triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Another Show Car (65 TR4) FOR SALE

To: Chris Lillja <Chris_Lillja@Pupress.Princeton.Edu>
Subject: Re: Another Show Car (65 TR4) FOR SALE
From: Craig Richburg <richburg@bellatlantic.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:16:55 -0400
Cc: Triumphs@Autox.Team.Net
References: <199710101510.LAA23343@mail.pupress.princeton.edu>
Dr. Richburg wrote:

Hello Chris,

It must be in the coffee.  What type is that, maybe I'll talk my
patients into some.

You appear to not know much about what you drive.  There is nothing
"lame" about my 65 TR4.  There is probably $18,000 worth of work in this
car.  More money then you probably made last year.  If you are really a
Triumph lover, your response would be on the car, not the marketing of
it.  I guess you are in the news business instead of the "Triumph Car
Driving Business" and it would be more interesting to report on the
marketing of a rare classic car vs. the car itself.

You know, there's a big difference in cars produced on Dec. 31 and Jan.
2.  That difference is 1964 vs. 1965.  In 1965 only 250 were made, 3
left in England, there remainder were exported to other countries.  This
fact is an added value to collectors of fine automobiles like my 65 TR4.
Remember, this is not the theoretical world of education, but rather the
business world of reality.

For your information, the commission number is CT40287. If you are
interested, come over and inspect the car and maybe we could talk about
what's in the news.

Craig Richburg



Chris Lillja wrote:
> 
> Dr. Richburg --
> 
> The point is -- that lame attempts to "market" what is probably a
> perfectly nice TR4, to people who love Triumphs anyway -- make it
> look suspect in the eyes of the very people who might buy it.
> 
> So my history book sez the final TR4 was built on Jan 6, 1965 and
> had the commission number CT40304. With 250 made in calender year
> 1965, that would make the first "1965" TR4 CT40054. Yes -- they
> should be in sequence and there are no gaps reported in this
> period...
> 
> Now the question at hand is does the commission number of this
> car fall in this sequence CT40054 - CT40304? If not it is merely a
> 1964 (or earlier) that wasn't bought and titled until 1965.
> 
> So what's that Comm. # doc?
> 
> It's pretty academic considering there should be no difference
> between a car produced on Dec. 31 (say CT40053) and Jan. 2....
> 
> "Still ride in triumph over all mischance..." - Shakespeare
> 
> Chris Lillja
> TR4A
> Norton Commando
> Spit MKIV


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>