XC Plate on ebay

It's close to Mark and Angie, I hope Mark's going to be able to take a look.

The car is a November 1972 XC plate 2000. Been off the road since 1985.

Not sure if anything unusual about the car - it looks like it may have tints in the photo.

Hopefully more to follow if Mark can get there.
 
well, I spotted this car as well and put into my watch-list- I bought recently this one:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... 0626927517
its running car but need to do lot of welding- will put more picture and info end of week, because this holiday time is problem to pay for car into bank acc and get some cheap delivery- I bought this car, for spares of my first rover: viewtopic.php?f=21&t=8657
(my first idea put leather seats into white rover and swap door mirrors, swap the doors on left side of car, because they are damaged, some other missing parts, etc,) but now I am little bit confused (again), because red-one is not so bad to scrap for spares, so maybe I need to take BEIGE rover as well to create one great 2000 sc and one great 2000 TC and some spares in market. but 3 rovers... it would be lot of cars in my yard as I already have old renault r4 (my wife's car) so it will be 4 cars together..
I sent some Questions but dont get any answers yet, so I really hope to get some more info from this forum :)
 
NickDunning said:
It's close to Mark and Angie, I hope Mark's going to be able to take a look.

The car is a November 1972 XC plate 2000. Been off the road since 1985.

Not sure if anything unusual about the car - it looks like it may have tints in the photo.

Hopefully more to follow if Mark can get there.

I asked to seller about mileage, rust and leather seats if there is any, hope get some info from Mark here. 26 years off-road is long time.
 
Still has no bidders, being off road for so long it is likely the engine is seized and therefore scrap, but otherwise it's a good source of spare parts... It being an XC plate the only hope is that it isn't a factory car.

I myself will be after a set of seats soon, however I have a friend who has a p6, and he doesn't like the colour of his seats (buckskin), so I would be in a fair chance of getting those.

Cheers, Adam.
 
I have been to see it.
It is a standard 2000SC home market manual. 88,000miles on clock
Tax disc says 30/04/85 so bears out what dvla says about last time on road.

Good news it looks fairly solid and has at some time had sills welded up. D posts are intact. Does however need a bit of welding to the back of OSR sill/floor (small plate) and also OSF inner sill is crusty (8 inch plate/angle). Engine is not seized and appears to be all intact. Gearbox appears ok, but not heard it running. Flitches solid.

Bad news The car is Lunar Grey not Almond. The paint that you see has been put on with a brush and is only on the outside panels not the doorshuts or D posts. The doors are all going on bottom edge. rear wings rotting through from behind along front edge. Front wings seem ok but under OS lamp unit there's signs of rust under paint. Front seats, all stitching has split. Rear seats hard. rear centre arm rest split.
Front screen is laminated & tinted but not sundym (aftermarket replacement) and is more blue than green. Car has been somewhere dry until recently but is now open to weather, bad news as doors don't close properly. (this maybe mechanism partly siezed due to lack of use) Carpets worn through on OS.
No V5C with car.
Brake pedal seems to work but clutch pedal siezed. Both would probably need overall.

Overall view. Car is all there, not pretty but could be put back on road. No ali corrosion in engine bay, that you normally see on a car that have stood for a long time so must have been in warm dry garage. The breakers yard is looking at a minimum of £425 for it, any less and it will be cubed, well thats waht the man said.
 
colnerov said:
Hi, I know it's not XC plate but I would think this was a better bet.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ROVER-2000-BLUE-/ ... 2a0d20bac4

Colin

No it wouldn't - I've seen this one today - thankfully I didn't go out of my way to see it.

I've asked the seller to amend his description - it's pretty rotten.

Not turned a wheel since 1985. I've no idea if it runs but wouldn't put money on it. Both 'D' posts and boot floor gone. Doors crumbly. This is based on a cursory look in the pouring rain in the middle of a field. Don't be fooled by the photos (taken in heavy rain). I suspect they've flogged the rear bumper and grille badge separately.

6thJanuary20109.jpg


6thJanuary20101.jpg


6thJanuary20103.jpg


6thJanuary20102.jpg


6thJanuary201019.jpg


6thJanuary201015.jpg
 
Hi, just goes to show that you never can tell. The blue one looked OK and is awful.
The XC plate looked awful and is quite sound. The earlier one is supposed to be made
from better steel!!

Colin
 
colnerov said:
Hi, just goes to show that you never can tell. The blue one looked OK and is awful.
The XC plate looked awful and is quite sound. The earlier one is supposed to be made
from better steel!!

Colin

Not much in it between a 1968 and a 1972 - it's up to 1966 that they really were made better. We still see a lot of rusty late 1960's cars.
 
No, the metal gauge changed in 70/71 not 68.
The two 'Lightweight' P6's were both 'H' reg and were built to check to see if the new lighter gauge would be safe, in prelude to the changes.
 
Mark, that's an interesting statement as to gauge of metal used! I always understood that the reduced gauge metal was limited to specific areas on the prototype "lightweight" cars, and that in fact it was not taken through to production. Perhaps if you know different you could enlighten me.

I always speculated that the change in apparent rust resistance was due to a combination of several factors. Firstly, the waiting list for cars falling away, so that base units spent more time sitting around before being used. 2nd, a possible change of steel strip spec and/or supplier as BL cost cutting took hold. And of course 3rd and eventually, the infamous SD1 paint process.

Chris
 
chrisyork said:
Mark, that's an interesting statement as to gauge of metal used! I always understood that the reduced gauge metal was limited to specific areas on the prototype "lightweight" cars, and that in fact it was not taken through to production. Perhaps if you know different you could enlighten me.

I always speculated that the change in apparent rust resistance was due to a combination of several factors. Firstly, the waiting list for cars falling away, so that base units spent more time sitting around before being used. 2nd, a possible change of steel strip spec and/or supplier as BL cost cutting took hold. And of course 3rd and eventually, the infamous SD1 paint process.

Chris

The first one - the waiting list falling away, wouldn't really be until 1973-1974 - peak production was circa 1971/2. We all know the stories of partly assembled base units sitting outside for what could be over a year at a time towards the end of production though. Those cars never stood a chance of survival.

Triumph's output was seriously decimated at after 1973 when they started using inferior quality steel. This doesn't seem to have been a factor so badly with Rover, but the real killer for the later cars was the SD1 paint process.

Early car panels (pre-1967), particularily the doors, just feel quite a lot heavier. I do wonder whether there was some rationing of gauge around the Leyland takeover.
 
FrazzleTC said:
royal_numis said:
Thanks for info and pictures :)
there is one nice re-advertised car with long mot with reduced price:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rover-P6-TC2000-C ... 0668426040



Renars
The seats in that look lovely, but going by the mould on the inside of the bootlid, I'd say there's water getting in there. Still seems nice for the price!


I wanted to go and have a look at that car before I bought mine, it looks a nice one for the money, it was just to far for me to travel, he has reduced the price quite a bit over the last few months thou. I think he's been mucked about by the sounds of the description.
 
That blue series 2 car has been re-listed countless times over the past year, I'm sure the first time I saw it up for grabs it was around £1300, then after at least 3 re-lists without bidders (or lack of advert views) he realised that the car had been listed in the wrong part of the rover section (I think in the spares section). The re-lists since then have had bids, but every one has failed in selling. I'm wondering if he's going to get so frustrated that the car gets broken, or similar. (hopefully not).

Cheers, Adam.
 
I've been to see this blue TC, last July. It's a car that was subject to a decade long restoration by a deceased P6ROC member in the early 1990's.

20thJuly20103.jpg


However since then it's been mostly parked in a field. I ran into the current owner at a show last summer who was talking it up to the highest, saying what a stunning car it was and that he needed the space. Apparently it needed a back box for an MOT. Apparently.

I went to Cardiff to visit my brother and to go and see the car. It was parked in a field, full of water. It did run - but there was no drive - the gearchange wasn't there at all. I think the seller thought I'd magically make it move!

A true horror story, IIRC there weren't any brakes either. Beautiful engine though. The guy told me as soon as I saw if that he wouldn't take less than £900 for it. I walked away, fast.

I love his comment about timewasters....I wasted a day and a £65 train fare on this one.

:roll:
 
Back
Top