TR4 Wreck

[Dave I O W]

Hi Everyone

 

Do you think that this was a good price for this car.

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1963-RHD-Triumph-TR4-Surrey-Top-version-for-Restoration-/291221560879?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2047675.l2557&nma=true&si=fplyONfLem%252Fuao6XNM8sqHavAQs%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

 

Cheers

 

Dave.

[Tom Boyd]

Lots of good bits still on there...............!

 

Seen worse to be honest and yes I think it was worth that price

 

Tom

[Alec Pringle]

Hi Dave,

 

that isn't a car, it's the mortal remains of what was once a car . . . . .

 

Judging by the visible rot there can be only a limited number of parts that are still of use to man or beast, and I reckon you'd be hard put to find sufficient to justify its future DVLA status as a rebuilt car.

 

As for the suggestion of low mileage, that's worthless without evidence, and from the state pretty much irrelevant anyway.

 

Of course, if it has a logbook and is on DVLA that has a significant value - and the registration number appears, and states it is taxed until Jan 2015, which seems fairly remarkable, as does the first registration date of 05 June 1969 . . . . . anomalies to unravel.

 

It's worth what someone is prepared to pay.

 

Cheers

 

Alec

[Guest ntc]

10% of that price

[Steve R]

The rear reflector is still working!

[peejay4A]

Crikey. That tells me that I paid a bargain price for the basis of my 4A restoration. It still cost me a fortune.

[cvtrian]

Overdrive gearbox, Surrey top complete with hard section roof, how much to buy these separately?

 

Would be a shame if it ended up broken for parts, but it definitely will cost a great deal of time, effort and £ to restore!

[Rodbr]

Compared to this was a tad expensive but value in the Surrey top.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/TRIUMPH-TR4-1962-LHD/331295933861?_trksid=p2047675.c100011.m1850&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D25291%26meid%3D355bbc858fde4a2fb9ce80436645a59f%26pid%3D100011%26prg%3D10621%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D10%26sd%3D291221560879

[Dave I O W]

I know its got a surrey top which looks like it wants a lot of work but it just seemed to be a lot of money for what's left,

 

Still that just goe's to show what I know.

 

Cheers

 

Dave.

[Geko]

this one has 4 days to go and likely to go at around the same price, with a proper surrey and many good bits, no gearbox though

Edited August 26, 2014 by Geko

[boxofbits]

It looks worth the money in that it is complete, original and many of the parts are re-usable.

 

However, if the buyer is outsourcing the work there is a heck of a lot of money involved.

 

This has got to be a home project to make it pay, but daunting either way!

[Dave Smith]

Alex

 

I can solve the problem why it appears to be Taxed but with no MOT, which is due to it being placed (V5) on the DVLA system before SORN was introduced but never taxed or sorn since the introduction of sorn. There is no legal requirement for the owner to declare it being sorn. It appears one way the DVLA can fudge their system!

 

I have a Rover in the same position (not condition) and that comes up as being taxed but no MOT. The last time that was taxed was in 1977, now very close to coming back on the road.

 

Dave

Edited August 26, 2014 by Dave Smith

[stillp]

The last time that was taxed was in 1977, now very close to coming back on the road.

 

It doesn't do to rush these things!

Edited August 26, 2014 by stillp