Ten grand for a grounded body?

Maybe, but if you have a siding full of windowless, paintless, shabby looking wooden carriages, the effect is much the same.

 

And back in the 19th century? I've seen all sorts in linear scrapyards; had there been more grounded bodies preserved, I suspect their share of the linear scrapyard would have been greater.

 

Failed to sell as it only got to £6200 which to me is still a very high price for something in that condition.

 

Rather than a linear scrapyard you would have something that looked like either the clifftop at Aberporth or an allotment / smallholding

 

They should've taken the money offered - I agree 6200 quid is still way more than it is worth.
Ray.

 

About £6,000 more than it's worth I'd say!

The rising cost of life expired railway rolling stock is a real pet hate of mine although I accept one can't change "the market". At the risk of falling into a cliche, when I started volunteering normal people with normal jobs could buy a coach or wagon and restore it themselves provided they had the tenacity. Now it seems you have to be rich to be able to repeat the "fun" of the 70's/80's/90's.

Sent from my moto g(8) power using Tapatalk

 

Remember if it was sold at that price it would cost the buyer £8060 if s/he was in the auction room and £8283.20 if s/he bid on line as the buyers premium in the room was 25% and on line 28% + VAT.

 

It was the same in the road engine world. In the 70's a traction engine or roller, perhaps needing restoration, was well within financial reach of a young enthusiast. Nowadays it is a rich man's hobby. In the early 70's around 250 quid would get you a recently withdrawn Mk1 direct from B.R.
Ray.

 

They aren't making any more history...

Anyone buying a pacer now might be making a very good investment.

 

Really?

Rarity alone does not automatically mean future desirability.

Which of these two classics do you think is rarest? Which one is cheapest to buy now?





Tom

 

Now look at the price movement in Allegros over the last 1o years. Gone from "can't give them away" upwards. Be interesting to compare the price growth between the two.

The reason I'd say a pacer might be a good buy is that they are at the point now where they aren't wrecks, but aren't wanted.

As people get older, they want a slice of their childhood. What lumps of the 1990s/2000s railway can you easily own and run as an isolated unit? MUs get larger and more complex. There's a risk, but given how much of NP is devoted to "what would you bring back from the past" suggests scrapper's regret is a common theme.

 

The issue will be keeping it going while it acquires value.

My own hunch is that about half the Pacers sold into preservation are like “Gordon Highlander”, spare parts sold into preservation in their bodyshell. Unlike the Deltic, I think their future is slow and bleak.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Aren't there quite a few rolling spares that have been turned back into working engines?

Honda superdreams went through a masive bubble of late. Good examples of these highly ordinary 250cc machines were changing hands for north of £2k. when I picked on up for a £100 about ten years ago, I was asked why I was buying a boat anchor (note, I have not made such a profit on it, I was planning to build a special. I still haven't quite finis^h^h^h^hstarted it...). If I'd kept the good one I had when I was a student I'd be quids in now...

 

Mark 1s are useful, practical and look good in their own right when well restored. They were readily available at a time when many of today's heritage railways were getting going.

Grounded wooden bodies which hadn't carried a passenger for 50? years were of no practical value at all to a heritage railway needing passenger rolling stock. Getting one back into useable condition again is a massive project.

Pacers, I'm not hugely bothered about. I can see the value in preserving a few, again, they have a use for low season operation. I tend to think that there has been a bit of mass purchasing of then, more than needed.

 

But do you select new additions to your rolling stock based on purely how cheap they are to operate, or how much they add to the 'attraction'? Or to put it another way, it doesn't matter how cheap they are to operate if no one wants to ride on them.

PS. This is not aimed at Cartman, it was just his post prompted me to raise this point.

 

Likewise, just carrying on the discussion.
How much do period carriages stock really matter? Yes, it's a nice-to-have, and people will appreciate it when pointed out, but where does it rank in people's priorities?
Clearly, there will be some diehards for whom it's a make-or-break, but for most?

There is plenty of evidence of a drop-off in non-enthusiast patronage when diesel haulage occurs, so there is a clear cost to not running steam, that has to be balanced against the cost of not doing it. Is there any evidence of the same for coaches?

I have limited time for over-slavish adherence to "period atmosphere" as the crowds, available engines, liveries etc will mean that is no more than an aspiration over a sufficiently broad timescale as to be an impossibility to fully adhere to.

I think there will always be a market for a steam-hauled "old-fashioned" railway. But to most Mk1s are in that backet (and not unreasonably so). Beyond that, are you not chasing an impossible dream? I've ridden on Gresley and LMS coaches on the SVR. Wonderfully restored, and from a conservation point of view, unambiguously a good that they are preserved. But on a GW branchline pulled by a BR-rebuild of a 1944-designed SR loco, why are they any more correct than a Mk1?

In pure terms of "adding to the attraction" from a tourist point of view, I'd imagine putting the premium for a pre-nationalisation coach over a Mk1 into some more toilets, a bigger cafe etc, will probably see a better return.

Last week I was on the EOR for the dinosaur day - full trains on Mk2A-C. There was no obvious loss from "inappropriate" stock there.

I suspect the cut-off is opening windows - not much point travelling behind a steam engine if you can't here it - with another cut-off for wood-paneling and horsehair seats.

(FWIW, I go for the haulage, the scenery. I'd happily travel in kind of carriage. But then I like linear scrapyards too).

 

Are you saying that some of the C&W departments scattered are the country are basically wasting their time and that they should concentrate on MK1 coaches? So get rid of all of the LMS, LNER, GWR and pre-grouping coaches?

 

Well, now you are getting into heart over head territory. Obviously many volunteers join up because they want to preserve certain aspects of the past, but if a railway only concentrates on that and ignores the business side then they are likely to struggle financially (not necessarily in danger of going broke, but if you fail to attract visitors and/or make a ‘profit‘ you have less money to spend on the things you really want to do.)

As with many things in life, its about getting the right balance, and getting back to the original point, which side do rolling stock such as Pacers come under? Personaly I found my recent ride on a Pacer on Wensleydale distinctly underwealming (Nothing against the railway as such, but I could have been riding almost any modern bus or light rail vehicle).

 

I like all coaches, from the early mark 2s, back to mid Victorian ones. To me, there is a place for all of these on heritage lines.

 

That's a very unfair response - which bit of " Wonderfully restored, and from a conservation point of view, unambiguously a good that they are preserved" supports that?