Petrol tank sump is later type which means the fuel tank is wrong. OBL’s had a shorter sump with the threads on the outside and the tank had inside threads - all later cars had the reverse. So early sump will only fit on early tank. The early fuel tanks and sumps are highly prized amongst OBL owners because they are unique. The tank also has different strengthening pressings.
David
And there, you have it: my first new factoid of the day!
What’s an OBL wigs ?
Outside Bonnet Latch.
I just re-read the description of the car on BaT, and I didn’t see any assertions that this is “a true, completely OBL car”. It highlights some of the features of the car, including Outside Bonnet Latches, Welded Louvres, and Flat Floors but doesn’t claim it to be authentic, as in “just as it left the factory”. That may be semantics, but short of a disclaimer saying that “some of the original parts have been replaced with non-authentic later components” I don’t see what the seller could do. As always, it’s “caveat emptor” - do your due dilligence. The reality is that any collector who really wants an athentic OBL car will know what to look for, or hire someone who does, and will immediately spot most of the issues and will decide what to bid (if at all) based on what they see. I understand from his posting on BaT that fellow Jag-Lover Maikel Lemke (@Maikel) is planning to visit the car and post a video. Maikel is very knowledgeable about all things E-Type, so I imagine that he will identify many of the non-authentic items. Rather than go to a serious collector (and this is what I meant in my earlier comment):
I suspect that this car wil be purchased by someone to add to their collection of 100 classic cars who will know enough to recognise that OBL cars are special, and consider that they got a bargain to get OBLs without the $300K+ premium a more authentic car will fetch. I seriously doubt that this car will go for more than $225K, and if the seller has expectations beyond that, it will not meet reserve. We will watch with interest…
As for the term “wrong”, I prefer “not authentic”. I agree with @MarekH that “wrong” is exactly the in your face phrase that gives the impression of an arrogant know-it-all type that wanders around Concours events nitpicking every little thing and spoils the events for folks who have no expectation that their car is perfect, but enjoy the camaraderie of fellow enthusiasts enjoying their cars. Not that there’s anything wrong with that… 
I’m OK with that, so long as you’re being authentic… 
I have enjoyed this thread…discussion
Mitch
PS…My wife is literally sitting next to me “thread…ing” or doing art with thread…aka tatting…real art
As did I: I think the inference was pretty close to what I asserted. Reasonable men can agree reasonably on this. But I think it is still good that people point out things about the car that make it not exactly a true, original OBL car.
I agree - being a “reasonable man” . It is quite appropriate in my opinion for commenters on BaT to point out that the car has a number of compenents that are not authentic for a car built so early in the E-Type production run, and give some examples. I imagine that this is what Maikel will do in his video. There will inevitably be a number of BaT commenters who ridicule such “nitpicking” comments - it happens every time, and many of us have been targets of such remarks in the past, myself included. The response from the seller will be very telling. If they welcome or at least accept the comments, it’s to the good for a fair auction. If they join those belittling the commenters it will be clear where they are coming from. I suspect that they will accept the comments in the spirit that they are given. That is, if they are simply given to provide factual information to others who have less knowledge/experience they will be accepted. I base this on the fact that the seller has apparently welcomed Maikel’s visit, and (just as an example) has included a close up photo of the license plate lights which make it clear that they are not authentic (Butlers), when it would have been easy not include such details in the gallery.
Now I have no problem with interchangeable terms ……however there is a difference between ourselves on this forum and broadcasting these inconsistencies on the selling site……you’ll note I never go on them to comment and am appalled by some of the arguments and comments made……I also rarely go to concours and when I do it is as an observer and for my own education ( looking for what is original placement of wiring looms etc) in unmolested cars.
I don’t brag about my cars to others and don’t knit pick on other cars unless specifically asked by the owner to do so…….so if that is being a know all and arrogant …I don’t know !
It is in my view totally legitimate to comment on this forum about the issues that are able to be seen on any car for sale, and in this case the lack of photographic evidence and underneath photos raises in my mind the issue of how throughly the resto has been done……I just don’t know!..… in any event a very serious collector as opposed to a braggard will make the assessment with a professional much more qualified than me or most of us here on the forum to assess the car …we happen to be lucky and it will be interesting to hear the result of the visit to the car by someone who knows these cars very well.
Yet another observation of non-authentic parts are the front side light/indicator lenses. They’ve used the later “fresnel” type lenses found on the 4.2 cars instead of the correct “fluted” style for the 3.8 cars as shown below.
From the auction photo gallery #64/255 (fresnel type):
The correct lenses on the 3.8 cars are “fluted” like these exact reproduction lenses finely crafted in the UK by forum member @MarekH:
Yes, perhaps another small detail but often the details can make a big difference. 
Good evening to the community,
got back home today and found a mail that I have been tagged in the forum. I was not aware of this discussion here but I am happy to join.
I have been to the seller today and have taken some long videos which I need to cut and I did not even point out every little detail but was trying to give a very good overall impression. No idea how long the video will be at the end. I have a very good impression of the car and I hope it will be reflected in my video which you can see on my youtube channel hopefully tomorrow.
You can subscribe to the channel at this video to be notified when I have uploaded it.
Hope is will help to evaluate the real value of this car.
Danny,
I think we are in broad agreement, though maybe you disagree. To your points:
I think that you hit the nail on the head when you said “unless specifically asked by the owner to do so”. The folks I’m refering to, and most of us probably have witnessed them in action, are those who provide their comments unasked for, and with a demeaning sneer of superiority and self-importance. I feel the use of the word “wrong” only re-enforces that perception, but maybe I’m oversensitive.
I’m in full agreement. When it comes to making the same comments on the BaT auction site I see a nuanced difference. If the seller makes detailed claims that are untrue, it seems appropriate to me for someone better informed to question or correct that claim. On the other hand, it seems inappropriate to me for a commenter to list 20 non-authentic (or “wrong”) things about a run of the mill car when the seller has made no claims about originality or authenticity in the auction description. To my mind, this is the equivalent of the *unasked for comments I refered to earlier. As with face to face communications, how a question is asked or a comment made can make a huge difference: “could the seller provide more photos of the underside of the driver side sill” vs “the lack of photos of the underside strongly suggests that the sills are rotted out”.
Me too.
No problem I was not implying rot underneath what I was saying that there are no photos that show the underneath …. For all I know it may well be pristine
How about photos 177 through 230? I’m confused… don’t those show the underneath???
Bloody hell I missed the …… many apologies to all especially the seller …… thanks @WoodBoatChick or pointing out that I missed them and I can see that it has some photos of the resto and the underneath is lovely crisp job
Here is the video, although I was spending hours of cutting out double and redundant stuff it still is 45 minutes long.
Thank you Maikel, very instructive!
very informative, looks like the blue convertible next to the car is also OBL. At around 25 minutes
It may have been already noted, but the steering wheel isn’t the correct one for an early car.
I stand redirected, as Mr. Kellogg sorted me out, in post 95.
Inside is different than outside.
Inside is different than outside.
Inside is different than outside…
