Where are you located?
There are a lot of Tiger "experts" that know what to look for in a car that
would love to hep you spend money.....wisely....
Doug
Charlotte NC
-----Original Message-----
From: MWood24020@aol.com <MWood24020@aol.com>
To: Camsales@aol.com <Camsales@aol.com>; tigers@autox.team.net
<tigers@autox.team.net>
Date: Monday, November 15, 1999 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: tiger valuations
>In a message dated 11/15/99 2:28:10 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>Camsales@aol.com writes:
>
><< I am considering purchasing a 1965 model. How should I approach valuing
>it?
> Are there any guides or guidelines available? I have perused the websites
a
> little but haven't found enough info to develop a value.
> Thanks for any help. >>
>
>I kind of see four levels of Tiger pricing:
>1. $6000-8000.Maybe a runner, but definitely not a driver. Expect to spend
at
>least $15,000 more to have a decent car. That does not include rust repair
>which may very likely be a part of the deal.
>2. $10,000-12,0000. Decent driver. Tired paint, interior, suspension, or
>motor likely (at least two out of that four need work!). Look at spending
>$5,000 to $10,000 to make "right".
>3. $15,000-18,000. Very nice driver, not concours. Either well kept, pretty
>original car or a car someone has put more into it than they can sell it
for.
>If you want minimal hassles, lots of fun and a turn key operation, shop in
>this level.
>4. $20,000 and up. Concours or very seriously hot rodded (vintage race).
This
>is the most difficult area to purchase in because whoever the seller is,
they
>have big dollars into the car, know they are going to take a licking and
may
>not have done the car right to be competitive in either venue...Unless you
>really know what you are looking at, find someone locally who knows Tigers
>inside and out before laying out cash at the upper end.
>
>Also, if you have followed this list, you are aware that there are a number
>of fake Tigers in circulation. The easiest way to avoid getting taken is to
>ask if the car has been authenticated and by who.
>
>Good luck-Mike
>
|