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
AIEEEEE!
His was the "commemorative edition" (cheap badges on body and dash) so he thought he could get even more than this over-retail bid.
Well, he just showed Lady Luck to the door.
And by the way, I don't think "Commemorative Edition" doesn't mean a thing on the last Spiders. They may have the cheap badges on the body and dash, and some nicer wood trim in the interior, but to me, they look like the same basic car that was introduced in 1966. I read that the last Spiders were produced in April '93, not '94, so technically, those last cars should be MY '93.
"And now, the Shiftright Bad Decision Award for 2002 goes to....may I have the envelope please?"
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1862914353
and thinking "if that guy thinks he can get THAT much for THAT spider, than I'm in the money!"
OK, in all fairness, I have seen late eighties spiders go for near $10K on Ebay, but we're talking about zero mile pristine examples from reputable sellers with a zillion pics to back it up.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
As for the f-bodies...they were REAL close to being dropped after ' 72(which would have meant no pontiac super duty for 73-74). Then by the late 70s (77-81 models) 2nd gen firebird and TA production skyrocketed(with a little help from smokey and the bandit).
Does the boat tail add anything to the value of a Spider? This is essentially my dream hobby car - with an engine built to about 150 HP - my youth regained!
http://www.carsonline.net/69alfa403.html
What would be a reasonable offer on this one - not that I'm going to do it...
They also have my car's twin for sale - that '88 Spider is identical to mine, or was before they put dual Webers on it. Just to pick nits, isn't the '69 a 1750 Spider? I understood that Duetto referred specifically to the carbed '66-'67 1600 Spiders, and the '69 with the Spica injected 1750 was simply a 1750 Roundtail Spider (not Duetto). Beautiful car, though, and probably worth every penny if it is what it purports to be.
-Jason
It's like people calling Jaguars XKEs, which Jaguar never did (E-Type, Puleese!), or 1964 &1/2 Mustangs, which the factory never did, and on and on. Popular nomenclature often defeats historical accuracy and you know, on minor items like this, best to give in.
-Jason
For Sale ALPHA ROMEO, rare Italian mini-Ferrari, V-4, 4 speed floorshift.
Don't you just wanna roll your eyes?
It was great for insurance purposes though... I parked around the corner from the Agent's office and went in to buy insurance. She couldn't find it in the book - no computers in those days? "What kind of car?" "Italian." "How big's the engine?" "It's a 4 cylinder" "Like a Fiat or a volkswagen?" "Yeah"
Bingo. Economy car rates... I finally got the title fixed to be sure I'd be able to sell it later.
Figure $6,000 is more than enough for a decent 912 and $10K should buy a decent early (pre-69) 911.
One major problem with the 912 is that althought the engine is just a 90HP 4 cylinder, rebuilding it costs more than the price of the entire car, possibly double. So you don't want a 912 without a rebuilt engine receipt in your hands.
Sure people drove old cars fast but they died in larger numbers, got car sick and a lot more tired than we do now I think.
The cars were not as enjoyable to drive recklessly or overly fast. Handling, braking, etc. demand a more leasurely pace.
Roads were not nearly as crowded everywhere you went. Sure, some freeways were crowded, but not every freakin' road out there.
People are more preoccupied in the car, from eating, the radio, the cellphone, changing CD's, watching t.v., etc.
And, I think people are just in a big hurry, why I'm not sure.
1. how long you consider a car's 'useful life' to be, which depends on
2. the car, and the care given by the previous owner(s), if applicable
3. if you fix it yourself of farm out repairs
4. the age of the car (sometimes, when a car reaches a certain age, and you've fixed a lot of things, you might reach a 'smooth sailing' point, at least in theory)
5. the owner--does he fix every little thing on his old car, or let some 'non-essentials' go (is there a point at which you quit repairing the power antenna, or that blown speaker doesn't bother you any more?)
I never had any trouble with my '57 DeSoto or '67 Catalina, or either of my Darts out on the highway. I'm also convinced that the sorry tires they used to put on cars is a good deal of the problem. My Darts had 70-series tires, and were good handlers. My Catalina though, has 215/75/R-14 tires, which is pretty puny for a car like that.
My DeSoto's even worse. It has those old-style bias plys on it, an 8.55x14 or something like that. I think the 8.55 is at the widest part of the tire though, and not what actually touches the pavement. There can't be much more than 5-6" of tread width hitting the pavement! I'm sure the cheapest economy cars nowadays have more than that!
Of COURSE you could. There are no functional/operational differences between a good-condition '60s car and a modern one. We're not comparing a Pentium 4 to Pong here, people! Or a 1920s car to a modern one, either.
I drove my bone-stock '64 Catalina everywhere & every day (no back-up driver!) for 2 years and 25,000+ miles (1991-93). I put performance radials & a great alignment on her and she handled very nicely. Tuned her myself every fall and she ran like a top; 'starts like a Pontiac' was the coined phrase amoung my buddies (started so quick it would be hard to 'bump the starter').
And the brake thing is often over-exaggerated with the passage of time. SURE some were bad- just like today. Motor Trend got a '02 Camry to do 60-0 in 146', an '02 Civic in 144' and a '99 Legacy in 135 feet. My '64 Pontiac when new with 8-lugs and crap-tires did the same in 145' (Motor Trend again). Add modern rubber for the Pontiac and it'll outbrake the new jobs. My other ride has the best brakes of the '60s: Buick's 12" finned aluminum drums- zero fade. Try when-new 60-0s in 138' (1960)! Add modern rubber and you should knock an EASY 10' off that.
"Whaaaa- but how would I play my Backstreet Boys CDs?? Where's my security blankie of ABS and EFI and SRS? Duh!... everyone knows 3-letter anacronyms make up for all my horribly pre-occupied & self-righteous driving 'skills'!"
It has no road feel and the brakes are overly grabby, and it can't go around corners as quick as the the 'Trep. It'll probably take off quicker though, and to me it's more comfortable, because there's more room to stretch out. Once I get used to it again, though, I'm fine.
As for a stereo, well, it only has an AM radio, so I'd just bring along a boom box if I was going to be in the car for any extended length of time.
The biggest problem with going back to something like this would be the fuel economy. I think I've only gotten below 20 mpg on a tank of fuel in my Intrepid once. With the Catalina, it's more like 10-11, although on a trip to Ocean City, MD, it did get about 18 once.
In some ways, I think older cars are almost easier to pilot around than new ones, because they don't have all the blind spots and hidden corners that new cars have.
And as for performance, it seems like newer cars are really built to only haul around 1 or 2 people. Add more people or cargo, and performance from those high-winding little engines drops off fast. With my older cars, I never noticed much of a performance drop-off, even with a full load. Even the ones with poor acceleration to begin with, a few extra people never hurt.
Another thing I never noticed on my '95 Thunderchicken was performance dropping off with more people. Of course, it does have a 200 hp 4.6L engine, which may be small by 1968 standards, but is probably one of the largest engines you can get in a regular passenger car today, so that may have something to do with it. I've never had the (dis)pleasure of driving a 4-cylinder Honda, so I don't know about their driving characteristics.
Cascading brake lights are a sure fire cure for non-grey hair in those cases...not just fading problems, but grabbiness and bad front/back distribution.
I am less concerned with speed than I am with getting an "original" or "stock" vehicle. I've got my Wrangler for adventurous driving (off road anyway).
Any thoughts or horror stories?
Not a good choice for your only vehicle for that reason.
Frankly, I'd be scared to drive it as a daily due to its small size.
I Would love to eventually "graduate" up to an MG TD. But that is a ways off.
My friend's Mini did not help its case by having important suspension and steering pieces abruptly pop off in traffic, nor by its tendency to overheat.