Bargain "Classics"--$12,000 or Less and 20 Years or Older

C13

Just what I needed.

sublime_007

I was wondering what foreign classic you think handles great. Lancia scorpion? How about the fiat 124 spider? Whats the best year for the 124's...early 70's or late 70's? When I say handling I mean do you think it can outhandle those miata's. How about the first gen RX7? Now how is the reliability on fiat and lancia and rx7? Can you drive one say 1000 miles in a weekend and not worry or do you have to sink in all this money for continuous problems? Sorry for the long post =-)

Mr_Shiftright

The Miata is a pretty ferocious handler, but I'd say the 3rd generation Mazda RX-7 would easily outhandle it and certainly out accelerate it massively.

The Fiat and Lancia can be reasonably reliable, but you need to start with a good one that hasn't been all-monkeyed up by financially-challenged owners and Homer Simpson mechanics. Once you get a 124, I'd say a late 70s (78-79 Spider 2000 CS2) car is the way to go...after 1979, you have gearboxes and rear axles made in Spain, and they are weak, and prior to 78, you have some narley emissions stuff, and it is usually the wiring associated with the early emissions equipment that has given the 124 it's bad reputation.

Actually, a 1982 on up Alfa Spider is a much sturdier and more reliable car, and costs about the same. It is also better than the Lancias of that time, and Alfa parts are far more plentiful than Fiat or Lancia.

If you really want to go 1,000 miles a weekend and feel safe, the Alfa or the RX-7 are your safest bets.

Shiftright

C13

How about a Giulia instead of the Duetto? You see em going for $7 to 10K. Much more money than a clean Duetto or an MGB, but the same as a lot of Miatas and 911's.

Granted, we're talking about a 30 to 35-yr time span, but let's say an $8K, apparently very solid '2'.

wilcox

Saw one the other day for $6,000.....but....I bet they'd take $5k.

Mr_Shiftright

And they'd be lucky to get it! It had better be a convertible jewel for that money.

dgraves1

I'm thinking about a late 80s Alfa Spider. Is there any difference in the drivetrain between the Graduate, Veloce and Quadrofoglio models or is it just trim levels? Also, I saw a 88 for sale for $8000 which seems a little high but what concerns me is the 126k miles. How expensive is it to rebuild an engine or transmission on these cars?

Mr_Shiftright

Just trim levels.

The '88 is well overpriced, by about $2,000, even if nice.

Alfa 4-cylinder twincam engines are very very strong. The only problem you will find with a high mileage engine is the valve seats receding into the head, causing decreased valve clearance and eventually burned valves. This can be corrected by a valve job and new seats and valves, around an $1,800 job if done thoroughly and professionally. The bottom ends are virtually indestructible, as this engine has been produced for many many years and is de-bugged.

Transmission always exhibit slow synchros and this is normal...you can't speed shift an older Alfa.

Other than that, I can't say much bad about them, other than that they are not quite as tight or quiet as a Miata...but heaters are good and parts can be found everywhere.

dgraves1

I'd like to get peoples opinions on a second generation RX-7 convertible vs an early Miata. Both are around $6000 and about 10 years old so they don't fit this topic. Should I start a new topic over in Sports Cars?

Mr_Shiftright

Well, you'd probaby get more response over there, and there are already RX-7 and Miata topics, so I wouldn't start a new topic...just pose your question in both of those topics in Sportscars.

dgraves1

I seem to remember back in the 70s one of the Italian sports cars had a back seat (a tiny one). I think it was the Fiat 128 but it could have been the Alfa. Any help?

Mr_Shiftright

The Fiat 124 Spyder, yes. The Alfa Spyder has a nice roomy shelf but no back seat.

gtt1

I feel these will make it into the classic catagory before to long and have a pretty good shot at increasing in value.

1st gen Monte Carlo's (and the sister cars w/ big blocks)

late 60's Ford and Merc mid-size w/ FE motors

late 2nd gen T/A's (These are already pushing the $5000 limit now)

non chevrolet/ pontiac A- bodys from 65-72

Big block, well optioned wagons.

Mr_Shiftright

Possibly some of these, but I don't see 4-doors making it, just the ragtops and 2-door hardtops. They will increase in collectible value, especially as you say the big blocks, but I doubt that any of these cars will ever be "classics" in the real sense of the word. There are just too many of them and they are mass-produced cars. If you look at the list of classics, these are usually rare and quite magnificent automobiles that were very special and much admired the day they were built. Monte Carlos, for instance, were built at 300,000+ PER YEAR, but a 1953 Corvette, for instance (also not a "classic" yet) had a production run of 315.

dgraves1

You did a wonderful job of defining "sports car" in one of the sports car forums. Care to take a shot at "classic car"? Do you consider a certain age so the car can pass the test of time? Is there an approximate cut off to the production totals to ensure exclusivity? What is it about a 1953 Corvette that makes it not a classic "yet"? I realize the early Corvettes were not wonderful performers but that will not improve with time. Only their age will increase with time.

Mr_Shiftright

There's actually a list published of "true classics" that historians tend to use. Of course, one could always argue as to why the makers of the list get to decide.

I suppose like anything else, you've got to put some rules down for the definition of a word or else no one will know what anyone else is talking about.

Anyway, on this official list, no car is newer than 1948. Generally, the list consists of cars that were somewhat remarkable when they were made.

A Corvette is often called "a modern classic" so I guess age really does have something to do with it. You almost have to wait until a few newer generations have gotten a chance to judge the car, otherwise each generation "stacks the deck" with their own opinions.

To me, the term "classic" represents an enduring quality that won't change once the next fad or trend comes in. And just being age and even rare isn't enough. The true classic has to be exceptional in some way, very superior to others of its type. Kind of "dominant" in style or power or engineering. So a Model A Ford, for instance, from 1928 is a great little car, but it wasn't so vastly superior to the 1928 Chevy and there are still about a million of them around. No classic there. As for the 1953 Corvette, well, it's a 6 cylinder automatic, so that's a problem, but I personally would still give it classic status when the time comes because the shape and style have literally been absorbed into the culture.

dgraves1

Well, that was my question - How much time does it take?. It's been 37 years. The Corvette will never be a 1948 or older. So it will never get there. I know I read in one of the other forums that 1948 is kind of viewed as the end of the "pre-war" cars so it represents a dividing point for old vs. modern. So I guess we have to wait for another dividing point before the Corvette is no longer a "modern" car.
Keep in mind, I'm not a proponent of the Corvette or any other car, just trying to sort out the classifications.

C13

I have problems with the rigid definition coined by the Classic Motor Club or whoever it is.

By their rules (if 1948 is the deadline), there's no Ferrari, let alone Lamborghini, that qualifies. No Lotus either.

The great thing about terminolgy is that anybody can make up their own. Whether or not you'll be able to convince anybody else of the appropriateness of your choice will depend on your powers of persuasion.

CMC have had a lot of success in convincing the world that their standard should be accepted as THE standard, but to me it's an even more ephemeral argument than the one that a couple of art historians might have about the moment that the Renaissance ended and the Baroque began, or something similarly arcane.

At least the scholars who enjoy arguing that sort of point are aware of the absurdity of believing too strongly in one interpretation of history over another; one label over another.

The car elitists, on the other hand, seem really convinced of their own pronouncements. It's like they forget that these rules were just invented by themselves, not handed down from god.

Mr_Shiftright

All very true, but I do feel some kind of standard has to be upheld...perhaps the CCCA or whoever is setting the rules could bring the classic "line" up to 1955 for starters. You have to remember that having "approved" classic status also allows the cars in question to participate in certain events and even adds value to them, so it's an issue that will be hotly contested.

Speaking for myself, I would not let postwar WWII mass-produced cars on the list, like '57 Chevys as a lump entry....BUT I might consider very special Chevy models with very rare equipment, like say a '63 Split Window Fuelie Coupe Corvette. Here one could argue a)bold new body style, b)high performance and c)engineering innovation......three good points in favor of a classic.....WHEREAS a stickshift 4-door Chevy sedan 6 cylinder is just another car.

So with modern classics, I think it would have to be done year by year, model by model, and even engine by engine, otherwise the term "classic" will quickly be watered down and you'd have 32 Duesenbergs and 1980 Monte Carlos on the same list, but these cars are world's apart in value, rarity, engineering, style etc.

So any modern car on the list would have to be able to stand honorably next to the old classics. I think a '63 split window fuelie could, but I don't see a 65 Mustang coupe on that list anytime soon, as nice as it is for a collectible car. Too common, no innovations whatsoever except decent styling (a mechanic from 1915 could easily work on a 1965 Mustang, no kidding...)

dgraves1

There are three Alfa Spiders in the current local Auto Trader - a '72 for $4200, needs new top, 44k miles, a'77 for $3000, condition - "good", mileage not specified, an '88 for $7000, very good condition,124K miles. I've ruled out the '77 because I don't think the late 70s was a good time for any car maker. The other two are overpriced, I believe, but I'm not worried about that because I'll negotiate to a reasonable price or move on. I'm a fair mechanic, I did a lot of work on my late 60s/early 70s, American cars but since cars have gotten more complicated I've been reduced to oil changes and brake jobs. When the engines, transmissions or accessories start acting up I'm off to the shop. I'm thinking that the '72 spider might be a better choice for someone who likes to fix his own cars. I'm guessing the '88 is on the verge of needing a lot of expensive repairs that I will be forced to take to some guy named Guisseppe who's going to suck my kids college money out of me. Any help?

Mr_Shiftright

Actually, I don't like any of those cars...the 72 is way overpriced if it needs a new top, and the 88, the best car of the lot, has a bit too many miles on it for that price.

What you need, I would sugest, is a very clean, well-maintained 82-89 Spyder under 100K and around $6000 or less.

If you are in the Bay Area, I can refer you to the one or two shops working on Italian cars who are not thieves and scoundrels.

dgraves1

I'll wait for something better. I'm in no rush. I'm in the southern California area. I notice that you usually recommend '82 or newer. Are there some significant problems with the older ones such as rust? Do you have any comment on my thought that a late '60s/early '70s spider might be more amenable to a backyard mechanic doing most of his own repairs?
Also, everything on the logical (right) side of my brain tells me I should forget the Alfa and go with a Miata. But I just can't get past its image. Can you give me any good reasons to buy an Alfa over a Miata?

dgraves1

Actrually, they don't have to be good reasons, just reasons.

Mr_Shiftright

Yes, well said.

I recommend the 82 on up Alfas because they have Bosch fuel injection and Bosch electrics, and this makes them more reliable than the earlier cars, which have the Italian SPICA injection from 1970 on up. Prior to 1970 they have Webber carbs, which are fine, but then I'm not sure you're going to find any decent pre-70s Alfa for $5,000, so there's that problem.

But if you can afford say a nice Duetto, 68-69, yes, it would be better for the backyard mechanic, since it's all ignition points and carbs.

I like Miatas and really they may be a "better" car, but like just about all Japanese cars they have no soul, and there are a gazillion of them on the road. Italian cars are like live animals, they really have personality, and they are fun to drive, no doubt about it. I like the 80s Alfas also because they are weathertight and warm and cosy inside. They aren't as quiet as a Miata at road speed or as "tight", but they are also cheaper.

dgraves1

This week's Auto Trader has that same 88 Spider but now the mileage is listed as 78K and the price has dropped to $6750. Now we're getting close if the original mileage was a typo or something. Any tips on how to tell if an odometer has been tampered with?

Mr_Shiftright

No way to tell really except by documented records.

dgraves1

In searching for a shop to check out a used Spider, I came across an ad for a shop near me run by a Stewart Sandeman, who supposedly was the technical editor for Alfa Owner Magazine from 1984 -1993. I know it's a long shot, but do you know this guy by any chance?

C13

graves

Have you checked out any of the Alfa Buyers' Guides in the bookstores? Very helpful.

dgraves1

Bookstores??? You mean there's someplace to get information other than the internet. Just kidding - I'll do that.

C13

Classic Motorbooks is another source.

http://www.motorbooks.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi

In a store though you can see and touch actual books. It's like the ultimate virtual reality experience. It's like actually BEING THERE.

speedshift

Can I vote for the MG-B? I had a '65, red with knock-off wires, that was a tremendous amount of fun, even on 3 1/2 cylinders. Yes, it leaked oil, but it was as reliable as any of the American beaters I drove in those days, and I drove it happily for years. Everything was so direct, especially the shifter, which I think is better than the Miata's. I have fairly solid sports-car credentials--I also enjoyed my brother's '65 Fiat 1500 and '69 850 Spyder--but I took an active dislike to a Miata I test-drove a few years ago. This suggests to me that either 1) the Miata is over-rated, at least if you're a gearhead, or 2) I'm getting middle-aged. No, it's got to be #1.

C13

This is the kind of info I've been seeking for years.

I'd like to hear you compare your impressions of the Miata and the 60's roadsters, particularly the MGB.

speedshift

Yes, that's an interesting comparison, and a subjective one, because so much of what makes a car entertaining is indefinable. The bigger, even more subjective question is: "Why aren't new cars as fun as the old ones?". I think the original sportscars come out ahead of the Miata in the one area that any performance car should excel in: personality. I'll gladly trade a little reliability (I can't remember the number of times we changed the head gasket on that 850 Spyder) for a lot more fun. The Miata is a better car by any objective standard, but instead of begging me to drive it to the beach, it asked to be taken back to the dealer's lot. Why? Probably because it's a better car, and I'm not its target market. As cars have become more refined, they've lost much of the mechanical directness that makes them involving. It's not just the Japanese that make soulless cars. My '96 Firebird Formula had tremendous performance, but I was happy to trade it in. The car I'll always regret selling was a '67 GTO with optional HO engine, quick-ratio manual steering, manual 9-inch drum brakes, M-21 with Hurst shifter, limited slip, full gauges and not much else. Driving it demanded involvement. It paid you back by telling you it was alive.

As for a direct comparison between the Miata and MG-B, my Miata experience consists of one test drive, so I'm no expert. However, my impression was that the vaunted Miata shifter was less direct than the MG-B. The B's shifter had a mechanical notchiness, as well as the Miata's very short throws and narrow pattern. As pre-war as the B's suspension was, it felt less nervous than the Miata. The Miata's exhaust note was more of a drone than a soundtrack. The Miata's engine is much better on paper, but the B was very flexible and revved willingly to its low redline (5500?). Finally, I think I missed the visceral cues that the old sportscars offer: a metal dash with traditional gauges, some gear whine, a narrow wire spoke steering wheel, a pool of oil in the driveway...

On the other hand, Peter Egan makes a compelling argument for Miatas in the latest Road & Track, so maybe I missed something.

C13

I think a book could be written on this subject. It's very hard to pin down.

I'm not disagreeing - just pondering the issue.

Are reliability and personality mutually exclusive? Can a reliable vehicle have personality?

Maybe recent designs (like the Miata) go too far in the direction of certain aspects of reliability, eliminating the need for the owner to maintain a running dialog with the car. Maybe we only *thought* we wanted something we could just hop into and take off, without a thought to babying the machine.

I can understanding the connection that you feel with a vehicle that you can do your own work on, vs. one best left to people who have the proprietary diagnostic software, but back in the 60's didn't we all wish for cars that didn't leave oil puddles, that always started, etc?

The metal dash is a stylistic element that I've missed for a long time. Funny how they've tried wood, leather and plastic, but body-colored metal is still not being used. It can certainly be made as "safe" as any other material. Soft aluminum with a few inches of crush distance would actually be much safer (in the passive sense) than what we have now - 1/2" of dense foam on a relatively unyielding piece of steel.

And body-colored metal dash can integrate interior and exterior styling in a way that no other stylistic element can. One of the problems with the vast majority of modern designs is that the inside and the outside of the car are strangers. They're not speaking. They've never met. They have nothing in common.

Mr_Shiftright

I think old cars had "soul" and style, and didn't look or behave like the car next to it. But frankly, I doubt if modern drivers would tolerate the noise and vibration and breakdowns of older cars--they are too spoiled and want everything to be just perfect---even Peter Egan is sick of "getting out and getting under" I guess.

I've owned many MGBs and they are swell cars as long as you don't get some rat of a car that was tormented by the typical down and out MGB owner. You need to find one that wa loved and hopefully not too botched up by an farm machinery expert.

They are simple and rugged. They may not be as reliable as a Miata, but when a Miata dies on the freeway, the only tool you'll need is a cellphone to call a towtruck--with an MGB you could probably fix it with someone lying on the road next to you.

carnut4

getting out and under is no problem. This discussion is also true for motorcycles. I'd still rather have either of my two Triumpfh 650s than any modern Japanese bike. And I know that blinding acceleration of the modern 1100cc superbikes. But that old '70 triumph Bonneville with the TT pipes was a kick to ride-nothing like that sound! Never mind about the oil leaks and the blown head gasket that wore me out trying to get it started...anyone have a Norton 850 Commando for sale?

speedshift

I may have been a little hard on the Miata. Maybe its only failing is that I didn't grow up thinking it was the hot set-up, like I did with English sportscars. Never mind that most of them made the Falcon look like an engineering breakthrough. I don't miss "getting out and under". I did that for years and with many cars, but out of necessity and not because I thoroughly enjoyed it or was particularly good at it. Part of the problem I have with new cars is that most are front drivers, and the sensations they give me are different than what I'm used to. On the other hand, there's at least one modern rear-drive car I'd gladly own. The BMW 328 I rented recently was a great driver. All the right sensations and just enough of them. These cars might catch on.

huftonii

Where can I learn the current values of 1948 DeSoto Suburbans being offered for sale?

Mr_Shiftright

Well, huftonii, sounds like you're asking two different questions. The prices at which these cars are offered are not necessarily their real value.

These are, I believe, the big 9 passenger 4-doors. They aren't common, (only 7,500 made in 1948) but not highly valued because they are 4-doors.

I would think $5-6K would buy you a very, very nice one. Anything needing work should sell for quite bit less than that. Probably a car you could drive home could be had for $2,500.

To find these cars, I would suggest

www.hemmings.com

to sign up for a subscription.

hwade

I'm seriously looking at a 69 Jag 2+2 that is running, not wrecked but paint is cracked and worn thin with some rust showing but no perforations and front leather seats are cracked and falling apart. Rubber around windows needs replacing and 1 rust hole in drivers floorboard.
He started at $5k but I've got em down below that a ways.
Is this a worthwhile car to restore?
It looks cool but were these nightmares or too expensive to keep running?

C13

I guess that would be an E-Type.

My opinion is that it's the wrong E-Type to restore. It was obsolete and tired when it was new.

One little story:
When I was at school in '71, a girl's father came to visit in his new V12 E-Type. I walked by the car once when he was standing around near it, so I said (disingenuously, cuz I didn't like the newer models), "Nice car."

The guy made a sort of weary, sad face and said "It's on its third engine". And this puppy couldn't have been much more than a year old.

I'd love to have an early 3.8, covered-headlight version though (pre '67 or thereabouts). Very clean. No project cars for me. Any English car of that vintage is gonna be enough of a project anyhow.

Mr_Shiftright

No, I wouldn't recommend the 2+2 XKE either. I think C13 is correct in saying that it is absolutely the wrong E-Type to restore. The car is considered rather unattractive by collectors and is the least favored of the XKE coupes.

What you get is all the difficulties associated with restoring an E-Type (a tough and expensive car to restore), but with none of the payback...the resale values are low and probably will remain so, and many find the styling objectionable. Worse than that, you can generally find really lovely examples for $10,000.

So if you really must have an E-Type, I would suggest either an earlier coupe that is not 2+2, (1961-67) or a convertible if you can afford one.

The Series II 2+2s made later suffer the same problem of low esteem among collectors.

An XKE is not a car you want to buy in shabby condition. Personally, I don't think the E you're looking at is worth more than parts for better cars.

trekkie2

I'm a casualty of the 1991 Lincoln Continental Executive Series debacle. I acquired this beauty in Feb 99 after my 96 Accord was stolen and am looking for something reliable, fixable, and affordable. The Lincoln was cheap to acquire but impossible to repair.
Older, poorer, (wiser?)...
Please comment on a 1975 Dodge Dart Swinger.
Allegedly one owner with 30K original miles. I'm planning to take a look at it. How would engine, tranny cost to rebuild, replace? Any obvious caveats? Thanks.

Mr_Shiftright

Well, it's a pretty basic car, strong and simple, but if you've gotten used to the feel of modern steering and brakes, the old Dart will take some getting used to.

Also, there's not a lot of collector value, so don't pay too much for it and don't put too much into it unless you don't really care about getting back most of your money someday.

bigbozer

I found a 1982 Lancia Spyder Zagato with very low mileage (48K) in perfect condition. I beleive these cars have rather low demand and I may not be able to recoup my investment I had to sell it in a couple of years time. What good be a fair price to pay for this car? I am inclined towards this car for several reasons: 1) they are cheap; 2) they have a distinctive style; 3) they have modern frills like disk brakes, A/C, power windows; 4) A targa roof which can be stored in the trunk; 5) Four seats verus only two in a Miata, Fiat or Alfa Spyder or for that matter your favorite the MGB; and lastly the name Lancia invokes the romance of the 1950s and the likes of the Aprillia, Flaminia and the Fulvias.

Mr_Shiftright

Hi bigbozer,

Yes, you're right, not much demand for the car...basically this is a Beta coupe with Zagato targa body but a front-driver, not mid-engined.

I suppose $3,500-4,000 would be plenty for the car if it were very very nice, and I wouldn't put any money into it or you'll lose it come resale time.

Still, a fun cheap ride, and yes, in the old days, Lancia had quite a name...well, even in the 60s & 70s with rallying.

Actually, MGB is not my absolute favorite...Alfa Spyders are still the best buy, I think, in the "cheap and cheerful" category.

tomcat630

In the Chicago Tribune a while back, it had an article discussing the waning of so called "classic era" cars. The car collectors of today want to buy a car from their youth, 1950's to 70's. So, prices have peaked or are declining on pre-48's.

"Classic" collectors are worried about the fate of the old rides.

Mr_Shiftright

It only goes to prove that car values are dictated by supply and demand. There are a lot of old cars out there, so if demand drops, price drops.

Of course, there are certain pre 1948 cars that will never drop in value, such as the custom body phaetons and coupes, the rare Bugattis, the magnificent open Duesenbergs, etc., the Cord Sportsters....cars like this will always have a market, although their prices may drop as well, who knows?

Some of the best "investments" these days are in old racecars, because people can use them in vintage events rather than have them gathering dust in a garage.

lark6

Two words: Studebaker Lark.

Mr_Shiftright

Yep, years and money sound fine...anything from 1982 on up are very good cars. Try to buy low mileage, as these engines will often exhibit valve seat recession at around 100K-110K (around $1,500 repair). The bottom end of the engines are virtually indestructible. Also, as you know, Afla gear boxes will wear their synchros prematurely, so if you get a little snag or grind in the 1-2 upshift, this is quite normal. $7,000 would have to be a stunning early 8-s car, but that price would be very cheap for a 1991...I'd suggest buying the newest, lowest mileage car you can afford.