Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today!



  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    I can just picture that Buick. A barge, of course, but nicely styled. I always liked how the four-door hardtops in '75 and '76 had that extra window in the "C" pillar--most stylish IMHO on the Pontiac Bonneville, Buick Electra, Olds Ninety-Eight, and Cadillac, a little less so on lesser Chevs-Pontiacs-Buicks-Oldses.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    That's an old Pontiac Montana--or maybe even the "TransSport Montana" if it's old enough.

    By all accounts, the Uplander, Buick Terraza, and '05-06 Montana were sales duds, but Pontiac actually only built their revised van for two model years! Amazing.

    Having had two Ventures before our Uplander, the Ventures rode softer, the Uplander did better in crash tests, and I think the Uplander, with its big tires, aluminum wheels, and revised interior, looked better, but it rode hard I think. I always wondered if the increased crashworthiness contributed to that. It was reliable and cheap to operate in the 94K miles we put on ours.
  • magnettemagnette London UKPosts: 1,927
    edited May 2013
    The 3-litre six in the MGC isn't the same engine as the one used in the Autin-Healey. Instead it was the same engine used in the Austin 3-litre (a larger RWD version of the Austin 1800) and it was not suitable for a sportscar, although I've known people with them here who have liked the C because it is more of a tourer.
    MG finally got it right using the Rover 3.5 V8 (ex Buick) which was a load faster, lighter etc, but by then it was too late and it never saw any development - the engineers at British Leyland probably deserve medals for what they developed on a budget measured in pence sometimes but the bean-counters should have been charged with treason for the way they ran our car industry...(Guess which ones actually got the knighthoods - with the notable exception of the great engineer Issigonis, of course).
  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes S.E. Wisconsin Posts: 894
    Hey, is that a curb feeler on the front of that New Yorker, or is it just the photo? ;)
  • berriberri Posts: 4,138
    I'm thinking that the 63/64 Cadillac's were never all that popular with Caddy fans. But I always kind of liked them. They just seemed kind of clean looking without a lot of excess baggage. In 65 they seemed to get a little plumper again.
  • berriberri Posts: 4,138
    I always though that vintage of Chrysler was rather stately looking. There was a kind of creme or beige color that I think was popular on them and looked very nice on it.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,496
    Hmm never heard of that, will have to look out for it. Caught part of "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" last week, where the bad guys have a fintail that crashes on ice and blows up (of course).

    Nothing particularly odd spotted on the road today, oldest car was a MB W123 I think.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,496
    Funny line, a "new 1979 car" - I bet people today would go insane at malaise era car quirks. I remember my friend's 83 Monte Carlo would run on/diesel if turned off with the AC on.

    I think I see the curb feeler, too.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,116
    I loved the 1963 Cadillac! When I was a very little kid, a neighbor had a big black 1963 Sedan DeVille. I asked my Dad what kind of car that was and he said it was a Cadillac. I have been in love with Cadillac ever since then.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    Around our parts, I always saw a lot of '63-64 Cadillacs, which made me assume they sold better than earlier or later models, but just guessing.

    The '65 Cadillac is my favorite. Love the instrument panel before a lot of crash padding needed to be added. After a few years, it seems like the separate cornering lights began to sag, though. They were integrated in '66 which took care of the problem.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,846
    Initially, I was going to guess that the reason you saw more '63-64 Caddies was that they built more than '61-62, as the economy kept improving, while in '65-66, even though they were even more popular, build quality started slipping, so they didn't last as long? But then, here are the production figures, which I found at the site

    1961: 138,379
    1962: 160,840
    1963: 163,174
    1964: 165,909
    1965: 182,435
    1966: 196,685

    So, while 1961 was a comparatively low year, '62-64 were all pretty close, and there's not a HUGE jump between '61-62 sales and 63-64. Maybe 10% total. '65-66 looked like a healthy increase, though.

    I think the '62 Caddy is my favorite, although I like the '61 as well. I just like the clean, crisp lines and overall sleekness of them.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,846
    Nah, you got it right, that's a curb feeler! Something I'd normally associate with pimpy big-city life, but this car lived most of its life in Pennsylvania, in the rural area south of Harrisburg (it was in Middletown when I "rescued" it).

    My other '79, a 5th Ave edition, has another pimpy feature from that era...little chrome mudflaps!
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited May 2013
    Did Caddy change engines from '63 to '64? I think they did. A buddy of mine whose parents had '56, '60, '65, '67, '70, '73, '76, and '78 Cadillacs had told me that the latter engine was better, but I can't recall why.

    I like the '62's also, and my friend just recently bought one from Indiana, a white Coupe deVille which I'm anxious to see (he lives about an hour northeast of me).

    When I was in college, a guy on my dorm floor (this is late '70's) had his parents' old '64 Coupe deVille (purchased new) for transportation. It was a little rusty but cleaner than the average '64 in NW PA by that time. It was a pale turquoise metallic with matching cloth and leather inside. I seem to remember it had a signal-seeking AM radio (!). We'd pile in it to go to a place we liked to eat, about fifteen miles away, every once in a while.

    Off the subject of Cadillacs, but my last paragraph reminds me that a girl in my dorm drove a '64 Studebaker Commander, dark red 4-door, which I'd see in the dorm lot. It was forlorn-looking. In an older house on Main St. in Clarion was also seen a '66 Stude back then. In the mid'70's in my hometown, there was a '64 Stude hardtop (which I later owned, another story) and a '65 Stude 4-door one street apart from each other, still being used daily.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,846
    I just looked it up, and yeah, there was an engine switch...390 CID with 325 hp in 1963, 429 CID with 340 hp for 1964.

    I'm guessing it was still the same basic engine, although both the bore and stroke are different between the two. Usually a manufacturer will change one or the other, but not both at the same time, when they enlarge an engine.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,846
    this morning I got the New Yorker fired up and drove it to the gas station. Figured I'd rather take it out during a less busy time, just in case it decided to misbehave. Impressively, it fired up on the second try this morning. Temps are a little cool, and damp, so that's just typical 70's car for you!

    Anyway, at the gas station, a nice sounding customized hotrod pulled up behind me. Couldn't tell what it was, but I'd say around a 1939-40 something-or other. It was a yellow coupe with a split grille, and lowered roof. And it had a split grille. Wasn't a GM product, as the headlights were integrated into the fenders. So I guess it could've been a Ford or Studebaker?

    Also, while I was there, a blue 1987 or older Grand Marquis sedan pulled in, looking pretty good. And, as I was leaving, an early/mid 90's Buick Century, dark blue, was entering the station. Looking a little ratty and worn, but considering what I was driving, I'm not gonna judge!

    And, this is a bit embarrassing...checking the fuel log, my NY'er was last filled up on 9/14/11. Since then, it had been driven 115.7 miles. The odometer and speedo are off, although I forget by how much, so that figure might be more like 120-125 miles. I'm sure letting the gas get that old didn't do much for it. It could just be my imagination, but on the way back home after the fill-up, it did seem to drive a LOT better. MPG on that tank was about 7.5. Ouch. But, I've gotten cars to get worse! :shades:
  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaPosts: 1,737
    Up through the 1962 model year the Cadillac V-8 was an evolution of their original OHV V-8 introduced in 1949. For the '63 model year they did a major redevelopment of that design, although it retained the 390 CID size. Then for '64 they changed the bore and stroke to bring it up to 429CID. That seems strange and I imagine that parts for the one-year only 1963 version must be tough to find now. In '68 they came out with an all-new engine of 472CID which later was increased to 500CID.

    2011 Buick Regal Turbo, 1968 Oldsmobile Cutlass S Holiday Coupe

  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    You should take the NYer out on the highway and give it an Italian Tune Up. In other words beat the snot out of it.

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,403
    edited May 2013 make a car even worse than it originally was:

    Behold----the SHADOWMINO!


  • berriberri Posts: 4,138
    While I readily admit to a certain fondness for the in your face 59, I share your preference for the 62 Cadillac. It has a kind of understated elegance about it.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited May 2013
    ...or to discuss price, but I just think this is the most original/authentic looking Cosworth I've seen in at least a couple decades: - - orth-Vega-Twin-Cam-All-Original-Only-15K-Original-/271203972592?pt=US_Cars_Truck- - - s&hash=item3f250435f0&vxp=mtr

    It is identical (the black cloth interior is somewhat unusual) to the single one my hometown dealer, Dart Chevrolet-Cadillac, Greenville, PA got in and I rode in when new (didn't drive). They had it a year later and sold it to an older lady (seriously) who traded in a six-cylinder '72 Nova for it. It is now owned by an old acquaintance, who bought it probably 15 years ago at another Chevy dealer fifteen miles away.
Sign In or Register to comment.