I have a 67.5 1600. Why a 1600? I use this car as my daily driver, I don't
race, and
higher performance is not necessary.
>From what I have seen on the net the 1600 doesn't require as much (or as
>expensive)
maintenance as the 2L. I think it cost me about $11 to replace the timing
chain and
gears on my 1600, instead of the (what is it now?) $500 or more for a 2L.
Purchase prices for the 1600 are generally lower than the 2L also.
The only thing that I like on the 2L over the 1600 is the 5 speed. My daily
commute is
about 60 miles, mostly on the highway, so a 5 speed gearbox would help reduce
the noise
a bit.
Peace,
Pat
> Regarding Steve Landuyt's comments about the desirability of a 69 2000, I'd
> like to poll the list members (who seem to know a hell of a lot more about
> the subject than I do), about just which model is considered the "marquee"
> version of the SRL/SPL series. It seems that there are a lot more 1600
> than 2000 owners on this list, and I'm curious as to what you see as the
> positives of the 1600 vs the 2000. I to own a 69 2000, and I love it. I'm
> trying to keep it as original as possible, although I question as to
> whether or not that really adds any financial value to the car. I have
> never been able to figure out why these cars aren't more sought after. I
> was told by someone that the price ran up about 10 years ago when the
> Japanese bought whatever they could find, but hasn't budged since then. I
> have seen what appear to be pretty decent examples in the $3000 range,
> which wouldn't even touch a dilapidated British sports car. Any thoughts?
>
>
--
- Support Habitat for Humanity, A "hand up", not a "hand out" -
Pat Horne, Network Manager, Shop Supervisor, Hardware Guru
CS Dept, University of Texas, Austin, Tx. 78712 USA
voice (512)471-9517, fax (512)471-8885, UUCP:cs.utexas.edu!horne
|