[Rovernet] 1970 3500S NAADA original

Wed Nov 6 14:18:09 EST 2013

Any assessment of the car, 50 years on, is always going to have the benefit
and influence of hindsight. Whilst your comments may have a basis in fact
some are clearly an expression of opinion rather than fact and phrases such
as "the rear end was heavy" "the V8 was gutless" "a complex front
suspension" are surely subjective and dependent on your experience of other
cars it is being compared with.

The car was not perfect, no car ever is, it's level of imperfection is
dependent on the expectations of the observer, a gutless V8 to you was a
breath of fresh air to UK motorists used to a 4 cylinder motor in the car.
This gutless V8 in Mk 1 form had a better 0-60 figure than a 3.4 Mk 2 Jag
and only a second slower than a 3.8 which had another 50 bhp on tap...so by
no stretch of the imagination could it be described as sluggish in
comparison with other similar saloons.

I agree the Ambla and Formica are somewhat 'tacky' but of course by the
time it was in 3500S guise it was no longer a Rover it was a British
Leyland product carrying all the baggage that being a member of that family
entailed, but you did get electric windows, power steering and an air-con
option when such things were still some way off in the UK. Whilst it may
not of been, with hindsight  'right' for the US market it was a genuine
attempt to meet the expectations of the US buyer and in general did
receive, intitially good reviews from the US motoring press in 4 cyl form,
unfortunately by the time the 3500s arrived the pitfalls of trying to
service the motoring needs and servicing requirements of a country
thousands of miles across had taken their toll on Rovers reputation.

It's important you don't forget it was, compared to other automobiles on US
highways at the time safe, very safe, and it cost many US lives to achieve
the safety standards now regarded as the norm. Other cars may have had less
complicated brakes and suspension, simpler rear brakes and a livelier
V8............not much consolation as it folds up around you in a hard
shunt and the steering column heads ever closer to your chest because it
had a non complex front suspension with a rack and pinion mounted low
down at the front.

In the UK Ford still hadn't fitted a brake fluid level warning light in the
1970's and of course the main cause of auto fires in the sixties wasn't
actually fuel, it was brake fluid pouring all over a hot manifold in a
shunt, something Rover also tried to prevent with a flexible plastic
reservoir.

Personally I love em , warts an all, and accept some of the criticism
levied, but I do think you have chosen to highlight the 'faults' whilst
ignoring the positive aspects of the car, or perhaps you genuinely believe
there were none?

That being the case I'm happy to take any NADA 3500's anyone is looking to
off-load........well they are rubbish aren't they. ;) ;)

Best Regards

Alan Francis (partviking)

On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, wrote:

> Hi
> I hate to tell you  but this car is priced properly ,any P6B is not worth
> more. A  NADA P6B cured me of a life long addiction to Rovers. These cars
> were hopelessly, stupidly,  over engineered  . The engine bay was
> supposedly designed for a gas turbine !! resulting in a complex front
> suspension , the rear end De dion was a heavy  rust prone joke [ Triumph
> built a proper IRS ] The V8 was gutless even after removing the AED and
> smog stuff , the brakes were a pig to overhaul , the rear brakes made an E
> type Jaguar's accessibility  look good , Rover were too cheap to either
> find a decent 5 speed ,manual or a modern auto box , instead they persisted
> with that dreadful Borg Warner box. . Build quality was atrocious , the
> interior used plastic seats and wood trim  instead of leather and tree wood
>  etc . The contemporary Triumph 6 cylinder sedan was a better car
> The P6B was a gas guzzling disappointment .
> I was happy to swap it for another British car with a V8, excellent
> automatic transmission and A/C a Jensen interceptor  which uses similar
> amounts of fuel but is a lot more fun
> Cheers Patrick
>
> -----Original Message----- From: GeffMcCarthy
> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 1:06 PM
> To: 'Rovernet'
> Subject: Re: [Rovernet] 1970 3500S NAADA original
>
> PPS...!  My car is 433000340A, this one is 1552A, and James Taylor's book
> shows that 2043 Federal 3500S were produced. I assume these went to both
> USA
> and Canada.
> It is sad that our beloved Rovers do not command higher prices...
>
> AvMedSafe
> Geoffrey W. McCarthy MD MBA DipAvMed
> 677 NW Melinda Ave Portland OR USA 97210
> 503-241-8468(h) 503-799-3809 (mobile)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rovernet [mailto:rovernet-bounces at rovernet.org] On Behalf Of Tom
> Rymes
> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:10 AM
> To: Rovernet
> Subject: Re: [Rovernet] 1970 3500S NAADA original
>
>  On Nov 5, 2013, at 9:37 AM, "Ben Saunders" <bsaunders at firstva.com> wrote:
>>
>> Here is the link to a 1970 Rover 3500S NADA that seems to be very
>> original and in fantastic condition.
>>
>
>
> Here's a better link, Ben's was broken:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/141105430488
>
> Tom
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rovernet mailing list
> Rovernet at rovernet.org
> http://rovernet.org/mailman/listinfo/rovernet_rovernet.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rovernet mailing list
> Rovernet at rovernet.org
> http://rovernet.org/mailman/listinfo/rovernet_rovernet.org
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.3426 / Virus Database: 3222/6810 - Release Date: 11/05/13
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: Jensen Interceptor Mk II 011.jpg
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 644575 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <http://rovernet.org/pipermail/rovernet_rovernet.
> org/attachments/20131105/15cbbbee/attachment.jpg>
> _______________________________________________
> Rovernet mailing list
> Rovernet at rovernet.org
> http://rovernet.org/mailman/listinfo/rovernet_rovernet.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rovernet.org/pipermail/rovernet_rovernet.org/attachments/20131106/89119cb8/attachment.html>