Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Bargain "Classics"--$12,000 or Less and 20 Years or Older
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
When that transmission first came out in 1981, it was troublesome. It was improved over the years, but I don't think it was until around 1984-85 that they really got it right, more or less. There was a beefed-up version of it that was used for the Grand National. I'd presume that it would've also been used in the Monte SS and the Hurst/442, but you never know, with GM!
I had an '85 LeSabre 307 and '86 Monte Carlo 305 with the 200R4 tranny. The LeSabre had 157,000 miles on it when we finally got rid of it, and the Monte had 192,000 on it when I got t-boned while delivering pizzas, and neither ever had any tranny trouble.
Now that I think about it, there was a guy at work who had one of those Hursts. AT least I think it was the Hurst and not the 442, as it had the lightning rod shifter and not the normal one. I forget how many miles he ultimately got out of it, but I know it was well over 200,000. I forget the year, but it was a grayish-silver, if that helps. It was pretty worn out when he finally got rid of it. I remember asking him if he'd ever be interested in selling it, and he told me that I wouldn't want the thing, as it was high-mileage and getting tired. Nevermind the fact I was driving a '68 Dart with over 300,000 miles on it at the time. :P
The 200R4 transmission was also used in full-sized station wagons and in the big RWD C-body coupes and sedans in the 80's. Many of those easily topped 4,000 lb. I wonder what would stress out a transmission more...an engine with a lot of torque, or a lot of weight to lug around?
I've also heard that the beefed-up version of the transmission was used in Impala and Caprice copcars in the 1980's, even with the 350 V-8, but I think that was actually a truck transmission, like the 700R4 or something?
Sounds like a great car, but the only thing I'm having trouble deciding, is whether there's only one too many zeroes to the left of the decimal point, or two!
I'd really like to see a Riv Diesel get 41 mpg, and suuuuure, the thing has anti-lock brakes. :P
I actually like these cars, but gimme an '84-85 model with the 307/4-speed automatic...none of this Diesel crap. And for some reason, I actually prefer the Toronado, although most people find it to be uglier.
I noticed the "diesel" emblem is the same as used on the period Monte Carlo diesel.
Book says $1200 bucks in "fair" condition....okay, I was a little off....
I really love that shade of green. The bucket seats are cool, too, but I hate when they give a car bucket seats, but then stick in a column shift! What's the point in that?! My old '69 Dart GT was like that.
Overall, it looks like it's in decent shape, just with the interior being a bit rattier than my '76. Has the rust spots in the same place as my '76, and even has a tear in the driver's seat, as does my '76!
I know I'd be better served taking that $2695 and putting it into the LeMans I already have...especially since it quit running. :sick: Or one of my other cars. But still, I feel the siren song of Nebraska calling out to me....
Oh well, it'll pass, I'm sure.
Thanks for the follow up on my transmission question. I wouldn't mind getting serious over a hurst olds, but I would definitely have to thin out the herd a bit.
As for the pinstripes, I believe they were an option, but I think the stock ones would be narrower than what's on this car. Personally I don't mind them...but the thing that bugs me is the mirrors on the car. They should be body color and not white. But I guess that's not too hard of a fix.
Funny you'd mention that, because "Smokey and the Bandit" is what turned me on to the '76-77 LeMans, in the first place! I know most normal kids lusted after the Trans Am. Or Sally Field :shades:
I always liked the 442/Hurst. I wonder why they weren't better sellers, compared to the Monte SS and Grand National? Did Olds just not market them?
It's funny, my brother's 5 year old minivan could probably out accelerate :shades: it, out brake it and out fuel economy it, but I don't find myself lusting so much after it LOL
I took my 3 year old out for a drive in it over the weekend. He was excited because he got to ride in the front seat (in his car seat) with Daddy...
I had year of manufacture plates put on my car in 1996. I found them at a yard sale for a quarter.
Do you have those on your Mustang? If you don't, you should seek out a set...they look cool on an old car.
The previous issue had a similar article, using a $9,000 price point, and the next issue will feature Corvettes that can be bought for $15,000.
About the only hi-performance car that doesn't seem to suffer too much with high miles is Porsche.
Here's a good running C4 for $3000 asking:
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/cto/1113523503.html
another good runner for $2800
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/cto/1108936519.html
Here's a year 2000 C5 that I bet you could get for $12000
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/cto/1117498569.html
Except for the M version, they're not the fastest cars from that period, but they permit you to enjoy the vaunted Beemer driving dynamics for a modest outlay. E30s are also among the lowest cost-to-own BMWs available. That doesn't mean they're inexpensive to maintain and repair, but from my experience, ownership expenses are not unreasonable.
Easily correctible, if you want to buy a high-miler and spiff it up. A late model C4 is a very good buy right now and there are all kinds of opportunities for under $12,000 bucks.
Just saw the 'Wheeler Dealer' where they did just that, bought a ratty one for 2,100 pounds, fixed it up for about 1,000, not counting labor. That included an entire new exaust from the manifold back and a reconditioned instrument panel. They sold it for about 3,800 pounds. Buyer got a good deal, it seems.
The smart money is on something fast, well made, and under everyone's radar. The Volvo 850 Turbo was a good example of this - a decade ago. Today, it's a lot tougher, since most of the middle-end cars are either aging classics or no longer made. A good example is the Surpa. Cheap used, fast, and oops - not made any more.
A well maintained 928 will drain your wallet faster than a topless blond and the boobie bar.
I recall that some time back we reduced the minimum age to 20 years, from 25, and raised the dollar value for this discussion to $12,000 from something lower. By substituting "Collectible" for "Classic" we could also consider increasing the minimum age to where it was originally, and/or rolling back the dollar figure to $10,000, or whatever.
Since it appears from some posts that some people don't make much distinction between classic and collectible, it may not matter much, but I thought I'd pass these thoughts along.
1970 Bonneville convertibles are one of my "guilty pleasures". Like the Super Bee, the front end of these cars are so ugly that I love'm. And, here's what appears to be a pretty nice one that recently sold on ebay for $12,000 - right at the threshold of this discussion. This car had been listed the week before with a "buy it now" price of $12,500. The high bid of $10,400 didn't meet the seller's reserve. It was soon relisted and immediately sold for $12,000.
I'm sure Pontiac made a ton of these, but it's fairly rare that you see one in nice condition that's for sale at a reasonable price. Ironically, there are two other 1970 Bonneville convertibles on ebay right now. And, an auction for a third one sold earlier today for $10,476 - but, it wasn't as nice as the one referenced above. There's also a '69 on ebay, but it's not a '70 and isn't as nice.
So, here you go. Submitted for your approval . . . . . . a 1970 Bonneville convertible!
But I never cared for that rear-end treatment. I thought the '69 looked good, with the big bumper and the hockey stick-shaped taillights above, but on the '70, I think it's just a bit poor-fitting. And I never cared for the "6 headlight" look created by putting those horn ports in. FWIW, I never liked it in later years either, when they put the turn signals between the headlights on some Cadillacs and Pontiacs.
Pontiac's image started going through some turmoil in the late 60's. I think 1967 is the last year the big Pontiacs really made a serious attempt at being sporty and youthful. That was also the only year they had a Grand Prix convertible, and the year with the hidden headlights, that made it look really futuristic. But then almost overnight, the '68 Pontiac seemed a bit dull and dowdy. The midsized cars looked good, but I just don't think the look translated as well on the big cars. But then I kinda like the big '69 Pontiacs. I had a Bonneville 4-door hardtop for a few years, and that thing was a nice car...at least in that rare moment that occurred after it firing up without eating a starter, but before it overheated.
By 1970 I think the big Pontiacs were just becoming, for lack of a better word, confused. At some angles they do look sleek and sporty, but then they have that retro look going on (they called it "neoclassic" back in the 70's), with the fake horn ports, tall, skinny grille, etc. Still, that deep red one you posted, Parm, looks really nice. Only real downsides I can see are no a/c and no power windows (yes, I guess I'm getting a bit spoiled). I'm sure it really moves with that 455, though! I'd love to know what kind of driving conditions you'd have to endure though, to support that 20 mpg claim.
Ebay Item number: 300353785696
A good example. I think it looks a lot better than the Pontiac version.
And here's a 1970 LeSabre convertible. I think the big Oldsmobiles and Buicks were very handsome cars in 1970...a bit less controversial than the Pontiacs. But then, controversial can be charming sometimes.
Kinda interesting how Buick and Olds played around with the split grille idea back then, along with Pontiac. And 1970 was the year the Dodge Coronet tried on that awkward double-loop bumper/grille that was kind of a love/hate thing.
The LeSabre convertible looks nice, though it's at the St. Louis place that has beautiful cars, typically overpriced by about 50% (I lived in St. Louis, this dealer was about 5 miles from our house, I used to BEG my mom to take me there, regularly). Back then (87-88), they typically had more imports (old 911s, Corniches, Silver Spurs, etc.), along with newly-collectibles ('59 Cadillacs, '60s Vettes).
Is that St. Louis place you mention Gateway Classic Cars? I used to love looking through their inventory online. One of my former co-workers bought a '66 Charger from them back in 2000. I think he paid $6,000 for it. It looked to be in great shape at a quick glance, although it had a funky paintjob with flames on it. It was sort of burgundy overall, with light gold flames at the front. It had a few quirks, too. Headlights wouldn't flip; you had to force them manually. I think you had to start it in neutral. Heater was disconnected, and I don't think it had a/c. It was a good driving car, though. He had registered for the Mopar Nats at Carlisle in 2001, but had to bail at the last minute because his mother took ill, so he let me drive it up there. It had a 383 4-bbl, and definitely had some kick to it! Yet, I remember that at 75 mph, it turned about 2500 rpm, same as my Intrepid. Fuel economy, not so good though. Got about 14 mpg on that trip, while a friend of mine, who drove my Intrepid up, got around 28.
I didn't realize it at the time, but my friend had fallen on some hard financial times. I got a clue though, when he said that if anybody expresses an interest in buying the car, get their contact info! Here, this guy had talked about nothing but '66 Chargers for as long as I'd known him, had wanted one since he was a little kid, finally got his dream car, and suddenly starts talking about selling it? Yeah, something was definitely wrong with that picture. :sick:
But things like substandard paint and disconnected heater are not minor items, and will probably discourage many buyers today unless the price drops accordingly.
A slightly funky '66 Charger with 383 is probably worth no more than he paid for it in 2000.
I forget now how much he ended up selling it for. My friend had a bad habit of over-paying for things when the times were good, thinking that the prosperity would go on forever. He'd bought a few other overpriced toys, but compared to them the Charger seemed downright cheap. I remember at one time he said he was looking for $4-5K, and I was kinda tempted. However, the '66-67 Charger really doesn't excite me. Now if it was a '68-70 Charger, or even a Satellite or a '68-69 Coronet (don't care for that double-loop bumper '70 as much) I probably would've hopped on it!