1963-1964 Cadillacs

12346

Comments

  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,642
    It bid up to $13,100, reserve not met. What fraction of interesting cars ever get their reserve met? 10%? At most?
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    I'm wondering if the seller can drop their reserve at some point during an auction like they can at "in person" auctions?

    On Ebay right now is the NICEST 1960 Impala Convertable I've ever seen. It's bid to over 30,000 at this point. Wish I knew how to post the link.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    $13000 was a more than fair bid for the Buick. There's no more money to be had. The seller would be nuts to turn down $13000 in real money, especially in May 2010, and especially on a 4-door car.

    A few more thousand and you're in Electra convertible money, so there's nowhere for this seller to go but OUT.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    Yeah.

    As nice as it is it's still a car that appeals to very few people.

    He may regret not grabbing the money when he had a buyer.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Oh man will he ever. That was an outstanding bid, DOUBLE book value!!

    :confuse:
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    Didn't know that.

    Yep, just a 4 door, stripper Buick that is as nice as they come.

    Nice but hardly a car that's in high demand.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,605
    On Ebay right now is the NICEST 1960 Impala Convertable I've ever seen. It's bid to over 30,000 at this point. Wish I knew how to post the link

    Take your pick. There's three of 'em right now, although knowing you, it's not that rodded green one that you're drooling over!
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    You need to teach me how to post a link like that.

    The green one does NOTHING for me although it must appeal to the people who have made higher bids than the stock ones!

    Actually, I ws talking about the one in the middle. The one with the 283 and Powerglide. I hadn't seen the third one.

    The third one is interesting. It has the 348 engine with tri power and a very rare 4 speed. The one with the 283 looks more "pure" so it would be a tough call for me to make. If I went with the one with the 348, the first thing I would do is pull off those hokey fender skirts and throw them into the closest dumpster!

    Thank God nobody hung a Continental Kit on it.

    Did you notice, the two bids on the two red ones are identical??

    How can that possibly be? Shills?

    I'm going to have to go back and examine the two red ones more carefully in case I decide to get my hand in the air. :P
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    The one with the 348 is rarer and no doubt more valuable but I'm leaning toward the other one. Maybe I'm too practical?

    Lookiing harder at the second one, I did spot a couple of accessories that probably add value but are things I don't really care for. I have never liked the second "dummy" antenna in the rear fender nor do I like the "fender birds" that have been added.

    A not so funny story from my youth. Yes, another of those "when I was a kid working in a gas station" stories.

    We were working on a customer's Chevy one day and we were trying to pull the intake manifold. It wouldn't budge so my co-worker got into the engine compartment and straddled the engine while he yanked on the manifold.

    Well, he slipped and sat down right on top of a "fender bird"!

    It really wasn't funny. He SCREAMED and let out a tirade of obsenities.

    We couldn't figure out what had happened until we saw the blood.

    I think he needed a half dozen stitches.

    Of course, every time I see these on a Chevy ar a car show, I think of that.

    OK Shifty...which one would YOU pick?
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724
    edited May 2010
    Not a good comp for the '63 Fleetwood? Yeah, I think it is. Good Gawd, you could it NOT be??? Of everyone here, I'm the only one who's seen ALL of the Fleetwood photos and everything that's been done to it "post photos". Yes, perhaps on the surface, this Electra may appear to have a few less "physical" flaws, but it's not NEARLY as well optioned as this Fleetwood. A good market indicator? In my opinion, yes.

    Let the debate continue . . . . . . ;)
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I wouldn't pick either one, because I like the one with the 348 but not with a 4-speed. The ideal car would be a 348 with an automatic and AC. I think the car with the 348 is a better restoration as well and certainly worth more money with the larger engine than a 283--not that a 348 is any great shakes except to drive a dump truck---but, ah well. The 283 has to work pretty hard to move that car around.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,605
    You need to teach me how to post a link like that.

    it's easy. Open up the other webpage in a new window or tab. Copy its url.

    Then, click the little "Url" button below the text box. You'll see a series of characters pop up ending in ". I won't post it, because it'll mess up my message. Then, paste the url in. Then, click the "Url" button below, and you'll get another line of characters, with the words "link title" in it. Just replace "link title" with whatever you want to call your link, and you're all set.

    If that doesn't work, let me know!

    And yeah, I thought it was odd that both '60's were bid to $30,100!
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,605
    I've always wondered...was the 348 engine a dog? I've heard on occasion that it was (mainly from Mopar lovers, of course. :P ). But I found this road test of a 1959 Impala with a 348 Tri-Power and a TurboGlide and they got 0-60 in a somewhat doggy 13.1 seconds. With 280 hp.

    Something just doesn't seem right, there. With that kind of time, the only 1959 Plymouth you'd better challenge to a drag race is a 6-cyl. And you'd even better watch out for Grandpop in his 1955 DeSoto Fireflite if he hits the gas faster than you do, because Consumer Reports got 13.1 seconds out of one of those...and that's just with a 291-4bbl Hemi and a 2-speed automatic, 200 hp, and no doubt a heavier car!

    I guess it's just that when I hear "big block" and "Tri-Carb", I think performance. But when I hear "13.1 seconds", I think 1985 Camry or Reliant.

    I wonder if Uncle Tom's test car was just out of tune, or something?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    That's because of the TurboGlide, which WAS a real pig of a transmission. Most "restorations" you see today would never put in the Turboglide. You'll notice the car for sale says "Powerglide".

    So it wasn't the engine's fault. You could knock seconds off your 0-60 just by trading out the Turboglide.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,605
    So it wasn't the engine's fault. You could knock seconds off your 0-60 just by trading out the Turboglide.

    Wow, that's sad. I remember with the 1957 Dodge Royal 325-2bbl poly head with 245 hp, if you got the 2-speed Powerflite, you got 0-60 in about 13 seconds (Consumer Reports). If you got the 3-speed Torqueflite, you got 0-60 in about 10 seconds (Consumer Guide).

    So, with Mopar, you subtract 3 seconds when you add the extra gear, but with Chevy, you add 3 seconds? :surprise: That's just sad.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 15,967
    edited May 2010
    Typically I'm not a big fan of '60 Chevys (although I love '61's), last night I was at a cruise-in and was stopped dead in my tracks by a red '60 Impala convertible with skirts that looked exactly like the one of three on eBay. This car was a 283 and Powerglide and it was perfect wherever you looked...but I HATE skirts on almost all cars...makes a big car look even more ponderous! Plus, maybe because I grew up in primarily a working-class town, but I don't remember skirts on most cars even though car shows now make one think they were the norm!

    For some reason, when I think of '60 Chevys, I always think of whatever color they called it that was a copper-y hue, almost like a new penny.

    Back to skirts...one car I think looks like it was made for skirts is the '70-72 Monte Carlo...although it was rare to see one with them. Those cars looked boring to me back then, compared to the '73--but in hindsight I think they've stood the styling test of time better than a '73.

    Bill
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    " It's easy"

    Doesn't sound easy but I'll practice. Thanks!
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    Yes, I think the ideal '60 Impala would have the 348 with a four barrel. Powerglide and factory A/C.

    I had a 62 Impala SS with the 327 -300 H.P. Powerglide with factory A/C.

    White with blue interior. Wish I had it back!
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    Andre,

    The 348's weren't really "dogs". They were heavy engines that actually held up quite well. People called them "truck" engines because that is where they got their start. Chevy used them from 1958 - 1961. In '62, the 327's came out and a 327 equipped Chevy could whip a 348 in a race.

    The Turboglide which was an "upgrade" to the Powerglide showed up in some '57's and was available through 1961. The indicator didn't have a "L" position. Instead they had a "GR" position.

    The "GR" meant Grade Retard and was used to slow the car going down hills. I think it created a turbulance in the fluid that slowed the car.

    These transmissions may have been the worst automatic transmission ever made and they are rarely seen today. The transmission shops usually converted the cars to Powerglides when the Turbos broke.

    In addition to being troublesome they made the cars very sluggish.

    I noticed the '59 "Uncle Tom" tested had air suspension. That was another nightmare for G.M.

    Tom Mc Cahill was one of a kind!
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    Where do I find the url on an Ebay listing?

    I know I'm dense but I can't find it.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 15,967
    one car I think looks like it was made for skirts is the '70-72 Monte Carlo

    http://www.phillyedge.com/fileadmin/thumb/590x590/1970_chevrolet_monte_carlo5288- 98.jpg
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    As ugly as that Monte Carlo is the skirts wouldn't matter either way.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,605
    The url shows up at the top of the browser window. on Ebay, when you to any given listing, it usually looks like this:

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1963-Cadillac-Fleetwood-/220613250965?cmd=ViewIte- m&pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item335d930f95#v4-36

    However, I've found that if you want to post it, you can usually truncate the post to this:

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1963-Cadillac-Fleetwood-/220613250965

    And, if' you're still unsure, you can always just post the item number of the auction, which in this case is 220613250965

    That way, others can copy that number and paste it in the eBay search, and it will find it.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    edited May 2010
    Just never done this before.

    Thie is a 1962 Impala SS but it doesn't compare to the others.

    It does have factory A/C. They don't say but it sure looks like a 283 engine and not the more desirable 327.

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/RARE-1962-IMPALA-SS-ORIGINAL-W-FACTORY-AIR-/18051- - 2829730?cmd=ViewItem&pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item2a07673122

    Something tells me this won't work but that's OK.

    I do appreciate the help!
  • bhill2bhill2 Member Posts: 2,458
    They don't say but it sure looks like a 283 engine and not the more desirable 327.

    Actually, they say it's a 283 in the description.

    2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])

  • omarmanomarman Member Posts: 2,702
    What kind of market price is there today for a solid #2 condition 2-door HT 1962 Impala with S/S trim and just a 283 and Powerglide? The white one in the link would need a deduct of some kind for the filthy, "driver" condition of the undercarriage.
    A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    They did? Sorry, missed that.

    The 283's had the rounded valve covers while the 327's were more squared off. That's how I knew.

    Not a bad engine. heck you could have bought that SS with a six!
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    edited May 2010
    The white 62 Impala is just a nice driver. Nothing wrong with that.

    It just won't command anywhere near the money of a rarely driven # 2 car.

    Looking again at the photos, the undercarrage isn't that bad but he does need to replace the pinion seal and clean things up.

    I remember pulling out those driveshafts with the center support bearing.

    Pulling them out wasn't too bad but wrestling them back in was no fun!
  • omarmanomarman Member Posts: 2,702
    edited May 2010
    I hadn't thought of that in a long time! Friend of mine in high school drove a blue '62 Impala 4-dr sedan. We were on our way to another friend's house to pick him up when the carrier bearing failed. :sick:

    His Impala was the 283/Powerglide and the car had over 100k miles before it happened. I would imagine a bigger engine and/or a 4-speed car would need repairs a bit sooner than that.

    As popular as these cars are even today, I suppose aftermarket parts have made it possible to sort all that out. :shades:
    A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    Yep, the 58-64 full size Chevies used a two piece driveshaft with four U Joints.

    It was supported in the middle with a bearing surrounded by a rubber collar.

    They usually gave quite a bit of warning before they failed completly.

    And, I'll bet a 409 with a four speed would be a bit harder on those parts than that 170 HP 283.

    I had a 409 like that but mine never went bad in the year or so I owned it.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,605
    I had to go back and re-read the text from that eBay listing, too. The light orange print didn't help things much, so the first time around I just glossed over it!

    It might not be easy to tell from the pics in that listing, but I seem to remember the badges were a bit different among the V-8's? Didn't the 327 badge on the fender actually say "327", while the 283 just said "V-8"?

    My Dad had a '63 Impala with the hotter 409 setup...425 hp, I think it was? He put "6-cyl" badges on the fenders, just to mess with people!
  • wevkwevk Member Posts: 179
    The 283 had a V on the front fender, 327 had a V with flags. We had a 1962 SS.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    That's right. the 283's just had the "V" and the 327's had the crossed flags.

    If it had a 409, the 409 numbers were above the crossed flags. Very impressive for me to see as a kid.

    409's were available in three different configurations. One had 340 H.P. the hotter one had 400 H.P. and with two four barrels they put out 425 H.P.

    Mine was a 400 H.P. It had a lot of brute power and torque but a one night a Buick Skylark Gran Sport made it look like a 6 cylinder.

    The Beach Boys made them a bigger deal than they really were.
  • bhill2bhill2 Member Posts: 2,458
    409's were available in three different configurations. One had 340 H.P. the hotter one had 400 H.P. and with two four barrels they put out 425 H.P.

    Mine was a 400 H.P. It had a lot of brute power and torque but a one night a Buick Skylark Gran Sport made it look like a 6 cylinder.


    I always kinda wondered about that. The 409 was a bored (I think) 348, and the 348 didn't have the reputation of being a performance engine.

    2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])

  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    Yeah, that's about it but that 409 did have a wonderful sound through it's dual glasspacks and it would just pin you back in your seat.

    They were no slugs but there were definatly a lot of cars that could beat one in a race. I did whip a '69 Road Runner one night and that took some doing!

    And there was a certain amount of respect when, at a liight, people would look over and see the "409" above the crossed flage.

    Again, we can thank the Beach Boys for much of that!
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724
    edited June 2010
    Hate to get back ON topic, but . . . . . . ;)

    Here's a 1964 Coupe Deville in Burbank, CA that a local restoration shop (or someplace like that) came to have and is asking $15,000 OBO. I don't know anything about the car other than what a CLC member who knows this place had to say about it.

    One owner car with documentation, very very nice "vanilla" Cadillac, A/C (cold and working and not converted to r134a). Asking $15K OBO, slightly high but the car is definitely a very roadable time-capsule original car and should, at the least, be at the higher end of the market.

    Not nearly as well-optioned as the '63 Fleetwood, but it's a Coupe Deville and it's a 1964. And, "OBO" implies the seller is open to some reasonable negotiation. Looks pretty decent to me, but these photos are taken from too far away to tell veyr much.

    image

    image

    image
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 15,967
    That horizontal molding at the bottom and rear of the quarter window would indicate a vinyl top at one time, though it doesn't look like it has one now.

    Bill
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    They wanted to put vinyl tops on everything in those days and they would often be rust traps even in California. Not uncommon to just remove them.

    It looks good. The only gripe I would have would be the color but that's just my subjective opinion.

    Still seems like a lot of money. Maybe I'm out of touch?
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724
    edited June 2010
    No, that piece of molding is common to all '64 Coupe Devilles (non convertibles). Yeah, not my favorite color either. But, that can be changed. My choice would be to a gold color called Sierra Gold (I believe) which was a standard color that year. That color would also match the interior.

    I can buy that '63 Fleetwood today for the same price ($15,000). The Fleetwood has received some sympathetic restoration and it really is in nice condition. On the other hand, this '64 Coupe Deville is "reported" to be all original. Haven't seen photos of the engine or trunk, but the CLC member said they're both pretty decent. Either way, I think $15,000 is more than I think either is worth.

    What does our intrepid California appraiser think??
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Don't you remember---I handed over the mantle to gbrozen :P

    But I'm sure he's busy with all the other heavy responsibilities of his new office, so I'll take a crack at it.

    64 Caddy Deville Coupe, *very* nice orig, let's say strong #3, low #2 car----I'd hit it at $11,500.00 and I feel I'm being quite fair, given the current market. I bet eBayers would agree with me, too.
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724
    Handed over WHAT mantle? Did I miss something???? Did I miss an important memo??? Is Shifty no longer our host with the most?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    No, I volunteered gbrozen for hazardous duty as Assistant Regional Pricing Guru because he's getting pretty good at guessing the final results on eBay auctions. I mean, we are a band of many experts, depending on makes and models. :P

    Of course, NOW he'll have to keep track of the auctions he predicts, in order to maintain his credibility.

    Yes, I am still host (far as I know).
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724
    Oh, okay. Does that mean you won't be offering any more value opinions? I've been a member in the Classic Car forum for a long, long time, but gbrozen's name is not familiar to me. Guess we hang out in different discussions. Looking forward to his input on this '64 Coupe Deville. Did I mention it's a 49K original mile car? And, there is documentation back to the original buyer. This is basically a 1-owner car. The shop selling the car bought it from the original owner.

    image

    My Cadillac Lasalle Club guy "at the scene" in Burbank further reports the following: The engine bay is very clean and there are no signs of major work to the engine or an engine repaint (unless they since touched it up, it didn't need it), the hinges for the hood are completely clean and original with bare steel components and black components, no signs of any paint touch-ups body work or overspray anywhere on the car, the trunk is covered in the original material with some staining but still very presentable. The entire car is untouched and original and looks better in person.

    Finally, a word about the shop selling it. They've had it since around February and they know enough to not touch a thing they don't have to. They did have the front seat out to clean the mechanicals and switches, that was a couple months ago. I think that was the only repair besides the usual fluids and things.

    Does any of this alter anyone's opinion as to it's value?
  • ghuletghulet Member Posts: 2,564
    edited June 2010
    wow, the interior sure looks nice, though maybe the carpets could use some shampooing (big deal). What options does it have (or rather, what does it lack might be a better question)? Does it have tilt and Climate Control, as those were the two big hot-new-things in that era? I can tell it has no PDL (the switches were visible vertically on the door panels), but those were rare then except maybe on Fleetwoods, and on a two-door car, certainly unnecessarly.
    That color combo was apparently pretty popular on '64s, I remember as an early teen going to 'visit' a '64 Sedan de Ville with the same (though it was rusty) on my bike. I was a tank-dreamer even then.
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724
    This one has working A/C. Pretty sure it doesn't have tilt wheel or cruise control. It does have the full leather interior, which I'm pretty sure was an option upgrade over and above a standard leather/cloth combo. Again, I'm not crazy about the color. Can't remember if I mentioned this or not, but I'd eventually change the color to a factory Sierra Gold.

    Admittedly, I'd prefer a few more options which is why I like Fleetwoods, plus I really like their long 4-door styling (yes, I'm "special" :P ) Some have questioned the coupe's styling, but I like it. And, a coupe is as "sporty" as a 1963-64 Cadillac could get. ;) The main thing that attracts me to this car is that it looks to be a pretty solid, unmolested, original, low-mileage (relatively) car - which is getting to be more rare.

    image
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    49K original miles is a pretty bodacious claim. Based upon what evidence?

    Also, I'm very leery of reports from club guys. They tend to vastly inflate a car merits, because they are not impartial, they are in love. This does not at all infer dishonesty, only that their eyes tend to pick things that reinforce their love and to be selectively blind to anything that besmirches the image of the beloved.

    It would be good to have a photo of underneath---that would tell a story or two.
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724
    Supposedly, this car has documentation back to the original owner - of which, I believe, there has only been one (other than the shop in Burbank that is now in possession and trying to sell it). So, I would imagine the 49K miles can be proven and it is something I would want confirmation on.

    Actually, I think a club member would be a good judge of quality/condition. Through national and regional shows/meets, these guys have usually seen the good, bad and the ugly and thus have a pretty good knowledge base to work from. Plus, if they have familiarity with a particular year, then tend to know what trouble areas to look for. I agree that their value opinions can be a influenced by their love of the marque, but that's a different issue.

    BTW, how often does our new "valuation expert" check into the Classic Car forum? Haven't heard from him yet.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    It's funny how tastes can vary.

    Personally I think that gold color was by far the WORST color that car could be painted and a color change would really hurt that car's value!

    The beige is fine. Woudn't be my first choice but still, not gaudy (like gold) and very tastful.

    I think changing a color on ANY car is a mistake and it would cost probably 5000.00 to do it "right".

    Others may disagree with me.

    After looking at the rear shot of that Cadillas I do believe that all of them had that chrome piece around the roofline.

    Price wise, I'm not the expert our HOST is but I was thinking 10-11,000 would be all of the money.

    When I was a kid just working for Sears, my boss had a black 1964 Coupe De Ville. One day he had me run an errand with him. I remember, we were in Palos Verdes CA in a narrow two lane road when he got irrated at a slow moving car in front of him. He florred the Caddy and passed the car on a blind curve.

    Thankfully, nobody was coming.

    A nice car Parm!
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,642
    parm - that was a joke regarding the 'new' estimator, just to point out his good recent estimates....
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited June 2010
    It looks like a really nice car.

    I'm very dubious of club member evaluations. They are GREAT for authentication but generally not very good at knowing market value. They tend to overvalue their cars considerably, so I'd rely on them for knowing what is "correct" but not for what to pay. Certainly they are a good tool in your toolbox.

    If the miles could be proven beyond a doubt (which is not easy to do), then it's a question of a) how much extra do you want to pay for low miles and b) what do you do with an ultra low miles car?

    If you drive it, then you decrease the very thing you paid extra for. If you don't drive it, then you sit in a beach chair on a lawn every weekend and talk about how low the miles are. Wheeee!

    I guess I'd value the car at between $12,000 and $13,500, or maybe in a highly attended auction house, $15,000. (top retail).

    This would presume that underneath justifies the mileage claims. If the miles are true, this means it was driven under 1000 miles a year and/or in storage a good deal of the time, so we have to worry about hard seals in engine/trans, and deteriorated lines, hoses, etc.

    A low mileage car is strictly a cosmetic and historical asset. It is a mechanical liability IMO.
Sign In or Register to comment.