There is a classic cars meeting each month here, in Toulouse. Today, I had a thought about this topic:

Thank you, dsl, I had no problem to identified these two ones

The MG ZR/ZS were all ex BTTC cars or from the MG class that existed in the mid-2000s with the V8s, racing in the MG class.
That Escort was racing in regularity, where you try to lap with all your times at the same time.
I just got back from the Historics at Phillip Island, I'm going to have to go thorugh the photos I took to upload. over 500 cars, a lot of really interesting stuff.

Not really, but our site selection had too many unknowns so I worked out what to look for to separate the different versions - once you get the sequence, it's more straightforward than most people think. It kind of stuck, and - even better - no-one picked up errors.

Nice Sandown album - good pictures and some unexpected - for me - sightings. Did not realise Aus had so many Rover 25/MG ZR and ZS - were they common? And they seem to like putting great big rear wings on some unlikely victims - a 4 door Escort Mk2, for instance.

I assume you are a Healey fan dsl?
This is my mates dads https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=546538185432965&set=a.544469532306497.10- 73741833.417986638288121&type=3&theater
Races in Group S historics in Australia. Theres some other photos in that album that I have taken of similar cars. More Healeys, MGs, Porsches, Aussie Muscle, etc.

Go for it.

Easy. Done - 66+ Mk3.

Thanks to show the proper way to a padawan, masters Jedi! And thanks for your patience.
Page done.

It could have been on the "1956 Austin Healey 100M Le Mans" page, on which you posted a comment, dsl, but as you say,

With your permission, I'll add this analysis on a comment with the other views.

For the record: on the "simple" Austin Healey 100M page, someone wrote:
"I suspect that by now, after 55 years, no two cars are exactly similar."
On that page, the tail matches "my" criteria of simple rear lights, by the way...

@ dsl: never tried to solve this?

That detail can be shown in comments, that's what extra picures are made for
Main pic should be the one that gives the best overall view of the car.

^ ... and has the advantage of showing the bonnet strap.

To me http://elmer.re:8043/Photos/picture.php?/21/category/IMCDb-Unknown1 is better as main pic : the car seems more visible (and I guess it is quite noticeable as there are less cars on screen in that scene)
On the showroom pic it is really far/small.

1] I'm happy with 1956 Austin Healey 100M as ID.
2] use the picture where the car is most obvious to the film viewer (I guess the rear view in showroom??) as the main. Put other pictures in comments.

At those distances and with fragmented views, we can not prove 100M, but it is an early 100-4 at least, and the bonnet strap gives 100M. We can't prevent it being a lookalike - bonnet straps are easy to fit - but there is nothing visible to prevent it being 100M and all other clues seem present. Sometimes we just have to make the best ID possible from what's visible.