|
i hope to buy a classic car, but what kind. i have looked at the following cars... ford prefect, rover p4, rover p6, triumph 2000, ford anglia, triumph herald, and of course the good old morris minor, but i dont know what to buy, any advice would be very helpful, and any other models that i should think about, the only problem is that i have about £1000, and the car must have mot, i am looking for a running restoration.
|
What purpose is the car for - commuting, family runabout, hobby etc?
For a good family sized car with commuting potential (ie ability to keep up on the motorway I would consider the Rover P6 or the Triumph 2000 from your list)
|
|
the car is for running family members to work, and pleasure driving around the north east coastline.
|
Definitely the more modern larger saloon like the Rover P6 or Triumph 2000 then - check out www.bangernomics.com - they have a section on classics.
"Practical Classics" magazine is probably the best source for cars for sale. How about a Cortina MkIII GXL or E - 'coke bottle' styling and a Ford 2.0 Pinto DOHC engine? - Proper 70s style
|
Marc wrote:
>
> Definitely the more modern larger saloon like the Rover P6 or
> Triumph 2000 then - check out www.bangernomics.com - they
> have a section on classics.
bangernomics.tripod.com/
>
> "Practical Classics" magazine is probably the best source for
> cars for sale. How about a Cortina MkIII GXL or E - 'coke
> bottle' styling and a Ford 2.0 Pinto DOHC engine? - Proper
> 70s style
|
|
A herald or derivitive plenty of cheap parts easy to work on and it has a chassis .Another option mgb or midget for the same reasons as above and you will not lose money.
|
|
|
|
My experience of Mk III Cortinas was that they rusted their wings through in the first two years and 60,000 miles from new. So I'd be very careful about buying one that was nearly 30 years old.
HJ
|
|
|
If you buy a ford prefect, make sure you do not get one with an arthur dent in it!
MMJ
|
|
|
Having owner a Rover P6 and a Triumph 2000, and being closely associated with Morris Minors, I would go for the bigger cars. I remember reading somewhere that rust can make the P6 terminally costly to repair, the front springs are horizontal and load up the cockpit bulkhead in action, and I think the de Dion tube rear axle can collect water and rust through from the inside. The rear brakes on the P6 are inboard, mounted on the diff, see other posts on the subject. The Triumph is probaby a safer bet, with an indestructible sweet-sounding straight 6 engine and more conventional design.
With apologies in advance to John Slaughter, I can't see the point of a Minor as a classic; no real engineering to speak of. Cute, yes, but uncomfortable to my taste and not able to hack it with today's traffic. In fact, since my sister-in-law bought a decrepit convertible, I hate the bl**dy things (by association, probably).
Good luck.
|
Darcy
Not offended at all, but I can't let that pass! Must disagree about the 'lack of engineering'. When you consider the typical small saloon of 1948, the Minor with a stiff monocoque body, genuine space for four, decent aerodynamics (later spoiled a bit by the higher headlamps), space saving and effective independent front suspension, fully hydraulic brakes, four-speed gearbox and rack and pinion steering must have been a revelation to most small car owners of the day. It actually went round corners! Just a pity it was originally saddled with the ancient side valve engine and not the flat four Issigonis planned. As for the cute styling, I think that's one of its attractions. It's always struck me it's a clever downsize of the large American saloons of the '40's. Certainly has their styling cues - the peak at the front of the bonnet, the front wings which run back into the doors, bulbous rear wings etc.
Your comments about relative lack of comfort and inability to 'hack it' with today's traffic apply to virtually all smaller older cars (and a good few large ones) and not just Minors. Crikey, Ford were selling 3-speed cars with side valve engines up to 1959! The whole point about them is that it gives the owners the fun of keeping an old car on the road, and, from my experience, considerable pleasure to visitors to cars shows etc. If I had a pound for everyone whose said, 'I wish I still had my Minor' or similar it would ease my running costs! However, from the point of view of usability, the Minor isn't bad. OK, it cruises at 50, which one or two drivers obviously think is holding them up, but most don't worry, and I don't use Motorways. Last time I was given a figure, the brakes gave nearly 0.9 G retardation, so that?s no problem. Given the availability of spares, and reasonable costs, they make an excellent classic. Also, don't forget there are old Minors and rebuilt old Minors. I've rebuilt the front and rear suspension on mine, replaced all the dampers and rear springs and it runs on the correct size radials. Also the brake system is totally replaced. Get a car where this work is needed and you'll get a very different impression of its abilities!
OK, the '60's classics everyone's advocating here are faster, but even if they are in 'as-new' condition they won't be as comfortable or have the brakes or roadholding of a modern car. They are by no means devoid of problems and won't be cheap to fix. I am a bit concerned, though, about the whole idea of a runabout classic. Frankly, there's no fun in trying to run a classic on an everyday basis. Morse and Bergerac have a lot to answer for! I'm not talking about fully rebuilt Jaguars here, but the idea of buying a 30 plus years old car and using it daily doesn't make a great deal of sense. It isn't an option to the 'bangernomics' idea of buying an old (8 - 10years old) car cheaply and running it for a year or two 'till it fails. Reliability of a 30+year old car won't be as good, and it won't be cheap because if you're interested in classics you won't want to scrap it after a year! You won't have much depreciation, unless you buy a fully restored concours model, in which case daily use will depreciate it. However, you'll always be spending money on something, and it's difficult to restore a car properly if it's always in use. Come the winter and you'll miss a decent heater and a heated rear window. I'm always pleased to see classics in use, but I admit there are times and ways to use them.
Regards
John
|
Darcy,
I think that sister-in -law gets the red mist up and then it all goes to pot. You'll just have to work on separating her from the honest Morris Minor.
Size of wallet has much to do with this. The Minor is possibly the best classic to run as a second/third car and not sell the house to do so. Every spare available and loads of advice about.
Move up to the more "desireable" luxury saloons and it is a different matter. Some of those can cripple you. There are some Daimler type cars of the 50s where the restoration exceeds the value many times, in effect the rough car has a negative value.
Most local garages could get an old Minor back on the road for you at sensible cost. Exactly the same applies to the old series Land Rovers, now they're an interesting classic choice.
My sister-in-law was over the other week and due again soon. The Saab convertible is off the list , too expensive for a toy. Now she wants an Escort convertible! She'll never make it in that, it'll pull into the hairdressers car park on auto-pilot long before it makes it here.
David
|
David
If she must have the Escort, don't for heavens sake let it be white with colour coded bumpers!
Regards
John
|
John,
My concern exactly!
David
|
|
|
|
