Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Future Collectibles--Make Your Prediction
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Eric's List --yes, you have an eye for what might be popular in the next few decades...but I think these will be second or third tier collectibles, not really valuable cars. Maybe we could call them "Cars of Interest" in the future rather than true classics? Maybe....MAYBE, in future years a 100 point Karman Ghia convertible will bring some serious money, but the rest are really just interesting old iron. There is nothing about them that excels in beauty or competence to qualify them as "classics", I don't think.
Really, ANY 50 year old car is collectible to someone, but hardly any 50 year old cars are classics....just a few.
Tell me if you agree, the current "wanted" cars are for example Mustang, Vette, Camaro, some euro's, but mostly american cars. These were once the love of teens(and other people). The point is, it was the desired car at the time amoung most. Well, today many teens favor import sport coupes. Like Honda Prelude, Celica, Civic Si, Integra, Eclipse, even Accords.
If keeped in excelent condition does anyone think these cars will be classic's or just another old clunker????
At my local Honda dealer, there is a 1972 yellow Civic hatchback(not for sale) list at around $6,500, all orginal. Damn!! and I thought my 95 Prelude was small!!!! This thing has more space in the back seat than my car!!!!!
Anyway, what do all you people think?
You can almost tell how a car will fare in the "classics" race by asking yourself HOW MANY of the following characteristics a car has:
1. very very low production numbers (around 1,000 more or less?)
2. very "hot" item when new....people going nuts over the car in the showroom
3. Successfully raced
4. Brings prestige to the owner when new.
So, with a Mustang or Prelude, maybe 1 or 1.5 out of 4....not great....a Viper, at least 2 or 2.5 out of 4. A McLaren F1, 3 out of 4 (never raced as far as I know). A typical 4-door sedan, zero out of four or perhaps one point if it's a luxury car.
Being a coupe with some performance capilities would help any current Japanese car to at least attract some interest down the road, but I don't think any of them are going to be big buck collectibles, and 99% are going to the wrecker as soon as the engine blows (after some incredible number of miles, I'm sure!)
Does anyone out there agree with me??? I'm predicting that Japanese cars will be the future collectible because it's whats popular among students now.(not common accords, but preludes, 240sx, integra type-R, eclipse, etc.....
BTW.. What about the Volvo C70, those are damn rare(to me). I'm guessing that not too many people want them...but I love the C70's styling.
Later
I agree with what you say about Japanese sport compacts though.
Honda hasn't sold enough of the Preludes to have the same advantage and they aren't exclusive enough to begin with.
I could be wrong about that,and I hope so, because I could see one of those in the garage in 10 years as a Saturday tinker-toy and Sunday driver.
And...I STILL think that RX-7's even the 1st and 2nd Gen versions will be collectables in the future. Yes, they made a lot of them but few will survive. They were a lot of bang for the buck and were very reliable if not mistreated.
Shifty, I know you disagree and you are probably right. In 20 years we can meet at the Seven Seas and see who was right!
I haven't read all 514 posts, but read about the first 10 and the last 20.
Did anyone mention Yenko?? or Baldwin motion? Or SLP? or ASC? cars?
these cars will remain unique to collectors.
Also, Low production doesn't always equate collectability.
For example, one of the most highly sought after cars is the 1969 camaro. Especially the ZL1, and even the Z28. And there were near 20,000 z28s made in 1969. YES I SAID TWENTY THOUSAND!!! Not very "rare" at all.
2nd
almost any ragtop from the 60s to early 70s has a higher collector factor than many coupes.
3rd.
If someone think only cars with extremely limited production will hit it big for collectors, I dissagree completely.
Take the Boss 429 for instance. only about 500 made in 69 and 70.
Well, fantastic for the few that have one.
But what about the rest of the people who like cars like that but can't find one or can't afford one???
In order for it to be collected, it has to be available.
So the typical joe car enthusiasts will get a car that is similar, same year, etc and drive it and appreciate it being part of the family or some even clone it to be like the one they can't have.
that is why styling in my mind is WAY above quantity built when it comes to being considered a collector to the general public.
That is why ANY 1st gen camaros, mustangs, etc. are now collectible.
Are some models worth more than others? Sure, but ALL are collected with regularity.
Don't know if anyone mentioned these facts, but they are facts and must be accounted for in desirability and collectability.
When I talked about applying low production and rarity to "collectible cars", I really mean to "first tier" and some "second tier" collectibles. Of course people will collect, and even attempt to restore the big full-size 60s and 70s convertibles, but that doesn't mean they will ever be worth a "fortune"...they will just be collected and admired for what they are....a "budget" collectible or a great "driver".
But I'm very much opposed to calling just anything a "collector" car and I'm opposed to insisting that any old car should be saved. I think, like with art or houses or documents, you save the most interesting, beautiful and significant things----we really do need to clear the parking lots and make some room for other cars, you know...we can't save everything.
The whole idea of education is to create some discrimination in taste....some logic and good reasons for us spending our time, skill and money on something. So far people have done a pretty good job in picking out the muscle cars, and the performance cars and the better styled autos.....these are the ones that get the best restorations and bring the biggest bucks.
But pleasure...ah, even a cheap old car can at least give you that!
Did these sell? If so (or if not), would they ever attain some sort of odd collectability?
More or less so than "real" original Z's?
Just wanted to throw one out for discussion..
[Or perhaps y'all have discussed this already and I missed it perusing past posts]
DATSUN 240Zs----no, the reconditioned 240Zs did not become hot collectibles, because the OLD 240Zs were never hot collectibles. (That's not hard to figure out, but some people didn't get it) I just saw a magnificent original one that has been advertised at $10,000 with no takers. So again, "budget collectible" seems to be its fate at the moment. Still, a nice old car to pick up in the $5-6K range.
Collectible . . . doesn't mean trailer queen does it??
Collectible means that it is worth having . . . I don't feel money is the only reason for something being collected. That is called INVESTING.
If sitting around and staring at a collection, or having it locked up for safe keeping is what collecting is all about, then I wouldn't want any part of it.
I think car Collecting should be done for personal reasons.
Oh, ya . . .
nothing like the feel of the big full size cruiser convertibles in the cool summer evenings. . . Has to be one of the best feelings anyone can ever experience.
Pile in 4 or five buddies, or 3 couples and go cruisin.
It is the american way!!!
Many cars are collected because of "memories" of days past, recapturing youth, etc.
Now, if we were collecting for a museum, well, that would be an interesting twist.
What would be reasoning behind a collection at a museum?
Or collecting as an investment?
Or collecting for personal enjoyment?
I think these questions are more valid as guides if you will, for collecting. . . the real reason for collecting has to be the driving factor. (no pun intended.)
I collect fossils.
I don't do it because they have a large monitary value, I do it for the uniqueness of what it is and the interest i have in them.
Are they valuable to anyone else?? Maybe.
Are they valuable to me?
Yes.
Value is in the eye of the beholder.
There are more underlying reasons for collecting things than just money to the TRUE car inthusiast.
Tim
In the long run, a few of these might maintain some pretty high value, the E-body hemi convertibles, the '66 Shelby Mustang convertibles, maybe (maybe) stuff like LS6 convertibles, RA-IV convertibles, etc, for sure the race cars will be worth a lot for a long time,
ie real Trans-am cars, famous drag racers, and the obvious exotics like GT-40s, 427 SC cobras, the cobra coupes, etc.
It's kind of hard to get real excited about dime-a-dozen cars like '69 Z/28s when they where built by the thousands, are basically identical to SS350 Camaros, and at a market peak, are still cheaper than a new one.
The interesting topic to me, and lot harder one than debating about the collectibility of a Pontiac Bonneville, is what *current* cars might actually have significant value in 25 years. Honestly I can't think of any (aside from race cars).
In general, I would think that muscle car prices will deteriorate along with the owners as both age. Like Model-T prices, values of 340 Swingers will sail into the sunset as the baby boomers expire.
Without discrimination, you might as well say one thing is as good as another, and try as I may to be fair about it, when I line up a '65 Rambler and a 65 Ferrari, somehow I see a big difference.
So am I an elitist because I think the Roman Coliseum is more beautiful than a MacDonald's storefront? I don't think so. I think an appreciation of style, performance, craftsmanship, etc., is a good thing.
To put it as gently as possible, anyone who thinks a 65 Rambler is equal to a 65 Ferrari or a 65 Fuelie Vette really needs to sit down and learn more about that area, just as one would in Art, baseball or anything else.
Otherwise, you've have to be content with insisting a '65 Rambler is a classic and with about 7 on earth agreeing with you....this could mean the world is misinformed or that you are. Now Galileo was against the whole world and he was right, but somehow I don't think the owner of a '65 Rambler, while maybe as happy as a hog in slop, is right about his "classic".
Obviously, when this was brought up it was meant to recognize that older, restored cars are not driven daily and thus use the facilities less, however I regularly see windowless vans with these plates on them still being used on a daily basis by itinerant workers and they are paying the low flat rate paid by people with Model A's and Duesenbergs.
Apparently some of these people really think they have a collectible or classic car. This forum seemed interesting, but having read the reports from the various classic car auctions fairly regularly, I can tell you that there are a lot of people who spend money unwisely restoring dogs.
Maybe a definition should be crafted that separates cars that are kept or restored for sentimental value from those that make sense to restore or maintain due to enhanced value due to their status. I don't know, but to read some of these posts it seems that there is little consensus about what we are talking about here. As an example, I would dearly love to have and save the back seat of my 1955 Oldsmobile 98 two door. I have very sentimental reasons and a poignant memory of history being made there, but the rest of the car was kind of mundane.
About 20 years ago, I had a neighbor who had a 1954 Mercury two door in her garage. It was not a perfect example and had not run for many years, but she was convinced this car would be worth lots of money in the future because when she bought it she had been assured that it was "THE" car which had been featured on the Ed Sullivan show. She had no documentation of this fact, just some pictures of an identical car on the stage in New York, but she was sure this car was her retirement. I am not sure, but I don't think so. Now, if she wanted to save it for herself, great, but she thought this was an investment that would pay dividends. Sorry.
quote...
"It's pretty obvious which thirty year old cars came to be worth fairly big bucks."
Would someone define "fairly big bucks" for me??
quote...
" That list does *not* include '69 Z/28s, AAR Cudas (and the rest of the Trans-Am homologation cars), most 442's, most GTO's etc. etc."
These cars are "not" collectible??? Hmmmmm. . .
Better try telling that to the thousands that currently have these cars.
Quote. . .
" They're pretty cool to own, get a lot of looks, run OK"
I thought that was a BIG part of what collecting was all about. . . did I miss something??
quote . . .
"I expect that the prices will drop for the next year on the relatively common cars."
I agree . . . the market on these cars goes up and down . . . just like the stock market.
but collecting isn't about investment.
quote . . .
"It's kind of hard to get real excited about dime-a-dozen cars like '69 Z/28s"
next time you see these cars for a "dime a dozen", would you mind giving me a call?? I will take a dozen, please. Thanks.
Has anyone here ever priced a 1970 LS-6 convert Chevelle??
or a 1969 COPO Camaro?
Or a 1969 Z28 Camaro?
Or a 1965 289 HO 4speed convert. Mustang?
Or a 1969-1970 Boss 429 Mustang?
Or a 1969 Z11 Camaro?
Or a 1969 YENKO Camaro?
I guess I have been out of the loop on collectability of cars!!
Man, could someone tell me what cars I should collect besides the exotic import cars from Europe??
Long live the American Classics!!
Mr. shiftright
quote . . .
""Just look at the workmanship on this bottlecap!"
Ever been in an antique shop??
There are some pretty cool collections, including bottle caps, old toys, bottles, etc. that I would love to own. Sometimes it's about more than workmanship.
Quote . . .
"Without discrimination, you might as well say one thing is as good as another, and try as I may to be fair about it, when I line up a '65 Rambler and a 65 Ferrari, somehow I see a big difference"
Hmmm . . . I guess I missed that one.
That reminds me of someone who once tried to compare the taste of apples and oranges . . . just doesn't quite make sense.
Man, shiftright . . .
how many of those ramblers do you own?? You keep referring to them as if they are a very hot item . . . want to sell one to me?? LOL!!
How come you keep saying we can't save everything?? You have something against old cars?? Or maybe you own a metal recycling factory?? LOL!!!
quote . . .
"Now Galileo was against the whole world and he was right"
Actually Galileo Galilee was not against the whole world. In fact, most of the scientific community was with him as well as the common people.
It was the Catholic church who opposed it because it was in direct conflict with it's doctrine.
Actually the only reason he was allowed to continue his work was because the community and other scientists had seen his publicly displayed scientific studies, and verified it as correct and was accepted. It would have been a little hard for them to silence him once his work was published. . . Bad PR for the church.
Does comfort come from the satisfaction of knowing that ones beliefs are accepted by the majority?
I guess it depends on which majority you refer too.
Like Alfred Wagener. Almost no one believed him, but most of what he believed turned out to be true.
Maybe in 25 years when there are no ramblers around because no one "saved" any of them, they will have value. Can anyone really predict the future besides Notre Dames?? (sp?) Hehehehe
rea98d
quote . .
"I think cars in general are the worst way to invest your money. "
I couldn't agree with you more.
Car collecting should be done for the love of the sport, not for the money!!!
Now let's go and Tell that to the NBA players and all the rest of the professional sports athletes!!!
This discussion is for future collectibles, not future landfill, so please, let's get back on topic here!
TOPIC AS INTENDED:
Your host opened this topic to solicit your opinions as to which modern cars might have enough rarity, performance, beauty and prestige to be considered highly desirable in the next 20 years. By "desireable", I mean something that would never end up in a junkyard, but rather a car that will preserved, or even better, actually rebuild from a wreck in order to preserve it.
In other words, cars that are the modern equivalent of the older "muscle cars" and "foreign exotics" that people are spending huge some of time, effort and money on today to restore.
What are we driving today that will truly be worth saving, no matter what the price?
Well, let's give the real topic a stab.
1996 SS impala.
Why??
One of the ONLY Cars I know of (but then again I don't run in the market of cars above $50,000 since I will never spend that kind of money on a car.) that has retained resale value above (in some cases) or near its actual cost.
They can be had for less. But the very clean ones still cammand over $20,000 and they are 5 years old.
1998-2002 WS-6 Firebirds.
Why?? Just because.
I like them. Sure, TOO much plastic, TOO many electronics . . .
But only about 5,000 each year produced. NOt bad for #s.
And brute force TORQUE!!!!
As PM magazine said,
Quote . . .
"When it comes to cars, one thing, and one thing only, separates the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA from the rest of the world. The rest of the world judges a car's performance by its top speed. They all want to know how fast it goes. Americans, on the other hand, couldn't give a thanksgiving turkey about top speed. Top speed is for wimps. . . AMERICA is the ACCELERATION NATION!!!"
And these cars were built for ACCELERATION and not refinement, workmanship, beauty, prestige, or ESOTERICAL significance.
IT is because the cars KICK FREEKING BUTT when it comes to acceleration.
Are there cars that have more acceleration??
Sure. But not that are affordable to the typical joe, like me.
Someone else will have to tell about all the exotic car stuff. I am not really interested in those kinds of cars. Maybe if I made 10 times my income, I would become interested.
So, those are my pics for cars that will have collectible value in the future. Heck, the SSimp already does!!
Big bucks?? maybe not. But I bet a lot of us common folk will be collecting them for the love of the experience of owning one these babies!!
Hey shiftright?
Any chance for a quick summary of the cars mentioned already??
But I think when people in the forum intuitively point to power or high style or high level of popular desire, they are at least on the right track to thinking rationally about "collectivity". But I must confess when they point to Pintos or 76 Pontiac 4-door I do secretly roll my eyes.
Fortunately, the economic laws of supply and demand work diligently to give evidence about what people really want in their collections....they step up and pay for some cars, and they shun and ignore others, or let the price drop so low that Uncle Fred can become a collector for $250 and the price of a tow.
Having said that, I'll go ahead and play (let's say the last 15 years).
Group B rally car homologation specials:
ie RS200, Sport Quattro, that weird MG thing etc.
Maybe a few US turbo cars:
Sy/Ty GNX
959? Naw...
Maybe Prowlers if Daimler/Chrysler (that is to say Daimler) quits building them.
I could see the last couple of years of Lightnings if production ceases (otherwise the new ones will always cannibalize sales of old ones).
Probably the best setup for interest in older cars (ie model year 2000 in 2020) will be if for some reason high performance models quit being sold ($10.00 gal gas or whatever). Their value would slip seriously followed by a resurgence of interest (think early '70s gas crisis followed by a booming economy a decade and a half later).
next time you see these cars for a "dime a dozen", would you mind giving me a call?? I will take a dozen, please. Thanks.
Has anyone here ever priced a 1970 LS-6 convert Chevelle??
or a 1969 COPO Camaro?
Or a 1969 Z28 Camaro?
Or a 1965 289 HO 4speed convert. Mustang?
Or a 1969-1970 Boss 429 Mustang?
Or a 1969 Z11 Camaro?
Or a 1969 YENKO Camaro?
End quote:
Geez dude... I've owned half of your list. Big deal. Some are worth a lot (a perfect L89 Z11 could go for what? 100k maybe?) and some not so much (crummy Z/28's are 5k-6k). I certainly wouldn't confuse Z/28 rarity with hemi E-body rarity (heck, I say two on Sunday in a trip to Sacramento, correct flat hood <5 in 6 were shipped this way>, correct bumper guards, etc.).
Sorry for the sidetrack Sr. Shiftright. It's always fun to pick on the holy 1969 Z/28 for a couple of reasons.
1) It's an SS350 with a trivial engine swap
(destroke crank/slightly bigger valves/holley + aluminum intake/mechanical cam)
2) They handle like pigs.
3) They're not particularly fast unless you beat the beejeepers out of them.
4) Most defenders have neither owned or driven one.
5) They built scads of them.
While I'm on a roll...who in the heck designed those goddawful tunnel mount gauges in early Camaros. I mean, man, those babies are dangerous to read when underway. Back to the main topic. Huzzah!!
Something like a 69 Charger Daytona, #1 condition 57 T-bird, the 3rd 53 Vette off the production line, or other cars that will break the $50,000 mark, or something like a 64 Stang coupe or 69 Camaro SS that will be kept by people wanting a cool old car, but will be affordable by most joes willing to sink moeny into maintainence?
Shifty, I seem to think you take the first view. I take the second. Is it possible to look at this from both sides, ie, which cars will be worth a boatload of money when they're 40 years old, and which cars to people think will make cool classics 40 years from now?
I am definitely NOT saying that a car has to be worth a lot of money to be "worthy' of savings...but I definitely AM saying that the car has to be "worthy" of being saved. It has to have SOMETHING going for it besides mediocrity. Cars are not puppies or redwood trees. They can be crushed if nobody wants them. IT'S OKAY!
When I say the "public has spoken" what I mean is that the overwhelming part of the population is more than willing to let a Rambler or Pinto or Chevy Citation go to the wrecker. And that goes for Camaros with small engines and rusty rocker panels and 1984 Oldsmobiles. These were just transporation. They are cars without soul.
Geez guys...the operative word is 'future'. That implies to me that the topic involves picking out cars that *aren't* collectible, most likely because they are new, and guessing (and being berated at) which ones will have some sort of lasting values. The amount of prescience needed to declare a Boss 429 Cougar or a Ferrari Daytona a sought after car is nil.
I thought about this for a moment on the way home from work and rather like the following families of *modern* cars that will have legs...
1) High performance pickups (if limited enough). Since we are probably seeing a peak in the pickup craze (not soon enough for me, I'm super tired of seeing 1 ton, Dodge diesel, crew cab trucks being used to haul around 135 pounds of vision impaired, ear hair rich, elderly man) I can see a day where Lightnings and any upcoming GM offering might be view with a lot of interest.
2) Homologation specials. I doubt 1LE Camaros will amount to much, but there are quite a few Euro cars that are closely associated with some sort of class racing.
3) The interesting Chrysler models. If the Germans do what I expect to Chrysler (reduce them to a SUV/truck company) the Prowler and Viper might end up being a really limited run in the scheme of things.
I think in general that little of collector interest will come out of this era for a couple of reasons.
1) An entire culture oriented to speculation (the stock market, beanie babies, state lotteries, Pokemon cards, etc. etc.) has led to price being built into cars from the get-go if they are of a limited/enthusiast sort. Kind of like the Corvette Pace Car debacle, I imagine there's a lot of R Model SVT Mustang's in temp controlled garages. If anything there will be less interest in all this stuff over time.
2) The increasing importance of large scale automation in manufacturing. As a result there is a lot less hand craftmanship and variations in cars than in say, pre-war coach-built stuff. Heck, in general cars *are* cheaply built consumer goods.
3) The current young car-buying public is not as car oriented as the boomers. Most of what drives the absurd level on some muscle car prices are successful 50 year old professionals who couldn't afford a $4800 hemicuda when it was new who now really really want to relive their youth (I would first suggest joining a good gym and quit with that hair turban already..). I don't see the equivalent follow-on generation bidding up the prices on Type-R Acuras or whatever.
RE: Ferraris---oh, not all Ferraris become collectible...I don't think the Testarossas from the 80s will be....15 years later, prices are still dropping like a rock, and they did made boatloads of them, too.
I like your style. . . you have a good way of expressing your opinion without having to try to
do it at the expense of someone else's view.
I agree with your analysis of the car collecting phenomena. There is a group of cars that will always appeal to the rich and a group that will appeal to the general masses. Which group has a bigger following?? So wouldn't that mean the cars they are interested in are more "collectible" than a car that would cost 5-10 times as much and only appeals to a limited few?
Find me a buyer for a car priced at $100,000 and I will find you 100 buyers for a car priced at $30,000.
For this reason, I believe cars priced at $30,000 are more collectible. But obviously not more "valuable".
It is always interesting to read threads like these. . .
Seems people will always claim to have some knowledge on a topic because they have read something in a book and then think they are experts on a given subject.
I guess I live by one general rule when it comes to making claims of knowledge about something . . . this isn't an exact quote, but . . . sometimes tis better to keep ones mouth closed, and be thought stupid, then to open ones mouth and remove all doubt.
Hey ndance
once again, would you please send me an email when you find a Junker 69 Z for 5-6 thousand? I guess you live in the Sac area? I grew up in California (Fresno) and know the area well. I have flown out of state twice in the last two years to make purchases of cars worthy of the trip. One of these (or dozens) would be well worth the trip to me since I know their collectability.
Please, Please, Please email me so I can make arrangements for a trip to Cali soon.
A side note on the Cougar 429s in 1970. Jerry Heasley, a friend of my friend, owns the only one known of.(2 made) (at least he did last time they talked). I would not consider this to be very collectible. There aren't any to be had!!! Ok, collectible to ONE person. My good friend Cory Hoover owns the ONLY 1970 428 SCJ R-code (ram air)drag pack 390 geared Cougar. He business is 4 blocks from my house and I see him frequently. I would not consider this car very collectible either. Valuable, yes. ONLY ONE.
Collectible to me means desired and available. Just because a decent quantity of a car was made does NOT mean it isn't collectible. ON the contraire . . . . But Valuable?? Yes, fewer is important.
As far as trucks being collectors . . . sure . . to the truck guys. But I wouldn't put them at the top of my list. There is a following for trucks just like cars and ones that are "limited" in production or are limited editions will have some collectability in the "lower" echelon of collectors (where I and most people reside).
A few years ago I was helping a friend of mine assemble a 1969 Boss 429 Hemi #1296 SO #96, with the NASCAR MOTOR. He needed to be ready for an all mustang show (which he won) and I learned to appreciate Mustangs as cars too even though I am not a ford enthusiast.
Why did I say this?? to illustrate that even though some people may not like a given car, this does not change the fact that there are people who will like that kind of car. I have an open mind when it comes to car collectability without feeling the need to slam on someone who likes those cars. Nor do I think they have to be worth a fortune to be collectible.
The 1LE Camaros will probably be popular to the guys who think handling is important.
This would not interest me personally as I am interested in acceleration, power and WOW factor. I like having to drive slow in corners . . . it gives me a second to catch my breath after a 12 second run in the 1/4 mile!!!
ndance and shiftright
I agree that the general public does not really care about cars . . . they drive Hondas and other generic cars all day long. I will never own a car like that. BUT, and I mean a BIG BUT, I would never let a first generation Camaro (or 2nd gen 70-73) go to the crusher unless it was wrecked and stripped of all usable parts. I, and many other people I know, would be willing to sink twice as much money into one of these cars then it would be worth if sold when completed to save the car rather then to see it destroyed for ever.
Last time I checked, they're aren't any more of these classics rolling off the assembly line. And small engine cars makes no difference. That can easily be changed.
ndance
I agree that one thing that makes muscle cars interesting to collectors is related to the mid 70s to early 90s lack of producing few cars of interest because of the gas crunch.
And it is interesting to think about what would happen if gas prices went through the roof.
I wonder how many people would still be buying SUVs and expeditions?? Hmmmmmmm. . .
Maybe the topic should have been . . .
"Which cars will be the most "valuable" in the future rather than most collected.
...
Hey ndance
once again, would you please send me an email when you find a Junker 69 Z for 5-6 thousand? I guess you live in the Sac area? I grew up in California (Fresno) and know the area well. I have flown out of state twice in the last two years to make purchases of cars worthy of the trip. One of these (or dozens) would be well worth the trip to me since I know their collectability.
...
Sure, I'd be happy to. The last one I stumbled on was in Petaluma, a blue + black vinyl top X77 car with *serious* rust + a replacement block 302.
Most underhood Z/28 specific parts (original carb, distributor, the goddawful low output alternator, smog stuff) were long gone. Wasted interior, crunch-o-rama under the vinyl top in addition to significant body cancer. The kind of car you put 15k into to produce a 16k car. Probably worth the price (6k) but no more. Personally I think these are bad investments generally because the current price spike (to say, around 25k for non-perfect, but really nice car), is unsustainable as the stock and real estate markets sink to whatever new equilibrium point they are headed for. The truly rare cars (unlike things built in the tens of thousands) and cars with history (specific race cars for instance) I think will be more immune to price erosion.
you got me there . . .it is true that a car like that would be a difficult resto. But finding a complete (well mostly) Z car for that price may be a bit more difficult.
Did you used to have an interest in cars like that? Just curious because I don't pay much attention to cars that don't interest me personally. I have probably missed seeing some good cars as collectors go by because of this neglect on my part.
I do know (called a friend today) where a complete 69 Z car is (needs resto, but he has some NOS parts for it)for 7,500. I also know where a 68 RS Z is complete but dissasembled) for $10,000.
They will both sell. . . if not for that price, something close to it.
I agree the cars you mentioned above are more stable then others.
Remember the early to mid 80s when prices spiked? Then the prices crashed on a lot of cars, if not 99% of them. Even exotics and rare cars. In 1990 I visited a shop in the Los Angeles area to sell a 454 needed for a resto of a 1970 Vette and he had some 35 cars including several Ferraris. He was explaining to me that one car in particular used to be worth about $500,000 and would now only bring about $200,000-$250,000. He wasn't too happy.
Markets fluctuate. But the cars are still collectible even if they are not particulary valuable or good financial investments.
As far as being off topic, I don't see a problem with interacting with info a bit off topic.
tdugovic--I myself don't "claim" to be an expert in collectible cars...your host IS an expert in collectible cars. I wouldn't give you erroneous information regarding collectibility status in today's market. My reputation would suffer. So you can be assured my information is based on lots of research and years of experience.
If you want to know what people are collecting, and what they are not collecting, and what they are paying, I will be pleased to inform you, or if I don't know right off, to ask someone who does know. I get paid very well to study the entire field of collectible cars and I have many contacts in the industry who are recognized authorities on American, foreign, automobilia, books, you name it. I also actually write the Kelley Blue Book on Early Cars, 1946-1978. You can go look, my name is in the masthead on the front page.
Now as for a 1969 Z28, you should be able to buy a complete, decent looking, running car for around $10,000. A junker would be far less than that, maybe $2,000 for a correct and usable parts car. Of course, restored cars with special options will go in the $30K range. A plain old Camaro with a 6 cylinder isn't really "collectible", it's just an old used car that's worth something, but not much.
You see the difference? (No, I didn't think so--LOL)
Host
Here's one: 1969 Camaro Z-28, X77, NOM, green, white stripes, black interior, 8K tach, stored many years, runs and looks great, ask $11,500 (phone # on request or consult March 2001 Hemmings Motor News, page 1780.
Did you used to have an interest in cars like that? Just curious because I don't pay much attention to cars that don't interest me personally. I have probably missed seeing some good cars as collectors go by because of this neglect on my part.
end quote:
Still do. I've owned two pretty decent '69 Z/28's (and used them for daily drivers). My last one was sort of a pain ownership wise since it was so original (junk like smog, hose clamps, glass, headlights, actually everything except tires and underhood rubber) that I felt sort of obliged to keep it stock.
In general, I'd rather be able to update the car in several obvious ways (tires, handling stuff, more modern drivetrain) to be able to enjoy it more.
I'm shopping around for another car now (maybe a '69 396 Pace Car, though I've already owned two, one of which was an L89 car) but would probably settle for any Camaro SS convertible, since the point of the exercise would be more sleeper (502 crate engine maybe) and less for originality.
Although I've owned quite a few musclecars since the mid-1970's, the whole meticulous restoration crowd has always sort of rubbed me the wrong way as the trend has slipped from hotrodding to Otis Chandler style home museums. It's one thing to properly rebuild a car as a mechanical device and quite another to have endless arguments about flat black finishes and putting those stupid 'PBT' stamps on Camaro firewalls. I admit that people like me still exist but are losing ground to the folks that make a competitive sport out of 'knowledge' concerning proper hose stripes. (I must say that in some cases the point is not to know a lot, but merely to know more than someone else).
Now, there's a guy locally here with a '70 Boss 302 with either Panasports or Minilites, rollbar, and built to the hilt motor (+ the car is *really* straight). That thing is cool.
begin rant>
While I'm on a tirade, you really have to ask what the heck is going on when you've got cars like E-body hemi convertibles (there's one of the Challengers for sale on www.traderonline.com) selling for $400,000? I appreciate the concept that prices are based on buyers needs, but jeez louise! Think about the pre-war or exotic you could get for this much. In addition we are talking about a car which shares %80 of its components with a 318 Challenger worth 1%/2% as much.
end rant>
I couldn't agree more....I also find the whole idea of such extreme "fussiness" about what is essentially good 'ol mass-produced American Iron getting to be a bit absurd. As if a Hemi were some kind of French poodle that needed little pink ribbons tied around it.
I'm also in favor of judicious, careful modernization to collectible cars, as long as no cutting is involved and as long as the original parts are kept in a box.
On the positive side of all this madness, there are still plenty of good solid coupes and convertibles around in the $10K-30K range that are stylish, interesting and perform well, so I don't see the Great Unwashed among us being "deprived" of our collectible cars...we just can't compete for those rare options or special editions.
I'm seeing a very definite trend to buying and USING older cars for club events, historic races, etc. Many people just got bored with dragging their trailer queens around. It's too bad some muscle cars have broken the $100K barrier now, since we won't be seeing those cars on the road anymore. Still, if you go to the Monterey Historics, you will see 1/2 million dollar cars being raced and even crashed. Hats off to those guys!
It's really a question of BALANCE, isn't it....between the extremes of $400,000 Plymouths (!) and calling any old beater a classic.....sanity must lie somewhere in the middle.
But I have read several posts at this site where other people try to pass themselves off as "knowledgeable" in a subject in which they are really not.
I am sure you are a knowledgable car person in many different areas . . . but not all. Nor am I.
I do wish I had all day to interact on the net on bulliten boards. One could learn a lot by just that.
Want to talk about the Rat engines?? I read in another post where you hadn't heard of the BB chevy refered to as a "rat". that is something I learned 25 years ago. I don't know where the nick name came from. Maybe because the first proto type 427 mark II was used in the 1963 NASCAR circuit even though it wasn't available in production line cars. They got "ratted" on by rumors but NASCAR allowed them to be used anyway for the rest of the year?? Just a guess.
Did you know that BB chevy heads are nicknamed "Porcupine heads" because of the way the rocker arm studs and push rods point out in all directions?
IN 1977 I had a bracket 1/4 mile race car (67 Camaro) with a tweeked 327 and the name on the side of it was "strych 9" and in small letters "kills rats!!". A little jab at the BB chevy guys.
And I know you probably have a very diverse wide range of knowledge . . . much more so than I. My knowledge is very restricted to certain things.
But that won't keep me from having an opinion about a topic. Hahaha
BTW anyone who knows what NOM means in that add will tell you why the car is selling as cheaply as it is.
For a Chevy, that is a VERY important problem for that car.
What does a 1969 $2,000 Z28 that is "correct" mean? I would beg to differ strongly on that one.
And Hemmings is a great source of into, but often times does not reflect the true market value of cars. . . many over inflated prices.
Also the old car guide is a "guide" and that is all. As you well know, The reality of what cars sell for depends on factors like the many variations of options, original parts, etc that can tip the scale to one extreme or the other very easily.
BTW pick a 4 door catalina. 1966. What does the OCG give as value for a #2 car?
Would you pay that for it?
I want to ad the Mustang Saleen to my list of future collectibles.
For instance, if you had, say a cowboy hat worn by Elvis in a certain movie, that's a hot collectible....you'd get a ridiculously large sum of money for that--thousands of dollars no doubt.
But if you had the hat worn by the doorman who opens the door for Elvis in that movie, you'd get the price of an old hat, whatever that is.
Why is this? After all, the doorman's cap is very nice, it has maybe some gold braid on it, sturdy little rim, probably just as hard to make as a cowboy hat. So why is it worth 1/100th the price?
Answer: Because nobody wants it or cares about it, so it goes to the thrift store where somebody "collects" it for $25.
So is the old doorman's hat a "collectible hat"?
My opinion is NO, not at all. It's just an old hat that somebody, finally, decided was worth $25.
Could you take it to a "rare hat dealer"? No.
Could you sell it for more money at a "rare hat show"? Doubtful
Would people gather around you, demanding to buy it, if you wore it in the street? Don't think so.
Could you buy it and call yourself a "rare hat collector?" No.
And this is the same difference between a Hemi Cuda and a 1965 Mercedes 4-door sedan with dents. One goes to a museum, one goes to the thrift store (junkyard).
Actually, a lot of scrap auto metal fromt the US goes to many useful purposes....that old Benz will either be a tea pot in Turkey or even the left front fender on a brand new Toyota.
Ending up as recyclable material is just as noble a fate for an old clunker as being dragged out of the wreckers to sit in somebody's back yard once he finds out nobody wants it. A nobler fate actually. Wreckers provide an enormous amount of material to industry.
How cheap and unwanted does a car have to be before it really can't be called "collectible"?
If EVERY car is collectible, we might as well discontinue classic car magazines, car shows, price guides, swap meets, etc. The joy of collecting old cars would have its heart torn out---the joy of the HUNT--the joy of the SPECIAL, the rare, the beautiful the powerful. With all cars being called "collectible", it would be more like Show and Tell, wouldn't it? "Say, Bobby, what old piece of junk did YOU find today? Care to show the group?
no thanks!
Occasionally a car is introduced in relatively small numbers in its first year but then floods the market in future years due to unanticipated popularity.
Presuming the 2nd+ years will never be "collectible" because of their lack of scarcity, what are the chances the 1st model year (which looks exactly like the others) will become collectible.
I'm thinking of Humvees or Vipers or (maybe) PT Cruisers or, jeez, maybe even looking ahead to the WRX if it is really a limited introduction.
These don't fit any of the criteria you've discussed, so I know they'll never be "true" collectibles... but perhaps they might be worth more than one might first expect. (on the other hand, I've never exactly jonesed for a G1 Voyager)
I don't necessarily believe what I've just theorized, but I thought it might get us back to talking about cars built in the last decade or so.
----
Oh hey - here's another talker:
What about the first viable "alternative power" vehicles?
If we truly will be all or mostly electric this century, will the Insight or Prius someday be collectible? Again, no one is going to race them, but perhaps they earn status merely as revolutionaries.
Just stuff to talk about...
Regarding the "first year" question....the Corvette comes to mind, where the first year (1953) was a rare car but not a popular one at all.....foreign car owners laughted at the automatic 6 cylinder arrangement, and American car owners, while they liked the style, were equally disappointed in the power output and the two seat business. So it was a car that appealed to few people. Then, in a few years, GM got the formula right and started pumping out Corvettes in big numbers, and people loved them.
So, are the 1st year Corvettes the most valuable? No, not at all. It seems that the "old rule" still applies for collectibility--a car has to be a sensation when it is introduced and has to be really lusted over to remain highly collectible in later years. I think if the later Corvettes had never happened (let's say they shut down Corvette production in 1955, which GM almost did), then the early Vettes would be modest collectibles, like say the Kaiser-Darrin or Nash Healey...cars in the $25K range today.
Electric/Hybrid Cars----I don't really have a clue about this, but I would suspect that they will become only marginally collectible. True, they will have some historical value, but there are plenty of cars out there that are historically significant but not very attractive or not very exciting to people. The first NSU Wankel rotary engine cars for instance (NSU Ro 80) are worth little today, and even the electric cars now approaching 80 & 90 years old are not really big buck collectibles......more like charming curiosities that certain collectors will pay a reasonable price for.
I think really "hot" collectible cars, the ones people literally FIGHT over, require DESIRE....I just don't see a Prius provoking LUST, do you?
No... no fistfights over pinks or catalogues full of mods or anything like that
But you know, that makes me realize what WILL be the first real "alterna-collectible": The first street-screamer powered mostly or wholly by an alternate fuel. When somebody builds a really boss electro-coupe or spyder, the whole world will change!!
Also, limited edition cars that are noting more than limited edition badge jobs usually don't appreciate any more than the non limited edition car of the same model, right?
What about a case like the Neiman Marcus T-Bird, where the limited edition is the first 200 made?
I guess what I'm asking is this, does being at the front of the Assembly line get any brownie points?
Would the same go for the last F-Body Camaro/Firebird off the line?
I remember someone who had one of these and was hoping to make a killing, suing GM when they re-introduced the Eldo Convert in the mid 80's.