[ROVERNET - UK] Response to Glen's well intended comments

Glen Wilson rovercar at comcast.net
Sat Mar 29 21:54:37 GMT 2008

Well, I was patiently answering questions as you can read below, but in 
terms of recanting...

Your car has a Federal 3500S VIN according to Taylors book.

Your car does not have Federal 3500S front wings.

Your car does not have Federal 3500S front bumpers (or, I assume rear 
                (scroll down re bumpers)
You did have the metal pieces at the bottom of the front fenders.

Your car does not have the floor dimmer mentioned in the 3500S operation 

Your car does not have Fed 3500S directional indicators.

Your car does not have the steering column stalks described in the 3500S 

So what are we saying, here. That your car has factory differences? That 
on the day your car was put together they didn't have NADA bumpers, 
fenders, indicator lights, floor dimmer switches or column switchgear?

How could this car possibly be a Federal 3500S that has not been altered?

Sounds like a lot of parts that don't belong on a car with your VIN, Dennis.


Brooks wrote:
> Lots of good questions raised there Glen...I will do my best to answer 
> most of them...
> "Did Canada get a hodge-podge of parts because they had less specific 
> laws than the
> United States? "
> I don't know what the US regulations were at that time...however today 
> the regulations seem to be even more strict here...as most US destined 
> vehicles need to be modified to meet Canadian standards before importing.
> The P6B that I am refering to NEVER had under the bumper turn 
> signals...The signals were wired into the front wing much like the 
> 3500 that was built for the home market in England....
Just to be specific, the P6B you mention is a Federal 3500S, right? I'm 
sure there are tons of P6Bs without the bumper directionals.

> the wings were not the same as fitted to the P6 ...however they did 
> have a small piece of stainless (I believe) fitted to the lower 
> portion of the wing next to the rocker panel (is this also seen on 
> 3500 cars made for the home market ?
Those pieces were original to the Fed 3500S, and I'm pretty sure they 
were aluminum. Why they didn't just paint the fender, I don't know...
> "Seems like some rewiring would be involved in deleting
> the under bumper lights"
> Again...not really ...as the lights were actually an addition as you 
> noted for the NADA market....wether it was required by law is a bit 
> doubtful when you consider the other cars sold in the same market at 
> that time .
I think they just spliced in wires that ran down to the under bumper 
lights. I know I read somewhere that those things were added to meet 
regulations, but I can't find where I read it, so that's hearsay!  ;-)  
They appeared first on the TC that preceded the 3500S and might have 
arrived along with the side marker lights which were definitely 
federally mandated down here. Maybe the ones up top were simply not 
bright enough or didn't have enough visibility from an angle.

> I have a P6B with a unit that is completly different from any I have 
> seen ...it's reversed to the opposite side like we have in todays 
> cars...also it came with a high beam flash plus on the unit you have 
> the feature of hi-lo beam switching ...not a dimmer on the floor. The 
> floor mat has never even had the hole for the dimmer punched out in 
> order to install the unit.
Now. we're cooking with gas. What's the VIN on that car? Let's sleuth it 
out. I'm still not clear on the setup. The '69 brochures I have show the 
directional on the right. The left stalk will flash the high beams when 
pulled back if lights are off or in low beam. The lights are turned on 
using the rotary switch on the dash. High beams by floor button.  The 
much older 2000 manual from 1964 shows the hi/low selection being done 
by the left stalk.  If you read between the lines, it looks like they 
left that same switch at the base of the left stalk even when they 
finally only using a single function of it to flash the lights.  Someone 
can check a parts manual, but it might have been pretty easy to just 
hook up that switch to operate like it did on the old cars, especially 
if the wires were still in the harness.  If that's the case, the dealer 
would not have had to change the switches on the column because they 
never changed (just didn't get hooked up).

> "The directional indicators and horn are on the right side,
> the headlight flasher control on a stem to the left."
> Not true on all P6B cars...as I own one that didn't come that way...My 
> Dad removed the unit and refitted it to another P6B that he was driving.
Not clear what you mean, here. If it "didn't come that way" did you have 
one that had the directional lever on the left and the flasher on the right?

Again, are we talking Fed 3500S here, or just generic P6B? There's lots 
of P6Bs, but there are only 2000 Fed 3500S's. Did you guys get any 3500 
models up there before they brought the Fed 3500S over?

> "Have you definitely seen 3500S's in
> Canada that don't have the dimmer footswitch on the floor? To me, it
> seems much more likely that such a car was modified by some owner than
> that it was manufactured that way at the factory."
> Yes...I own it...and before me Ben Rogers owned it....at the time of 
> purchase Ben told me that everything was the way he bought the 
> car...and I can't really see anyone going to such trouble as to remove 
> the foot dimmer hide the holes where it would be fastened ...change 
> the wiring and replace the floor mat with one that was never cut for a 
> floor mounted dimmer....it's just too much of a strech to make.
Again, share the VIN on that car.

> "Even in 1964, NADA P6's had foot dimmers. "
> I'm sure the '64 Mustang did as well...but eventually things 
> evolve...so I am not sure what your point is  ....most of the P6B cars 
> had foot dimmers....but I have one that does not...and never did.
Point is that if the foot dimmer was standard on NADA cars since 1964, 
why would they  make yours without one? Unless it wasn't intended for 
this market...
> "The bumpers of a 3500S are unique to the 3500S and so are the front
> wings to match them. If a 3500S was shipped with non-standard front
> bumpers, they would have to have been 2000TC bumpers which would mean
> the car had 2000TC front wings, as well. How could the factory send out
> a car like that?"
> That's making a lot of unfounded presumptions Glen
Not if it's an NADA Federal 3500S. Why does your car have so many anomalies?
> ....I actually think it was fitted with a front bumper from the three 
> thousand five....it would fit directly and would easily explain the 
> lights in the front wings operating like the ones used in the three 
> thousand five model as well...I also think you may find the front 
> bumper of the 3500S is also a direct fit to the three thousand 
> five...contrary to your statement.
I don't know if it would bolt onto a 3500, but the Fed 3500S bumper was 
unique to the model. That's a definite fact. Someone in the UK or Europe 
would have to let us know if the 3500 had the same wings as the 2000. If 
so, the Fed 3500S bumper wouldn't bolt onto a 3500 because it would be 
missing an attachment point on each side. In fact, I just looked at 
pictures of the 3500 and can confirm what I just said. You could fit 
3500 bumpers to a 3500S, but you'd have an empty hole in each front 
wing. If you put the heavy wrap-around bumper on a 3500, the ends would 
not be supported.
> " Is it possible that the car you are remembering was a TC and not a
> 3500S? Maybe a non-NADA LHD 2000 or 2000TC was imported into Canada by 
> someone."
> An honest question...but not even a glimer of a chance....These are 
> not the same 3500 S units that I am noting differences ...but they are 
> certainly not "TC" models....I've owned and driven a 3500S since 71' 
> ....I am very familiar with the marquis and believe me there are 
> indeed many factory differences ...for whatever reason...I can't tell 
> you for certain ...but you are off the mark when you try to explain 
> those differences as after market or dealer modifications.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
> "I'm not sure what you mean by finishing trims in the boot."
> Up until I saw the P6B that I bought fronm Quebec...I had never seen 
> stainless steel installed along the back edge of the trunk...located 
> just inside the lip where the carpet stops....there was a full length 
> of stainless installed there . It was a match to the desigm used on 
> the entry step of the main part of the car...it was not something that 
> was aftermarket ...it was factory installed ...even the screws marched 
> the rest of the screws used on the cars other trim pieces....
> ................................................................................................... 
> "If I saw a car with a non-NADA spec headlight
> dimmer circuit, I would check the VIN to see if it was ever intended to
> end up in North America."
> Sounds reasonable.....43301964A
> Once again Glen....it stands the test....perhaps you might care to 
> reconsider and recant....LOL
> .........................................................
> Now as a final thought....every car that came to canada had to meet 
> standards that were put in place effective Jan 1/1968...so the bumper 
> theory you have so clearly noted may indeed be only a theory...because 
> if it were factual ...then please explain how the 1968 Rover 2000  was 
> permitted to roam the streets of the USA ... Just a little food for 
> thought :)

Don't confuse the Clean Air Act requirements with the new auto safety 
requirements that came about a year later.

> Regards
>  Dennis Brooks
> _______________________________________________
> rovernet mailing list
> rovernet at lyris.ccdata.com
> To unsubscribe, go to this web page, look near the bottom and follow 
> instructions:
> http://mailman.nipltd.com/mailman/listinfo/rovernet
> Back-up list and photos at:
> http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Rover_net/

More information about the rovernet mailing list