[ace.cafe]

I think it's worth $3k, and if you can talk him down a bit,  so much the better.

It is a project bike. Expect to do a lot of work to it, and put a lot of money into it.
At 18k miles, they need an engine rebuild. Typical Brit bike rebuild mileage. Figure that in. A lot of other little things to do. If you want to get a project,  it is a decent starting point.

[mattsz]

Jerry - does this dress make me look fat?  Seriously... I appreciate your candor.

Guaire - you can tell the petcock is about to break?  I'm impressed!  (BTW, the right-side petcock, which he says is the reserve petcock, is already broken...  )

Ace - I've got a project bike already, so there's nothing lost there.  I wish I knew what engine work was done and when, but I'm afraid we'll never know.  Based on what I see and know, I'd expect to put some money into it, but I don't know if I'm ready to put a lot of money into it...  Are these '72 models really worth it?

[ace.cafe]

Alway expect that it will need more work than you initially think.
It's burning oil, and I already informed you that they go through pistons and bores quickly. Typically they need a valve job at 10k, and a bottom end at 20k. It may vary, but that would be typical. So a full rebuild can be expected.
The good side is that it has a lot of the cosmetic and chrome looking good/new, so that saves a lot of money.  Re-doing the wiring is cheap. Touching up the rust and paint on the frame is cheap.

And I  would be remiss if I didn't say that a Fireball Iron Barrel would have an overall cost that is similar or less,  is faster than that Triumph,  gets better fuel economy, and has 50k mile longevity.

[Chasfield]

I owned that precise spec. model back in 1981.

Price wise they are at the bottom of a well. People prefer pre oil-in-frame 650s or later OIF 750s.

Mine suffered a fractured weld in the upright section of the oil tank by the swing arm spindle tube, as I mentioned in an earlier post. The top end did wear out quickly, as Ace indicates. When I rebuilt the motor, I discovered that the PO had skimped on oil changes and the crankshaft sludge tube was blocked down to a pin-hole diameter. So the rebuild was not a moment to soon.

Electrical and cosmetic issues wouldn't worry me at all. Those are very simple cycle parts to work with. I loved that bike.

If you buy it, you may regret it. If you don't buy it, you may also regret it!

[Chuck D]

If I wanted another headache bike, I'd wait for a pre oil in frame Tiger. Much prettier.

[ace.cafe]

You could put that engine in a feather bed frame, and build a Triton.
 

[Chuck D]

You could put that engine in a feather bed frame, and build a Triton.
 

I know a guy...

[barenekd]

I worked at a Triumph, BSA, Norton shop from '70-'75 and the new bikes overall weren't really that bad. I didn't car for the '71 frame, it was too tall. But we didn't have that many warranty problems. However, owning one will remind you of what the Good Old Days were really like! The old English bikes were just like an iron barrel RE, they require a lot of TLC and maintenance; valve adjustments, carb cleaning and adjustments, timing adjustments, and much more frequent overhaul and top end jobs. as was mentioned, an electronic ignition system is a must if you want to the reduce maintenance time on the bike. Not that they're hard to start, but the system will keep it that way. 
My favorite Triumph 650s were the '68-'70 single carb models. My favorite Triumphs, though, were the '68-'74 single carb 500s.They were a lot lighter and smoother than the 650s. Far superior machine in everything but outright speed. They were somewhat faster than an Enfield with a top speed in the mid '90s, but if you're going to buy a Brit bike you not buying to go fast! I used to race scrambles and more often than not I beat the 650s with pretty good regularity. It was lighter, handled better and got better traction in the dirt and the wheel spinning 650s.
Bare

[pmanaz1973]

From looking at the pictures, those bends in the frame look an awful lot like a crash bar connecting point that took a decent hit.  You might want to take some basic measurements of the frame and see how tweaked it is. I'd be curious if the forks are bent or not...I'd bet you a beer and burger that they are slightly bent.  Every time I've seen "new" forks tubes they almost always came off a similar bike and are cleaned up but never turned to see if they are true.

After playing the "semi-restored" game with a 76 Norton, I agree that you will spend more money than you think.  It's always better to know that going in and sometimes still worth it if that is what you are after. 

[Guaire]

Like Bare, I worked in a shop. I've had one of those petcocks, just like yours, break in my hand. Triumph got a much better one for replacements. Lots of them sold as the older ones sucked.
  The electronic ignition is a game changer. Check with Sudco. They may have a flat slide for your size.

[mattsz]

a Fireball Iron Barrel would have an overall cost that is similar or less,  is faster than that Triumph,  gets better fuel economy, and has 50k mile longevity.

If I knew then what I know now - I passed on that nice $2k 2006 Iron Barrel with 1800 miles, and instead bought my $5k dog.

This has been an interesting - and for me, fun and enlightening - discussion.  Thanks to all for your input!

Unfortunately, it may all be moot as my car just failed inspection and I might be looking at a $1200 repair bill...   

Stay tuned...

[JVS]

$1200?!

I don't know what's wrong with it, but whatever part has failed, I'm hoping you can get it for a fraction of the cost at your local wrecker(s) probably.

[mattsz]

I know.

As usual, in Maine, the problem is rust - they like to use that liquid ice melt on the roads here all winter (calcium chloride?  magnesium?) and all the mechanics say it's trashing the older cars.  Brake and fuel lines (5 all told) all must be replaced.  Fuel filler pipe and associated vents are questionable.  Fuel tank is questionable.  I'm not set up for this kind of work.

The car is a 2001 Corolla.  I don't really like it much, but I've gotta fix it - we've already got a car payment, for another 2 years.

This car owes me nothing... it was a gift, and we've spent very little on it since we've owned it.  It's only got 80k miles, and it's basically my bad-weather commuter (18 miles a day).

I recently learned about "fluid film" for underbody rust prevention - I asked my mechanic about it, he said "great idea!"  Now he tells me...    I asked about the rest of the car, and he thinks the rest of the structure is in good shape still - he says these Toyota uni-bodies do pretty well...

Still, I don't like these kinds of surprises...

[barenekd]

the "Fluid film" is probably ACF-50. It's an Anti Corrosion Fluid designed for aircraft. It works extremely well and is considered good for a year between applications, although on a car, I probably use it a bit more often. I used it on my Enfield and never had any corrosion problems that some other guys have complained about. I use in the barrels of my shootin' irons, too.
Bare

[mattsz]

I was told that the "fluid film" in question was a lanolin-based product... and to expect to spend about $100 per application, once a year...