1964 Austin Princess DM4: Confused Seller

right front

The seller of this 1964 Austin Princess Limousine, a model DM4, states it is one of the Rolls Royce model in their listing here on eBay. The history of these cars gets very confusing over the years, as the brand changed hands and names several times. This Austin may have a Rolls Royce engine, a six cylinder adapted from a military engine, but some sources say the engine wasn’t used by Rolls Royce until 1968. It looks like a lot of the major work has already been done to restore this one, and the seller says they have a correct bumper and grill, which will only take a day to install. If this is true why don’t they do it themselves? Does the hood really fit that badly or does it indicate a seriously out of square front end? Perhaps it been poorly repaired after an accident? This is a grand old car, but $12,999 seems way over priced, don’t you think? For about the same amount you can purchase a left hand drive Rolls Royce in good condition. This is an unusual old car, but what is it really worth? Do you think anyone would actually buy this thinking it is a Rolls Royce? Nothing in this posting makes much sense to me, so I’m hoping to learn more from you guys in the comments!

right rear left front front interior back seats

Like This? Get Our Daily Email!

Comments

  1. jim s

    anyone interested in this car should first contact the Rolls Royce Owner Club and give them the VIN number. if any part of this car is RR they should have the information you need. interesting find.

  2. Jamie Palmer jamie Staff

    It’s not, I believe this will have a 4 ltr. Austin truck engine.

  3. Stephen

    Drives like the Austin truck it is. Bloody awful beast.

  4. Frankie

    Ok, I went and looked at the ad, it says Rolls Royce Edition, the pictures took time to load and say in the upper left corner 1962. They have a 50% rating on eBay too. Some of the pics show a car they say they restored earlier, the body gaps are pretty poor, the fender skirts gaps are pretty big. If you know the person who actually pays the asking price you might want to check them for a head wound or labotomy scar.

  5. Peter

    If you look at the front bumper of the one they have restored you can see the 2 small holes where the “Princess” badge once was. The only RR thing about these Austins are the badly fitted grills. The hood has been badly reformed in an attempt to match the more angular grill. There were loads of these so called RR Princesses in the UK at one time. Done to make a cheap Rolls wedding rental. For $12,999 you can buy a good Shadow or even find a Spirit.

  6. Dave at OldSchool Restorations

    I may be wrong, but it does not look like a Rolls alloy motor..

    looks like one d-d carb, too

  7. kenzo

    I like the last comment. “Just lowered from 20K, it will be gone soon @ $12999. I don’t think so.
    I wonder if white leatherette with black piping is a stock interior fabric and colour?

  8. Jim

    80% restored!

    Right down to the original LED taillights!

  9. Gazzer

    People always get these confused with the Vanden Plas Princess 4- litre R. That was basically an Austin Westminster with a Rolls Royce engine. The car featured here has a very basic lorry engine and was mostly bought by local mayors who could not afford a Rolls.

  10. D. King

    Seller states the car has no odometer. Really? A 1964 car wouldn’t have such a basic instrument?

  11. Peter Hollinshead

    This car is an Austin (BMC)/Vanden Plas Princess, not a Rolls-Royce. The Rolls grille was someone’s later add-on, and does not belong on the car. The only Princess with a Rolls engine was the 4-Litre R, with the BMC Farina body.

  12. jos

    Seriously? Show me a Rolls Royce of this era in good condition for $13k and I’ll buy it sight unseen.

  13. brakeservo

    Regarding the comment on a ‘Rolls Royce of this era in good condition for $13k’ there are in fact plenty of running/driving Rolls Royces for much less, the caveat is that they will be a Silver Shadow or successor (1966 or newer) and thus ungawdly expensive to maintain, repair (particularly the brakes, hydraulics and electrics) and they’re incrediby ugly and ordinary looking to boot! And thus they are priced accordingly – cheap!

  14. brakeservo

    Again I repeat my comments that seem to have ‘disappeared’ – this mis-represented pig has appeared on eBay for quite some time. The seller cannot claim innocence or ignorance either – I’ve written to him pointing out it is a ‘cheap and vulgar’ Austin and even the grille appears to be counterfeit. I trust he realizes that there law firms that now devote their practice to eBay fraud!

  15. gunningbar

    Its hard to imagine anyone wanting this ugly white beast.. even when it was new. Sad waste of metal.

  16. jos

    A 1964 Rolls Royce would be a Silver Cloud III, worth way over $13k. Even a 1966 Silver Shadow in good condition is worth more, and not bad to keep up if it is in fact in good condition.

    • Bentleyguy

      I’m gonna guess you’ve never owned a Silver Shadow . . . nor known anyone who has

  17. Mark

    I would not pay anything like $13k for that hateful heap. These cars are good for banger racing or growing flowers out of, but not driving. Here in the UK I doubt it would be hard to find a better example than the one shown for more like £1500

  18. JefffH

    This is what the front is supposed to look like…..the one on offer here, simply looks crass.

    http://www.newirelandlimousines.com/wp-content/gallery/austin-princess/fleet_princess_view3_lrg.jpg

Leave A Comment

RULES: No profanity, politics, or personal attacks. Don't post your car for sale in the comments. Click here to get it featured on the homepage instead.

*

Notify me of new comments via email. Or subscribe without commenting.