Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Discussion On FWD Cars As Future Classics

mminerbimminerbi Posts: 88
edited March 2014 in Dodge
There are very few classic front wheel drive cars, but then large scale production of these models began in 1979. Cords, certain Cadillac Eldorados and Oldsmobile Toronados, and some Citroens are considered classics, but which models from the '80s and '90 will eventually become classics?

For purposes of this discussion lets define a classic as a vehicle with exceptional qualities or strong special interest appeal rather than one that has merely reached a certain age. For example, an Audi TT may eventually reach classic status, but how about a Dodge Omni GLH?


  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 24,049
    ...but here's a few modern FWD models I like...

    1979-85 Eldo/Toro/Riv: neoclassic looks in a fairly modern body. One of the few FWD cars to offer a truly flat floor. Also available some years as a convertible

    1995-99 Aurora/Riviera: Nice styles that just continue to get nicer

    1990's Cutlass Supreme Convertible (forget the exact year span...'91-'95, maybe). One of the last attempts at anywhere near a large convertible. Probably not much roomier than a Sebring, but Sebrings are everwhere; Supreme 'verts are comparatively rare.

    There really isn't too much from Ford that interests me as an FWD car, because for years only their cheapest models, such as the Tempo and Escort, were FWD. The Taurus was a bold break at the time, but there were just too many of 'em built, and they weren't exactly symbols of quality.

    Same with Chrysler. Every FWD car they made up until 1993 was either based on the L (Omni/Horizon) or K-car platform.

    I think part of the problem is that, for the most part, 4-door cars don't generate much interest as classics, yet that's about all they make nowadays. For the most part, 2-door cars are now relegated to cheaper, low-line models, which aren't going to make very hot collector's items, either. Then add to that the fact that FWD cars can get pricey when they break, so who's going to want to collect a cheap old car that's expensive to maintain?
  • jrosasmcjrosasmc Posts: 1,711
    1986-91 Cadillac Eldorado/Seville. Although these models were unpopular when new, more and more people are discovering that they have a sporty feel and look to them. They're probably the smallest Cadillacs to come out of Detroit in recent times (excepting the Cimarron and CTS). The short deck/long hood look of the Eldo reminds one of the original Mustang as well. My doctor has a '90 Eldo which he bought new and now has 169k on it. He's got the 4.5-liter SFI V-8 and has nothing but praise for it; he also adds that it's the most reliable car he's ever owned, albeit a little expensive to maintain and keep running. Everybody ought to have these Eldos/Sevilles.
  • ndancendance Posts: 323
    You can make an argument that there will be no new classic cars (or at least a declining population of new ones). While this may be just a sign of incipient curmudgeonhood, it seems to me that the automobile generally is losing it's hold on the general public as an art form. In addition, changes in design (implying a move to appliance-like maintenance cycles) and giant changes in government regulation will push cars off the pedestal they've inhabited.

    That strikes me as a good general question...will the car as 'classic' survive the upcoming century. I kind of doubt it.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    It's hard to think of modern cars as classics because they make so many of them and so many of them survive. Also, they look so much alike these days that I suspect the Eyes of the Future won't ever be able to tell them apart (future eyes are not as disciminating of subtle design cues as a rule--to most of us, for instance, stuff just looks "old" rather than Victorian, Edwardian, World War I, World War II etc.).

    Probably the only cars that will be seriously collected (as opposed to just "collected" in someone's back yard) are limited edition high HP cars. Lots of HP always seems to attract attention down the road.

    Once a modern, or even 80s, FWD mass produced car wears out, it is unlikely someone would go through the tremendous expense to restore a common everyday car like that. But doubtless a few people will patch 'em up and keep 'em running, just like they do now.
  • There were lots of low production special Shelbys made and the R/Ts of the early 90s with their 224hp turbo 4s are rare and will have a following.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    Being rare unfortunately does not make something valuable and a following has to be substantial to support an aftermarket support network of parts.

    Those FWD "Shelby" cars have little value today (about $2,500) and do not a very large following, so my feeling is that they are all doomed to extinction. Not enough value to justify a restoration, and not enough of a following to support making parts for them. Best you could do is buy ten and cannibalize them until parts run out.

    It's kind of cruel, but that's the world of old cars.
  • From an English point of view, I think Chryslers PT Cruiser is a prime candidate for being a future classic (although it could do with more power), well at least over here!

    It’s the first practical, mass produced ever-day car in a long time to step away from what would be considered to norm. That is, boring, small to medium sized, front wheel drive hatchbacks.

    As for other cars sold in the UK, most are so no-descript that I doubt very much, many will be remembered. Even Ford, who have produced some memorable cars in the past have fallen by the wayside

    The only other model that springs to mind is the Cadillac Servile STS. This has to be the best front wheel drive car I’ve ever driven. I was almost temped to reconsider my dislike for front wheel drive cars.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    Yes, maybe a second-tier collectible in a Morris Minor sort of way. A PT would never be a classic as they are mass-produced sedans, but they may take on a kind of cutsey cult status like the Minor or the VW bug. I think Cadillacs from the 90s will be scrap metal myself, if we can judge from what happens to old, broken, expensive to fix luxury cars from the 80s, like old beater Benzes and Audis and Jaguar XJ6s and BMW 7-Series. Only a few cream puffs will survive, as restoration costs cannot be justified by resale value.
  • Will the first year Chrysler LeBaron Convertible ('83?) and more recent LeBaron TC make the cut as classics or second-tier collectibles?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    I don't think any will be any Lebarons left to collect, quite frankly--they are rather perishable. The Maserati TC will be passed around from person to person but it never has generated any excitement in the past.
  • badtoybadtoy Posts: 368
    Lee Iacocca called it the "best-looking Italian since my Mom." Scary idea......
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 24,049
    I had a LeBaron turbo coupe a few years back. It was an '88, and my uncle bought it in '90. We got it in '95, and when I divorced in '96 I let her have it. Then, the car let her have it. It was junk by '97. She gave it back to me and I stipped some parts off of it and then sold what was left for parts. When that car went South, it did so in a major way. It needed about $900 worth of suspension work right before we split up. After we split, the radiator went, the a/c compressor went, the trip computer would tell fibs. Finally the head gasket blew and the head warped. After that, the turbo went, and so did 2 of the 4 cylinders.

    I'll say one thing for it though. It was probably the most attractive K-car ever built. From an aesthetic standpoint, I think it was beautiful, much better than other aerodynamic efforts such as the Ford Taurus, Tempo, GM W-bodies, etc. They just weren't put together all that well. In all fairness, ours was pretty good up until the 90K mark, but all the stuff I listed above happened between then and around 115K or so, when I junked it.

    They were also very popular when they were new. Some years, the LeBaron was the most popular American convertible available. However, that's something else that probably doesn't bode well for their collectibility. It does mean that trim and body parts are readily available in the junkyard, though!

    As for the TC, I think its main problem is that the LeBaron is actually more attractive (in the eye of this beholder, at least ;-), and sold for about 1/2 the price. Still, go to a Mopar meet sometime, and you'll see that there are plenty of TC's around. I think they're kinda like Prowlers...people with money buy them because they're cool, take care of them, and don't drive them much, so they last.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    You don't need a lot of money to buy a TC, and I have a feeling as time goes on, you'll need less.

    If you see a car acting like a used car, that is, the older it gets, the LESS it's worth, that's the opposite of a "collectible", which is supposed to get more valuable as it ages.

    So continuing depreciation after 10-15 years isn't a good sign.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 24,049
    I know they're pretty cheap nowadays, but I'm thinking more along the lines of when they were new. People bought LeBarons and ragged them out, while they probably bought TC's because they thought they'd be a classic, or for a second, fair weather "toy car", etc.

    Actually, at what age should a car start to come back up in value, instead of continuing to depreciate, to be considered "classic" or "valuable"? For instance, I heard with 'Vettes that they tend to bottom out at 20 years. That may not be a good example though, consdidering that a 20 year old 'Vette isn't too desireable!
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    You should start seeing the bottoming out at around 15-20 years, yes, and then the car should start climbing in value. I think a 1980 Vette will bottom out and stay there, however.

    Not all old cars get more valuable as they age.

    Some old cars will even "re-depreciate", like Model T Fords are now, as the people who like them die off and younger enthusiasts shift their focus. You can buy good running Model Ts (later models without brass) for as little as $5K-6K, even though they are 85 years old.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 20,302
    Funny but a nice Model A will often bring more than an equal Model T.

    I think the reason might be that the A is, at least drivable. Not on freeways but they will chug along at 40 MPH pretty easily.

    The T on the other hand would be a menace given any traffic.
  • Over here the Cadillac is still to a degree seen as an enthusiast car and GM have done little to alter this as its only sold through a limited number of specialist dealerships. Although, I think the same could be said for a variety of American cars that make to these shores.

    I know over the last few years the number of 1970's and 80's models that have appeared at classic cars events have increased considerably. I think it has a lot to do with the uniqueness add to that the bonus of low running costs and parts availability, a great deal of fun can be had.

    I found this last summer when a friend asked if I would do some work on his 78 Fleetwood whilst he was on Vacation. I had the car for three weeks and used it for two and had a great deal of fun. so much so I am considering looking for something later this year.

    All-in-all, I think we are looking at different sides of the same coin. I watched a TV program not so long back about different car collectors around the world, and one of the guy's that was interviewed was from Boston and he had a collection of 70's and 80's British cars from BL/Rover.

    Now over here, they would be considered as nothing more than junkyard fodder, however, there uniqueness provided a great deal of fun and entertainment for him and his family (although if it's a BL product its probably down to all the exercise gained in pushing it!) So along that line of thought, if you had an old LTD parked in your drive, no-one would give it a second thought, however, park the same car on my drive and it would certainly generate some interest.

    So, whether or not that make a car a classic I really don't know. We'll just have to wait 20 years and see what people collect.
  • badtoybadtoy Posts: 368
    to something different -- and sometimes, the odder the better.

    The only Cadillac I ever owned was a 68 Sedan de Ville with 80k on the clock, in absolutely perfect condition. The owner never even put the windows down because it had climate control, and he never let his grandkids in it either -- that was reserved for his wife's Mercury. He changed the oil every 1500-200 miles, and it didn't burn a drop.

    The local Cadillac dealer tried to screw him on the trade-in for a new one (this was his fifth bought there, so you can imagine his ire at being so treated), so he went down the street to the Lincoln dealer and put his car up for sale -- for $800!!! I bought it on the spot, thinking to re-sell it at a profit as quickly as possible. The longer I drove it, the better I liked it. My first revelation was when blowing out the carbon on one of those wide, straight country roads southeastern Michigan is so full of. I nearly ran up the tailpipe of the guy in front of me. Later, I found out that I could dust small-block Novas (stock, of course) with the thing, and that it would deliver 18 mpg at a steady 70-80 mph.

    Things ended tragically. On the way to my insurance agent one day to write a special policy on it (it was worth far more than book, obviously), a dumptruck driver made a u-turn across three lanes of traffic and t-boned me, wiping the whole front end of the car out. But it was a wonderful car for the 2-3 months I was able to drive it. Rode like a cloud. Pretty, too.
  • Yer! You find the same thing over here. Some dealers just cannot grasp the concept of customer loyalty. Same about the car though. Although, I know in these days of environmental awareness, to admit to fact of liking old gas guzzling American cars is a major sin. But, personally I really don't care!

    I like late sixties and early to mid seventies full size sedans. I think old Lincolns and Cadillac's are great. I went to see a 1970 Fleetwood last year that I was looking at as a restoration project, and it drove like a dream, and the performance.

    I nailed the pedal and the auto box shifted down and the car just took off. I was amazed that a car of its size could move as quick. Unfortunately, the owner had begun to restore the car himself, had then lost his job and just left the car sitting for almost two years. In that time it was vandalized and when I looked at it, the owner wanted more than the car was really worth.

    By the time I had tracked down the parts (including a new windshield) it would have cost more to restore than a good roadworthy example would cost. So, its still there. Although, If he would be willing to lower his price I would like to resurrect the old girl. I would hate to see it sit there until its nothing more than junk.
  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHPosts: 21,514
    cars will ever be considered classic or even collectible IMHO. Probably Mini-Coopers, Citroen DS, early SAAB Turbos and just maybe VW Corrado VR6s might make the grade. Only time will tell.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • badtoybadtoy Posts: 368
    has little to do with whether or not the car will be a collectible (except in the case of a V12 Ferrari or 427 Cobra). Usually it's a combination of the brand name and styling. Even ugly Ferraris (yes, there are quite a few) don't go for that much money.

    It's sometimes hard to tell what will be a classic when the car is a current model -- familiarity breeds contempt. No one in their right mind would think a Citroen DS would be a classic, back when they were making them -- but they may very well turn out to be just that. The Mini-Cooper, on the other hand, had a racing record and the Cooper name, so even back then it was a safe bet that they would become collectible.

    Also, don't forget the big American FWDs -- the Toronado and Eldorado. The early models are already considered classics, and clean examples will continue to appreciate in value as they become more and more scarce.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    I think you are an optimist, BT, on some of those cars you mentioned, because hey, the Citroen DS has had a lot of years to start getting "classic" and there's no sign of it yet. At least you can see Minis going up in value and generating lots of excitement at auctions. But a Citroen at a classic car auction pulls just about the same money year after year after year. And my friend has a mint '76 Eldo he can't sell for $8,500. If anything, FWD Eldo prices are dropping still (but pretty close to bottom, which should be about $7,500 for a nice one).

    But I do agree in principle, it's not the drivetrain that determines classic status
  • badtoybadtoy Posts: 368
    I thought early Toronados would start bringing in decent prices (high 20s, low thirties) by now, if they were extra clean. All that speculation without a shred of hard evidence! Thanks for the correction, shifty.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    Well, you could still be right, but it isn't looking good at this point, and really, if a car doesn't start to show some glamour after say 15 years, it may never.

    As a rule, only cars that really lit people up the day they were new (even non-car people) become true classics.
  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    I like early Toros too but I sure wouldn't park one in my garage just for its appreciation potential. For one thing it's an Oldsmobile, an off-brand in the collector market. It's going to be extinct soon and that won't add any cachet. They've been surprisingly cheap for years and I don't think an extablished history like that usually changes.
  • badtoybadtoy Posts: 368
    I thought that's why the Toros would be collectible (much more so than the Eldo, although I thought the Eldo was a high-water mark of Mitchell styling, and much prettier than the Toro). I do know that it caused a sensation when it was first introduced -- I was a student in Chicago at the time, and everybody just went nuts. Here was a sleek, big American car with non-nonsense styling and a 130 mph top speed. The FWD just made it that much more exotic.

    speedshift: Intuitively, I don't agree with your contention that the Toro will be less valuable now that Olds has left the market -- in fact, I think it would make it MORE valuable. What do you think, shifty?
  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    I could be wrong but I'm sceptical because I've owned--and sold--four Olds.

    Three of them were really nice semi-collectibles, a '63 Starfire convertible, '65 Starfire hardtop and '68 Toronado. All were in excellent mechanical shape and had been detailed to look good. The buyer indifference to them was remarkable. No one I dealt with was dying to own an Olds. But if they'd been big block Impalas I'd have had to beat off buyers with a stick. Less car but more demand.

    The fourth Olds was a '90 Cutlass International Series coupe, also very nice but with no resale value, which I understand was typical of Olds even before GM pulled the plug.

    None of this bodes well for Olds values down the road.

    I think Olds is going to join the ranks of makes like Hudson, Nash and DeSoto. It wasn't a marketing disaster like the Edsel, or involved in scandal like the Delorean. Olds had some very good years into the late '80s but since then it's been downhill. The Toro will have more appeal than most Olds but there isn't enough magic to either name make Toronado a big collectible.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    Yeah, I agree, most Olds will be just another orphan. Oh, it will certainly have those who love them and "collect" them, but as collectibles they will always be 2nd or 3rd tier----"mildly interesting to a select few". But the right year 4-4-2 with the right options might bring some money.
  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    Right, maybe a '70 W-30 or a '69 Hurst Olds or I suppose one of the ultra-rare 3 deuce '66s.

    BTW there was a W-34 Toronado in 1970 with 455/400, upgraded Turbo-Hydramatic, GT emblems and striping.
  • badtoybadtoy Posts: 368
    Guess, after all the arm-waving, that GM actually did the right thing in killing off the brand.

    Just incase that is already gone its a 93 daytona iroc r/t that just sold for $9,402.00. Acording to other people there were only 8 of these made not 300-400.

    Since I have starting looking around on the net, I am looking for a Shelby Daytona, I have discovered they do have a pretty decent following. They may not be in the same league as Mustangs and Camaros but its not just a few smucks either. You maybe able to pick up Shelby cars rightnow for $2500 all over the place, especially daytonas since they aren't very rare, but they aren't very old yet either. Give them another 10-20 years and if they don't all rust away they will be worth something if nothing else just because they are Shelbys.

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    I think that's the problem though. They aren't really "Shelbys" in the way people know Shelbys. They are a badge slapped on by Chrysler, so many people do not think these cars are worthy of the name :Shelby" since he didn't build them.

    Personally, I think you are being very optimistic about future value, since these cars have already had plenty of time to get valuable, or to start getting valuable. But they just sit there, behaving like used cars (that is, the older they are, the LESS they are worth--the opposite of most collectible cars).

    And there are really nice real dodge shelbys selling for $5k+ now.

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 24,049 the Dodge Spirit R/T. There's info about it in the link DarkWolf posted. 2.2 Turbo III with 224 hp. 0-60 in 5.8 seconds.

    As for collectibility though, are there any FWD Mopars around yet that are old enough to be beyond the "used car" stage and into "collectible" stage? What was the first year for the 2.2 Turbo, anyway? 1984 or so? I know by 1985, it was available in just about every FWD car they made, so yeah, it's way too common. But the high-output versions (more than the Turbo I's 146 hp) didn't even appear until the late 80's.

    As for potential future Mopar collectibles, what about the Intrepid R/T?
  • "are there any FWD Mopars around yet that are old enough to be beyond the "used car" stage and into "collectible" stage?"

    I think the "real" Shelbys are just starting to get into the collectible stage but the regular turbos probably wont be worth anything for a long time if ever.
  • I had an 87 Sundance Turbo with the 2.2, it had great torquey engine. Sister had an 88 Lebaron with the 2.2, but had a Mitsubishi turbo that spooled a little faster.

    None will be collectible, but neither of us ever had any engine troubles.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    Thank you wolf for figuring that out. I am constantly confused what with the less than wonderful nomenclature.

    I have to admit I'm pretty skeptical about these cars as collectibles.

    The collector car market differentiates sharply between what was built by Shelby/American and what was built by Shelby Automobiles.

    Scanning all the price guides, the only car I see that has even modest collectible car value seems to be the 1987 Shelby Charger. The rest are price just like used cars from the looks of it, and since these cars are getting on 17 years old with book values of $2,000 I really don't think they are going anywhere. The '87 Shelby Charger can go up to $4-5,000 in one book I looked at, so there might be some hope there. Still, that's a pretty modest price for what would have to be a show car, according to the price guide's standards.

    Lemme see what Manheim Gold Book says here.....okay, a 1986 Shelby Charger shows a show car at $1,800.

    Strange. Is there a substantial difference between 1986 and 1987?
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 24,049
    I can think of 2 things that would make the '87 more valuable. First, it was the last of the Shelby Chargers. Also, there weren't that many built...7,669 in 1986, and only 2,011 in 1987.

    1987 was the first year for the Turbo II engine, but according to my book, that engine was only available in the Daytona Shelby Z, which was K-based, not L-based (Omni/Horizon) like the Charger. The original, Turbo I, put out 146 hp, and was the standard Turbo that Chrysler used in just about everything. The Turbo II put out 174 hp, though. Maybe my book was wrong though...that engine might've been offered in the Charger Shelby.

    For '88, the Turbo II was available in the Shelby Daytona and Shelby Lancer. The Lancer was another car I liked. Even though just about anything based on the K-car was going to have some shortcomings, I thought the Lancer (and sister LeBaron GTS) were about as attractive as they got. That Lancer Shelby must've been a pretty hot little car.
  • Just screwing around on ebay over the last couple months looking for my daytona I have seen several ragged out beat to hell omni glh/glhs go for $1000-$1500 and I have seen people asking up to $6k for perfects ones. I am not sure how much they are actually getting though.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    Yeah, that's always the problem, not just with these cars but any collectible. Asking prices are an exercise in First Amendment rights, that's about it.

    But really, if every major guide book in the world says a car isn't worth much, you have to treat that as credible information. And one sale at $6K, should it ever happen, does not constitute the market, just as one sale at $500 wouldn't.

    I'd say after looking around, that it is an erratic and rather small market and that it is going to stay that way. Sort of the Chrysler version of the Citroen Owners Club.
  • wilcoxwilcox Posts: 584
    and not for humor.

    I have a neat FWD Sports Sedan. It's a Contour produced by Ford in the mid and latter 90's. What makes me think that it is special is that it came close to being a FWD BMW 325/328 wanna be.

    The Ford Special Vehicle Team made this car interesting. It almost always got good reviews and recommendations (from Edmunds was voted Most Wanted 2 years in a row I think).

    Anyway, SVT modified the Contour's looks so well, that it created a beautiful butterfly out of a caterpillar.

    Not only was it handsome, it had great sports handling, and it's high performance V6 could crank out 200 hp stock. And the brakes performed well. The interior leather seating was very comfortable. The dash was attractive but unrefined. And considering that the car with power moonroof retailed for around $22K, that was ok.

    The Contour was related to the Mondeo, and now the Jag XType. When I shut a X Type door at the car show, I hear the same "thunk" my little Contour makes.

    Many people who have owned these cars have made modifications on them. Mostly in the horsepower arena. Not many SVT Contours were made, and I'd bet that less than half of them have not been tampered with. At any rate, when I drive this nice sport sedan, I just love it. It's great for commuter driving or just weekend stuff.

    Fast, good looking, comfortable, and actually pretty reliable (by my experience with a 1999 model)...I hope that they find a classic niche somewhere and people appreciate them a little more than their rental car cousins.

    I keep my 1999 green SVT Contour washed and waxed all the time. I enjoy watching people notice it...taking double takes! I've really been enjoying the ownership experience with this vehicle.

    If any FWD sports sedan becomes identified as a Classic, I hope this one is it.

    Ok, if nothing else, you gotten a good chuckle...shiftright.

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    Well, no I don't chuckle so much at the TYPE of cars we all speculate on, but more at the fact that any "classic" status takes a long, long time to achieve. So those of us sitting on cars we feel are special COULD be right, but we still have a long wait. I have no crystal ball about new cars and how they might fare as classics, of course.

    On a 1999 car, there is no way to know how people may view the car in 25 years. But when folks are sitting on say a 1980 or 85 car that has no value today but insist that their ship is going to come in, I have to point out that if there isn't any action on the car after 15-20 years, you can pretty much give up on it as a "classic".

    As a rule, low production, great performance and a reputation as a "winner" are good pointers toward some future collectible or classic status. Take away one or more of those three criteria, and you have that much less of a chance. Also classics can't be ugly, of course, which is why cars like a '59 Cadillac will never get there while I can lift a finger to prevent such a tragic declaration.

    We have some FWD classics -- Cord, Auburn, and some modern FWD "collectibles", like the Saab Monte Carlo 750GT/ But of course these were interesting cars in their own day.
  • wilcoxwilcox Posts: 584
    As for my situation, I'm going to keep telling my self that I have a potential domestic least until I get rid of it and take a huge bath on it's depreciation....Aahahaha!

    Thanks for the words of wisdom.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 24,049
    ...your SVT may never become a "classic", but I'm sure it'll hit collectible status somewhere along the line, even if it hasn't already. I just checked Edmund's used car prices, and they list the more basic LX and SE around $7500-7600, while the SVT is around $12,000 (using Edmund's parameters, whatever they may be, for mileage, options, etc). Of course, the SVT was a lot more than a regular Contour when new, so as a percentage of the original price, they may have depreciated the same.

    Back in '97, I worked with a guy at Little Caesar's whose dad bought an SVT. I remember him saying it cost something like $25,000, and that it caused a fight between his Mom and Dad! Big change from their previous car, which was a '93 Taurus wagon!
  • corsicachevycorsicachevy Posts: 316
    No one has mentioned the Buick Reatta. If memory serves me right, these vehicles were produced in relatively small numbers and represented a radical departure from the "typical" Buick. They should, at some point, be a desirable collector car.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,482
    Reatta does have a kind of "second or third tier" collectibility, as a curiosity, but its prices have been very stagnant and are likely to remain so. Nobody really cares about these cars except a very few people. Coupes are cheap, just used cars, but the rarer convertible, if pristine, can theoretically bring $12K if you can find anybody to buy it.

    Not really much radical about the Reatta, but I guess for Buick at that time anything would be radical. It has a transverse mounted V-6 with RWD. It was built on a Rivera floorpan, offered no manual trans and until the convertible came out, was not thought to be attractive.

    Reatta tried to pick up the Fiero market, but to me at least the Fiero had a lot more spirit, especially in the last 5-speed V-6 editions.

    Sports car for a Vegas chorus girl.
  • jrosasmcjrosasmc Posts: 1,711
    And nobody has mentioned the nice-looking 1986-91 Cadillac Eldorado/Seville (the baby Caddies).
  • corsicachevycorsicachevy Posts: 316
    The Reatta has a transverse V6 with RWD? Huh? You may want to check the specs on the Reatta. I believe you will find that it is a FWD car.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 24,049
    ...Shifty probably meant to say FWD. Basically the Reatta was the corporate E-body (Eldorado, Toronado, Riviera) with about 9.5" removed from the wheelbase. I think it even shared the same dashboard as the Riviera.
  • corsicachevycorsicachevy Posts: 316
    Shifty clearly meant to say RWD - check out the title to his post.
This discussion has been closed.