Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Morgan Aero 8, 2012< Plus 8, SuperSports, Coupe & Aeromax AEROMAX

Dean, you've hit the nail on the head when you say "what do you think the right colour is in your opinion"; the right colour really is down to personal opinion.

However, in my humble opinion, the lines of the Aeromax are shown best by a lighter shade of metallic. When speaking with Matt Humphries (designer of the Aeromax) I asked him what colour he envisaged when he designed the car and his response was the Liquid Mercury colour (the colour of the original Morgan car). He said it made the most of the lines and showed the changes in surface better than any other colour - I have to agree (but again, I am biased and also it is simply my opinion). What I do know is that if I could change the colour of mine with click of my fingers, I wouldn't.

Another way to view the 'right colour' would be the one that would appeal to the largest audience, should you ever choose to sell the vehicle. The metallic silvers, gunmetals and navy blues seem to all be quite popular when it comes to Aero/Aeromax resale.

That said, whilst some unique colours may take longer to sell, if you really love it, then I'd suggest that is more important than future concerns about resale. However, that doesn't negate your question about the perception of the 'right colour'.

Interior leather and trim colour is also a consideration and the combination of both with the exterior of the car. The car I mentiond above not only had 'documented damage' but was also a manual (considered by many to not suit the character of the Aeromax) but also whilst the exterior was a reasonable colour, the interior trim and leather seemed to put quite a few buyers off when matched with the exterior.

As mentioned, the ideal is to buy what you like but if you have concerns about the best possible future value, there are some other factors you may choose to consider.

All IMHO

I reckon that it was manual gearbox and interior colour that delayed the sale of the Hammond car. The advantage of the well documented collision was that it showed that the accident was little more than a bump

buying such a car on finance:
ain't got the money: don't buy it,
finance isn't for free!!!!

just my 2 cents (euro )

@Simon: thought there were 25 max'es sold in the UK, RHD,
already 10 of them left the Islands????

my Max goes to a oldtimer-show in februari and if it ain't sold
I'll get it back and use it another season
I'm selling it to go to a higher level sportscar (still fond of the 12C), need the €€€ of the max to fund it

??? Surely the best kind of car to buy on finance is one that ain't depreciating. For many of us (particularly those who run our own small businesses) even if we can afford to buy stuff outright it can make more sense with the current low interest rates to borrow the cash & retain liquidity for more important things.

Finance is there as a tool, sometime it makes perfect sense - especially on something non depreciating. The reality is however that very few if any Aeromaxes (or areas full stop) are bought new with finance. This is what the factory said when I spoke about this a couple of years back.

I'm not a fan of finance on cars (learned the hard way with a Maserati once!) but on a car with a stable value it really comes down to the opportunity cost, and as said, if you can afford it, and can afford the downside if the risk doesn't work out then why not...

The perception was different to "little more than a bump"; therefore, the perception did assist in over taking the facts.

Over the course of it being up for sale I received 3 enquiries about that car and each person raised concerns about the accident damage. I relayed the same information that I had been told, by the source of the repair, and that was: the damage was repaired correctly and despite having to have some panels replaced, there was no chassis damage. I made it clear that the factory were willing to discuss the repair and what was done to correct the damage; furthermore, that there was no lasting mechanical damage that would effect the use of the car. Despite my reassurance and that of others, none of those individuals went forward with the purchase. Whilst I cannot solely attribute this to the 'accident pedigree', the perception - due in a large part (imho) to Hammond writing about it - was that this would negatively effect future value and thus people were wary.

Thanks for the insight Simon, If panels needed replacing then it was more of a bump than I though from the photos.

Wasn't it rumoured Simon that it was pranged more than once?

That was also my understanding...



Brian, I agree with your points about the manual transmission and interior colour combination; however, from my experience, I did find people were put off because of the perception of the accident and the damage caused. A shame really but I'm sure the first owner didn't loose any sleep over it.

As someone who tested the car with a view to purchase and agreed a price (though not as it turns out in the right order...) I decided to wait for another. My reservations about this example were not so much the accident damage - which I was told amounted to a new front valance and one repaired wing - but water damage to the leather interior (passenger door skin, sill covering) which would be hard to remedy with a small repair given the unique distressed leather. The interior wood was also very light against the leather. True, these are all things that can be fixed and the exterior colour looked stunning. In the end I simply decided that an auto without side-pipes would better suit my intended use.