Those Rileys again

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Sir,

I was delighted at last to see an article on Rileys in the November, 1970, issue.

As a Riley owner for over seven years I can really vouch for the cars. I have, in fact, never possessed another car and use one of my two Rileys for everyday transport. My total mileage over the past seven years has been 56,000. The total cost of my cars £165—being made up of £45 for my 1952 2 1/2-litre years ago and £120 for my 1953 1 1/2-litre saloon over seven years ago. The 2 1/2 is my favourite car, is bodily in very good condition and still runs on its original pistons and unground crankshaft after 103,000 miles with an oil consumption of 600 miles per pint. My 1 1/2 was rebored at 105,000 but still runs on an unground crankshaft after 126,000 miles.

I do all my own maintenance and only darken the doors of garages for M.o.T. tests. The 1 1/2 engine is a beast to work on but the 2 1/2 an absolute joy with easy access, by virtue of removable bonnet sides, and good solid castings—no modern-pressed tin rubbish.

Although I started by expressing delight over your article, I feel that in a way it is a pity as I now find that in one short month the average 1 1/2 has appreciated approximately 60%—based on your average price and this month’s prices. I trust that this trend is not the shape of things to come. I own my Rileys because they are cars, not investments.

I get the impression that some advertisers have no real knowledge of the cars, especially when advertising a 2 1/2 as a 1950 RMF. According to my figures RMFs were not manufactured prior to 1952. My 2 1/2—engine number RMB2 508—was sold in June, 1952, in which year 1,069 2 1/2s were built. A simple arithmetical calculation therefore tells me that RMEs at the very earliest commenced production at the end of 1951.

Another curious point is the numbers of incredibly low-mileage cars advertised for sale—two in this month’s issue. When one considers that the total production of 2 1/2s and 1 1/2s was only 22,665 this seems unbelievable. Perhaps Riley is a self-propagating species.

Neil M. Ross.
Edinburgh, 4.

Related articles

Related products