1960's Oldsmobiles

speedshift

'61 Bonnevilles are gorgeous. The longer length agrees with the styling. And the four speed hydro is miles ahead of the Catalina's slim jim. Of course a T-10 four speed would be nice in either car, with Tri-Power and eight lugs. And while I'm dreaming, make it red on red.

carnut4

I always thought the 61 Pontiacs were some of the best looking ever. And I agree that the Bonneville's extra length that year worked well, unlike some other cars with exttra length tacked on the rear. But the 61 Pontiacs are so hard to find! Try to find a good one-maybe a Ventura or Bonneville 2dr hardtop, maroon with tri-tone interior and 4speed-hey, one of those might make me look for more parking space again.

isellhondas

I forgot what they called your '67 Skylark transmission but it wasn't a Dual Path.

Dual Paths were only used in 61-63 Buick Specials and Skylarks. They were total JUNK! I had one.

The transmission pan is held on my one bolt up the middle.

Mr_Shiftright

Dual Path and both dead ends.

speedshift

You're right, the later Buick two-speed is called Super Turbine 300 according to my '66 factory manual. The oil pan is held on by a number of bolts around the edge so it's probably not the Dual Path with a different name. Optional on the 225 V6, the 300 V8 and 340 V8 when installed in the Special/Skylark and on the Skylark GS 401. Interestingly, it looks like the Turbo 400 (or "Super Turbine 400") was optional on the 340 LeSabre as well as the 401/425 Wildcat and Electra.

According to the '63 Olds manual the F-85/Cutlass uses the same automatic as the full size car. I looked at the oil flow diagrams in all four(?) gears and they're identical trannies, although with different ratios for first and second. It mentions a torque converter which the old four speed hydro didn't have. Very strange.

My '62 Pontiac manual doesn't include automatics so I can't compare the Olds tranny to the Pontiac slim jim and four speed hydro.

Parm must be rolling his eyes by now :-). We're probably getting into the "more information than I needed" stage.

parm

I'm staying here in the baby pool. But, I'm listening to what's going on in the deep end just in case I get the urge to go for a swim. ;-)

parm

that I do enjoy looking at this car. http://www.duffys.com/duffys/results.asp?stockid=206041

But, $21,000? No way.

I've talked to this dealer twice now and he keeps telling me that the CPI Price Guide is essentially worthless. Today, I sent him a page out of an article from the Sept. 2002 issue of Mustang Monthly (MM). The article is a "how to" for buying a classic Mustang, though the rules apply for any classic car.

For determining an offer price, MM recommended using CPI (specifically, CPI was the only price guide they mention in their article). I found it interesting that of all the price guides in the collector car hobby, they chose CPI. While they didn't NOT recommend Old Cars Price Guide, they also didn't even bother to mention it. Thus, it's omission speaks volumes.

Of course, the dealer insists that Old Cars Price Guide is far more accurate (I guess I would too if I were in his shoes) and he continues to maintain that this car is worth Old Car's #1 value of $21,000. The CPI value for a '65 Olds 98 convertible in "good" condition is $5,875 while one in "excellent" condition (which this car appears to be) is valued at $9,700.

It's puzzling how there can be such a wide gap between CPI and Old Cars Price Guide. I mean how many '65 Olds 98 convertibles sell in any given year? Not many, I'll bet. Don't these publications have access to the same sale data? In any event, if I'm wrong about wanting to use CPI, then so too are the folks at MM. Thus, I'm in pretty good company. It'll be interesting to see what reaction (if any) the dealer has to this article.

Having said all this, I have pictures of this car and it does look to be a very well-preserved, very original car. The engine compartment is not detailed, but it contains what appears to be the original, factory chalk markings. The interior looks pretty pristine. This car is also fully loaded.

The dealer is hanging his hat on the fact that this is one of the best '65 Olds 98 convertibles in the country and it just may be. I wouldn't dispute it based on what I've seen. But, the point I tried to make to him (though I don't think he ever heard me) was that demand is more of a determinant of value than condition. I contend that demand for this car is not very strong which is something I need to consider as a potential owner that may want to eventually sell it.

I told him if I paid $21,000 today, that I seriously doubted I'd be able to re-sell the car for that price to which he didn't have a reply. Whatever car I get, all I want is to be able to sell it for what I paid.

He acknowledged that at $21,000, this car would most likely be purchased by a collector. I would agree. However, I also have to believe that dealers of this caliber are few and far between. Otherwise, this car would've been sold long before now.

carnut4

this car is way overpriced at $21,000! Hey, I see 60s Oldsmobiles all the time in original condition in the $3-10,000 range. Even convertibles, for under 10 grand, in original condition. Not to detract from the one in your ad-it's beautiful-but-I think you should be able to buy a comparable car for $12,000 or less-based on what I've seen in CPI and Old Cars Price Guide.
But, you know, if something turns up that really tweaks your fancy, and it's in range, of both the CPI and OCPG, [like my pristine, original 62 Impala SS was] then I say GO FOR IT! You know, even if you pay a bit too much, [according to what the price guides say] there are other factors that affect that [original papers, documents, etc], and in any case, you'd surely not LOSE anything-if you kept the car and used it over time, etc. So, if you find a car that looks good overall, and the price guides say you're in the ballpark, then what the hell-GO FOR IT! you know, you can't lose much, even if you pay more than what a price guide says. And, if you get an all original car, that's obviously a cherry time capsule, you'll enjoy it, no matter what-and never regret it.
Hey, when I saw my 62 Impala SS, I wasn't even looking for one, but when I saw this one [a time capsule, all original with 41,000 miles] I had to have it, regardless of book value. As it turns out, I've had TONS of pleasure with it, and it will ALWAYS be worth more than what I paid. That's enough for me. Hey-go buy an old classic while you still can-and enjoy it! You'll never regret it!

parm

Well, the dealer is at $21,000 and CPI is at roughly $10,000. That's a pretty big ball park!

He'd have to get a lot closer to $10K than I would to $21K I can tell you that right now.

Personally, I would not be willing to pay in excess of a car's value just to own it. If someone has money to burn, then fine. But, I don't.

Believe me, if I bought this car at $21,000, I would definitely "lose" if I kept the car and used it. Maybe if I put it in a time capsule and held it for 10 years I'd be able to sell if for more than my investment. But, what's the fun in that?

When you drive a car, you invariably get paint chips, dings, rust/corrosion, etc - all of which are fine if you didn't have to break into Fort Knox in order to buy it. But, when you start piling on maintenance and repair costs, then all of the sudden that $21,000 doesn't look like such a good deal after all.

Keep in mind your '62 Impala SS is a car some folks would kill for. So there's far less risk for a car like that if you buy it high. For a '65 Olds 98, I doubt most people would even bother to walk across the street. That's not to say I don't like this car, because I do. But, I have to put myself in the shoes of a more typical, mainstream buyer.

jsylvester

Yeah, you do pick up paint chips, etc. if you use the car. But unless the car is kept in a heated, ventilated garage, it is going to corrode whether it is used or not to a certain degree.

I saw the dealer had a 67 Impala convertible for $9,500. Kind of plain looking outside, and based upon his pricing schemes, probably not the greatest paint job?

Just FYI, on E-bay you can search for collector cars just in your region by selecting "All Collector Cars", and then selecting whatever region you wish. Doing that in my region came up with 47 vehicles in my region, including a 65 Coronet station wagon with a 440! No really interesting convertibles for sale, though.

The next month or so will be excellent convertible weather in the midwest, so good luck!

Mr_Shiftright

CPI is NOT worthless.!! Bad information you got there!

CPI is one of the more accurate of the price guides, and I'm in a position to know this---so take my word for it, CPI is as good as it gets when it comes to "real world" prices on MOST cars. Old Car Price Guide on the other hand, is for padding retail prices or padding appraisals.

CPI isn't too too good on figuring out all the complex options on muscle cars, for instance, but even there it isn't too far off.

Gold Book (www.manheimgold.com) is another decent price guide for "classics" and NADA is pretty good, too.

Another "off the wall", or "don't you wish" price guide is Cars & Parts "Utlimate Collector Car Price Guide" --- crazy prices.

For exotics, Sports Car Market Price Guide is hard to beat.

I use about 7-9 price guides, plus 4 auction databases going back 5 years, plus Internet and in-print comparables for sale, plus consultation with my dealer network.

And based on ALL that, Duffy is overpriced by a lot.

parm

It's funny you mentioned NADA, because the guy at Duffy's dismissed that guide as being inaccurate as well.

Here are the results for a 1965 Olds 98 convertible as per the three guides you recommend (I tried valiantly to put these figures in an easy to read table, but the Edmunds software wouldn't let me).

CPI:
Fair $3,525
Avg/Good $5,875
Excellent $9,700

Gold Book:
Fair $9,000
Avg/Good $13,000
Excellent $21,000
Show Car $26,000

NADA:
Low Retail $6,215
Avg. Retail $11,900
High Retail $18,100

The values from Gold Book and NADA are fairly consistent, but CPI is a hell of a lot lower. What gives?

How can CPI be that much lower than these other two? As a buyer, I'd love CPI, but as a seller I'd probably want it banished from the earth.

I mean, come on now. How can these guides be this far apart?

By the way, where do these guides get their prices? Auction results would be fairly easy to obtain, but I'm always skeptical of auction values because buyers can let emotions carry them away. Next thing you know, they're writing out a check for more than the car is worth.

How do they get in the trenches and obtain sale prices in private sale transactions involving folks like us? Please don't tell me they include asking prices and dealer listing prices in their calculations. That would be down right scary.

Inquiring minds need to know.

NOTE: The NADA values above assume the base engine which in 1965 was a 425 V8. They allow a 15% for an optional 425 V8 which I think perhaps had a slightly higher compression ratio. I'm assuming the car at Duffy's has the base engine, or else it'd be mentioned in the ad.

Mr_Shiftright

Well you know Price Guides are "guides".--it's all ballpark. Unlike new cars, which are pretty much all alike in the showroom, or 1-2 years old, very old cars are each unique. You have to look at each one.

I suspect that the difference we see is because some guide books use actual sales data and other books use formulas of what cars "should' sell for.

Personally I think a '65 Olds 98 is a tough sell over $10K, but if you reference it as a formula against other 60s full-size convertibles, it should be more in the $15-16K range for a super nice car. But a '98 isn't a 442 or a Starfire--I can't see it pullling big money.

Essentially, when I see a big gap in price guide prices, this tells me that actual points of sale are few and far between. When I see a very close agreement with all the price guides, I tend to rely more on those, since that means to me that the data comes from many sales transactions, not just 20 a year or some such.

I'd say CPI is a bit low on the car, and NADA a bit high.

As for Gold Book, I don't think price guides should list "show cars", since cost-no-object restorations can fetch very unusual sums in the right venue (big famous auction with everyone drunk, for instance). To me a "show car" is never driven, and the tires are kept in little tire mitts while the car is trailered from place to place.

parm

My first job out of college was with Burroughs Corporation in direct sales. One of my sales trainers had a baseball cap with the words "so what" written on the bottom of the bill. When you were roll playing (with him being the customer) and if you made irrelevant references, he would flip up his bill so you'd see the words "so what". It was a pretty effective way to make a point.

During my phone conversations with the dealer of the '65 98 convertible, I could've used this hat. The reportedly original, time capsule condition of this car (limited to the interior and exterior paint to some extent - the engine bay is not detailed) only goes so far. After that, it's "so what". My point being that "demand" is a greater determinant of market value than "condition". And, the market demand for a '65 Olds 98 convertible is not overwhelming - at least as far as I can tell.

It's kind of like being the best golfer on the north pole. Yep, you got it - "so what".

The dealer honestly believes he has a real find on his hands with this car and he probably does to a bona fide Oldsmobile collector. But how many of these guys/gals are running around? Thus, I suspect he'll eventually have to drop his price to reflect the more mainstream level of demand in the market.

But, since he thinks the CPI value guide is not worth the paper it's printed on, I doubt his "taking" price will get low enough for me.

Mr_Shiftright

Who "collects" Oldsmobiles anyway? I never have seen an entire Oldsmobile collection and I doubt there is one except maybe in the GM museum. Sure, one car in a fleet of collector cars might be an Olds, I've seen that, but really they didn't make all that many iinteresting cars, or at least not interesting enough to be storing a fleet of different models. It's the kind of car you drive around, not collect in large numbers.

andre1969

About 7 years ago, I tried to buy a 1958 DeSoto Firesweep from a guy who collected '59 DeSotos. He must have had about 7 or 8 of them, all in various states of repair/restoration. He was in the process of getting rid of everything he had that wasn't a '59 DeSoto, which included the Firesweep, a really nice looking '56 Firedome 2-door hardtop, and a somewhat rough '65 Fury 2-door hardtop.

I'm sure that, somewhere, there's an Oldsmobile equivalent of this guy. Of course, that dealership may never find him, and that '65 may sit on the lot with a high price tag until the end of time!

jrosasmc

I'm with Mr. Shiftright on this one: Who really does collect Oldsmobiles? My parents had one in the late '80s and it was nothing but a disposable piece of steel and plastic. At least that's what my mom called it (the car was a Cutlass Ciera).

speedshift

There are "collectors" and there are "eccentrics".

Somehow the eccentrics never have much money (there's something Darwinian about that) hence they will never pay top dollar.

parm

Was that a hidden "dig" aimed at me? ;-)

Mr_Shiftright

No, not at all. I also drive cars nobody collects.

By "collects" I don't mean "collects in the backyard". I mean a true collector with vertical and horizontal examples, with all important years highlighted and with various models of particularly stellar years--a 10-25 car collection in other words. A collection that "makes sense" and has been well thought out.

I was just saying that an Oldsmobile is not liklely to be the type of car that one would collect in that sense.....unlike say a Corvette collection, which might have an early 6 cylinder, a fuelie, a split window, a big block, a convertible, maybe the first year of each body change, etc. etc.

But just "collecting" (as in "gathering") cars, sure, anybody can do that. Free country.

jsylvester

Unless you are in love with Oldsmobiles, keep looking. I would guess that is what the consensus seems to be on this board - no one is dying to own that specific make and model. If buying a not so collectible car by the pound is acceptable, a mid 60's Imperial or Chrysler 300 convertible would be a little more interesting to me.

Did find out 64-65 Falcon Futura Sprint convertibles are worth more than my 67 Galaxie XL convertible in similar condition. Strange how time turns prices upside-down.

parm

To jsylvester: I'd certainly consider a '68 Chrysler 300 convertible if I could find a real nice one that wasn't clear on the other side of the country. We've been down this road before and I even started a Chrysler 300 Townhall discussion group several months ago, but don't know if it's still active now.

I heard from the dealer (Duffy's) again today by email. He responded to Mustang Monthly's recommendation of the CPI Guide by saying after further review he agreed with CPI's values for Mustangs. But, that's all he said in that regard. Guess that means he doesn't agree with their values for a '65 Olds 98 convertible?

He's asking $21K and said he'd entertain a "reasonable" offer, but if I was thinking of offering $10K (by the way, the top end value per CPI), then there was "no need."

I'm not trying to be a bean counter here, but I have to be smart about this and feel I should have a reasonable exit strategy should I ever decide to sell it. If I bought it for $10K, I think I could probably sell it for that if I ever needed to. But, anything more and it's like walking a high wire with no net on a windy day and I'm not prepared, willing or able to assume that risk.

So, I guess this car won't be sitting in my garage anytime soon. But then again, I suspect it won't be sitting in anybody's garage anytime soon - except for Duffy's.

speedshift

No, no dig intended, just a comment on the flakey end of the collector market.

I agree with you entirely, no point in paying a steep premium for a backwater collectible.

One could make a slight case for paying a slight (operative word in both cases being "slight") premium for the best darn '65 98 convertible in the whole world bar none. What's a "slight" premium, maybe 10% at most, perhaps less? So if CPI is $10k, then *maybe* $10,500 to $11k. Yes, that buyer would pay too much but the damage is relatively minimal.

Even so I'd need to have a very large place in my heart for '65 Oldses for me to feel good about paying that premium. Personally I wouldn't pay $1 more than market for a car like that, however pristine.

ghulet

I saw a '64 Olds 98 convertible for sale today (white/black leather) for $10k ('new fuel pump, battery, tires, dual exhaust, runs great, all original'). It looks nice, and is in a Chicago suburb; not sure if this interests you at all, if so, e-mail me (click on my profile) and I'll give further details. I'm guessing the price is negotiable.

parm

To his credit, the dealer has upgraded his website to include a slide show for each car. Check out the link then click where it says "start slide show". Then, click on the double arrows to advance the photos. You'll see the photos I've been mulling over for about a month.

Your reactions and opinions are encouraged.

http://www.duffys.com/duffys/results.asp?stocknum=206041

chris396

They probably only paid $11-13K for the car. A lot of first time classic buyers won?t even think of looking for a car from a private seller, so a dealer can get a high price for his car and the buyer doesn?t find out the true value unless he goes to sell. Some 442?s sell for decent money, but for the most part Olds aren?t worth a whole lot.

parm

$11-$13K? Do you really think this dealer paid that much? I figure it was closer to $7K.

chris396

Ha :~) you might be right.

carnut4

Parm-I can see why you've mulled it over. If it really is what it says, 44,000 original and all-hey it may be the best 65 Olds 98 out there. Trouble is, the dealer has that dang Price Guide to point to. This would be a great car if you could get it for 10-12K, I think. Doesn't matter if it's not as collectible or worth as much as some other cars-if it gives you everything you want, it's good.
I know,though-I looked at a 50 Plymouth convertible at a dealer in Portland a couple years ago-a gorgeous original-maroon with maroon leather. He wanted way too much, I thought-even more than the Price Guide-$20,000. Well, a week later some guy from Texas bought it sight unseen. There are people out there like that-with huge money to buy any toys they want. And, the dealer can say, "Well, where are you gonna find another one like that?" For a 50 Plymouth, he's right. For a 65 Olds? I don't know. But that doesn't matter if you want the car.
I'd like to know the history of that 65 Olds-where DID they find it, and how much did they pay? I'm guessing you're right-probably less than $10,000, and the private seller had no idea. That's a dealer forya. Whadya gonna do.
Anyway, that is a gorgeous car,no doubt,would be a great driver, and probably last forever with that drivetrain, which is much better than the 61-64 cars before it. But $21,000? I think it might be for sale for a long time.

ghulet

...but that $21k price is more in Eldorado/Impala SS (w/big engine)/Camaro territory. There just isn't that much interest in Olds 98 convertibles. Love the color, love the options, love the car in general, but the price is 50% over crazy.

parm

I know a little about the car's background. According to the dealer, it came from a local owner (in Iowa) who has/had multiple classic cars. I don't think this guy was a dealer, just someone with the means and enjoyment to own various cars.

This dealer has known the owner for a long time and has supposedly tried to buy this car (and probably others) from him for quite some time.

I don't know if this "collector" was the original owner, but I think he was. Anyway, I think the car has been well maintained, but not restored because it really didn't need to be.

So yeah, this is a pretty special car.

Mr_Shiftright

It may be special but it still is what it is and has to adhere to the market value.

Whether "some guy in Texas" overpays one time for a car or not does not determine the market, any more than someone "stealing" the car from an old lady, like the dealer probably did.

If 98 Olds consistently sold for $20K, well then you'd have to adjust the books to reflect that. But one time? Just a glitch in the statistics until a pattern shows up.

I paid less than book value for every car I ever owned, so if you were printing price guides based on my reports, they would be substantially lower than they are.

parm

In real estate, I like to say that the market generally seeks it's own level. In other words, people will pay only so much for a property no matter how over-built the improvements are. In appraisal parlance, we refer to these facilities as being "super adequate" or "over-improved" relative to market standards. The technically correct term is "functional obsolescence". I think this applies to this '65 Olds 98.

Actually, and this is exactly what I told the owner of Duffy's, if you take away the Sport Disc magnesium wheels, this car is pretty plain-Jane in terms of it's styling and visual appeal. All other factors being equal in terms of condition of the car, I'd much rather have a 1962-64 Cadillac. The Cadillac body styling is much more attractive, at least to my eye, and the visual appeal of these cars is not dependent on an optional accessory item such as the wheel covers.

In reply to his "if you're only going to offer $10K, then don't bother" (in so many words) statement, I presented an eloquent (naturally) rebuttal that the market demand for a '65 Olds 98 convertible (even for the very best one) is not all that great and that demand is the main determinant of value AND NOT the physical condition of the car. That was a couple of days ago and I've not heard anything back from him since.

That's not say assuming two cars of the same year and model that I'd expect the piece of junk to sell for the same price as the nicely preserved example. Obviously, the nicer car should sell for more. But again, the condition of a car (at least for a '65 Olds 98 convertible) is only going to carry so much of a premium.

CPI shows the value of a '65 Olds 98 convertible in excellent condition to be about $10K. You could argue that since the car has 44,000+ miles, it is not, by definition, in excellent condition. However, I'd be willing to concede their is some additional value attributed to the originality of the car. Thus, I think $10K would be a fair price.

However, since I've not personally inspected or driven the car, I've not made an official offer because if it is as good as it looks, my offer would probably be $10K. At which point, the dealer would likely have me escorted off the property.

So, at this point, its a waiting game - which is fine with me. Because, I know I'll be able to find another car I like equally as well (probably a Cadillac). Meanwhile, unless there's another oil baron down in Texas willing to buy this Olds regardless of the price, this car should be sitting in their showroom for a long time.

andys120

Nice photographs, nice presentation, nice car but yeah there's probably some real beauties out there for $21k and that's the thing.

savannahgrace

anybody interested in a 68 olds cutlass

speedshift

He's waiting for the one-half of one percent of serious marque collectors who are willing to step forward and have their wallet emptied for the right car.

Unfortunately for Duffy, the pool of serious Olds collectors is so small that the one-half of one percent he's waiting for is a guy who's been stuck under his Dynamic 88 for the last six months.

Mr_Shiftright

I knew a dealer who sat on a car for 3 & 1/2 years before finally facing the facts.

parm

So, I shouldn't abandon all hope?

Mr_Shiftright

No, you should abandon all hope, then you are free to do as you please.

speedshift

This is great--we're ninth in number of new postings in Town Hall.

Isn't this a first for the Classic Cars forum?

This is the break-out thread we've been waiting for.

parm

I never considered myself as being married to this car. The dealer would have to swallow a lot of pride before he'd consider selling this for a reasonable price. And, while I know he you can't eat pride, somehow I think he has a point to prove.

speedshift

Okay folks, keep it up. No longer do we labor in obscurity.

avalanche325

that the dealer had his price guide that said $21,000. He saw the car for sale for $10,000 or less and thought he had hit the lottery. He eagerly scooped it up figuring it to be an easy profit. Come to find out, HE paid fair market for the car. Now it is a pride issue. Being the "expert" and getting burned is a hard thing to swallow. He may not back down for a while.

carnut4

hoepfully there won't be some rich guy come along who just wants it for his collection and doesn't care what it's worth.
Like the guys who answer those ads in the Dupont Registry for "your own private jet for only $5700 a month!"

avalanche325

Hell, I'll take two.

ghulet

...as has been mentioned ad nauseam here, the dealers seem to have many, many price guides, naturally the lowest of which they will point to when buying, the highest is cited when selling. I still can't imagine where this guy found one that said anything close to $21k for a '65 Olds of any variety.

parm

Maybe you already know this, but Old Cars Price Guide shows the value for a '65 Olds 98 in #1 condition to be $21,000. I subscribe to Old Car Price Guide, but actually I've not even bothered to look it up. However, enough people have said that's what it says.

Anyway, I don't put much, if any, credence in this particular guide. Unless, of course, I was trying to sell a car ;-)

Mr_Shiftright

The problem with Old Cars Price Guide is that they don't tell people that there ARE NO #1 cars in the real world. That is a level of perfection people rarely if ever see. Even most trailer queens are not #1 cars. They barely exist, so I think the guides should not give out #1 prices. It just causes confusion abuse and misunderstanding in the buying and selling.

avalanche325

This guy is claiming that the car is not restored and original. How can it be in #1 condition? Isn't #1 BETTER than factory? That would mean that a brand new 2003 car with 0 miles that no one has ever sat in and the engine has not been started for the first time is a #2 car.

Mr_Shiftright

That's right. If it was driven on public roads for any distance, and say in for even 20K miles, the chances of it being #1 are slim. A #1 car is MUCH better than what ever left the factory. There are funny stories about a few rare old cars with only say 2,500 miles on them losing points in car shows to over-restored cars that weren't originals. So the factory standard wasn't good enough to win the trophies, in other words. Which is true, they were pretty much slammed together cars in the 1960s. Some of Detroit's work was not very pretty. Depends on the make of car really. A 60s Cadillac was put together with some care, but a Camaro or Corvette was very loosey-goosey.