The rudiments of Rickonomics
Mr Parkington explains his financial theories regarding vehicle repairs. Move over, Philip Hammond...
‘WOULD IT BE SENSIBLE TO BUY A NEW BIKE OR SPEND TO REPAIR AN OLD FRIEND?
“YOUR BLOKE’S NUTS!” observed our mate Lawrence to Judy as she opened the front door. “I’d scrap it.” Lawrence had very kindly come round to our place to tow our 2002 van to his garage for major repairs.
He’s right, of course, but galvanising prevents the dreaded rot pulling the Renault back into the earth – and having spent way too many hours welding four-wheelers, to me that makes it worth saving, even though it’s far too teccy for me to fix. But having already paid for a cam belt, water pump and clutch, it now needs another £1000-plus spent on it to get it roadworthy. So you can see Lawrence’s point. But I’d say the money’s already spent. Yes, £2000 would buy me another van, but that one would probably be about ready for a cambelt, water pump and clutch as well, so surely anything less than that spent on fixing this van is money saved. After all, it’s not so long ago that people thought you were crazy for pulling an old bike off of a scrapman’s cart. Today’s classic values justify it – but what if my beloved ’68 Triumph was as valueless as a 50-year old vehicle should be, by any logical criteria? Would it be more sensible to buy a brand new bike that I’d hate or spend whatever it cost to repair an old friend that I love dearly?
Ask Rich Bailey; in March Fixes he asked for help to fix his Honda XL600R – a bike that common sense told him to break for parts. I gave him some pointers and I’m delighted to say that he’s fixed it and is back enjoying the big trailie once more.
When a ten-year-old bike could easily be in far better condition than a 2016 model, surely the truly crazy bit is basing a value system on age rather than quality.