GT not a Hoey.

[DJR-351]

I could be wrong (and i probably am) but with that roof it looks like a South African Fairmont version....?

Sad to see an old classic in that state, no matter where its from.....

[Vincenzo]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

It must be well and truly rooted I would say, maybe too much hard work

I thought the most important part of these vehicles was the Compliance plate. Grab the plate and build yourself a new one, isn't that what they do?

Cheers Vincenzo

[galaxy xr8]

Originally Posted by Vincenzo

I thought the most important part of these vehicles was the Compliance plate. Grab the plate and build yourself a new one, isn't that what they do?

Cheers Vincenzo

The plate dies with the car, or that's how it should be, putting a compliance plate on another vehicle is not only down right wrong but illegal.

There are many classic car's such as GT's that are missing their plates but that doesn't make them any lesser of a GT, the body is a unique 54H body and as long as that is proven to be it is a genuine GT in my mind.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by Vincenzo

I thought the most important part of these vehicles was the Compliance plate. Grab the plate and build yourself a new one, isn't that what they do?

Cheers Vincenzo

the compliance plate on any car is nothing more than a glorified beer coaster
the number on the shock tower or radiator support is the only thing that matters
put a falcon 500 compliance plate on a gtho and it is still a gtho
put a gtho compliance plate on a falcon 500 and it is still a falcon 500


and as galaxy suggested, it is illegal and downright wrong - it is fraud

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by DJR-351

I could be wrong (and i probably am) but with that roof it looks like a South African Fairmont version....?

Sad to see an old classic in that state, no matter where its from.....

I agree, it's a rhino isn't it?

And if he knocked back 60k for a rhino in that condition then he's just plain deluded.

[Bearman]

It's a GT, not a HO.

http://thebushmansgt.blogspot.com.au/
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11358595

It's a great read!!

[Bearman]

And the Outback GT.

http://oldred1970.blogspot.com.au/20...blog-post.html

Great stories.

I guess this opens up the debate of whether to restore or not and everyone has a view on this. Each to their own but you can't deny these cars have character!!

[pottery beige]

i dont cry seeing them like this.. it rocks out original..

[FGII-XR6]

this is destined for a fraudster unfortunately. the vin will be used on another body and sold to someone for big money . this shows the importance of getting these cars validated by an expert on GTs before purchase.

[Pepscobra]

So that particular car in the op has been saved then?
Nice.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

this is destined for a fraudster unfortunately. the vin will be used on another body and sold to someone for big money . this shows the importance of getting these cars validated by an expert on GTs before purchase.

read the post above mine....

[Vincenzo]

Originally Posted by galaxy xr8

The plate dies with the car, or that's how it should be, putting a compliance plate on another vehicle is not only down right wrong but illegal.

There are many classic car's such as GT's that are missing their plates but that doesn't make them any lesser of a GT, the body is a unique 54H body and as long as that is proven to be it is a genuine GT in my mind.

Originally Posted by gtxb67

the compliance plate on any car is nothing more than a glorified beer coaster the number on the shock tower or radiator support is the only thing that matters put a falcon 500 compliance plate on a gtho and it is still a gtho put a gtho compliance plate on a falcon 500 and it is still a falcon 500 and as galaxy suggested, it is illegal and downright wrong - it is fraud

For heaven's sake, I was not saying to do it, I was asking isn't that what has been going on for a while. Bloody hell, grant me some intelligence please.

Cheers Vincenzo

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by Vincenzo

For heaven's sake, I was not saying to do it, I was asking isn't that what has been going on for a while. Bloody hell, grant me some intelligence please.

Cheers Vincenzo

i didn't really think you were serious, but we don't want to give ideas to anyone

it has been done many times before and was even not totally illegal from what i have heard. i believe many insurance companies have done it over the years

[mik]

painful to see.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

i didn't really think you were serious, but we don't want to give ideas to anyone

it has been done many times before and was even not totally illegal from what i have heard. i believe many insurance companies have done it over the years

technically youre not even allowed to remove ID plates to paint engine bay

true story

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

technically youre not even allowed to remove ID plates to paint engine bay

true story

it wasn't always though, was it?

i had thought the rules were tightened up in the last 10 years or so

i think the insurance companies were given more liberties (or at least a blind eye was turned) to repair damaged gt's. there have been many stories (some on here) doing the rounds of gt's being re-birthed under insurance over the years

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by mik

painful to see.

these cars are survivors and awesome just the way they are.

for me its painfull seeing a low milage car in good nick full nut and bolt restoed with silly little chalk and paint marks over them in attempt to make them original again..

[ianxy351]

Originally Posted by galaxy xr8

The plate dies with the car, or that's how it should be, putting a compliance plate on another vehicle is not only down right wrong but illegal.

Its sad to see a GT in that state but you never know, it may be salvageable.

As for the compliance plate swap issue, a fellow here in Tassie did jail time last year for selling a fake GT as a real one. The courts will take a dim view!

[galaxy xr8]

Originally Posted by Vincenzo

For heaven's sake, I was not saying to do it, I was asking isn't that what has been going on for a while. Bloody hell, grant me some intelligence please.

Cheers Vincenzo

Maybe you should have worded it a bit differently then because it sure as hell didn't read that way to me.
And like has been mentioned we don't want to give any low lifes that read this public forum an idea.

[In Focus]

Out of curiosity, at what point of restoration does it no longer remain a GT(HO)? By this I mean what percentage of the parts can be replaced before it is no longer what it began as?

I'm reminded of Captain Cook's axe. Half of the NZ population is said to have it: each version has only had the blade and handle replaced...

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

it wasn't always though, was it?

i had thought the rules were tightened up in the last 10 years or so

i think the insurance companies were given more liberties (or at least a blind eye was turned) to repair damaged gt's. there have been many stories (some on here) doing the rounds of gt's being re-birthed under insurance over the years

Pretty sure this is now illegal, and in relation to a rare car would be fraud, but the post got me to remembering, back to the days when labour was cheap and parts expensive.
One of the fleet cars at Dad’s work (they were all near new Falcons turned over every 2 years, I think it was an XE) got T-boned. The assumed it was a write-off, but the insurance company bought a new body from Ford and rebuilt the car. Seemed weird even at the time. Thinking back now, I really doubt Ford did such things? I assume it was really a body from another wreck?

Suppose you had a current model GT, and you somehow got it turned around and hit a pole RIGHT where the compliance plate is. Provided the car was not a write-off, would it be legit to replace those panels with new ones.

[arronm]

Just another 40 year old pile of rust.

[H.G]

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

these cars are survivors and awesome just the way they are.

for me its painfull seeing a low milage car in good nick full nut and bolt restoed with silly little chalk and paint marks over them in attempt to make them original again..

There only original once, but can be restored many times ....
Many people get that mixed up

The cottom wool brigade annoy me as well
These things when new were absolutely flogged to death and then some,noone pampered them like they carry on about now

[Tickford Rebel]

Yeah rust and the rest... My dad kept a xy falcon 500 and it was undercover for probably 75 percent of its life... We were considering working on it but the amount of rust in the boot and around the trims was quite daunting. .. Eventually a friend offered $5000 so we said deal and goodbye to the old family falcon... I wouldn't pay $5000 for that pile of junk... If the guy wanted to keep it for and investment he should have payed the magic $5000 and had a decent shed built for it and locked it up under a car cover. .. Absolute waste and absolute crazy way to make a dollar... Goodluck selling that in a few years lol