Yellow SEAC @ Barons - sold £6,600!
Discussion
1986 TVR 420SEAC Convertible-Quite rare 4.2 litre-Sold £6,600+Premium
www.barons-auctions.com/lots/D659YLP.htm
Doesn't quite seem the bargain it could have been but suppose it depends on whether authenticity can be proven.
Either a dealer and we will see it being punted once more to the faithful - or could it have been someone on here?
www.barons-auctions.com/lots/D659YLP.htm
Doesn't quite seem the bargain it could have been but suppose it depends on whether authenticity can be proven.
Either a dealer and we will see it being punted once more to the faithful - or could it have been someone on here?
2 sheds said:
I wonder what happens if you buy a car at auction only to find that its not the model descibed by the Auctioneer/ sales sheet. ?
Tim
Did you read the bit about a letter from the factory stating it was a SEAC but had a 350 vin etc, I think I'd need a bit more convincing than that myself
. Still looks like a 350 with a bad body kit to me, all IMHO obviously 
. Harry
Harry
It is most likely to be a 420SE with the bumper removed and the wrong lights fitted. Because TVR never had type approval for the larger engined cars many were registered as 350's but with larger engines( even 400SE's). 420SE's were basically 4.2 litre engined 390's with the 390 body. This has been fitted with the SEAC rear spoiler to make it look more like a SEAC.Some even had trailing arm rear suspension.Should be worth more but that is unfortunately the state of the wedge market. Good prospect for the TVR CC Challenge.
There's more to it than that Steve. The front end, wheel arches (F&R) and sills are different, partly to accomodate wider wheels and tyres, then there are the brakes...and my eyes are not good enough to see if those are the larger injectors. This is unmistakenly advertised as a SEAC not an SE. This is an 86 car with 350 wheels and tyres, modified front spoiler and an 89ish rear aerial. Iwonder who owns it now.
Obviously a tarted 350/ 390 to my eyes. It has some of the 'shell features of my '87 390, but not all, yet more than the early 390 as reviewed by the car mags back then. I don't believe a non-SEAC-shape car got the boot spoiler. Losing the front bumper is an attempt to recreate the short-nose styling. Badly.
The dash, naff front lights and 420SEAC logos are the worst bits: left alone it would have been a nice 390/420SE even if scruffy. Is it REALLY a 4.2 engine? The NCK engine number is 010: were NCK making 4.2s that early in their involvement?
Looks like another attempt (like the one in the 'owners' page on tvrwedgepages) to pass one model off as another. Twats like this get the motor industry a bad name.
Ian
The dash, naff front lights and 420SEAC logos are the worst bits: left alone it would have been a nice 390/420SE even if scruffy. Is it REALLY a 4.2 engine? The NCK engine number is 010: were NCK making 4.2s that early in their involvement?
Looks like another attempt (like the one in the 'owners' page on tvrwedgepages) to pass one model off as another. Twats like this get the motor industry a bad name.
Ian
It does seem odd - although this letter from the factory that's quoted makes this even more interesting - according to the chassis no. the car was made in Feb 86 - would this make it one of the first SEACs made? - perhaps the first owner didn't like the SEAC look (mad thought) and requested a 390 body - not completely beyond the realms of possibility. Would be interesting to see original photos. In relation to the scoop - I've seen at least 5 non SEAC wedges with the spoiler, including a 400 for sale on Exchange and Mart at the moment - curious-er and curious-er
I've seen a couple of 4.2 Engined 390SE's in my Wedge time as per Steve Gamekeepers note. At around the change to the "big engined Wedges", circ mid 80's, quite a few funny things took place during 'experimentation' at the factory and also as a consequence of customer requests.
I got in touch with Barons and also sent them a genuine SEAC body picture and mentioned the chassis differences - they said they'd check the car when it came in but did mention the letter from the factory saying it's a SEAC, (the guy who contacted me had driven a 450 SEAC).
IMHO if it don't have the SEAC body style and the SEAC adjustable chassis and at least a 4.2 lump then no matter how many letters, etc, etc it ain't a SEAC.
As one of the gang have said here it is a tidy looking car from the photo's the question is; is it a unique piece of our Wedge history thus £6.6k is cheap or is it a bitza but just recon'd thus IMHO £6.6k is steep.
Either way lets hope the owner joins here and lets be welcoming after all
IT's A WEDGE.
GB
I got in touch with Barons and also sent them a genuine SEAC body picture and mentioned the chassis differences - they said they'd check the car when it came in but did mention the letter from the factory saying it's a SEAC, (the guy who contacted me had driven a 450 SEAC).
IMHO if it don't have the SEAC body style and the SEAC adjustable chassis and at least a 4.2 lump then no matter how many letters, etc, etc it ain't a SEAC.
As one of the gang have said here it is a tidy looking car from the photo's the question is; is it a unique piece of our Wedge history thus £6.6k is cheap or is it a bitza but just recon'd thus IMHO £6.6k is steep.
Either way lets hope the owner joins here and lets be welcoming after all
IT's A WEDGE. GB
Get up on the wrong side of bed mungo? - would of thought with the extra hour you'd be more relaxed. 
In retrospect I would think Steves initial guess was the closest - either way I wouldn't mind a refurbished 4.2 engined wedge for that money, it is a nice looking car and will no doubt have the right soundtrack - as for badging it incorrectly - naughty, but if you really wanted an SEAC (correct in body and engine) then it would be hoped you would know what you were looking at. 
In retrospect I would think Steves initial guess was the closest - either way I wouldn't mind a refurbished 4.2 engined wedge for that money, it is a nice looking car and will no doubt have the right soundtrack - as for badging it incorrectly - naughty, but if you really wanted an SEAC (correct in body and engine) then it would be hoped you would know what you were looking at. Mungo:
It's not really a bad bodykit: the flared arches were added over time, and the sills, spoilers etc were modified to blend in with the flares. If you look at the sill you'll see it's flared at the back, but not at the front. On my car, for example, it's flared at both ends to blend in with the (flared) shell, but if you take an early 390SE, the only different bits were the front spoiler and the rear low wing; there were no flares at all.
So this could be an early-mid production 390SE or, indeed, a 420SE.... the only really 'wrong' bits are the wing and the front lights/ no bumper. The dash is a matter of taste (or lack of it) I guess
As you say, a true SEAC it ain't.
Ian
It's not really a bad bodykit: the flared arches were added over time, and the sills, spoilers etc were modified to blend in with the flares. If you look at the sill you'll see it's flared at the back, but not at the front. On my car, for example, it's flared at both ends to blend in with the (flared) shell, but if you take an early 390SE, the only different bits were the front spoiler and the rear low wing; there were no flares at all.
So this could be an early-mid production 390SE or, indeed, a 420SE.... the only really 'wrong' bits are the wing and the front lights/ no bumper. The dash is a matter of taste (or lack of it) I guess
As you say, a true SEAC it ain't.
Ian
mungo said:
The thing is just an embarrasment to the TVR marque Seamus - The SEAC is a pretty special TVR model. There is no shame in modifying a 350i and putting in a 4.2 but to call it a SEAC is sacrilidge!
If it had 420i written on the side it would be acceptable.
Not disagreeing mungo -: purely making a suggestion that we are asuming all without anything but a few pictures (book by its cover and all that) - Let's say the buyer in 1986 ordered a 420SEAC and decided they prefered the 390 body on it (given TVRs ability to provide bespoke builds), TVR then gave it an SEAC badge and due to the order cocked up the chassis number. Only closer inspection of car/factory history/speaking to the original owner would tell for which none of us have that advantage at this time - just thinking latterally.. IMHO and for the record I agree this is likely a 420 SE but badged as SEAC which as previous stated IS naughty for which no-one would disagree. Still a fab car for the money.
Dont you just love that interiour too ?
I thought SEAC's had the funny handbrake that went under the dash, not the real thing ....
what can I add to this already mature thread ...
Sick colour .. Sick front lights, Sick interiour, sick the person that is trying to flog this as a SEAC.
I thought SEAC's had the funny handbrake that went under the dash, not the real thing ....
what can I add to this already mature thread ...
Sick colour .. Sick front lights, Sick interiour, sick the person that is trying to flog this as a SEAC.
jvaughan said:
Dont you just love that interiour too ?
I thought SEAC's had the funny handbrake that went under the dash, not the real thing ....
what can I add to this already mature thread ...
Sick colour .. Sick front lights, Sick interiour, sick the person that is trying to flog this as a SEAC.
jvaughan said:
Dont you just love that interiour too ?
I thought SEAC's had the funny handbrake that went under the dash, not the real thing ....
what can I add to this already mature thread ...
Sick colour .. Sick front lights, Sick interiour, sick the person that is trying to flog this as a SEAC.
Not as
as the new owner is gonna be if he buys it before finding this site.Gassing Station | Wedges | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff