I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)

uplanderguy

An older fellow I used to work with, father of five, bought a new Country Squire--before I knew him. He made it seem like it would've been maybe early or mid-seventies. His kids were excited about the facing seats in the back. He got it home, opened it up back there....no seats. He called the dealer. They said, "Can you get that car back here ASAP?". They had actually delivered him the wrong car.

ab348

That '69/'70 Ford dash is cool in a space-age sort of way, but I gather customers didn't like living with it. Only the driver could do anything (like control the radio) and the only ashtray was over by the right edge of the cluster housing. I remember my mom (a smoker) commenting on that, and how sitting in the passenger seat she had nothing to look at or do anything with. I liked the '67/'68 and '71/'72 setups better.

fintail

I recall when my dad had the 60 Ford, the rear end started howling, so he wanted to replace it. Apparently one from a later car is a good fit, and he knew a guy with a mechanically sound 69-70 Squire wasting away on his property, so for something like $50 and u-pick, my dad went and got the rear end out of the newer car. I remember, it was blue on black, and in reasonably good shape - this was probably no later than 1992 or so. I recall sitting behind the wheel of it, and being kind of shocked at the wraparound dash. IIRC it was a loaded car, and I thought it was a shame the car was in this condition.

omarman said:

And it's this too. For me anyway.

By 1971 Ford went back to boring IP. And added the sad emoji steering wheel in '75 or so.

fintail

I'm thinking it was in a Chrysler my grandpa had when I was little. I also recall the button tufted interior in that car, which had many more buttons than more restrained (hard to believe) interior in my mom's T-Bird, and the buttons interested me.

ab348 said:

We had a set of clear floor mats in our '71 Monaco. It had a gold interior and Canadian Tire didn't sell mats in that color, but they had the clear ones, so Dad bought those to show off that sweet gold carpeting.

laurasdada

My father had a '70 Country Squire. Given the quality and reliability of this particular car, he would not buy another domestic car until a Cadillac Catera (or maybe it was a Pontiac Dustbuster minivan he briefly owned first). Needless to say, his return to domestics was short lived.

The AM radio to the driver's left was always a question mark and annoyance, "Driver, can you please change the station?"

stickguy

That would drive my wife insane if I had full control. She won’t keep her hands off the radio. I would love it.

tjc78

stickguy said:

That would drive my wife insane if I had full control. She won’t keep her hands off the radio. I would love it.

Problem today is you’re probably streaming BT and she could grab your phone and change it from there !

stickguy

nope. usually on XM. plus my phone is usually in my pocket. start wrestling for that, and going to end up hitting a telephone pole!

fintail

Saw a pristine first gen A8 on the road, looked brand new. I suspect the survival rate for those is not high.

fintail

Today saw a white Ferrari F355 being loud, forgot to mention not long ago saw the light silvery blue 61-63 Continental convertible I've seen before, it was out for a spin on city streets, top down.

explorerx4

Today I saw an Abomination. S2000, metallic purple, stanced, dark gold wheels, giant flat wing on the trunk that was about as high as the top of the windshield and an awful sounding exhaust system.YUCK!

uplanderguy

OK, not really about spotting a car, but Tuesday I returned our daughter's cat after a long weekend of cat-sitting, to her and her husband along I-71 in OH. We met at Bellville, where her husband bought me a doughnut at the Amish restaurant there. While eating it in the car I noticed the cat's food and toys were still in my car. I called them, and the next exit was 25 miles south. I had taken the day off and was in no hurry and in fact planning on taking scenic backroads home, instead of boring interstate, so I drove the 25 miles south and met them just off that exit and gave them the stuff.

I decided to take Route 3 home.

I went through the small, nice-looking town of Mt. Vernon, OH. I was thinking I remembered that that had been the hometown and burial location of Paul Lynde. I drove past a cemetery with an office right near the entrance, so asked the lady there. She said, "I don't know, let's find out". She went to her computer and said "He's buried in Amity, just up Route 3, but don't blink". She showed me a pic of his stone and from the shape and color, I found it in two minutes at tiny Amity cemetery. His siblings and parents are buried nearby. A brief and interesting sideline to the drive. I love twentieth-century U.S. history and pop culture.

President Harding's mistress and mother of his only child, Nan Britton, who lived until 1991 (!), is also buried in Knox County in a burg called Howard, but it was too far off my route. Some time, LOL.

Car related: I have since read that Paul Lynde's '64 Thunderbird is on display at the Mt. Vernon Historical Society.

Here are a couple pics I took. Boy, Amity, OH is a long way from Hollywood!

uplanderguy

A friend noted, "He's not in the center square", LOL.

stickguy

He was only 55? Didn’t realize he died that young.

kyfdx

Very cool. One of my favorite actors, from when I was a kid. (plus, Hollywood Squares)

kyfdx

Today, a Suzuki Kisashi.

Geez, can't figure out why Suzuki didn't make it in the car business...

roadburner

kyfdx said:

Very cool. One of my favorite actors, from when I was a kid. (plus, Hollywood Squares)

I always liked him, but he apparently led a tortured life.

andre1969

I always associated Paul Lynde with "Bewitched", but interestingly, he was only in 11 episodes, out of a total of 254. And only 10 of those were as Uncle Arthur...the first appearance was as a driving school instructor who tried to teach Samantha how to drive. I guess he just had so much presence, that it made him memorable enough that you always remembered him, even though he didn't show up that often in the show.

Or, part of it could be that "Bewitched" has been in endless reruns for as long as I've been alive, so I've probably seen each episode many times over (heck, I have it on in the background right now...it was that or "Bonanza"

I know I've mentioned it before, but he also had "The Paul Lynde Show", that only ran one season, '72-73. The opening credits show him driving from the office to home in a Sequoia Green '72 Impala convertible, although that's the only time you actually see the car. The whole show was shot on a soundstage; no outdoor shooting like they used to do in "Bewitched" and all those Columbia/Warner Bros Ranch sitcoms.

From a totally objective standpoint, it's not exactly Masterpiece Theater, but it's fun to watch him in another show. Plus, I'd never seen, nor even heard of this one, until about two years ago when Antenna TV started showing it. So it's almost like a "New Old Stock" tv show!

kyfdx

andre1969 said:

I always associated Paul Lynde with "Bewitched", but interestingly, he was only in 11 episodes, out of a total of 254. And only 10 of those were as Uncle Arthur...the first appearance was as a driving school instructor who tried to teach Samantha how to drive. I guess he just had so much presence, that it made him memorable enough that you always remembered him, even though he didn't show up that often in the show.

Or, part of it could be that "Bewitched" has been in endless reruns for as long as I've been alive, so I've probably seen each episode many times over (heck, I have it on in the background right now...it was that or "Bonanza"

I know I've mentioned it before, but he also had "The Paul Lynde Show", that only ran one season, '72-73. The opening credits show him driving from the office to home in a Sequoia Green '72 Impala convertible, although that's the only time you actually see the car. The whole show was shot on a soundstage; no outdoor shooting like they used to do in "Bewitched" and all those Columbia/Warner Bros Ranch sitcoms.

From a totally objective standpoint, it's not exactly Masterpiece Theater, but it's fun to watch him in another show. Plus, I'd never seen, nor even heard of this one, until about two years ago when Antenna TV started showing it. So it's almost like a "New Old Stock" tv show!

10 episodes as Uncle Arthur is hard to believe. It feels like he was in every other one!

Maybe, they were just that good?

ab348

ABC aired a Paul Lynde special (maybe more than one) around '74 or thereabouts. It was somewhat bizarre IIRC. I think it is on YouTube or somewhere else online. I remember watching it a year or so back.

roadburner

ab348 said:

ABC aired a Paul Lynde special (maybe more than one) around '74 or thereabouts. It was somewhat bizarre IIRC. I think it is on YouTube or somewhere else online. I remember watching it a year or so back.

Was that the Halloween Special? It was the first appearance of KISS on prime time television.

explorerx4

I always thought tat guy was creepy.

omarman

ab348

roadburner said:

ab348 said:

ABC aired a Paul Lynde special (maybe more than one) around '74 or thereabouts. It was somewhat bizarre IIRC. I think it is on YouTube or somewhere else online. I remember watching it a year or so back.

Was that the Halloween Special? It was the first appearance of KISS on prime time television.

Yes, that’s the one.

uplanderguy

I thought he was largely hilarious on Hollywood Squares--really pushed the envelope, going right...up...to...the...line, on stuff, LOL.

I had read online that his father for a period was the Sheriff in Mt. Vernon. Later, watching a clip of 'best of' Lynde moments on Hollywood Squares, there was a clip where he said to Peter Marshall, "I lived in the jail you know" and Peter replied, "yes, your Dad was the sheriff, right?".

One of his siblings in that cemetery was a brother who was killed at Battle of the Bulge. Honestly, I didn't think in WWII that American dead were returned to the 'States, but I'm not certain of that.

uplanderguy

UPDATE: If the family wanted remains to be returned to the U.S., they were.

uplanderguy

Spotted today: Powder blue with white painted top '64 Galaxie 500 two-door hardtop. Mag wheels; some rectangular spots of gray primer.

Not a fan of the styling particularly, but I always thought they must've sold a lot of them, and they must've been pretty durable, as it was not uncommon for me to see these being used around here even, even into the '90's.

roadburner

I always thought it would be fun to build a BTCC Galaxie replica.

explorerx4

@roadburner,
I've watched a few of those video's on youtube lately.
Big beasts compared to many of the others on track at the same time.
I enjoyed this one, although a Cortina got the last laugh.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWkDaVUn0EQ

uplanderguy

That '63 1/2 styling was similar, but I always thought better than the '64 styling.

ab348

I remember as a kid that I always liked the styling of the '64 Ford. Looked substantial. The '63 was certainly cleaner in design but perhaps less impressive to a young version of me. I recall reading years ago in a Collectible Automobile about the '64 Ford that they were very robust cars that often racked up many years of use by owners. Being the last year of that platform Ford probably got most of the weaknesses fixed by then. 1960, '64 and '66 are my favorite Ford years in that decade. Don't like '61, '62 and '65 much.

fintail

I've always preferred the cleaner look of the 63 as well, but a 64 isn't offensive. Both are probably underrated cars now eclipsed by their GM competition. I have similar taste to ab in that I like 60 and 66.

I still remember when I was maybe 20, a local used car lot had a 64 XL 4 door HT, white on blue, and it looked immaculate in and out. $4K.

andre1969

The '63 is probably my favorite, but I do like the whole run of '61-64 big Fords. And, the '60 is pretty cool, in its own offbeat way. One little tidbit I remember about them, is Consumer Reports mentioning how roomy they were inside. I seem to recall one auto issue, maybe '61 or '62, where they said the Ford Galaxie had more legroom in back than a Cadillac DeVille! Part of that might have been the Ford being a pillared sedan and the DeVille being a hardtop, though.

Hardtop sedans usually had tighter interior dimensions than their pillared counterparts, usually when it came to headroom and rear seat legroom. But, the Ford hardtops of that era looked like they had an upright, boxy area with large window area, so I wonder if they actually shared the same roof (or at least a very similar roof) with the pillared models?

A few years ago, I was also a bit surprised to discover that Ford used the same frame from 1957 all the way through '64! In the past, I had always thought the '57-59 was the same, and then the '60 was all-new, but apparently the '60 was just a new body on the old frame. One area that really gives it away though, is in the trunk area. As the trends dictated more low-slung cars, Ford obliged. However, at the '57 frame was rather high, so lowering the decklid resulted in a really shallow trunk.

I think '65 was the first year where Ford started doing those deep-well trunks, where the gas tank was vertical, and mounted between the axle and the deep well.

sda

I remember my 62 Galaxie 2dr Club Sedan had a lot of room in the back seat and it was more comfortable than in the front. One oddity that I haven’t seen on any 62 other than mine. There was a huge coil spring located dead center over the rear axle. I wonder if that was to increase the load factor. Or..if it was a moonshine runner in the backwoods of Va. I bought it from a friend for $100 in central Va where we lived for a couple of years.

ab348

I wouldn’t think that coil spring was factory. The ‘61/‘62 (maybe ‘63 too) had soft rear leaf springs and tended to sag in the rear. I’d suspect a previous owner didn’t like that.

uplanderguy

RE.: '64 styling vs. '63 1/2: For whatever reason, I never liked when a piece of trim extended over the front wheel openings of any car, and was very close to the wheel opening, like the '64 has. Similarly, I hated on '73 and '74 big Chevys, when the side moldings extended over the front wheel wells. That was dropped for '75 and '76.

uplanderguy

A friend of mine who's 12 years older than me, wrote this in an email yesterday, where '63 Fords came up independently of the discussion here:

I do like 1963 full-size Fords. For my money, 1963 was pretty much the high-water mark for both Ford and Chevrolet.

He knows I love the '65 full-size Chevrolet, but always kids me that if I had a '64 and '65 on two lifts next to each other and looked underneath, I'd choose the '64. I don't think so.

omarman

Until he got his own car, a friend in HS drove a '62 Impala which belonged to his dad.

I was helping him look for a car a few months before graduation and spotted a good looking well-kept '65 Impala sedan for sale. Seller was the 2nd owner and showed me the receipts from a local shop which rebuilt the powerglide trans. It had just over 80k miles and he wanted $350.

The owner let me test drive it and it seemed perfect for my friend - and his dad. His father loved those early-to-mid-60s full size Chevys and had a '65 wagon along with the '62 sedan that his son was driving to school.


That same day my friend's dad bought that car for his son's (upcoming) graduation present. I never did get a picture of their driveway after that which if seen today would like a local car show!

stickguy

At the (Very expensive houses ) shore town this week. Day 1, a later bug Convertible, And a perfect looking baby blue 280 SL pagoda with the top down. Have not been out much to see other stuff.

fintail

Saw 2x the final Saab wagon on the road today.

kyfdx

fintail said:

Saw 2x the final Saab wagon on the road today.

I like those

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

He knows I love the '65 full-size Chevrolet, but always kids me that if I had a '64 and '65 on two lifts next to each other and looked underneath, I'd choose the '64. I don't think so.

I've heard that the '64 Chevy was actually pretty well-built...it just doesn't hold up well in an offset frontal crash test! I recall reading an article on the '58 Chevy, that said when they went to the X-frame, they beefed up the body, so that it would be a sturdier component than it would have been if it was just the traditional body bolted down onto a ladder frame or perimeter frame. The article mentioned some of the beefing up techniques were similar to what an automaker would do with a unit-body car. I'd imagine a lot of that beefing up was also done to the '59-64 body shell?

It does seem like, as the 60's wore on, cars started getting cheaper in some respects...more plastic, sloppier build quality, and such. But, they got better in other areas, such as improved safety, better transmissions, and so on.

Personally, I love the '65 Chevy. I think it's the best looking of the whole '65-70 model year span. With the '62-64, my favorite is the '62.

I know we've had this conversation before, but if I was buying a new lower-end big car in '65, good lord it would be a hard choice! I like the Chevy, Ford, and Plymouth, all in their own way. Going up just a notch though, I think I'd go with a Pontiac, over a Dodge or Mercury.

ab348

Both of my older brothers had '63 Chevies in the 1960s, both of them bought as used cars. One had an Impala convertible (with the 230 CID 6-cylinder!) while the other had a BelAir sedan, also with the 6, as his first "real" car after a few dalliances with things like a Sprite and a Sunbean Imp. The BelAir was about 5 years old when purchased and was a remarkably smooth-driving car. Dull as dishwater of course but it just drove really well.

My sense just from what I have heard or read was that the '65 Chevy was not a very robust car. Up here they were known for rusty frames and leaks around the front and rear windshields after several years.

uplanderguy

Going from memory here, but when they added the Caprice in Dec. '64 I think it was, the advertising even mentioned stronger frame IIRC. I believe I've read the '66 full-size cars' frames were all strengthened in the Chevy line. I like the '66, but I love the plain sides and round taillights of the '65....to me, there simply isn't a bad line on it, and the interior is pretty nice. I love the Pontiac's dash that year...IF it was the Bonneville or Grand Prix; otherwise you got a big wall-to-wall swath of blank crinkle vinyl no matter the color of the rest of the interior.

The Mopar equivalent, in my head, of a '65 Impala two-door hardtop, is a '68 Satellite two-door hardtop. I like it from every single angle, including the interior. I even like the looks of the 'Satellite' nameplates, and placement.

uplanderguy

RE.: The '62-64 Chevys, for styling...I think each year looks worse than the year before.

The '62 looks best to me. I'd like a Bel Air Sport Coupe, with the bubble top, but I swear every single one has been converted to a 409. Give me a 327, full wheelcovers, whitewalls, and I'd be happy.

uplanderguy

I can remember my local grandparents' '63 Bel Air wagon. As a kid, I liked the very tall windshield with the large band of dark blue tint.

andre1969

In '65, that was when the Fury went back to being a genuine full-size, with the stacked quad headlights. It pretty much matched the Chevy model for model, with Fury I (Biscayne), Fury II (Bel Air), Fury III (Impala), Sport Fury (Impala SS), and then for '66 they trotted out the VIP, to go up against the Caprice (and LTD).

In midsized ranks, they had the Belvedere I and Belvedere II, which probably equated to Chevelle 300 and Chevelle Malibu, respectively. The Satellite was limited to hardtop coupe and convertible that first year, and most likely meant to compete with the Chevelle SS. However, there was also a Super Stock hardtop coupe in the Belvedere I line, that came standard with a 426 Wedge and 365 hp (425 optional). I think it was pretty much meant for racing though, rather than being a street-ready musclecar that was easy to live with on a daily driver basis.

andre1969

I prefer that "bubbletop" roofline of the '62 Bel Air to the more formal lines of the Impala, myself. Sometimes I wish they'd kept that roofline going for a few more years. But, I guess as the cars started getting a bit more crisp and blocky, it probably wouldn't have worked that well. For instance, I don't think it would have worked that well on any '63 B-body. And, truth be told, it might not work well on a '62 Catalina or LeSabre, which seem a bit more squared off to me than a '62 Chevy or Olds. But, I do like the idea of having a choice.

I think the only down side of a '62 Chevy with the smallblock is that it only offered a 2-speed automatic. But I'd imagine a 327 had enough power to overcome that. At the time, 2-speed automatics were still pretty common, so I'd imagine it wasn't a deterrent to most buyers. But, to more modern drivers, I wonder if it would get annoying? Although I guess the newest drivers, that have gotten used to these 6+ speeds, CVTs, etc, a transmission with only 3 or 4 forward gears would feel strange?

xwesx

andre1969 said:

I know we've had this conversation before, but if I was buying a new lower-end big car in '65, good lord it would be a hard choice! I like the Chevy, Ford, and Plymouth, all in their own way. Going up just a notch though, I think I'd go with a Pontiac, over a Dodge or Mercury.

I agree on that! Moving up the scale, Pontiac has a far greater appeal to me during that era than any of its "competition." Man, they fell so very far....

kyfdx

Member needs help:

https://forums.edmunds.com/discussion/62208/chevrolet/x/need-help-pricing-1970-chevy-nova-sedan#latest