>Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 09:48:56 +0000
>From: Michael Hargreave Mawson <OC@46thFoot.com>
>Subject: Re: Forwarded: triumphs in general
>
>On Sun, 26 Jan 2003, at around 13:27:05 local time, lists@autox.team.net
>wrote:
>
>
>>> From: L1J1S@aol.com
>>> Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 20:55:31 EST
>>> Subject: triumphs in general
>>>
>>>Listers. Trying to come up with a subjective opinion on the importantance
>>>and most desirable Triumphs today. With a general pool of
>>>TR2-3-4-4A-250-SPITFIRES-GT6- 6-7-8 what is the the choice for today and
>>>tomorrow?
>>
>>
>
>Much as I love Triumphs, I'm not sure that any really count as
>"important" cars.
>
As far as important Triumphs or for that matter any of the lower priced
mass produced sports cars go the only way the true collector world see
them as important is through documented competetion history. Such as the
factory Rally cars and Lemans cars, or the Sabrina engined cars. Nothing
else was low enough production or of a ground breaking design. Even
having a rare car doesn't guarantee it will be valuable. My 1963 Fait
Cabriolet was a hand built Pinninfarina car they built 15,000 of them
between 1958 and 1963 only 2200 came to North America. Triumph did
higher numbers of any single model of their sports cars in one year than
Fiat did in 5 years but this doesn't make the Fiat's collector values
any higher. The only Fiats of significant value are the ones that Carlo
Abarth massaged for competition and they go for 6 figures where as any
other Fiat is worth 10k max.
So my $0.02 on the subject is if you are buying a car as an investment
you are getting really bad financial advice, buy the car to drive it and
have fun with it.
Doug Hamilton
1960 Triumph TR3
1963 Fiat Cabriolet
/// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|