Thank you Neil Campbell, Vit6 Convertible stats

[vit6iw]

In the July issue of PC there was an article titled Endangered Species. At the end of the article it was suggested that if anyone was concerned about the surviving numbers of a particular model to get in touch. I did this, asking about the numbers of Vitesse 6 Convertibles still on the road. Lo and behold, whether by coincidence or due to my request, this month's PC has all the stats I could wish for on surviving Heralds and Vitesses.

I now know that there are 132 Vitesse 6 Convertibles still on the road and 37 are SORN'd, making the 2 Litre Convertible on 956 and 219 as common as muck!

Cheers again Neil.

Denis

[admin]

You're welcome Denis - it was indeed your request that sparked this. With our new data we can give info that other sites - such as how many left, cannot. Plus howmanyleft is only from England Wales Scotland - our data includes NI so gives a UK wide view.

[admin]

Worth mentioning also that we can only work with the data we have - the DVLA database is crammed with errors which we have to include...

[mr rusty]

Those numbers can't be right- everyone knows that the MkII convertible is the only Triumph still in production and the numbers increase year by year.......soon there'll be more MkII Vitesses than there are Mondeos.....

[vit6iw]

So the figures aren't gospel, but they must be pretty accurate. And as it's such a low figure (132) 10% either way doesn't amount to much does it?

Denis

[admin]

Those numbers can't be right- everyone knows that the MkII convertible is the only Triumph still in production and the numbers increase year by year.......soon there'll be more MkII Vitesses than there are Mondeos.....

Too true. On a related note, and i don't wish to be rude to Classics Monthly (honestly not my intention - this is an independent forum and these views are mine, not those of Practical Classics mag etc) this is why i can't really agree with their reshell or die petition. If we did make reshelling using the (better) body usually from a lower spec one owner from new model legal (although this happens unofficially all the time as we know) the country would be full of reincarnated sporty classics such as MG Metro Turbo's, Vitesse 2 ltr convertibles, Golf GTi's etc, while the number of genuine low mileage boggo spec cars dramatically dwindles. I personally prefer to see a MkI Golf L in original brilliant condition in boggo non stereo no body kit spec (a rarity these days), than another shiny (rust free thanks to a reshell) MkI GTi recreation using the engine / vin plate from an abused / crashed / ringed other car.

[karlsgazelle]

Those numbers can't be right- everyone knows that the MkII convertible is the only Triumph still in production and the numbers increase year by year.......soon there'll be more MkII Vitesses than there are Mondeos.....

Too true. On a related note, and i don't wish to be rude to Classics Monthly (honestly not my intention - this is an independent forum and these views are mine, not those of Practical Classics mag etc) this is why i can't really agree with their reshell or die petition. If we did make reshelling using the (better) body usually from a lower spec one owner from new model legal (although this happens unofficially all the time as we know) the country would be full of reincarnated sporty classics such as MG Metro Turbo's, Vitesse 2 ltr convertibles, Golf GTi's etc, while the number of genuine low mileage boggo spec cars dramatically dwindles. I personally prefer to see a MkI Golf L in original brilliant condition in boggo non stereo no body kit spec (a rarity these days), than another shiny (rust free thanks to a reshell) MkI GTi recreation using the engine / vin plate from an abused / crashed / ringed other car.

I was thinking something along those lines too, I don't think Gary has thought this through properly.

There are some cynical dudes who accuse them of just trying to be controversial in order to sell more copies (Murdoch journalism stylie), not me though

[vit6iw]

I posted the figures regarding the Vit6Conv on the TSSC site. I can't believe some of the responses I've had pooh poohing the DVLA figures. Here's an example:

I Wrote:

I've just received this month's Practical Classics and have found the information that I was hoping the IVR scheme would have given me.

Reply:

It would only have given you this information if 100% of Vitesse owners were TSSC members, and had submitted their IVR forms.
It seems to me that many members believe the IVR scheme is a Holy Grail of information containing all the details that their car has even had - previous owners, all work carried out, even what events it has attended or trips it has undertaken, then go away very disillusioned when they find out that the club doesn't have it all.
Similarly the PC figures are inaccurate in that they only contain details of cars that are either taxed or sorned, so many intended restorations aren't included. I personally know of at least six Heralds which are not in either category, so there must be many more around the country.
So: interesting figures, but not at all accurate.

I know that the TSSC IVR Scheme is not a good indicator of numbers as it depends on TSSC members filling in and returning a form, and non-members cars aren't included. However, there was no other means of finding out how many Vit6Conv were on the road.

The poster then states "Similarly the PC figures are inaccurate in that they only contain details of cars that are either taxed or sorned." So they are accurate then? Make your mind up! He then says that "intended restorations" aren't included! Does anyone know the number of "intended restorations" in the UK?

Denis

[Gary Stretton]

Given the online reply of support I received from PC editor, Danny Hopkins, in February regarding the Reshell or Die proposal, can PC now clarify its stance please as no-one at PC to my knowledge has signed the petition?

Classic and Sportscar gave coverage to it in a recent issue of their mag without mention of CM, which is fine by me. Were I not the editor of Classics Monthly the proposal would still have come about.

I can think of more contentious and less time-consuming ways to create 'Murdoch style' headlines, karlsgazelle. It's not a whim for me to engage with professional bodies and government departments for the sake of it. Sod controversial, this is about saving cars, jobs and heritage. Shame you can't accept that.

By way of an example why sticking heads in sand doesn't work, take a look at this link. It was for two decent Saab 99 bodyshells, both now scrapped. Splitting hairs over which models should survive is pointless, let those who want to save a classic be the judge of how they use their private property in a legally transparent manner.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/250859891257? ... 1423.l2649

As I said at the outset, it is a proposal, open to input and solutions from anyone. Rather than wearing PC hats and trying to undermine the initiative because it's from your main competitor, put on your true enthusiast hats and be part of the solution.
http://www.gopetition.com/petition/4290 ... tures.html

Come on PC, it's down to the likes of us who are listened to because of who we are, that we try to change outdated legislation that ill-serves our readers and fellow enthusiasts.

All the best,
Gary

[karlsgazelle]

...
I can think of more contentious and less time-consuming ways to create 'Murdoch style' headlines, karlsgazelle.

...

Yes I noticed. Like every headline having to be a pun, or your patronising "the Sun says" summaries.

Why not alienate some more classic car enthusiast with a dose of belligerent attitude? That will win them over to your "cause"

Regards
Karl