Is this restorable do you think?

  • Thread starter David J. Button
  • Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Tim Hobbs wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 16:24:35 +0000, "[email protected]"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>David J. Button wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4500441632&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT

>>
>>Door parts are available from the 101 club and, as it just so happens,
>>we are just about to remove a fully working 3.5litre V8 from our Ambi in
>>order to fit a diesel......
>>
>>Lizzy

>
>
> You're not pulling out the gearbox as well are you?
>
>


She isn't. I might be. I like the Disco box, but it might not be strong
enough.

Steve
 
On or around 7 Nov 2004 10:31:38 GMT, "Simon Atkinson" <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>What will ?160 buy these days? A half decent meal for two (sans wine),
>a couple of ordianaryish tyres. A single mens welted shoe. It's a tiny
>drop in the ocean compared to the running costs of our Land-Rovers (and
>lives generally).



well, I dunno about you, but my shoes and meals don't cost anything like
that much. Tyres, maybe.

but yeah, yer right, it's small fry compared to the cost of fuel and so on,
but then again, it's still a rip-off.

 
On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 12:48:03 +0000, Mr.Nice.
<mr.nice@*nospam*clara.co.uk> wrote:

>On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:31:04 +0000, Austin Shackles
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>well, I dunno about you, but my shoes and meals don't cost anything like
>>that much. Tyres, maybe.
>>
>>but yeah, yer right, it's small fry compared to the cost of fuel and so on,
>>but then again, it's still a rip-off.

>
>still better in my pocket than theirs ta very much.


I agree. I loose a fair whack of my money in tax of some form so a bit
less is nice!

£160 is still a fair bit to me!

It makes having a landrover as a second car much more feasable since
the only cost i have to worry about is the insurance (which is not
that much more than the tax would be!)

In the 4 years i've had my landy I've saved £640. Thats probably 6
months fuel costs for me! Makes it worth it in my mind!
 
Tom Woods wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 12:48:03 +0000, Mr.Nice.
> <mr.nice@*nospam*clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:31:04 +0000, Austin Shackles
> ><[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > well, I dunno about you, but my shoes and meals don't cost
> > > anything like that much. Tyres, maybe.
> > >
> > > but yeah, yer right, it's small fry compared to the cost of fuel
> > > and so on, but then again, it's still a rip-off.

> >
> > still better in my pocket than theirs ta very much.

>
> I agree. I loose a fair whack of my money in tax of some form so a bit
> less is nice!
>
> £160 is still a fair bit to me!
>
> It makes having a landrover as a second car much more feasable since
> the only cost i have to worry about is the insurance (which is not
> that much more than the tax would be!)
>
> In the 4 years i've had my landy I've saved £640. Thats probably 6
> months fuel costs for me! Makes it worth it in my mind!


I wish it was 6 months for me! More like 3 weeks fuel bills - but I do
a lot of miles.

Perhaps that's why (although I buy it with as much bad grace as I can
muster) I just don't understand why a nail made (allegedly) pre-72 is
worth more than a nicer example made later.

I think it's creating a false market for older vehicles - and a market
for ringing newer ones.
 
On Sunday, in article
<[email protected]>
mr.nice@*nospam*clara.co.uk "Mr.Nice." wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:31:04 +0000, Austin Shackles
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On or around 7 Nov 2004 10:31:38 GMT, "Simon Atkinson" <[email protected]>
> >enlightened us thusly:
> >
> >>What will ?160 buy these days? A half decent meal for two (sans wine),
> >>a couple of ordianaryish tyres. A single mens welted shoe. It's a tiny
> >>drop in the ocean compared to the running costs of our Land-Rovers (and
> >>lives generally).

> >
> >
> >well, I dunno about you, but my shoes and meals don't cost anything like
> >that much. Tyres, maybe.
> >
> >but yeah, yer right, it's small fry compared to the cost of fuel and so on,
> >but then again, it's still a rip-off.

>
> still better in my pocket than theirs ta very much.


And it's easy to forget the capital value of BBP 160 per year. It adds
up when interest rates are low.


--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"History shows that the Singularity started when Sir Tim Berners-Lee
was bitten by a radioactive spider."
 
On or around 7 Nov 2004 14:34:30 GMT, "Simon Atkinson" <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>Tom Woods wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 12:48:03 +0000, Mr.Nice.
>> <mr.nice@*nospam*clara.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:31:04 +0000, Austin Shackles
>> ><[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > well, I dunno about you, but my shoes and meals don't cost
>> > > anything like that much. Tyres, maybe.
>> > >
>> > > but yeah, yer right, it's small fry compared to the cost of fuel
>> > > and so on, but then again, it's still a rip-off.
>> >
>> > still better in my pocket than theirs ta very much.

>>
>> I agree. I loose a fair whack of my money in tax of some form so a bit
>> less is nice!
>>
>> £160 is still a fair bit to me!
>>
>> It makes having a landrover as a second car much more feasable since
>> the only cost i have to worry about is the insurance (which is not
>> that much more than the tax would be!)
>>
>> In the 4 years i've had my landy I've saved £640. Thats probably 6
>> months fuel costs for me! Makes it worth it in my mind!

>
>I wish it was 6 months for me! More like 3 weeks fuel bills - but I do
>a lot of miles.
>
>Perhaps that's why (although I buy it with as much bad grace as I can
>muster) I just don't understand why a nail made (allegedly) pre-72 is
>worth more than a nicer example made later.
>
>I think it's creating a false market for older vehicles - and a market
>for ringing newer ones.


which it'd not do if they'd left it alone. No-one's going to take the risk
and effort to use a 1972 ID on a 1974 vehicle if it'll be exempt next year
anyway.

 
"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> well, I dunno about you, but my shoes and meals don't cost anything like
> that much. Tyres, maybe.
>
> but yeah, yer right, it's small fry compared to the cost of fuel and so
> on,
> but then again, it's still a rip-off.
>


£160, when Percy is running it's the fuel to run him for a year given that
he is a Big boys toy / backup car. If I had to pay to tax him I wouldn't be
running either Percy or the 101 (Which isn't tax exempt).

I know this is not alot of fuel, in the last 2 years I've done 900 miles and
540 miles IIRC in Percy. Given the fact we need at least 2 vehicles on the
go at any one time even bearing in mind the insurance it works out way
cheaper than getting a hire car for a week when one or the other is
inevitably off the road for something. Having to pay to tax them would tip
the balance. Last time I spent £160 on a meal for two was ..... er...ok so I
must be tight. I prefer to call it prudent.

Lee D


 

"Simon Atkinson" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> What will ?160 buy these days? A half decent meal for two (sans wine),
> a couple of ordianaryish tyres. A single mens welted shoe. It's a tiny
> drop in the ocean compared to the running costs of our Land-Rovers (and
> lives generally).


WTF? £160 meal for two??????? Where do you eat? The Ritz? Or Raffles?

My god, you have very expensive shoes too, Imelda Marcos (sp?) has nowt on you pal!!!

;~)

Nige


 
On 7 Nov 2004 10:31:38 GMT, "Simon Atkinson" <[email protected]> wrote:

>What will ?160 buy these days? A half decent meal for two (sans wine),


Please allow me to graciously accept any offer you may make to
Charlotte and I to dine with you at some point...

 
The 109 looks a bit past it, even as a source of spares... As for the plate,
well, U can only transfer it if the "donor" vehicle is road legal, so that's
not a lot of use DOH.

I'd have a crack at that 101 tho, always fancied one :)


 
Mother wrote:

> On 7 Nov 2004 10:31:38 GMT, "Simon Atkinson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > What will ?160 buy these days? A half decent meal for two (sans
> > wine),

>
> Please allow me to graciously accept any offer you may make to
> Charlotte and I to dine with you at some point...


I would like to make the point that I don't spend 160 per meal every
night of the week - but now and again it's nice.
 
Nige wrote:

>
> "Simon Atkinson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > What will ?160 buy these days? A half decent meal for two (sans
> > wine), a couple of ordianaryish tyres. A single mens welted shoe.
> > It's a tiny drop in the ocean compared to the running costs of our
> > Land-Rovers (and lives generally).

>
> WTF? #160 meal for two??????? Where do you eat? The Ritz? Or Raffles?
>
> My god, you have very expensive shoes too, Imelda Marcos (sp?) has
> nowt on you pal!!!



The benefit of expensive hand made shoes is that they fit well and last
forever - the pair I wear for work are 15 years old and (the uppers at
least) still look like new.

Bit like remoulds never last or look as good as new tyres!
 
>
>The benefit of expensive hand made shoes is that they fit well and last
>forever - the pair I wear for work are 15 years old and (the uppers at
>least) still look like new.
>
>Bit like remoulds never last or look as good as new tyres!


But when you get a puncture you're glad you only spent 30 quid on a
remould.






--

Tim Hobbs

'58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
'77 101FC Ambulance aka "Burrt"
'03 Volvo V70

My Landies? http://www.seriesii.co.uk
Barcoding? http://www.bartec-systems.com
Tony Luckwill web archive at http://www.luckwill.com
 
On or around Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:44:05 +0000, Tim Hobbs
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>>
>>The benefit of expensive hand made shoes is that they fit well and last
>>forever - the pair I wear for work are 15 years old and (the uppers at
>>least) still look like new.
>>
>>Bit like remoulds never last or look as good as new tyres!

>
>But when you get a puncture you're glad you only spent 30 quid on a
>remould.


hehe. I once gashed the side of a 50-quid minibus tyre, which was about a
week old, on a concealed sharp-thing in someone's driveway. Not happy, I
wasn't.

Actually, there's another thing about long-lasting tyres that I find a
slight put-off, and that's the fact that you spend a (relatively) long time
with not much tread, before they're worn enough to justify lobbing 'em out.

 
So Simon Atkinson was, like

> The benefit of expensive hand made shoes is that they fit well and
> last forever - the pair I wear for work are 15 years old and (the
> uppers at least) still look like new.


Totally agree. I have a pair of Trickers brogues bought for (I think) £110
about 14 years ago. A massive amount to spend on some shoes. Since then I
have had them resoled 3 times at about £25 a go. The last time I collected
them from the cobblers, there was a scruffy chav-type person in there. When
he overheard the price of the repair, he nearly choked on his rollie. I
explained the maths to him. £185 total cost over 14 years = just over £13 a
year for the most comfortable shoes I have ever had. I asked him how much
his trainers cost, and how long they would last. No answer.

Mind you, these don't look like new. They look well battered, but I think
they look better like that, and go well with anything from jeans to a suit..
A bit like the Landies of the footwear world*.

*On-topic reference.


--

Rich

Nullum Gratuitum Prandium


 

"Richard Brookman" <[email protected]> wrote in message>
...
> A bit like the Landies of the footwear world*.



What? they leak & need constant attention!!!! :~)

Nige


 
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 19:39:09 +0000 (UTC), "Richard Brookman"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>So Simon Atkinson was, like
>
>> The benefit of expensive hand made shoes is that they fit well and
>> last forever - the pair I wear for work are 15 years old and (the
>> uppers at least) still look like new.

>
>Totally agree. I have a pair of Trickers brogues bought for (I think) £110
>about 14 years ago. A massive amount to spend on some shoes. Since then I
>have had them resoled 3 times at about £25 a go. The last time I collected
>them from the cobblers, there was a scruffy chav-type person in there. When
>he overheard the price of the repair, he nearly choked on his rollie. I
>explained the maths to him. £185 total cost over 14 years = just over £13 a
>year for the most comfortable shoes I have ever had. I asked him how much
>his trainers cost, and how long they would last. No answer.
>
>Mind you, these don't look like new. They look well battered, but I think
>they look better like that, and go well with anything from jeans to a suit..
>A bit like the Landies of the footwear world*.


I've had a pair of dr martins that are 8 years old and on their third
sole. I've worn through the leather now though so have to go buy a new
pair of shoes :(
They did pretty well considering that they wernt expensive shoes to
start with!
 
>
> Totally agree. I have a pair of Trickers brogues bought for (I think)

£110
> about 14 years ago. A massive amount to spend on some shoes. Since then

I
> have had them resoled 3 times at about £25 a go.


I can beat that matey boy!

Got a pair of shoes here that I've had for 19 years, only had 3 new soles
and 2 new uppers. Like new they are!


 
So SimonJ was, like

>> Totally agree. I have a pair of Trickers brogues bought for (I
>> think) £110 about 14 years ago. A massive amount to spend on some
>> shoes. Since then I have had them resoled 3 times at about £25 a go.

>
> I can beat that matey boy!
>
> Got a pair of shoes here that I've had for 19 years, only had 3 new
> soles and 2 new uppers. Like new they are!


LOL - yeah, I've got a hammer like that. Seems to last for ever...

--

Rich

Nullum Gratuitum Prandium


 
Back
Top