- Seller: Charles M (Contact)
- Location: Loveland, Colorado
- Mileage: 56,432 Shown
- Chassis #: HBJ8L32637
- Title Status: Clean
- Engine: 3-Liter Inline-6 with Dual Carbs
- Transmission: 4-Speed Manual with Electric Overdrive
This 1966 Austin-Healey 3000 MK3 has been parked since 1999 and needs to be put back on the road. The MK3 is considered by many to be the ultimate iteration of the Big Healey, boasting a well-appointed interior, enhanced creature comforts, and the most potent version of the 2.9-liter inline-six engine. The seller has already taken some steps to get it running again, so if you’d love to be the one to clean it up and take it for a drive, make the seller an offer!
Big Healeys have always been popular and sought after, so finding one that hasn’t already been overly restored is relatively rare. The seller believes this one was repainted once, but there aren’t any signs of body damage. Its engine is the numbers-matching unit and is the easier to tune twin-carburetor version.
The MK3’s interior is comfortable, with a burled walnut dash, Ambla vinyl upholstery, a full complement of gauges, and wind-up windows. It might not sound luxurious by today’s standards, but this was considered quite luxurious for a drop-top British sports car at the time. They are comfortable cars and feel just at home on the highway as they do on surface streets. This example’s interior appears to be complete and in usable condition. The dash wood is cracking, which is a common problem, and replacement wood is available. For the most part, it appears to just need a good detailing to be ready to use.
The 2.9-liter inline-6 was a major selling point for the 3000. While not as powerful as the twin-cam inline-6 found in the Jaguar E-type, the BMC C-series engine is far simpler and easier to maintain in optimal running condition. The Mk3 received a new camshaft and larger SU HD8 carburetors, which increased horsepower from 136 to 150, and torque rose to 173 foot-pounds. It’s paired with a 4-speed manual transmission featuring overdrive. This example is a Phase II MK3, meaning that the rear chassis was revised to provide much-needed ground clearance. The seller has already rebuilt its carburetors, refurbished the radiator, adjusted the valves, and installed breakerless ignition points.
Big Healeys are fantastic cars that blur the line between sports and grand touring cars wonderfully. They are smooth, look fantastic, and are fun to drive. Given how long this one has been parked, it will likely need the rest of the fuel system gone through, the brakes serviced, and the fluids changed in the transmission and differential. It looks like it’s a great car, though, and could be a fun project!
Could be a good buy but for 30K you’d think there would be some decent pictures of it.
That’s about all there is to see of the car – and every photo looks like it is in excellent shape. Since there’s no rust at all showing anywhere on the body, and all the chrome looks absolutely perfect, I doubt there would be any rust or problems on the undercarriage. The trunks on 60’s Healey’s are not as big as it looks – as there’s not much space between the floor and trunk lid. I had a ’63 Austin Healey 3000 MkIII and this ’66 presents in excellent condition and very much worth the asking price. In fact, I think the owner is selling it short. I saw a ’65 in British Racing Green and black interior in excellent shape go for a bit over $45K a few years ago. There’s not many of them left in this condition, so they will always be a high-ticket collector’s car.
I agree with both of you. There should be a lot more pictures (remember the BRG Etype that Jesse and team were selling…50 pictures at least). The price seems really soft to me, although from nearly $100K prices of 15 years ago, they have come way back to earth, in fact too much so, IMO. I really would like to see under carriage shots and much closer looks at the inner wheel wells. Don’t really understand why they haven’t gotten it running. Also no mention of whether the engines turns by hand.
BTW Al, I don’t think a 63 was a MkIII, but rather a MkII. A BJ6 or 7. My 65 (in need of total restoration now,,,one more project) is a BJ8 and a MkIII.
Also, while Josh comments on the HD8 pair being easier to tune, a buddy of mine had a 62 with the triple carb setup (HS6s???) and sure, a 3rd carb adds a minor hitch, but tuning them is no sweat. People buy these fancy tools, but all you need is a short piece of hose and a good ear to synch them really well.
BTW, Jesse sent me an email saying the Thumbs Up might be fixed. I was able to give both Bob and Al a Thumbs Up, Jesse/Josh. Thanks.
Back in the early 70’s, I had the privilege to have a ’63 Austin Healey 3000 MkIII in absolutely excellent condition. It was a gorgeous cream color, whereas this one looks white, and the ’63’s interior was a bit different. – The interior was all black instead of red. It had the plastic slide side curtains instead of glass windows – the dash face was covered in black Naugahyde instead of wood, and the dash dials were all in a gold anodized face that glistened instead of gloss black, and the ’63 did not have the console between the seats. Otherwise, the interior looks very much same as this ’66 model and the rest of the ’66 looks exactly like the ’63 including the wire wheels and the same engine / carbs.
I loved that car – it handled superbly due to its large wheels while hovering a couple inches off the ground – and was very fast on its feet – capable of down shifting into third at 60 mph – hitting the gas and watching the tach climb and then shifting into fourth – it took off like a rocket to 90 mph in a flash passing up everything in sight — just pure ‘you know what’ on wheels.
However, a beautiful woman in heels and a fur coat saw it parked outside my apartment – rang the doorbell – asked me if that was my Healey out there. I said it was and she asked if she could come in. I let her in and she asked how much I want for it? I said it’s not for sale. She sat down at my dining table and started laying hundred dollar bills on it. I told her its not for sale, and she said; “Yes, it is.” and kept putting down bills until she said that’s $5000. — Well, that’s the most cash I had seen at one time, and $5K was a LOT of money back then. I had about $1500 in the car and just starred at the cash. She asked if the title was clear. I said it was, and she asked to see it. I got it for her and she said all she needs is my signature here – pointing at the bottom line of the title. I thought about it for another second and then signed it over to her. She asked if I need to get anything out of it. I said I don’t keep anything in it except it’s paper and maintenance records – mainly because the side curtains provided no security from getting into it. She asked for the keys. I gave them to her. She thanked me and I watched her walk out to my Healey – put her long legs and the rest of bedazzled self in it and drive it away – and the most exciting car I had ever owned was gone. — If she kept it in as good a shape as I had in – it would certainly be worth $30K or more now.
I bought a 1967 Healy3000 w/od inNiagara Falls around 1970 for $1000. Dollars. It was BRG and I loved that car .I tought my sister to drive stick shift in that car, we still talk about that. These are awesome cars
very nice
I’m sorry but “breakerless ignition points”?
Eric – the ’63 Austin Healey’s were the first year of the MkIII’s. Likewise, the ’62’s were the last year of the MkII’s. Their Mk system indicated what they considered a significant improvement in their design, which is why there were many years of production with the same Mk number.
It was the same for MG. When I met my wife, she had a ’62 MGA MkII, which marked a design change over the original MGA’s. Then came the MGB. The English were like that. They basically produced the same model cars year after year and didn’t give them a different name other than the year of manufacture and the Mk numbering system designating a design change. — The MkIII was the last iteration of the Austin Healey’s before they went out of production after the ’67 model year.
There may have been some ’63’s designated as MkII’s at the beginning of the ’63 production year, but my ’63 distinctly had the 3000 MkIII designation under the Austin Healey name between the wings right above the grill. — On the manufacturer’s papers, my Healey was a 1963 BJ8 Mark III convertible.
Maybe my Healey was even more rare than the others in the following years of production – if it was indeed a split year of their Mk designations. And possibly the rich beautiful woman who pried my Healey out of my hands with $5K cash knew it was a rare find which she was not about to pass up — but we’ll never know. :-)
Al, I stand corrected on your vehicle. Here’s a definitive explanation of the 3000s.
https://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showthread.php?45502-Austin-Healey-3000-1959%961967
October of 1963 saw the introduction of the 3000 Mk III according to this posting. As you rightly point out, they had the designation as part of the front insignia. Just as with the MGA, the first 3000s had no Mk designation. They became Mk I when the Mk II was introduced.
I’m not certain, but I believe all of the BJ8s had what they laughingly called back seats. In mine, the seat back folds down and latches to become a package shelf.
Al, I had posted a comment reflecting that you were and are correct about the 63 MkIII. October of 1963 was when the switch from Mk II to Mk III was made. I included a link to a website that gave the history of the 3000s, but my comment must have been deleted. I don’t know why and that sort of thing has occurred in the past to me, which is why I gave up my membership but continue to be a watcher. I don’t appreciate it when my innocent postings are removed without notice or comment. As such, no longer a member.
Thanks for the correction, but its no big deal. I should have posted more factory information about my Healey than I did. — Sometimes, you’ll notice there is no ‘reply’ option under a person’s comments, so you have to go down to the bottom and make a new post, and just address it to the person you are replying to, and that usually works. Yes, the Barn Finds site has some problems, which appear to me to be their memory and storage capacity is being slammed to its limit, which causes a site to slow to a crawl during peak times, and at those times, some things can get lost in la-la land too.
Haven’t much experienced slowness recently, and the thumbs up has returned on a consistent basis. Used to be the first time it worked and then didn’t thereafter until a new session. Could have been a cookie issue too. My problem has been with censorship of innocent posts. I don’t get political (although some folks do hover around the edges of it), and I don’t engage in mean-spiritedness. However, things have disappeared without comment.
We have fixed the thumbs up and are slowly upgrading the servers so things should be running better. As for “censorship”, we have some filters in place and do delete comments that break the rules. Normally people think we are deleting their comments when they are just pending moderation or the cache has not cleared yet.
If your car had the plastic slide side curtains, it was not a Mark III (BJ8) or even a Mark II (BJ7). Both those had roll-up windows and convertible tops that fold back. Earlier models, such as BN4 and BN6, were roadsters (top completely removable for storage, and with the plastic side curtains.
For Austin-Healeys, they were not built by “model year” as we are used to in the USA. The USA “new model year” begins in September, so Healeys were typically assigned a “year” on paperwork when first sold, depending on when that was in relation to the “new model year”. The production of Mark III (BJ8) cars began in October 1963 but none of those arrived in the USA until after the beginning of the USA “1964 model” year in September 1963.