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!

Have you recently switched from a luxury sedan to a luxury SUV?
A reporter would like to talk to you; please reach out to [email protected] by 7/25 for more details.
Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Discussion On FWD Cars As Future Classics

2»

Comments

  • http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=598783605


    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: 64,490
    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).
  • http://www.xmission.com/~dempsey/shelby/sheldodg.htm


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

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,496
    ...is 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: 64,490
    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: 23,496
    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: 64,490
    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 even...it 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.

    wil
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    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 classic....at 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: 23,496
    ...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: 64,490
    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: 23,496
    ...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.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    Oops! I guess I was reading about the GM concept car specs or something. That's what it says in my book "Sportscars A-Z", RWD, transverse V-6, but it's clearly not right on the production car.

    Yep, FWD, you are correct.

    Otherwise, the collectibility opinions, etc., remain the same.
This discussion has been closed.