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
Bargain "Classics"--$12,000 or Less and 20 Years or Older
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
So add to the list over this weekend I saw the Lotus Europa, awesome shape, owner asked me if I wanted to take a spin, but I declined, his price was out of my range.
Then it was off to drive a 1968 Porsche 911, which I saw shining on the side of the road....$7500...worth a look. Open the door and check out the rockers...look...no rockers...just big rust holes where there is supposed to be steel. They guy tried covering them up, and really didn't feel like discussing it. I decided to take a spin anyway, took the top of and away we went, lots of backfire, the shifter wiggled from here to eternity...what a joy!
From there it was off to drive the 1980 mgb. They wanted 4000 and I am getting antsy to put something in the garage. Drove around in that, with the top up. Owner didn't feel like taking down. See ya!
Finally, Sunday night I went and drove a 1972 TVR 2500M. Wow...that was fun. Sitting down on the road, just enough room for you steer and shift, engine roaring!!!! That was a fun ride. Body didnt look to good, but I didnt care, you cant see it from the inside....little to much hassle to keep it running, and not a great investment from what I have heard.
So, my question is any input on a Triumph GT6. Most of the TVR's parts were triumphs. I figure I could get a better deal on the Triumph, and maybe get the same kind of fun ride as the TVR?
Also, if you are over 5' 9", just forget it, and even that's going to be tight for you. It's a really tight car.
Typical GT6 problems are rust, water leaking in (check everywhere for water damage before you buy). Also check the "doughnuts" in the driveline right away as they like to break, and do a compression test paying particular attention to the head gasket between #5 and 6.
I am told a better car is the GT6+ or Mark II, as it has better ventilation. GT6 cockpits can get very uncomfortable in summer.
So buy the best one you can because if you put a lot of money in a GT6, you will go to your grave without seeing a cent of it back.
Oh, plan on using premium fuel only, as compression ratio is 9:1.
If none of the above is daunting to you, you could have a fairly pleasant cruiser for cheap. Forget about any exciting performance, though. it'll be fun but just adequate at around 100 HP.
I'd forgotten that the early GT6s had the Spitfire's rear swing axles.
Some folks get confused with the GT6 and think it is the coupe version of the TR6---no such luck. It was basically a spitfire chassis mated to a small 6 cylinder engine from the Vitesse. 2.0 liter I think.
The Ghia is just a plain old VW with a fancier body, so you get VW performance at Porsche prices; however, some people (women mostly it seems) like 'em because they are not so common on the road and they are pretty easy to fix mechanically speaking. But one hard shot to the body and you are in deep doo doo if you are not properly insured or if it was your fault.
Also, there is the safety issue, but really all old VWs have to cope with that. Nothing like having a gas tank sitting on top of your feet and only a spare tire and some thin sheet metal in the front end.
MGBs can be daily drivers for attentive owners. If you expect to ignore it like one does a Honda, it won't perform to Honda levels I don't believe.
But it far outstrips a Honda in fun (well, maybe the S2000 is lots of fun, but in a different, modern way).
I've owned both and can tell you one may be more fun but talk about troublesome!
Good thing Mr. Honda and Mr. Lucas never got together!
He didn't invent the short-circuit, but he perfected it.
I must respectfully disagree. I drove an MGB for many years through hell and fire and flood and it never let me down. Neither the burning sands of Nevada or the icy peaks of Colorado could stop it. Of course, I must admit I really kept after it, and would not expect the average owner to do that. In fact, the owner right after me had all kinds of trouble within 6 months.
Let's say the reliability of the MGB is earned, not given to everyone.
All I remember is when I swapped out the speakers on my '79 Newport, I had to run an extra wire from the new speakers, which were the normal 2-wire type, and attach them to something metal. For some reason, the front speakers were the normal type, with 2 wires.
Hard to say, JR, it's really more about each particular car and its owner. Most of the modern Alfas have all Bosch equipment so it's pretty good. Prior to that, it's more a matter of keeping battery terminals clean, fuse boxes all tight and dry and fan belts tightened.
I don't know if this has already been discussed somewhere between messages #25 and #425, but I would add my '66 Corvair Monza to the list of worthwhile (and underappreciated) cheap classics if a decent one could be found.
Anyway, has this forum died off, or does it just periodically go dormant? As I approach retirement, the idea of acquiring something that fits in this category and "doing some work" on it has growing appeal. I'm not a wrench like Shifty or Speedshift, but it's never too late to start, is it?
Why not a nice Covair convertible? Pretty simple car and still cheap. '65 on up Corvairs are among the nicest looking American cars ever made in my opinion. And you can drive them everyday, too, no problem. The brakes are good, and if you get a stickshift, you can improve the gearshift throw (which is pretty bad), put on some better shocks and tires (brakes are already great on these cars) adn thre you go. Instant inexpensive top down fun.
I'd avoid the turbo at all costs. Fortunately they're hard to find.
Other affordable and fun Detroit iron from that period: Falcon Futura V8s and Sprints, and the Mercury S-22, Caliente and Cyclone. There's lots of them and they're cheap. Barracuda, Valiant Signet or Dart GT with the 273-4v, an interesting performance engine that's as strong as the 289 Hi-Po but not nearly as expensive. All these cars are simple to work on and small enough to be fun.
As far as wrenching, all you need is lots of patience and time and a factory shop manual.
It is not a show car, but one that can be driven for years with very little work put into it.
Whether the price is right is up to you.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1849592887
Yes, a convertible Monza or Corsa would be a nice way to go, but you sure don't see many around. Where would be a good place to look - Hemmings?
Yeah, the rust in the quarters of that Galaxie gave me a little trouble too but I figured that's because we Californians are spoiled. If I saw rust bubbles on a car I'd run away screaming but most of the country doesn't have that luxury. But Sylvester's idea is right on. An "unmolested original" as they say in the ads.
The cracked dash is another issue, to be sure.
The big one is the body rust and how it was repaired.
I've always liked the Monza as well, never made sense why it didn't sell well besides bad press; maybe price?
I don't know, the market hasn't been kind to rear engine cars. You could say the design was obsolescent in 1960 when the first Corvair came out. Unless the Corvair had acquired an incredible mystique something like the 911 I think its days would have been numbered even without the Mustang.
Around 1971, Buick, Olds, and Pontiac versions would have sprung up, with appropriate trim differences.
In 1972, the change from gross to net hp would cut that 140 hp Corsa model down to around 100 hp just with the math...even worse when you figure in actual compression cuts, smogging, etc. Also, around this time, they'd probably make the back windows in the coupe stationary, or flip-out, like on a Duster.
By 1973, we'd get a fat bumper on the front, and a new roofline called "Colonade" which would kill the convertible and stick a fat B-pillar up the side. Roof choices on the coupe would range from full-vinyl to landau, and also an S-3 model with a louvered quarter window.
In 1974, the base engine would be down to about 62 hp, 80 optional, with an SS package that bumps it up another 5%, but then adds 10% in weight because of flashy graphics, spoilers, etc. Also this year, we'd get a nice fat rear bumper to go with the nice, fat front bumper.
Somewhere along the line, GM would get sued because their '77 Corvair ended up with an Oldsmobile engine. In '78, people would [non-permissible content removed] because the rear windows in the 4-doors would no longer roll down.
The platform would go FWD for 1980, and knock the Aspen/Volare out of top spot as the most recalled car of all time. For 1982 the Cadillac version would appear.
Then, after years of lagging behind, they'd suddenly invigorate the thing oh, around 1994, and make it one of the most formidable cars ever. Then in 1997 they'd pull the plug so they could free up another assembly line for SUV production.
Yeah, maybe it is best that the car was retired when it was!!
My idea is more modest. In '66 when sales fall off the map GM buys the rights to the Crown mid-engine conversion kit, upgrades it and inserts an interesting small block, maybe the 327/350.
Of course the result would compete with the Corvette and the upcoming Camaro, and there's a price premium because of low production that the market won't want to pay--because after all it still looks like a Corvair and between the Mustang, Nader and an iffy reliability record no one wants one.
And GM would have to set up a seperate entity just to replace all the blown transaxles.
There is a Corvair out there called the Fitch Corvair. If you see one of those, that's the one to buy.
Hey Shifty, what's a Fitch Corvair? I've never heard of that.
A Fitch Corvair will scare the hell out of any contemporary Porsche of the time and probably whomp it except for the 911S. Even the stock brakes were pretty darn good and once you got away from the rotary telephone dial steering and the "oar in a barrel" shift linkage, you had a very pleasant car to drive. I guess the carbs boosted low end torque. The radials were self-evident as an improvement, and the Koni shocks of course didn't have a coronary at the hint of some spirited cornering as the stock units would.
It's more of a modest power GT type of car, like the MGB GT.
That configuration would have negated the traction and space efficiency of FWD, but, hey, the marketing people could have had a field day touting it as "the compact like no other."
It wouldn't make any sense, which would make it very much in keeping with the period.
Who knows what the Corvair could have become had GM not wimped out on it. Contrary to some of the inventive scenarios posted above, I think that it would have remained too limited in appeal for the other divisions to badge engineer it. What it needed was a corporate angel/chief engineer to fix on a relatively pure vision and stick with it come hell and bean counters. Perhaps let Pontiac take it over to flesh out the low end of their performance line, where it ironically could have survived the passing of the muscle car era. In time, it could have become Pontiac's Corvette -- low volume, limited appeal, but with a fanatical following that would not let it die.
But you bring up a good point. I think Pontiac should have taken on the Corvair, ditched the Fiero concept (ugly car) and put lots and lots of R&D into the Corvair, maybe even changed the name.
It should have become America's Porsche, not Pontiac's Corvette, since there would have been room for a domestic Porsche, but little more room for more Corvettes.
First, they were a '50s engineering idea and obsolescent when they were new. How many rear engine cars made it out the '60s? The 911 and maybe a Renault (R8?).
Second, GM put plenty of money into the '65 redesign and it was still hammered by Mustang. By April 1965 GM realized Corvair just couldn't compete.
But the biggest reason I don't see the Corvair doing big things after 1965 is that it didn't happen, even with guys like Pete Estes and John Delorean in charge. Back in the '60s GM usually knew what it was doing. Yeah, there was the rope drive Tempest, the Buick aluminum V8 and a few other things that made you wonder, but GM was still the gold standard in those days. (Although they sure blew it handling Nader.)
As for Corvair selling as a low volume car with a fanatical following, the Corvette (and 911) had far more power and mystique than a Corvair could ever have generated. I can maybe see a Fitch-type Corvair as GM's answer to the MG-B et al., certainly a hot market in the late '60s.
It's always good, when lamenting the Corvair, to drive a stock '65 model with the sloppy shifter and 35 turns lock to lock (not really) steering and the poor oil sealing and heater problems (all correctible, by the way, and often corrected by current Corvair owners).
GM wouldn't put the lousy $100 per car in these models to make them decent and reliable drivers.
Memory lane...the '65 was my second car, bought for $450 in January 1970 after I totaled the '60 Corvair. Danube Blue with light blue vinyl interior, dent in the right rear quarter and mileage somewhere in the 60k range.
Saw it after a long Saturday of looking at cars and I don't know if it was just because we were tired but both Dad and I knew this was the car. The "Turbosupercharged" emblem on the lid was the icing on the cake.
Ultimately a disappointing car--I think I was more of a Falcon Sprint kind of guy--but I kept it 15 years because I knew it would be worth big money someday.
I sold it in 1985 for I think $750 and lucky to get it.
I had a '66 TurboCorsa convertible for a couple of years. Very rare car, it turns out. Great short-throw shifter, quick steering, astonishing road-holding, otherwise a monument to GM's short-sighted penny pinching. Pushrod seals lasted what seemed like nanoseconds. Ok, a couple of months. About the road holding, in '74 had a colleague with a new 2002 that he thought was the greatest. Took him for a short drive, turned him about as green as my car's paint. He never spoke again about his BMW's great adhesion.
Cheers,
Dan
Of course, the bone-stock Corvair handicap against a Porsche would be the drum brakes (which were GOOD but faded eventually) and the stock suspension, etc, which would wilt after some hot laps. Porsches were much tougher cars, due, as you say, to GM penny pinching which let some very cheap parts handle some very critical assignments.
Not sure if the $5,500 includes the finger in two of the pictures or not. As the seller says, perfect for those that want to restore a "classic"
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1858664523
He's about $2,000 too high.
Ebay dummies. You don't start off the first bid over retail! DOH!
Put a reserve on it, and start it at $500 and see what happens.