Howdy, Stranger!

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


hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,167
edited March 8 in Datsun
Okay, the '70s wasn't a good decade for sports cars, but a few, like the Datsun 240Z, were good. Others, even from the same manufacturer, as was the case with Datsun's 260, weren't. As the decade progressed, it's interesting to consider how various makes and models coped with the ever tightening emissions and safety regulations.

Let's talk about the good ones, the decent ones, and the awful ones.


  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    It's a painful era to trace, for the sports car lover. It started off in grand fashion but by 1979 we had to witness the death of the British sports car industry and the total humiliation of the Corvette into a car that STILL nobody wants.

    It's kind of can almost draw a line at 1975 between "good" and "bad".


  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,501
    So does this mean a TR7 isn't a great car?

    RX-7 came out in 1979 I think...that wasn't so bad.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,167
    ...the Datsun/Nissan 280Z was exciting. Oh sure, not today, but back then, yes, even though the swapping of sport for comfort was regretable to those who were unhappy to see the original sports car transformed into a sporty boulevard cruiser. And while the 280's value proposition may not have been as appealing as the 240's, it was still a solid value.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    Hard car for me to love, the 280Z, and not much loved by collectors either. Basically it is viewed by some as a bastardization of a pure form into a bit of a slug.

    But you are right, it's a good value for how little you have to pay for one today. Trick is to find one that hasn't been run to death by owners who couldn't afford to take care of them.


  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,167
    "Hard car for me to love..."

    My thinking on this is that the 240 set people up for a disappointment, and that memories and regard for the 240 undermine the value of the 280. Consequently, if the 280 had been the first generation Z car, it would be held in higher regard today, just as the first generation 4-seater T-Bird would be. Why? Because, despite the fact that they're little more than used cars today, the 280 and the
    Square Bird were innovative and popular in their day. Today they'd be viewed as positively differentiated, whereas their more highly regarded predecessors are more unique.

    "Trick is to find one that hasn't been run to death by owners who couldn't afford to take care of them."

    True. Also, Nissan doesn't support its older models with new parts the way BMW, Mercedes and GM (with its muscle cars) do. That may be true of most or all Japanese manufacturers. Stocking new parts for older models helps the image and value of the brand, but apparently the Japanese manufacturers are more focused on the disposal and replacement of their old cars than in nurturing heritage. Oh well, that's a topic for another discussion.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,167
    "It's a painful era to trace, for the sports car lover. It started off in grand fashion but..."

    Shifty, could you elaborate on which models qualified as "grand fashion" examples. I presume the '70-72 Alfa and Fiat spyders, Datsun 240Z, and perhaps certain Porsches might be among the non exotics you might list.

    Acknowledging that the (roughly) '73-'82 decade represented the nadir (or Nader?) for sports cars, which are the least bad examples, and how did these compare with their counterparts from the '50s and '60s?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    Well if you start with 1975, the first really "bad" year for sports cars, you still have a few decent candidates:

    I'm only trying to include cars that can really be driven as a sports car, and which aren't total mechanical disasters that make ownership onerous.

    TR6--the 1973 and earlier cars are far prettier, but the 74-76s are the same mechanically.

    Mazda RX7 1979-82

    Porsche 914 1975-76

    Jensen Healey 1975 if you can stand to look at it.

    Porsche SC 1978-83 (great cars!)

    BMW 2002 75-76 -- bog slow and heavy but still fun and you can modify them.

    If you include 1974, the Alfa Spider, Saab Sonnett, Volvo P1800ES, Lotus Europa, Fiat 124 Spyder and the last "real" MGB come to mind.

    also the Fiat X1/9, while a piece of crap in build quality, is a really fun car to drive for peanuts.


  • jrosasmcjrosasmc Posts: 1,704
    Would you personally buy an Alfa Spider from 1976-81 (the last of the Spica-injected cars)?

    Oh yeah how about mid-70s Toyota Celicas- would you consider them to be true bona fide sports cars?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    Sure, nothing wrong with the Spica cars as long as you can find someone who knows how to set them up properly. Once tuned right and dialed in, the Spica cars actually perform better than the later Bosch-injected ones. However, I don't think I'd SEEK OUT a Spica car per se. I'd rather run an Alfa with carburetors and be done with it.

    No Celicas aren't sports cars in any way...they are incredibly boring to drive and they handle like mush. A Japanese appliance...albeit a very good appliance.


  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,167
    Saab Sonnett? Really? I'm surprised you included it because, while it may have been an interesting car, and Saab's only attempt at building a sports car, from what I've read it wasn't a good car. However, I suppose that, just as the Fiat X1/9 was fun, but not good, so too the Sonnett may have been fun.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    Well the last Sonnett, Series III I think it was, had a more pleasing shape and was pretty competent as a sports car, if you could excuse the FWD I mean. True they suffered the fate of all Saabs (lousy transmissions) but for a low buck two seater with a distinctive look, hey, why not? With MGAs and Bs pushing 20K they are starting to look more attractive to the average guy on a budget.


  • We have a Sonnet floating around the autogroup some where in the classic car collection.

    Not sure what type or year it is though. It seems like a good little car.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    Well it has the typical Saab foibles...weak transmission, torque steer and in the case of the very early Saabs, a rather raucous V-4 engine that is not particularly pleasant to listen to. I always thought a Sonnett III with the Ford Cologne V-6 2.8L would have been an interesting car.

    But it was rugged like old Saabs could beat the crap out of them and drive them on railroad tracks all day if you wanted. And unlike British sports cars, they had heaters that WORKED!


  • I would hope the heaters worked in any old SAABs or Volvos...

    How much of Sweden is within 75 miles of the artic circle?

    The heater in our 59 Rover works great if you want your legs burnt and your head frozen... :cry:
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    British cars always amazed me like that...the engine temperature on a cold day would be hot enough to melt steel and yet, just on the other side of the firewall, a mere 6 inches, it was a meat locker.

    Model A Fords used to have a little tin tunnel that you clamped on the exhaust pipe, and it ran like a little mouse labyrinth through the firewall, where you opened a tiny trap door and let the exhaust heat in...and the carbon monoxide, too.

    The British play tennis in the rain, so that explains a lot.


  • Those silly brits... :sick: They could never get AC to work either. I remember a bunch of people who reviewed the Mclaren F1 said that the AC sucked in that car too.

    Ohh and on the 59 Rover only your right leg gets hot the left leg freezes.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    A friend of mine ended up putting a Bedford truck heater in his MGB-GT, and that worked very nicely.


  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,167
    I read that a '71 Hemi Barracuda convert sold for (whew!) $2.2 million at a Phoenix auction last month. While the 'Cuda is a pony car rather than a true sports car, it's close enough to be noteworthy in this discussion. Talk about a bubble! I'd be awfully nervous about having paid that much, if I were the buyer. My advice to him would be to look for another greater fool baby boomer immediately.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    Well that's one of the rarest cars in the world---it's not a good example. They only made 7 (yes SEVEN) of them in 1971 and if it was a 4-speed, they only made 2 or 3 of those.

    This is a case where you have every conceivable desirable option PLUS extreme rarity. So the "supply and demand" equation is skewed way in favor of the seller.

    You want a '71 Hemi Cuda ragtop? You either buy mine for 2.2 million or you wait the rest of your life for another one to show up.

    So in my opinion, while the price is inflated, you're right...still I can at least see some rationale, some human logic, to the price...incredible rarity.

    It's the people paying $100K for clones that makes me shake my head---they are going to get stung big time.

    I bet that '71 will hold its value, even after the coming crash...maybe not quite 2.2 million, but it won't tank.

    7 cars will always be 7 cars, and after the next garage fire, it'll be 6 cars.


  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,167
    It will be interesting to watch what the next of the 7 sells for. I agree that you can't argue with the market, since it's the final arbiter on price. I just have a hard time wrapping my head around $2.2 for 'Cuda, no matter how rare or great it is.
This discussion has been closed.