My first post. I am asking for your input as to the better buy for enjoyment and resale. Both cars are barn finds and currently not licensed. I have the opportunity to buy either. I am leaning towards the 1965, as I dont need a back seat. I believe current owner drove both cars before parking them. I have not seen the 65. I saw the 69, white with black interior. Owner is ready to sell both. So these are complete, non-running cars. So what do you think I should offer for each.

But have no idea what to offer on the 65 as few for sale so it is hard to know where to start.

I am looking for a project for this summer

Dave

 

Welcome to the hobby that never ends. You can check Hagerty classic car values for a ball park price on the barn finds. Be prepared that may take more than a summer to get an E-type restored. Rust is their enemy and the tub may require a full rebuild to be safe. Then there are all the mechanical components, suspension, brakes, wiring that need attention after 50 years. For investment the two seater is a better bet, but is you are tall, a 2+2 is much more comfortable. Lots of info on line about the costs and time needed to rebuild these cars.


Its a fun ride restoring these cars but it does take time, and money.


A

 

Dave,
A series one coupe will be more valuable than a any series 2+2, however the key as stated by Alfred is the condition...mainly rust. I would perform an Ebay search for both models and look into the "sold" category. Although it is not a perfect read, it is a decent guideline and you will see cars in various condition.
Cheers,
Geoff

 

I'd definitely lean toward the '65 - both for styling and resale.
Meanwhile, I expect you'll find it's more than a 1-summer project.

 

Dave, First off good luck and have fun with either one.
1. The 65 coupe is 9 out of 10 the car
2. Ive had them all, its all about the rust and condition.
3. Ive seen people put 80 grand into a 2+2 , they never ever recoup.
Yes a series two is an easier car to drive and the brakes and such are upgraded for more modern driving, BUT its like an ASTON MARTIN DB5 or A ASTON MARTIN DB6.
I like them both, BUT.
Enjoy either way, if theres rotted body sills and frame rails, you summer project will become a lifetime sentence.
GTJOEY1314

 

The 2+2 came out because so many owners with small children wanted an E-type but couldn't fit them in, so Sir William Lyons decided to meet their needs ! Early 2+2s were a bit ugly, to be honest, due to the windscreen angle being wrong for the extended passenger compartment. However a 1969 2+2 will be the restyled version with the windscreen having a greater rake angle, so it looks almost as good as the coupe.

I would go for the car in the best condtion. You can spend almost the US defense budget if you have to rebuild one !

 

Ah Dave; you have a perfect opportunity to compare them side by side. Unless there is a roadster/convertible in the mix, then in my book, and the world-wide markets agree everywhere . . . the Series1 FHC will win hands down every time when compared to any of the less appealing 2+2s.

We owned an immaculate '65 FHC for near 40yrs, but became overwhelmed by market values . . . I feel compelled to point our there is also a "Plan B" . . . instead, buy a combination of late model XKR which is a far more enjoyable, reliable, fun ride . . . and a small European country as well!

Some will hound me for sacrilege, but I AM a long term Jaguar lover and E-Type owner.

IMHO, "barn finds" these days are products of 10yrs of fun followed by 40 yrs of neglect. Count on both sills, both floor pans and boot/trunk needing to be cut out and replaced. My car was never allowed to degenerate to this condition, but was still an ever present and watchful program of expensive maintenance. More than anything else, I recommend you think hard about a "summer" restoration . . . the reason most E-Type restorations are carried out professionally ($80K sounds about right) is that a ground up project to even a "show" standard (NOT "concourse") is quite daunting.

All said, I wish you well if you proceed,

Ken