VW 411 LE Auto Sedan 1971 48000 miles

philgunn

as usual i have been asked by a friend to list this due to him being a Computer numpty, This is a garage find the vehicle was parked up and the owner died,
it has not turned a wheel in about 20 years , but was going perfectly until the morbid moment. it would suit a person looking for running gear, the body is to far gone for a restoration . but if you have a 1641 cc engine with injection and auto you could pick up a bargain , all the little trim parts are there , inc origional radio , will not be sold as a parts if you buy a nut or a engine you take he lot Call dick on 086 824 7129 (the owner) he also has a emil address but does not look at it too often richardaslattery@gmail.com

these should be some pics

carchaeologist

Pity its so shagged,it would be a nice original car if it wasnt so rotten,tipp south reg...

VWPowered

yay, i love 411's although that said a cleaner one, shame though:rolleyes:

Dirty1

Potential rodent!

Kevin_Herron

Thats exactly what I was thinking!!! I think its a bit too crunchy for a HoodRide though.

carchaeologist

Dirty1 wrote: »

Potential rodent!

Brilliant!!It really does look the part!!Amazing what dropping it a few inches and a set of wheels will do to a car!!Would it drive without collapsing though?!!Are they seperate chassis like the beetle or a monocoque?

Dirty1

Theres alot of VWs slammed in similar condition!!:D

411s are pig ugly but theres been a few done well, I always likd this one, done a while now!

Bitten & Hisses

carchaeologist wrote: »

BAre they seperate chassis like the beetle or a monocoque?

First monocoque VW made, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VW_411

trevorbrady

I'm fairly sure the Schwimmwagen was monocoque, way back during WW2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwimmwagen

Dirty1

Could type2s be classed as monocoque??

peasant

Dirty1 wrote: »

Could type2s be classed as monocoque??

Nope ...even the type2 T3 (the brick/wedge) still wasn't monocoque but pretty much a frame and pillars affair.

trevorbrady

Dirty1 wrote: »

Could type2s be classed as monocoque??

I'd be with you on this one. The chassis is integral to the bodyshell and cannot be readily removed. I always thought that was the definition of monocoque...

peasant

trevorbrady wrote: »

I'd be with you on this one. The chassis is integral to the bodyshell and cannot be readily removed. I always thought that was the definition of monocoque...

semantics really ...according to wikipedias definition it would definetly be unibody, but not monocoque

Monocoque (French for "single" (mono) and "shell" (coque)) is a construction technique that supports structural load using an object's external skin. This stands in contrast with using an internal framework (or truss) that is then covered with a non-load-bearing skin. Monocoque construction was first widely used in aircraft, starting in the 1930s.

Structural skin is another term for the same concept.

Unibody, or unitary construction, is a related construction technique for automobiles in which the body is integrated into a single unit with the chassis rather than having a separate body-on-frame. The welded "Unit Body" is the predominant automobile construction technology today.

trevorbrady

carchaeologist

peasant wrote: »

semantics really ...according to wikipedias definition it would definetly be unibody, but not monocoque

Haha,pedantry will get you everywhere!!;)