• Hi Guest!
    If you appreciate British Car Forum and our 25 years of supporting British car enthusiasts with technical and anicdotal information, collected from our thousands of great members, please support us with a low-cost subscription. You can become a supporting member for less than the dues of most car clubs.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

Daimler V8 on eBay

Share this page

I'm not, but would LOVE to! Looks very nice - M'lady would look particularly smashing in it! /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/thumbsup.gif
 
Well yes it is interesting. However, If it were a 1966 it would be a 250 V8 rather than a V8 250. The seller has corrected the year to 1969 which is about right. Never the less, the car has all the attributes of a 250 V8. This is not surprising as several of them have turned up in that configuration. Beware though, these cars are Smokers so if you are in an area that requires smog certification its going to be a hard sell and they are not your usual LBC to work on.---Fwiw---Keoke
 
Hello Keoke,

I'm surprised that as he imported the car in 1985, that the picture shows a 1966 U.K number plate. Is it that the pictures are old ones, if so why?

Alec
 
Hi Piman, I do not Know. I saw the reg too and I wondered about that also. But as you can see it looks more like a 250 V8 Than a Thin bumpered V8 250 Huh.---Keoke

Hey I missed your point about the Picky's I will check that out also-good point.
 
The plate has just been left on for "cosmetic" reasons, I would say. The plate and the bumpers would suggest a 1966, but he says that the papers cite is being a '69. (I sent him a message asking several questions about the car, as I am interested).

Other than the engines, aren't they otherwise the same setup as the Jaguar MkIIs of the same vintage?
 
There are some similarities but a lot of differences critical parts are not from the Jaguar bin, and no bin now has them at all.--Keoke


The issue with the number plate is entirely different. In the UK a very early number plate can have a value greater than the car it is mounted on. Consequently, exported cars are generally stripped of the number plate. However, like mine. The PO owner brought the car with him to the US it was not a purchased new owner import and the original number plate is attached.
 
I agree that some of the older numbers are worth quite a bit, however that really applies to those that have two letters and four numbers, or three letters and three numbers. The ones such as that attached to this car would really have no particular value at all, unless it could be read as a word. The number COM 1 C was particularly famous.

Even if a number were transferred prior to the car leaving the UK, the physical plates themselves would probably stay attached to the car. The plates themselves don't change hands, new ones showing the transferred number would have to be obtained.
 
OK Steve, Thanks; I always wondered what made a plate valuable. I stil wonder Why!---Keoke
 
tempting, but thats shoving the old buick/rover V8 into a very very small space... these cars run hot and smokey unless in a cold part of the planet... although if you run this beast enough maybe you'll put out enough CO2 to warm up the planet for the rest of us!
 
/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/savewave.gif


/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/nonono.gif-Not a Buick/Rover V8---Keoke- /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif
 
Hello keoke,

I agree, and think that the seller is mistaken about the year of manufacture.

As regards the question, what makes a registration valuable, simply market forces, enough buyers and prices go up.

Alec
 
Keoke said:
/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/savewave.gif


/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/nonono.gif-Not a Buick/Rover V8---Keoke- /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif
Click to expand...

Yup - the Turner designed Daimler SP250 engine - lovely, but the Mk 2 body is way overweight to make it anything but a slug.
 
Guess you been reading some of the wrong books too!---Keoke-- /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif
 
Keoke said:
Guess you been reading some of the wrong books too!---Keoke-- /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif
Click to expand...

I know that the Daimler had outright performance similar to that of the 3.4 Jaguar, and because the V8 is lighter than the XK lump, it also has better handling characteristics than any of the Jaguar variants. I've never thought of that car as a slug.....
 
Yep, and if you have Whitehouse in the UK rebuild and beef your converter you can just about hang with the 3.8.- /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cheers.gif---Keoke
 
AX 201 is another famous plate, as is GEN 11. Who can name the vehicles they belong to? No Googling first to find out!!! LOL
 
Steve said:
I know that the Daimler had outright performance similar to that of the 3.4 Jaguar, and because the V8 is lighter than the XK lump, it also has better handling characteristics than any of the Jaguar variants. I've never thought of that car as a slug.....
Click to expand...

Not even close Steve.

V8 - not far off weight, loses by 3 secs in the 1/4.

It did, however, blow away the Jag 2.4s.
 
Keoke- just bought the IMP brochure, and it compares 250-V8 performance with the Jag MK2 3.8 and the Rover P5B.

Standing 1/4:
Jag-16.4
Rover-18.0
250-V8-19.6

Power:
Jag-220
Rover-161
250-V8-140

All FWIW
/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/angel.gif
 
Back
Top