Brake pipe corrosion common on early Vantages?

[NickXX]

Hi all,

I've seen what seems to be a nice vh2 vantage pop up in my perfect spec and am tempted to look at it over the weekend. On paper, it looks great (1 owner, famsh), but doing an MOT check seems to reveal some nasties;

Advisory notice item(s)
Offside Rear position lamp(s) has light sources not illuminating, but not more than 50% (1.1.A.3b)
Nearside Front Brake hose has slight corrosion to ferrules (3.6.B.4e)
Offside Front Brake hose has slight corrosion to ferrules (3.6.B.4e)
Nearside Front Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Front Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Inner Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Outer Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)

The rear lamp has been a recurring advisory for a few years, but the brake pipe advisories are all new. Is this a common thing on an early Vantage? Could it be a clue that it's lived near the sea (or even been driven on a beach?!).

http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/a...

I'll give the dealer a call tomorrow, but any critique would be appreciated!

Thanks,
Nick

[divetheworld]

Doesn't state much on the spec at all. No Satnav etc?

[Murph7355]

Rear lights are expensive. So much so that the car doesn't seem "cheap" to me.

Surface corrosion on ferrules of any of the hoses on the car is not uncommon IMO.

Corrosion on the actual hoses possibly less so. Depends what they're referring to.

[NickXX]

Thanks guys. Would be interesting to know if the garage has sorted any of the advisories, so I'll give them a call. I didn't actually spot that it didn't have navigation - is this generally an issue for resale? Given the mileage, I'm thinking it's maybe worth closer to the £31-32k mark (with the rear light fixed!).

[Jon39]

NickXX said:

.....navigation - is this generally an issue for resale?

SatNav does seem to be expected by buyers. Ironic really, because we all criticise it for not being very good.

Resale difficulties might include the mileage, and 'complimented by iron core'. I think they mean Iron Ore.

[8Tech]

The taillight reference just means one or more LED's are not working, and as it is just an advisory, you dont need to do anything about it for now.

The minor surface rust is again just an advisory and may be a critical tester covering himself just in case someone sells it and this is mentioned on an inspection without him mentioning it on the MOT.

[shunt]

I've a Dec 2005 V8 Vantage in Meteorite with Nav, clear rear lights and only 35K miles. PM me if you're interested.

[Murph7355]

8Tech said:

The taillight reference just means one or more LED's are not working...
....

That are very expensive for someone not prepared to dismantle a light unit to rectify. With so many cars available without this fault, why buy one with it unless the price of replacement is accounted for? (Which it doesn't look to be to me, with the lack of other extras etc).

[The Surveyor]

Jon39 said:

NickXX said:

.....navigation - is this generally an issue for resale?

SatNav does seem to be expected by buyers. Ironic really, because we all criticise it for not being very good.

Looking at the pictures, it does have the sat-nav, certainly has the controls on the dash and the flap in the ski-slope. The Vantages I've seen without sat-nav have the joy-stick and buttons blanked over. There can't be many that didn't have sat-nav?

[NickXX]

Yeah, it does look like it has nav (maybe it doesn't work?!). The car looks quite clean from the pictures- I guess my main concern now is whether or not the mileage (+ another 10,000 or so) would make it difficult to sell in 12-18 months.

[8Tech]

Murph7355 said:

8Tech said:

The taillight reference just means one or more LED's are not working...
....

That are very expensive for someone not prepared to dismantle a light unit to rectify. With so many cars available without this fault, why buy one with it unless the price of replacement is accounted for? (Which it doesn't look to be to me, with the lack of other extras etc).

In the overall cost of the purchase, the cost of a single taillight that can often be purchased used for around £100.00 seems not to be a particular issue as it is not required to actually enjoy the car.

[NickXX]

Is this really a VH2? The seats don't look like 2007 ones (or could these be an optional seat spec?).

[JS1500]

Mine had an advisory for corroded front brake pipes.

I would say it's a little overpriced for a pre-facelift with quite high mileage. I paid that for my 2007 with 16k less on the clock and that was 15 months ago and included a 13 month warranty (£1600). I could be wrong though - i've not checked prices recently!

[Grumpydev]

NickXX said:

Is this really a VH2? The seats don't look like 2007 ones (or could these be an optional seat spec?).

Looks pre-facelift to me, assuming they are photos of the actual car.

[Mr Ed]

I've just bought a 55 plate one of these with 42k on the clock for £33500 from Stratstones, I think that is over priced

[Murph7355]

8Tech said:

In the overall cost of the purchase, the cost of a single taillight that can often be purchased used for around £100.00 seems not to be a particular issue as it is not required to actually enjoy the car.

Potentially, but for so little money why would the vendor not sort it out and save a prospective purchaser a hassle?