Discussion
And the cynic in me sees the many folk, dealers and auctioneers who genuinely believe the market values, make the market hype and drive up prices...all believing they belong to some pseudo-exclusive club when all along they're simply custodians of Aston's whilst bouncing on their mortal coils.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with this for those who 'want to own' an expensive classic but one has to ask are they really worth some of the crazy sale prices? Compared to some other classic car makes, do they truly represent good value? Unfortunately market trend values will naturally drag along other makes and models with them i.e. AC Ace and Acecca, but there are still some makes which, by comparison, represent excellent value in terms of driver appeal, performance, style, manufacture history and racing success.
For me, I side with Sir William and Browns Lane...a 3.4 MKII for shopping, an XKSS for the odd track day and daily commuting in the fifth dimension, a Suffolk SS100 for traditional long distance open-top touring...all topped off with a Jensen CV8 for those days when only something a little different will do.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with this for those who 'want to own' an expensive classic but one has to ask are they really worth some of the crazy sale prices? Compared to some other classic car makes, do they truly represent good value? Unfortunately market trend values will naturally drag along other makes and models with them i.e. AC Ace and Acecca, but there are still some makes which, by comparison, represent excellent value in terms of driver appeal, performance, style, manufacture history and racing success.
For me, I side with Sir William and Browns Lane...a 3.4 MKII for shopping, an XKSS for the odd track day and daily commuting in the fifth dimension, a Suffolk SS100 for traditional long distance open-top touring...all topped off with a Jensen CV8 for those days when only something a little different will do.
exkay said:
Wghats with the prices of Astons...why such ridulous amounts being asked ? surely the XK is a much nicer looking car
you do know they are different cars, built differently. You might as well add Ferrari v Maserati too. But for Astons, the handbuilt adds cachet if not actual quality, they are rare, arguably better looking (depending on what you are comparing to what of course) have a better name, and of course there's always Bond.
It does amuse me to see the prices of once unloved cars soar to silly heights because they were in a film or a TV series, or somehow just perfectly represent their time. So nostalgia and lost youth spike the price of a knackered but very old Mini to a daft 40k. What is clear is that it isn't the car's fault so perfectly OK just to judge on aesthetics. Which as a Lotus man(in real life ) and a Ferrari man (in my dreams) is where I struggle with both Astons and Jaguars . The E Type.. well it's all a bit obvious isn't it. some lovely curves but comically narrow track and huge waste of space- big car, tiny cockpit. Heresy to many - sorry.The Jags which look good to me are XK150 (but not the others)and XJ6/12 from launch until early 80s- fabulous stance. Astons..like most people I think they all look identical since DB7; original DBS was Ok in a flash sort of way . DB 6- now you're talking . DB5 - even better- and not for the 007 connection either.DB4 - probably sexiest of all.But give me an Elan and a Dino anyday thanks.
Edited by coppice on Sunday 3rd February 09:22
A bit O/T, but can someone explain to me the enormous difference between the cost of an XK and Aston engine rebuild? For me, a piston in one high performance engine shouldn't cost much more - if at all - than in the other, nor should cams etc., but am I cynical in thinking that Aston owners are perceived - and I guess have - deeper pockets than Jaguar owners, so they charge accordingly? I have heard tales of £15,000 upwards for an Aston rebuild, but an XK rebuild can be had for around £4,000. I mean, I am comparing one straight six with another here.
lowdrag said:
A bit O/T, but can someone explain to me the enormous difference between the cost of an XK and Aston engine rebuild? For me, a piston in one high performance engine shouldn't cost much more - if at all - than in the other, nor should cams etc., but am I cynical in thinking that Aston owners are perceived - and I guess have - deeper pockets than Jaguar owners, so they charge accordingly? I have heard tales of £15,000 upwards for an Aston rebuild, but an XK rebuild can be had for around £4,000. I mean, I am comparing one straight six with another here.
I suspect its partly this, party their percieved ability to pay (i have overheard conversations like yes you shell bearings did need doing...i know you only gave it to us for an oil change), partly some odd sonbbery about how much their mechanic charges for work- alan clark was very good at this, but the big difference is that they built many 000 of Xk engines, so parts are cheaper (things ike c type heads excluded, of course) and comparatively few aston engines made, and aston were never any good at making parts for stock, and they sold a lot f stock off about 10 years ao. So many parts are from a diminishng supply of second hand parts, or very new.
williamp said:
I suspect its partly this, party their percieved ability to pay (i have overheard conversations like yes you shell bearings did need doing...i know you only gave it to us for an oil change), partly some odd sonbbery about how much their mechanic charges for work- alan clark was very good at this, but the big difference is that they built many 000 of Xk engines, so parts are cheaper (things ike c type heads excluded, of course) and comparatively few aston engines made, and aston were never any good at making parts for stock, and they sold a lot f stock off about 10 years ao. So many parts are from a diminishng supply of second hand parts, or very new.
exkay said:
Well, the lines of a 120 Roadster or a 120FHC does it for me, far above an Aston, even tho Roger and co drove one in the film 
While your Pistonheads name reveals your allegiances I would venture to suggest the argument is not as one sided as you suggest 
Edited by RichB on Sunday 3rd February 19:40
lowdrag said:
A bit O/T, but can someone explain to me the enormous difference between the cost of an XK and Aston engine rebuild? For me, a piston in one high performance engine shouldn't cost much more - if at all - than in the other, nor should cams etc., but am I cynical in thinking that Aston owners are perceived - and I guess have - deeper pockets than Jaguar owners, so they charge accordingly? I have heard tales of £15,000 upwards for an Aston rebuild, but an XK rebuild can be had for around £4,000. I mean, I am comparing one straight six with another here.
No different as to why a Breitling should cost so much more than a Casio, they both perform exactly the same function and probably to the same accuracy.Having said that though I'll let you guess which one I have on my wrist
LordBretSinclair said:
No different as to why a Breitling should cost so much more than a Casio, they both perform exactly the same function and probably to the same accuracy.
Having said that though I'll let you guess which one I have on my wrist
How does that equate to the price of pistons exactly ?Having said that though I'll let you guess which one I have on my wrist
When I was a schoolboy in the 60s Aston's had a special glamour as I hardly ever saw one and on paper at least they were one of the few cars quicker than an E type {in Vantage spec anyway}. I've done runs like the Euroclassic and found actually that an unmodified Aston is not as quick as an unmodified series 1 and that if we had had Top Gear style power laps in those days the Jag would have been much faster.
Of course partly this is because the Aston is more of a GT and cars like that {eg Jensen Interceptor etc} tend to be more designed for high speed cruising than track stuff but it has made me wonder why everything the Aston's straight 6 seems to cost 5 times as much as on Jag's very similar looking XK.
These days if I won the lottery I'd go for the XK or E type Jag over any of the Astons of that period though I must admit I'd be tempted by a DB7 V-12 at the right price before they become classics.
Bill
Of course partly this is because the Aston is more of a GT and cars like that {eg Jensen Interceptor etc} tend to be more designed for high speed cruising than track stuff but it has made me wonder why everything the Aston's straight 6 seems to cost 5 times as much as on Jag's very similar looking XK.
These days if I won the lottery I'd go for the XK or E type Jag over any of the Astons of that period though I must admit I'd be tempted by a DB7 V-12 at the right price before they become classics.
Bill
lowdrag said:
A bit O/T, but can someone explain to me the enormous difference between the cost of an XK and Aston engine rebuild? For me, a piston in one high performance engine shouldn't cost much more - if at all - than in the other, nor should cams etc., but am I cynical in thinking that Aston owners are perceived - and I guess have - deeper pockets than Jaguar owners, so they charge accordingly? I have heard tales of £15,000 upwards for an Aston rebuild, but an XK rebuild can be had for around £4,000. I mean, I am comparing one straight six with another here.
I would challenge anyone that says that they could rebuild an XK engine to a proper standard for £4,000. maybe at home with some very careful parts research and writing off the true cost of labour. It takes quite a few hours to build one properly too.WJM said:
When I was a schoolboy in the 60s Aston's had a special glamour as I hardly ever saw one and on paper at least they were one of the few cars quicker than an E type {in Vantage spec anyway}. I've done runs like the Euroclassic and found actually that an unmodified Aston is not as quick as an unmodified series 1 and that if we had had Top Gear style power laps in those days the Jag would have been much faster.
Of course partly this is because the Aston is more of a GT and cars like that {eg Jensen Interceptor etc} tend to be more designed for high speed cruising than track stuff but it has made me wonder why everything the Aston's straight 6 seems to cost 5 times as much as on Jag's very similar looking XK.
These days if I won the lottery I'd go for the XK or E type Jag over any of the Astons of that period though I must admit I'd be tempted by a DB7 V-12 at the right price before they become classics.
Bill
Slightly ironic that the E Type's successor ended up hidden inside an Aston body shape, leading on to considerable success for Aston in recent years. Of course partly this is because the Aston is more of a GT and cars like that {eg Jensen Interceptor etc} tend to be more designed for high speed cruising than track stuff but it has made me wonder why everything the Aston's straight 6 seems to cost 5 times as much as on Jag's very similar looking XK.
These days if I won the lottery I'd go for the XK or E type Jag over any of the Astons of that period though I must admit I'd be tempted by a DB7 V-12 at the right price before they become classics.
Bill
LordBretSinclair said:
lowdrag said:
A bit O/T, but can someone explain to me the enormous difference between the cost of an XK and Aston engine rebuild? For me, a piston in one high performance engine shouldn't cost much more - if at all - than in the other, nor should cams etc., but am I cynical in thinking that Aston owners are perceived - and I guess have - deeper pockets than Jaguar owners, so they charge accordingly? I have heard tales of £15,000 upwards for an Aston rebuild, but an XK rebuild can be had for around £4,000. I mean, I am comparing one straight six with another here.
No different as to why a Breitling should cost so much more than a Casio, they both perform exactly the same function and probably to the same accuracy.Having said that though I'll let you guess which one I have on my wrist
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff