I think you're right on target, shifty and andre. Since the new luxury cars have more gadgets and features than I feel I need or prefer, I think my reaction will be to either stay with the older luxury cars (pre-'08 or so), or go down scale.
Those multi-hundred page owners manuals are a turnoff to me. Also, with the proliferation of speed cameras and speed bumps, not to mention traffic, who needs 400 horsepower?
On the other hand, while I enjoy reading about classic and collector cars, I'd never want to own a carburated car again. I'm using carburater metaphorically here, since I'd put vacuum wipers and even hand cranked windows in the same category. And, oh, a/c is also a must have for me. I guess what I'm saying is that the features the luxury brands were adding until recent years were appealing, but some of the more recent electronic ones detract from the driving experience.
I like what some people are doing with "retro-rods". They build motors with aftermarket fuel injection----you don't even need a laptop to program them---they sell you a little gadget along with the injection system and the motor, and you just make a few simple adjustments (the motors are pre-run with the injection in place and calibrated for you).
So you CAN have a 50s or 60s car with more torque, better gas mileage, faster cold starts and more power at altitude. What you can't have is a totally "correct" car.
A few trips on a hot summer day, with vapor lock, overheating and spongy brakes would cure you of most of your nostalgia I think. Of course, some people like the challenge of nursing the smoking, bullet-ridden fighter plane back to base, so if that's your thing, well then, authenticity, by all means!!
Some old cars are more competent than others, and some more vulnerable to depreciation if altered. It depends on the car: If it were a '50 Caddy 4-door, I'd modify it without blinking. If it were a '55 Eldo, then probably not--or all the mods would be hidden from view and easily reversible (like say electronic ignition and radial tires).
Well, yeah, while the nostalgia's there, as evidenced by my participation in the classic car discussions, the patience with old technology isn't, so I could be persuaded by your arguments. As it stands, though, I'm in that category of enthusiasts who loves chatting, viewing and listening to collectible cars (and new ones too, for that matter), but prefers not to own one. I suppose that makes me an armchair collector, if such a term exists. The history of the cars, and the people and companies associated with them fascinate me to no end too.
On the other hand, while I enjoy reading about classic and collector cars, I'd never want to own a carburated car again. I'm using carburater metaphorically here, since I'd put vacuum wipers and even hand cranked windows in the same category.
I guess carburetors don't bother me so much because I still deal with them on a regular basis. I have a feeling though, that if I was removed from carbs for a long period of time, it would be hard to go back.
I had a similar experience with crank windows. Never bothered me in the past, but lately, I just haven't been getting cars with crank windows, even old cars. I think the last car I got with crank windows was a 1967 Newport, back in 1999, and I only had it a few months before getting rid of it soon after buying my Intrepid. I didn't drive it much, either.
Well, the Intrepid had power windows, and so did every car after that...5th Ave, pickup, LeMans, NYer. And now the Park Ave. My '67 Catalina has crank windows, and in the past they didn't bother me so much, but after I got it fixed up and started driving it a lot more, I kept thinking damn these crank windows SUCK!! Part of the problem too, is that car is so big, that it's hard to reach the passenger side. Just for kicks, I took a tape measure to that car...62.5" of shoulder room up front...probably more than any car made today.
Windshield wipers? Yeah, that's something else that I had forgotten about, how bad the old ones were. Now my Chryslers actually have interval wipers, and I think they work better than the ones on my Buick! But I remember the last time I got caught in the rain in my '76 LeMans...2-speed wipers with the settings of "fast" and "faster", and no delay. Oh, the humanity!!
Air conditioning, I can still live without, although a black convertible top and black vinyl interior don't make the best combination for really hot weather, especially when you're stuck in traffic. Those old cars tend to "breathe" better than newer ones, since they had better fresh-air ventilation to make up for the relative scarcity of a/c. By the 1970's though, they it was less likely that you'd have a rear door window that rolled down all the way, and in coupes a window that opened at all became a rarity. With the more integrated HVAC systems, it was less likely you'd have those nice fresh air vents under the dash. And front vent windows went the way of the dinosaur. Cars also became more airtight, with better insulation and padding, which also meant they kept in more heat. And with more rakish windshields, rear windows, and curved side glass, more of the sun's rays came into the car, and the roof gave the interior less shade.
I think in a daily driver, a/c would be mandatory, but in my old cars, I can deal without it for the short periods of time I usually drive them.
I saw a very nice black 1951 Cadillac Series 62 sedan at my club's national fall meet. Were the grille "bullets" that would house optional driving lights painted black or body color? The surface would have a chrome cover or house driving lights, but would the shell be black or body color? A friend who was with me suggested they might've been painted black to match the "waffle" pattern on each side of the grille.
I'm not fond of Mickey Mouse modifications either. But they needn't be like that.
For instance, you'd think it somewhat reckless to modify a '58 Corvette, right? But one Corvette I appraised was modified in a very special way---aside from the genuine body, the entire frame and powertrain was from a C5 Corvette. An enormous and difficult task, and, to the casual passer-by, completely undetectable.
Did it hurt the value of the '58? Probably not actually. This is a very desirable, albeit altered, '58 Vette.
Would a modified '50s Cadillac fare the same? I think not, unless the modification was so radical, so custom, as to propel a 50 4-door into a new realm of 'automotive art'.
The car is definitely over-restored but more importantly, the seller has to put down the Cadillac Kool-Aid, check his calendar to make sure he knows it's 2010, and lower the price to maybe $175K and take less if there's serious money on the table.
Actually it's a rather poor ad for such a premium price---it suggests that the car still has needs. If you can't get a '53 Cadillac right after spending 1/4 mil on it, you'd best give up.
I'd be curious to get opinions on this '55 Coupe Deville. While I wouldn't go so far to call it a resto-mod, it's not stock either. The major upgrade is the 454 motor with a TH400 transmission. It also has a nicely done A/C system. The stock radio has been replaced with a Blaupunkt unit with CD (a fair upgrade as long as the dash wasn't cut for it) and the stock instrument panel has been totally swapped out for a modern unit (I'll let others decide if this was a tasteful upgrade or not) and the wipers are electrically operated. Given these modern conveniences, the electrical system has obviously been upgraded to 12-volt. The interior appears to have been replaced with what looks to be a factory style kit. Looks very nice to me anyway.
This Cadillac won't win any originality awards, but no doubt the upgrades make this a better car to live with and drive.
A totally stock '55 Couple Deville in nice condition is probably worth around $40K (feel free to debate that). So, how do these upgrades impact its market value?
yeah, $40K for a very nicely done retro-mod is not out of the question...but it had better be well done, meaning quality parts and quality install. None of that 300 plastic wire tires, a bungie battery tie down, sloppy drippy welding and Kragen engine accessories. And the paint should be first rate all the way---no peel, no overspray underneath, no tape lines. And speaking of underneath, it should be clean and flat-blacked.
On the plus side, that is one beautiful car inside and out! I don't remember ever seeing a fire engine red 55 before?
Whoever did that interior did a wonderful job!
It is, however, no longer a 1955 Cadillac and although it appears that the modifications were done in a first class fashion, it is now a Cadillac with a Chevrolet engine and a different transmission among other things.
And, I don't care at all for the "updated" instruments.
That car was 12 volt to begin with.
So, althoughI can certainly admire the time, talent and dollars that went into that car, I would much perfer an accurate "restoration".
But that's me. A lot of others would consider the changes to be a major improvement.
I think the preferences for "stock" over "mods" depends a lot on what one intends to do with the car. If you're in the lawn chair/local show routine, or taking the kids out for ice cream a few times a year, than "stock" is probably the way to go.
But if you want to do long tours with high levels of comfort, safety and fuel economy, you'd probably want to go "mods".
The last 2 posts make excellent points. To me, the primary purchase motivation is to be able to drive a car that has the feel of a classic car - in this case, a 1955 Cadillac. But, once you make mods to it, you lose that. Well I'm sure it drives better with the mods, the higher value should go to the all original/all stock car.
I think my biggest concern would be how that car sounds, with that 454. Cadillac V-8's always had a nice, muscular, understated sound to them that I always found appealing. Even the choked-down 500's of the 70's still had a nice sound to them.
I'm impressed with what a good job they did restoring that Caddy to still make it look fairly original. But, if the second you turn the key it sounds like a Chevelle SS, then it's lost me.
Here again, it depends on which car you 'mod'. Some of them could actually be worth more modded than original. I think the Cadillac would be neck and neck either way.
Sometimes, keeping certain old cars stock is the last thing you want to do with them. Some of them really suck to drive.
The '55 Caddy is a nice-driving car "as is", certainly, but has both handling and safety limitations. I'd certainly leave a nice one alone but if it was shabby, i'd definitely make it a pro-tourer if I'm going to put that much time and money into a car. I want to drive it with full confidence.
How does a DeSoto V-8 sound? I'm trying to recall what the 500 sounded like as I had a 1975 Cadillac Sedan DeVille. From what I remember, it was extremely quiet at idle. A coworker asked me if the car was even running it was so silent.
Sad thing is, I'm trying to remember how my '57 DeSoto sounds! The last time I started it was in 2006, and the exhaust system had been shot for awhile, so it sounded a lot more loud and powerful than it really was! And that reminds me, I haven't heard from the mechanic who has the car, in awhile. I'd better stop over there...for all I know, he might've sold the thing out from under me!
As for those Cadillacs, they had a sound to them that, if this make sense, was deep and powerful, but quiet at the same time.
While I would expect a 454 to have a somewhat different tone, the sound coming from the tailpipe is determined by the type and quality of the exhaust system - primarily the muffler(s), right? Please correct me if I'm wrong (my kids do all the time! :P ). I would think you can make a fire-breathing torque monster motor purr like a baby kitten if you go with a top-quality muffler. Obviously, you'd be depriving yourself of some of the power said engine could make, but that's not the subject.
Two other things that'll make a difference will be tube headers (obviously) and the type of air cleaner housing. Caddy's would have a pretty quiet intake roar, I'd guess, while a high-performance air cleaner setup on a 454 would let quite a lot more out. That one looked to have a Caddy-type air cleaner, didn't it?
Yes, the air cleaner is the stock design. It's just chromed which wasn't stock.
I'm guessing if I took this car (or any car for that matter) to my local Midas dealer and told them I wanted this car to be whisper quiet, they could do it.
Comments
Those multi-hundred page owners manuals are a turnoff to me. Also, with the proliferation of speed cameras and speed bumps, not to mention traffic, who needs 400 horsepower?
On the other hand, while I enjoy reading about classic and collector cars, I'd never want to own a carburated car again. I'm using carburater metaphorically here, since I'd put vacuum wipers and even hand cranked windows in the same category. And, oh, a/c is also a must have for me. I guess what I'm saying is that the features the luxury brands were adding until recent years were appealing, but some of the more recent electronic ones detract from the driving experience.
So you CAN have a 50s or 60s car with more torque, better gas mileage, faster cold starts and more power at altitude. What you can't have is a totally "correct" car.
It still looks like one but it's something else.
Carburators work just find providing you can find someone who knows how to work on one!
Some old cars are more competent than others, and some more vulnerable to depreciation if altered. It depends on the car: If it were a '50 Caddy 4-door, I'd modify it without blinking. If it were a '55 Eldo, then probably not--or all the mods would be hidden from view and easily reversible (like say electronic ignition and radial tires).
I guess carburetors don't bother me so much because I still deal with them on a regular basis. I have a feeling though, that if I was removed from carbs for a long period of time, it would be hard to go back.
I had a similar experience with crank windows. Never bothered me in the past, but lately, I just haven't been getting cars with crank windows, even old cars. I think the last car I got with crank windows was a 1967 Newport, back in 1999, and I only had it a few months before getting rid of it soon after buying my Intrepid. I didn't drive it much, either.
Well, the Intrepid had power windows, and so did every car after that...5th Ave, pickup, LeMans, NYer. And now the Park Ave. My '67 Catalina has crank windows, and in the past they didn't bother me so much, but after I got it fixed up and started driving it a lot more, I kept thinking damn these crank windows SUCK!! Part of the problem too, is that car is so big, that it's hard to reach the passenger side. Just for kicks, I took a tape measure to that car...62.5" of shoulder room up front...probably more than any car made today.
Windshield wipers? Yeah, that's something else that I had forgotten about, how bad the old ones were. Now my Chryslers actually have interval wipers, and I think they work better than the ones on my Buick! But I remember the last time I got caught in the rain in my '76 LeMans...2-speed wipers with the settings of "fast" and "faster", and no delay. Oh, the humanity!!
Air conditioning, I can still live without, although a black convertible top and black vinyl interior don't make the best combination for really hot weather, especially when you're stuck in traffic. Those old cars tend to "breathe" better than newer ones, since they had better fresh-air ventilation to make up for the relative scarcity of a/c. By the 1970's though, they it was less likely that you'd have a rear door window that rolled down all the way, and in coupes a window that opened at all became a rarity. With the more integrated HVAC systems, it was less likely you'd have those nice fresh air vents under the dash. And front vent windows went the way of the dinosaur. Cars also became more airtight, with better insulation and padding, which also meant they kept in more heat. And with more rakish windshields, rear windows, and curved side glass, more of the sun's rays came into the car, and the roof gave the interior less shade.
I think in a daily driver, a/c would be mandatory, but in my old cars, I can deal without it for the short periods of time I usually drive them.
Here is an example for clarification:
If they overheated, we had the radiators rodded out and in extreme cases, whe had a "four row" radiator installed.
But, I lived on the coast where it never got very hot in the summer.
Someone driving a correct old car has to respect it's age. You don't drive 80 MPH in the left lane. You don't tailgate people and you drive carefully.
If you aren't willing to do these things, you can just buy a modern car or take a nice old car and
Mickey Mouse...modify it.For instance, you'd think it somewhat reckless to modify a '58 Corvette, right? But one Corvette I appraised was modified in a very special way---aside from the genuine body, the entire frame and powertrain was from a C5 Corvette. An enormous and difficult task, and, to the casual passer-by, completely undetectable.
Did it hurt the value of the '58? Probably not actually. This is a very desirable, albeit altered, '58 Vette.
Would a modified '50s Cadillac fare the same? I think not, unless the modification was so radical, so custom, as to propel a 50 4-door into a new realm of 'automotive art'.
Actually it's a rather poor ad for such a premium price---it suggests that the car still has needs. If you can't get a '53 Cadillac right after spending 1/4 mil on it, you'd best give up.
I'd be curious to get opinions on this '55 Coupe Deville. While I wouldn't go so far to call it a resto-mod, it's not stock either. The major upgrade is the 454 motor with a TH400 transmission. It also has a nicely done A/C system. The stock radio has been replaced with a Blaupunkt unit with CD (a fair upgrade as long as the dash wasn't cut for it) and the stock instrument panel has been totally swapped out for a modern unit (I'll let others decide if this was a tasteful upgrade or not) and the wipers are electrically operated. Given these modern conveniences, the electrical system has obviously been upgraded to 12-volt. The interior appears to have been replaced with what looks to be a factory style kit. Looks very nice to me anyway.
This Cadillac won't win any originality awards, but no doubt the upgrades make this a better car to live with and drive.
A totally stock '55 Couple Deville in nice condition is probably worth around $40K (feel free to debate that). So, how do these upgrades impact its market value?
Whoever did that interior did a wonderful job!
It is, however, no longer a 1955 Cadillac and although it appears that the modifications were done in a first class fashion, it is now a Cadillac with a Chevrolet engine and a different transmission among other things.
And, I don't care at all for the "updated" instruments.
That car was 12 volt to begin with.
So, althoughI can certainly admire the time, talent and dollars that went into that car, I would much perfer an accurate "restoration".
But that's me. A lot of others would consider the changes to be a major improvement.
But if you want to do long tours with high levels of comfort, safety and fuel economy, you'd probably want to go "mods".
The larger shows usually include a separate "Restomod" division and that's OK.
I'm impressed with what a good job they did restoring that Caddy to still make it look fairly original. But, if the second you turn the key it sounds like a Chevelle SS, then it's lost me.
Sometimes, keeping certain old cars stock is the last thing you want to do with them. Some of them really suck to drive.
The '55 Caddy is a nice-driving car "as is", certainly, but has both handling and safety limitations. I'd certainly leave a nice one alone but if it was shabby, i'd definitely make it a pro-tourer if I'm going to put that much time and money into a car. I want to drive it with full confidence.
As for those Cadillacs, they had a sound to them that, if this make sense, was deep and powerful, but quiet at the same time.
I'm guessing if I took this car (or any car for that matter) to my local Midas dealer and told them I wanted this car to be whisper quiet, they could do it.