• Hi Guest!
    You can help ensure that British Car Forum (BCF) continues to provide a great place to engage in the British car hobby! If you find BCF a beneficial community, please consider supporting our efforts with a subscription.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

65 BJ8 Front Single Lamps

Share this page

AUSMHLY

AUSMHLY

Yoda
Country flag
Offline
66 BJ8 Front Single Lamps

Friend bought a 65 (sorry, it's a 66) BJ8.
The rear shroud has the red brake light and the orange turn signal, as it should.
The front shroud has a single clear turn signal on each side. Like the rear, should have a pair, clear and orange.
Could this be a car that was built in transition from the 1964 to 1966 year, using older parts? 1964 front shroud, 1966 rear shroud? Or is this too much of a noticeable issue and the factory would not have done that.
My feeling is, car was in an accident and the repair shop put the wrong front shroud on.

PS. edited year from 65 to 66
 
Last edited:
Re: 65 BJ8 single turn signa up front

I have a 64 with twin front light and the red and orange rear lenses .. someone swapped the shrouds in its life ??
 
Re: 65 BJ8 single turn signal up front

Did he buy it via a Bring-a-Trailer auction? There were a couple of big Healeys there with "shroud issues" like this lately.

Is the car an early '65 or late? Does the wiring (for turn signals, side lamps and brake lights) appear to have been monkeyed with?

The urban myths/old wives' tales about using up old stocks of parts begin to wear pretty thin at a certain point. Some like to trot them out - or just make up new ones - to justify all kinds of anomalies. A few are real, such as the 100-6 grille badge on early 3000s, but the old saw about how they just grabbed whatever they could find in a parts bin somewhere, or how they "discovered" a batch of old shrouds in a store room and decided to use 'em up ... well, you believe what you want, but BMC was actually more careful and meticulous than they sometimes get credit for.

Besides, a single side lamp front shroud wouldn't work with a big Healey wired for separate turn signals and side lamps, so unless you want to believe that they halted the entire assembly line - that included other models; Abingdon was a huge operation with multiple models on the line and all on a schedule - to modify the wiring to accommodate the older shroud(s), it makes more sense, at least to me, that the shroud was replaced at some point.

Steve Byer may well be able to shed some light, but I don't believe that the changeover of front and rear shrouds - to different lighting configurations - would necessarily have happened in sync. Clausager's book may well also address this.
 
Yes indeed, he just bought the BGR one from Bring-A-Tralier. My friend came over yesterday to tell me about it. I have not seen it yet. In discussing it with him, I learned of the single turn lamp.
Per the photos on Bring-A-Trailer, car is BRG, the frame is black. Weren't the frames the same color of the car?
Seller discloses he had some door work done. No mention of front end damage (why the single turn lamps). Makes one wonder why the frame is black. Was this in an accident and what was the damage?
 
It's an early phase 2....My 65 has the same setup, and it's original. I think the later ones had the 2 front lights.
 
dancrim said:
It's an early phase 2....My 65 has the same setup, and it's original. I think the later ones had the 2 front lights.
Click to expand...
Your 65 phase 2, how many in the rear, how many in the front? 65 should be two rear (red break lower and orange directional upper) two front (orange outer side, clear grill side).
64 phase 2 should be single rear red, single front clear.
 
The light configuration does not depend on "year" since BMC didn't build the cars by "model year", which is a USA concept. The configuration also does not depend on chassis (VIN) number. It does depend on body number. Early Phase 2 cars up to body 76137 have a single light under the headlamp (larger plastic lens, rather than the small glass beehive lens of the Phase 1 cars). From body 76138 and up, the parking/turn signal lights were separate -- at least in theory. Cars near that body number may have either configuration, which is why Clausager says "by chassis 31336 (approx)" all cars had the separate indicators. The body number for chassis 31336 was chassis 76138. Or it was the body number for chassis 31259 since the same body number is recorded in BMIHT build data for both cars.
All the above applies to non-German or Swedish cars, which had a different schedule.
 
Last edited:
BJ8Healeys said:
The light configuration does not depend on "year" since BMC didn't build the cars by "model year", which is a USA concept. The configuration also does not depend on chassis (VIN) number. It does depend on body number. Early Phase 2 cars up to body 76137 have a single light under the headlamp (larger plastic lens, rather than the small glass beehive lens of the Phase 1 cars). From body 76138 and up, the parking/turn signal lights were separate -- at least in theory. Cars near that body number may have either configuration, which is why Clausager says "by chassis 31336" all cars had the separate indicators. The body number for chassis 31336 was chassis 76138. Or it was the body number for chassis 31259 since the same body number is recorded in BMIHT build data for both cars.
All the above applies to non-German or Swedish cars, which had a different schedule.
Click to expand...

The car in question is chassis 35210, so well after the separate turn signal and side lamp lenses were in use. Since the car has a pair of single lens up front, it appears as though the front shroud is a replacement from an earlier Phase 2 BJ8.
 
I don't have any previous record of 35210 (and why not?). I have 35209, but no body number recorded for it. 35206 has body 80108 and 35214 has body 80102 so 35210 should be well within the range to have dual indicator lights under the headlamps. The most likely explanation is that the car had an accident at some point in its past and an available single-light shroud was used for the repair.
 
My 65 was built in Oct. of 64. Body#74318 Ser.# 29443. Sold in Neb. 8/65. I have the
Heritage Cert. and the original sales slip(sold as a 65). I have 1 amber light in front
and 1 red one in back(on each side of course) along with a small red reflector above
the tail light. It has the phase 2 rear radius arms and late Bj8 leaf springs. Since
the sales slip says 65 and the DMV says 65, I call it a 65. If it walks like a duck
and looks like a duck...........
 
dancrim said:
My 65 was built in Oct. of 64. Body#74318 Ser.# 29443. Sold in Neb. 8/65. I have the Heritage Cert. and the original
sales slip. I have 1 amber light in front and 1 red one in back(on each side of course) along with a small
red reflector above the tail light. It has the phase 2 rear radius arms and late Bj8 leaf springs.
Click to expand...

Your shrouds sound as though they are the originals, but the front lenses should be clear, not amber. Many have been replaced over the 50+ years with amber lenses for various reasons, quite often simply because some people think the amber goes better with the car color!

Nice that you have the original sales receipt. Have you registered your BJ8 with Steve Byers? There's a form right here on the BCF for that. Highly recommended. Try this link:

https://www.britishcarforum.com/bj8form/bj8quest.html

You'll need the username guest and the password bighealey2013
 
Dan, your car would originally have had a single clear light in front. You have a private message.
 
I am not sure as to the front lens color. I never changed it and the prior owner never mentioned it.
I have seen a lot of 65 pictures and it seems to be about 50-50 clear and amber. I do know
the car was never in a front collision as I did all the body work and paint myself.
 
dancrim said:
I am not sure as to the front lens color. I never changed it and the prior owner never mentioned it.
I have seen a lot of 65 pictures and it seems to be about 50-50 clear and amber. I do know
the car was never in a front collision as I did all the body work and paint myself.
Click to expand...
Although I wasn't there, I'm pretty sure the factory did not put single amber lenses on some cars and clear on the others. It's easy enough to substitute a later amber lens for the earlier clear one for those who prefer that look.
 
Hi All,

As I have come to understand, when the factury had to get a car shipped, it did what it needed to make the transfer. When receiving my Healey at the dealer, I noticed that the bracket holding the accelerator rod to the intake manifold was constructed of a piece of angle iron with a hole drilled for mounting and another for the rod. I never changed it and still have that piece of angle iron holding my accelerator rod today.

Inked100_1412_LI.jpg

Although I expect the Factory did all it could to maintain some semblance of Model Component Adherence, from what I have seen and heard over the years, what ever was in the bin was used to complete the car for shipment. Also, when cars arrived at a Distributor in the States, it was not uncommon for these Healeys to be placed on the floor of local Dealers on consignment. As far as I understand, the Distributor considered the Dealer-resident car as new whenever it was sold to the first buyer and the year of the car was set by the sale date and/or the conventions set by the laws of the first State of registration..

Yes, it is possible that an earlier shroud was installed on a later model or a single amber, rather then clear, front light was installed at the Factory. We are talking by-hand finished manufacturing and the degree of automation present was reasonable for the day.

My understanding,
Ray(64BJ8P1)
 
Last edited:
We could be quibbling about mute facts. These cars were built with virtually no quality
control, and considering a model change to phase 2 and being near a new year.
I'll bet a dollar to a dime that if they had a bin of amber lenses they would have
used them up instead of throwing them out in order to go clear. Same goes for
other parts in the "bin". Just my 2 cents.
 
Re: 66 BJ8 Front Single Lamps

Hi fellas,
im the guy who bought the healey site unseen from bat it got here last Friday. I will register it with you Steve over the weekend. This front end appears to be original the harness appears to be original with no provisions for a second light. The inner fender work and in are straight and all intact. I’m a metal fabricator by trade and would be able to recognize any type of repair work done to the front additionally I did a very challenging ground up restoration on my studebaker hawk. And my 66 mustang convertible So I’m familiar with cars and signs of modifications this car is indeed an anomaly, thanks to all of you for contributing to the thread and I’ll look forward to a continued dialogue. Cheers , jeff
 
Hi Jeff,

Welcome to our on-line gathering. With your background of skills and past automotive accomplishments, you have picked a beautiful Healey that, I expect, will greatly extend your enjoyment and present you with challenges. You have a great local supporter and guide in Roger (who has one of the cars I most admire) and, along with the many others on this Forum, are looking forward to hearing your impressions and experiences … and provide help when needed.

All the best and enjoy your Healey,
Ray(64BJ8P1)
 
Welcome, Jeff,

Congrats on your purchase. May you enjoy many fun miles. I was also one of the BaT commenters who doubted the originality of the shroud, much to the seller's displeasure. The info you provided about there being no wiring for the separate indicators furthers the mystery. Can anyone familiar with the twin indicator wiring explain how the wiring differed from the single indicator wiring? Perhaps obtaining the Heritage Certificate with build dates may provide a clue. I suppose something dropping on the front of the car could explain the lack of inner fender damage or even in shipping to the US where the damage would have had to be rectified before the car was sent to the dealer and it would be more likely that a leftover shroud would be in parts spares here. At the end of the day, all that really matters is the issue was brought up by the commenters on BaT and you as a buyer could decide about the purchase. It really is a very handsome car.
 
Back
Top