George Mowat-Brown wrote:
(clip)
> The aesthetics of mark I over mark II are very much in the eye of the
> beholder, my own feeling is that the mark I version looks a bit nicer, but
> the multitude of mechanical improvements over the production life of this
> model means that the later ones are significantly better in a host of small
> ways.
I agree on your MK I versus MK II differences and prices would support my
purchase of an earlier model, but the 2000+ modification that R-R made over
lifetime of the car makes a later one more desirable for me. That and
a bit of an edge on reliability and wear and tear.
>
> The RREC [of G.B. http://www.rrec.co.uk/] used to claim that it was not
> an easy car for the owner to look after themselves; whilst this is true,
> and specialist help would be required for some of the jobs, it is not as
> complex as many a more recent car of more meagre origins! There are an
> awful lot of everything (if you take my meaning), so there are many more
> parts that require servicing/attention, or eventual replacement, but each
> individual part is not that complex. When given regular attention, basing
> this statement on those that friends have owned (I seem to be going down
> the earlier-model route - crazy, I know, but there is that worm inside all
> of us that takes different forms!), the T-type or Shadow II can be reliable
> and comfortable to drive. By European standards, it is a large car, but an
> easy one to drive and place on the road.
>
> The ride-leveling system takes a bit of sorting out, so check the one you
> are buying - take a couple of sacks of something heavy [people - not in
> sacks! - will do], plonk them in the boot/trunk, start the car and see if
> it levels off within half a minute. The $4,000 brake job is a reality, but
> again, many of the brake units can be overhauled (not something R-R dealers
> over here do, they just replace, but then, you would have to know that many
> of the parts are similar to those used by Citroen! - there used to be a
> Citroen specialist in the U.K. who also overhauled all these units).
Everyone I have talked to (including trained R-R machanics as well as educated
DIY folks) all agreed the hydraulics -- both brakes and load-leveling -- are
the most routine $$-intensive items to consider. One prospective seller I
talked to had the brakes re-done but, after buying the car on impulse and having
it for two years, didn't even know of the complex load-leveling system. "I
don't think my car has that option." was his reply (1980 Shadow II). I didn't
pursue the conversation any further as he obviously didn't know his own car.
>
> The brake jobs would come under my general advice, look for a car where
> there is a virtually complete service schedule, evidence of a recent
> COMPLETE brake job, or cheap enough to allow you to have these items
> attended to. The engine is not complex, neither is the G.M. derived
> gearbox. The electrical system is simple in terms of function, complex in
> terms of miles of it! Quite a few of the solenoids etc. are frightfully
> expensive is bought as a R-R spare part, but many are common to quite cheap
> plumbing switches etc. (really, there was a fairly recent article in the
> English magazine 'Practical Classics' where someone was commenting upon
> this).
Always good to know. I wonder if those articles ever make it online ...?
>
> As far as corrosion goes, the vehicle is not too bad (but remember the
> bodies were made by Pressed Steel Fisher - the same as Morris, then Rover,
> of the period), the wheelarches (front and rear) and bits of the boot floor
> seem to be the most prone to rot (check the dryness of the carpet in the
> boot).
Good advice...I'll check...thank you.
>
> Obviously, they are not a cheap car to run, but one in good condition when
> you buy it should be a manageable prospect and you should not suffer the
> extremely high rates of depreciation of a new car (actually, this model has
> increased in price a little over the last year or two, but seems to be
> about as cheap as they are ever likely to get).
>
> You do not mention which books you have looked at, the two that would come
> to my mind would be:
>
> Robson, G 'A collector's Guide Vol. 3: The Rolls-Royce and Bentley Shadow,
> Corniche, Camargue 1965-85' Motor Racing Publications, 1985/90
>
> Bobbitt, M, 'Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow & Bentley T-Series' Veloce, 1996
> [This one is excellent on the history, the other might be better for the
> intending purchaser]
I have read cover-to-cover the second book and was unaware of the first. I'll
put a call into our local bookstores to see if they can locate me a copy.
>
> Get yourself the factory manual if you intend to look after it yourself!
Do you have a source for the factory manual? I'm surprised they make them
available to the public.
(rest clipped)
Thanks a lot for your insights and feedback. I always welcome more
experience into my decisions ...
Cheers,
Carl
|