JD Classics, what have they been up to?

[RichB]

Doofus said:

Hence we see things like OI Aston Martins rising because DB5s are out of reach. Realistically, if you want a DB5, because your uncle had one when you were a kid, or somesuch, an OI isn't going to be a suitable substitute.

I guess you mean the AMV8 Osacar India (or otherwise)... These are very different beasts to the the previous David Brown cars so I doubt anyone would by an AMV8 thinking of it a substitute for a DB5. That said, I loved the AMV8 Vantage when I was a teenager.

[Doofus]

RichB said:

I guess you mean the AMV8 Osacar India (or otherwise)... These are very different beasts to the the previous David Brown cars so I doubt anyone would by an AMV8 thinking of it a substitute for a DB5. That said, I loved the AMV8 Vantage when I was a teenager.

That's my point. V8 Saloons, and DBSs are increasing, and many pundits will tell you it's the halo effect of the DB cars.

[RichB]

Indeed...

[cardigankid]

RichB said:

cardigankid said:

I hope that I do understand classics...

The fact that you've owned a few doesn't mean it's in your blood and when you pose questions like this;

cardigankid said:

Right now, you can buy low mileage Bentleys, Aston Martins, Porsches or BMW M-cars which would run rings round most of the classics. Why buy a Bentley Continental R, which is a museum piece, for £1m, when you can buy a new Mulsanne, or Black Badge Ghost, which are better cars in every measurable way

It suggests to me you don’t. I have a 1958 Aston, which by your measure I should sell and buy a DB11 and pocket the difference but that completely misses the point of owning and driving a classic.

That’s not what I am saying at all. In the end I am asking just how you define a classic. Back in the day there were those who derided anything post-1931 in similar terms to those who today deride relatively modern cars. The definition would surely relate to history, tradition, design and engineering qualities, and the fact that the experience may not be masochistic is not particularly important. People forget that these cars were not designed to be awkward or uncomfortable, that was the stage of technology at that time. In some cases, Bentley for example, they were designed to be the best that money could buy, and in that respect bear a direct comparison with today’s Rolls-Royces and Bentleys. Although my own cars are relatively modern, I find it advisable to be a fully paid up platinum member of the AA, as there is plenty to go wrong though I try to ensure that it doesn’t.

I applaud your 58 Aston - sounds marvellous. But I don’t know at what stage in the cycle you bought it. If you can afford to spend several hundred thousand pounds on a hobby I congratulate you. But what advice do you give to the many enthusiasts who cannot afford to do that?

What I am saying to them is exactly the same as I found in the late sixties. In those days you couldn’t give away old DB’s TR’s or E Types, and many of them were proper buckets. Today there are plenty of very fine cars worthy of TLC which they can acquire for a few tens of thousands or even a few thousand (986 Boxster?) which are just as much classics as your Aston, if rather less grand (not that that is meant as a criticism) provided that their prime intention is not to brag about how much it is worth, which is an attitude I find a little unpleasant.

Edited by cardigankid on Sunday 1st April 23:41

[lowdrag]

This is all old stuff being recycled chaps. I love my Jaguars; I anguish as to whether I should sell one and pay off the kids' mortgages from time to time, then I take the car out and come back with such an insane grin that I know I can't sell it. I am fairly sure there is a crash coming when venture capitalists are getting involved in the market and we have classic magazines talking about the "Hagi Index". I should sell because each of my cars is worth more than my home is. I should have sold my E-type in 1990 and didn't, and I won't sell now. The monetary value doesn't touch my soul, whereas the sound of that straight six with its tip of the hat silencer does. I am an addict, and an addict needs his drugs, and all I have to do is think of the open road, or, if the need is too great pick up the keys and venture forth. The whirr of the starter is like the needle going into my vein, the expectations so great. The sound of the beast awakening must be akin to the explosion in the brain as the drug hits, but in my case the coming down is gentle, there is no need for a daily fix. just the satisfaction of the knowledge that I can have one any time I need, day or night, summer or winter.

I agonised over spending what I did on my cars in the day, have stayed with them through thick and thin, and here they stay. For what use is the money if I sell? A pile of printed paper, a few extra zeros at the bank, and a barren life.

[RichB]

cardigankid said:

That’s not what I am saying at all... <clip>

Maybe I misunderstood you. Owned the Aston just over 10 years. Cost me around what you'd have paid for a new Boxster S back then so not exactly a cheap purchase, had a deposit on a new V8Vantage but decided my heart was really into classics. I've spent a few bob on it yes, the full engine rebuild and gearbox refurb was the most costly a couple of years ago but like Lowdrag says, it put a huge smile on my face and as you may have seen from some of my other posts it get used, hard. Memorable moments like a track session at Monza, getting stuck up the Stelvio Pass and many sunny drives in France are priceless. The kids can do with it what they want when I'm gone.

[aeropilot]

cardigankid said:

What I am saying to them is exactly the same as I found in the late sixties. In those days you couldn’t give away old DB’s TR’s or E Types, and many of them were proper buckets. Today there are plenty of very fine cars worthy of TLC which they can acquire for a few tens of thousands or even a few thousand (986 Boxster?) which are just as much classics as your Aston, if rather less grand (not that that is meant as a criticism) provided that their prime intention is not to brag about how much it is worth, which is an attitude I find a little unpleasant.

Proof you really don't get it.

Of course you couldn't give away an old DB or whatever in the late 60's, they were just 'used cars' as people were chopping them in for what ever newer car of the day they were buyer, just as first owners of 7-8 year old Boxsters or whatever today are doing for a new F-Type or newer Boxster etc.
You are trying to compare the used car market of one era with the classic car market, by citing the used car market of today?

Saying people should buy a modern used car instead of buying a classic, is fundamentally not understanding the very reason people want to buy an old car

[iSore]

However, when a D Type sells for 15 million quid, and a Supermarine Spitfire - one that saw action in Europe - is worth 3 million or so....and a 250GTO is worth 25 million........ It certainly adds perspective.

Not comparable? I'm not so sure. They're all beautiful, evocative old machines but I bet a Spitfire is a tad* more exciting.

I know who gets the best bragging rights down the pub as well.

[iSore]

aeropilot said:

Proof you really don't get it.

Of course you couldn't give away an old DB or whatever in the late 60's, they were just 'used cars' as people were chopping them in for what ever newer car of the day they were buyer, just as first owners of 7-8 year old Boxsters or whatever today are doing for a new F-Type or newer Boxster etc.
You are trying to compare the used car market of one era with the classic car market, by citing the used car market of today?

Saying people should buy a modern used car instead of buying a classic, is fundamentally not understanding the very reason people want to buy an old car

He gets it, but he's trying to justify the often insane prices paid for these cars. Ten grand for a Mark 3 Cortina? I love old cars and would use one over a modern, but not at any cost. Very often, crushing disappointment follows when you find a DB4 is actually not very good. It's old, noisy and a bit exciting but Christ, did I really pay all that money for this?

The smart folk bought these cars when they were worth the same as a new 1300 Astra, not the ones buying now.

[TooMany2cvs]

steve2 said:

I was lucky enough to win a place to have a tour around JD Classics last year...

"lucky enough to win a place to have a tour"...

It's a fking second-hand car showroom. No more, no less.

[aeropilot]

iSore said:

However, when a D Type sells for 15 million quid, and a Supermarine Spitfire - one that saw action in Europe - is worth 3 million or so....and a 250GTO is worth 25 million........ It certainly adds perspective.

Not comparable? I'm not so sure. They're all beautiful, evocative old machines but I bet a Spitfire is a tad* more exciting.

A lot more exciting, yes, but a LOT more expensive to run, assuming that you have enough hours to be able to fly one, but, actually it is a valid comparison, if only for the relative increase in value over the same time period.
Easier to buy a car and store, even if you don't drive it, than a WW2 warbird, hence the bigger value gain over the same time period for the D-Type or GTO over a Spit or P-51.

[a8hex]

iSore said:

However, when a D Type sells for 15 million quid, and a Supermarine Spitfire - one that saw action in Europe - is worth 3 million or so....and a 250GTO is worth 25 million........ It certainly adds perspective.

Not comparable? I'm not so sure. They're all beautiful, evocative old machines but I bet a Spitfire is a tad* more exciting.

I know who gets the best bragging rights down the pub as well.

The first D-Type I blagged a ride in had just been acquired from it's previous owner who'd sold it to fund adding to his plane collection. I'd met him a few months earlier and got chatting when we was looking over my Jag, he commented he'd come to the show in his Spitfire since he couldn't get his Mustang to start that morning. The green flying suit we was wearing kind of gave away the context of the conversation.
To put these prices into context a dirty piece of canvas can be "worth" ten times those numbers, any wouldn't give you any bragging rights down the pub.

[iSore]

I wonder what Spitfire running costs are? Insurance, fuel, storage (Duxford?), maintenance. Horrendous I should think. I'd have one, but I'm odd - at the OGP at the Nurburgring 10 or 15 years ago I walked past 2 or 3 250GTO's to look at a stunning 1974 308GT4 in metallic brown with red velour trim.

The big value cars have no appeal to me anyway. I'd always have a seventies V8 Aston over a DB5, a 250GTE over a GTO and so on. Nothing to do with values, I just prefer them.

[aeropilot]

iSore said:

I wonder what Spitfire running costs are? Insurance, fuel, storage (Duxford?), maintenance. Horrendous I should think.

Around £3000 per flying hour I think is the oft quoted sum.

Couple of hundred k for a Merlin overhaul.

[Dr Jekyll]

aeropilot said:

iSore said:

I wonder what Spitfire running costs are? Insurance, fuel, storage (Duxford?), maintenance. Horrendous I should think.

Around £3000 per flying hour I think is the oft quoted sum.

Couple of hundred k for a Merlin overhaul.

I saw some figures a few years back of £50,000 a year to keep it insured and stored and another £50,000 a year for routine maintenance.. Plus another £1000 a flying hour in fuel and maintenance including £400 fuel and £300 towards the 500 hour engine overhaul.

So you could probably still manage £3000 an hour if you can fly it a lot.

[iSore]

Sounds like value!

[Doofus]

iSore said:

The smart folk bought these cars when they were worth the same as a new 1300 Astra, not the ones buying now.

That's simply not the case, as long as prices continue to rise. We all have our own ideas about the intrinsic value of any particular car, but if this thread is about anything, it's about the investment in hyped commodities by people who couldn't give a stuff about the product as long as there's a financial return..

[a8hex]

Doofus said:

but if this thread is about anything, it's about the investment in hyped commodities by people who couldn't give a stuff about the product as long as there's a financial return..

Funny, I thought this thread was about whether if a dealer says he's got a client who wishes to sell a car to a collector and he's prepared to handle the purchase for a certain sum, whether the dealer is actually trying to sell the collector a car which he actually owns and the "I know a seller" is fictitious.

[lowdrag]

Oh Ken, you are really expecting people to look back further than two posts? Get real.This is the outernet. The internet is for people who actually bother.

[Doofus]

a8hex said:

Doofus said:

but if this thread is about anything, it's about the investment in hyped commodities by people who couldn't give a stuff about the product as long as there's a financial return..

Funny, I thought this thread was about whether if a dealer says he's got a client who wishes to sell a car to a collector and he's prepared to handle the purchase for a certain sum, whether the dealer is actually trying to sell the collector a car which he actually owns and the "I know a seller" is fictitious.

In this context, they are the same thing

One party is hyping a commodity to an ignorant buyer for financial gain.