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

sda

I saw these two within 5 minutes of each other, ahem, at the ABC store
. The white and blue had Slinger written on it.

roadburner

sda said:

I saw these two within 5 minutes of each other, ahem, at the ABC store
. The white and blue had Slinger written on it.

I'll take the Morgan.

kyfdx

The top one is a Slingshot, I think.

Made by Polaris?

fintail

The Morgan style 3 wheelers are kind of cool in a dorky steampunk way, but the modern wannabe Bladerunner style things seem to be for those who can't ride motorcycles (not that I am Rossi myself, but I am not pretending otherwise).

sda

Yes, Slingshot by Polaris. I looked both up, wow are they expensive, over $40k before options. I took a liking to the Morgan Six, $80k+. Won’t happen in this household.

andre1969

Spotted this yesterday, about 5 miles from my house. I guess that's a true sign of a tony neighborhood, when the broken-down, abandoned cars still have a monthly payment higher than some rents!

I know this type of car is out of character for me, but I kind of liked them, when they were newer.

ab348

Does the yellow sticker on the top corner of the windshield signify it came from some low-end used car lot?

andre1969

That was my first thought too, but I think it's one of those tow/impound stickers that the police put on a car that's been sitting, abandoned-looking, for too long.

fintail

I think one can get a neglected early XK8 for less than the price of a 94 Accord with a broken timing belt.

ab348

Out and about today and was in traffic next to a Triumph TR8 convertible, orange in color with black interior, top down, sporting an vanity license plate reading "EXTINCT".

fintail

I recall they tested a TR8 in my 1981 Consumer Guide. The summary was something like "There will always be an England, but if our test car is any indicator, there may not always be a British motor industry".

Somewhat obscure car spotted yesterday:

https://youtu.be/Da1aVyvlTC0

stickguy

64 GTO?

explorerx4

Close, but I think it's 65 GTO.

omarman

explorerx4 said:

Close, but I think it's 65 GTO.

Best looking GTO too.

andre1969

Funny thing, I always thought the '65 was too pretty to be a GTO. Good looking car, but something about it just seemed too "petite" for lack of a better word, to be a musclecar. I thought the '64 looked a bit more muscular, while the '66-67 were a good balance of "muscular" and "pretty". Well, I guess a better word would be "handsome".

But, in the overall scheme of things, there isn't a loser in the bunch. Kinda like the old saying "A bad day in Aruba is still better than a good day at work!"

xwesx

andre1969 said:

But, in the overall scheme of things, there isn't a loser in the bunch. Kinda like the old saying "A bad day in Aruba is still better than a good day at work!"

As long as it is not hurricane season. I might take the good day at work, in that case.

andre1969

Yep, hurricanes can be pesky things. Usually, they miss Aruba because it's too close to the equator, so about the worst that happens is that it kicks up the sand in the water and the snorkeling's not as good. But, a few years ago one of them passed pretty close and made a mess. Not like the "Galveston Hurricane of 1900" type of mess, but still something you wouldn't want to be caught in.

roadburner

As you all know, musclecars and ponycars are the only domestic cars I really like, so I'm very envious of the author of this story.

omarman

Nice looking Trans Am with the 403 Olds called the 6.6 litre. But it has a shaker hood scoop sporting a T/A 6.6 decal which was only applied on a '79 Trans Am equipped with the L78/W72 Pontiac 400. And there weren't many of those. Still it's a nice car but too bad it doesn't have the W72 Pontiac 400 under the decal.

stickguy

That T/A is gorgeous. Love the colors. Too bad it’s not a 4 speed.

xwesx

roadburner said:

As you all know, musclecars and ponycars are the only domestic cars I really like, so I'm very envious of the author of this story.

Yeah, that's a fabulous article! While my truck was a bit younger (30 years) when I took it on my 11,000 mile "meet the folks" trip back in 1999, we had a similar experience (particularly in terms of the oldest-vehicle-on-the-road and head-turning bits).

If/when we head out of Alaska, I'll likely drive it south pulling a 5th-wheel flat bed trailer loaded to the gills.

stickguy

Real moral of the story us, don’t cut corners on the recommissioning. Always need to make sure the tank, fuel lines and fuel filters are clean too if it’s been sitting.

explorerx4

@roadburner,
Thanks for posting a great road trip story.
Elena Scherr - Edmunds Car reviewer.

roadburner

omarman said:

Nice looking Trans Am with the 403 Olds called the 6.6 litre. But it has a shaker hood scoop sporting a T/A 6.6 decal which was only applied on a '79 Trans Am equipped with the L78/W72 Pontiac 400. And there weren't many of those. Still it's a nice car but too bad it doesn't have the W72 Pontiac 400 under the decal.

I saw that, I would rather have the Pontiac as well.

explorerx4

@fintail,
Go all in.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/enthusiasts/michael-jordan-s-mercedes-s600-lorinser-seen-in-the-last-dance-is-for-sale/ar-BB17QgbT?li=BBnb4R5&ocid=hplocalnews

stickguy

will probably get strong bids for provenance, but a 25 YO V12 Mercedes with over 150k on the clock? That sounds like you might want to have Jordan's money to keep it on the road.

fintail

I like the cars, but the provenance adds no value for me, and not my choice of colors. I'd also rather have a period AMG:



I am surprised BHCC is selling a car that doesn't look barn fresh, to put it nicely.

xwesx

fintail said:

I like the cars, but the provenance adds no value for me, and not my choice of colors. I'd also rather have a period AMG:

I am surprised BHCC is selling a car that doesn't look barn fresh, to put it nicely.

They didn't mention that the photo in the article is from 15 years ago.... Just wait until it pops up on eBay; remember all those California wildfires last year?

fintail

There's a greater than zero chance of that being true

Fun place to browse and they sometimes have palatable driver quality cars, but on many with their prices, they are so far beyond economic restoration that they are labors of love far beyond even my fintail.

xwesx said:

They didn't mention that the photo in the article is from 15 years ago.... Just wait until it pops up on eBay; remember all those California wildfires last year?

uplanderguy

RE.: GTO--yeah, that's definitely a '65. I like the '64 best, but seems like one mostly sees and reads about '65-67 cars.

When I was a kid, a woman who lived near my grandparents drove a salmon-colored ("Sunfire Red") '64 GTO two-door post, with the factory (I think) mag-looking wheelcovers, and I thought it was gorgeous.

A sporty car that I thought looked delicate, or even feminine, were the '67 and '68 Camaro coupes. I like them, inside and out, better than the '69, with its squared wheel openings and almost dead-on Nova instrument panel (the '67 and '68 had a panel that reminded me of the '68 Corvette), but even in SS or Z-28 forms, the '67-68 are still 'hip-py' and curvy and feminine. A '65 -68 Mustang notchback gives me a similar feeling, but not as much (definitely not 'hip-py').

andre1969

I prefer the '67-68 Camaro to the '69, although I do like the way the '69 was bulked up a bit. There's just something about the front-end of the '69 I don't like, though. For some reason it makes me think of those flying subs from "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea". The RS models with the hidden headlights are way cool, though.

One of my earliest childhood memories was of my Dad bringing home a '64 GTO 2-door post. Dad got that car in 1973, so that would have put me around 3 years old. I remember riding in the car with Mom, following him back home from where he bought it. It was night time, and its exhaust system was pretty much shot, and hanging low, so there would be the occasional shower of sparks whenever it made contact with the pavement. As a small kid, that made me afraid of the car.

I also remember Dad picking me up from nursery school one day in it, and about 500 feet past the Shell station, it ran out of gas! I can't remember when Dad got rid of that car. It broke down a lot, and we lived in a townhouse with limited parking, so it ended up spending a lot of time over at my grandparents' house. Mom's parents, which I'm sure was a point of contention! Years later, I remember Dad saying he paid $400 for it. And, when he sold it, he also got $400 for it, and the buyer threw in a little something extra. So, let's call it $420.

andre1969

Oh, on the subject of those '79 Trans Ams, look at what's for sale at a local car dealership!

https://www.richmorton.com/used/Pontiac/1979-Pontiac-Firebird-087c65dd0a0e0a6b7893c9a82f4575a2.htm

Not a lot of info, but according to the VIN, it's a 400-4bbl (the fifth digit being "Z"). And, if it's a manual, and, well, that looks like a Pontiac V8 to me, so I'm guessing this is indeed one of those elusive, desireable 400/4-speeds!

texases

If it had a few less miles it could have sold at BJ for $187,000:
https://www.barrett-jackson.com/Events/Event/Details/1979-PONTIAC-FIREBIRD-TRANS-AM--190563

omarman

Looks like it sold for $46K at BJ in 2016. Their auction details claimed all documentation was in order and reported 58K miles at that time.

I remember seeing them for sale with low miles at just used car prices in early '80s. That one looks very well kept. At first glance I noticed that even the Peter Frampton 8 track looks period correct 1979. It's funny what shows up at local dealer inventory. Never saw anything like that at Fitzgerald's when I lived in Frederick!

ab348

Silver leather, imagine that. Now you'll get black and you'll like it! ($1 to Judge Smails)

omarman

$187K for a never-driven '79 Trans Am. Can't ever be driven now unless you want to see the odometer register all the money you're losing with each mile. I really like those cars but not as a museum piece with a 6 figure price. It's a '79 Pontiac.

stickguy

I love the one at the Mazda dealer. Not the $187K one you can't drive. Very cool.

xwesx

andre1969 said:

Oh, on the subject of those '79 Trans Ams, look at what's for sale at a local car dealership!

https://www.richmorton.com/used/Pontiac/1979-Pontiac-Firebird-087c65dd0a0e0a6b7893c9a82f4575a2.htm

Not a lot of info, but according to the VIN, it's a 400-4bbl (the fifth digit being "Z"). And, if it's a manual, and, well, that looks like a Pontiac V8 to me, so I'm guessing this is indeed one of those elusive, desireable 400/4-speeds!

Damn; that thing gives me chills. Looks exactly like the one my mom owned from the outside. Her interior was blue.

fintail

Good ROI from new, bad showing from 2016.

uplanderguy

Everybody here knows I like these cars, although I'd like it better if it was the updated LS model from '86 and later. Love the wheels. Seller's asking price is insane, but I liked these cars new and still do--very quiet and smooth. I know, I know, totally different from the Thunderbird and Cougar except for the place in the lineup. I'm totally OK with that, LOL.

First year for the 4.3 FI V6. Unusual in my memory to see one so loaded up that wasn't a 305.

https://barnfinds.com/only-19k-miles-1985-chevrolet-monte-carlo-cl/?fbclid=IwAR0qaEStULL2yzM6uyE5xalyQpAcKxs4dJtSjuwLt4U_TxbnCJqRZ_VMVbw

stickguy

I much prefer the styling on that generation Grand Prix.

uplanderguy

Chevy was the only one to use an upgraded V6 for some reason. The rest soldiered on with the 3.8.

I liked on the '81-86 Sport Coupes, how the rear end styling very much reminded me of the '74 Monte Carlo.

andre1969

I wonder if there was some kind of engine quota GM was trying to make, to keep the various engine plants up and running? While you'd think the 262 would be a welcome update over the 231, maybe they had some kind of contract obligation to make so many 231's per year?

I've theorized that's why GM started putting 307s in the B-body wagons for '87, to sort of even out production of the 305 versus 307.

I've always been kind of curious about the 262, in something like a Monte Carlo. I think it had 130 hp and 210 ft-lb of torque in 1985, but for '86 through the end of the Monte, it was boosted a bit to 140. While not as quick as the 305, obviously, I'd imagine that, especially with the 4-speed overdrive automatic, it still gave a good balance of power and economy.

GM never did mate the 4-speed overdrive to the carbureted, 110-hp 231 V6. I've always wondered if that was simply because the fuel economy rating with the 3-speed was already good enough, for CAFE purposes? Or, was it because the engine was already low enough on power and torque that a 4-speed would have made it totally gutless in top gear, and it would have constantly been downshifting? Or, perhaps they just wanted to give buyers more incentive to upgrade to a V8?

If they would have offered the 231 with a 4-speed, but a quicker axle ratio, I wonder if that would have helped give it a bit better fuel economy, without sacrificing performance?

uplanderguy

All good questions. I can't remember for sure, but did the 4.3 V6 get the 4-speed automatic in the Montes? That would've been for '86 and later, I'm thinking, if at all.

RE.: Styling--I never cared for the chiseling in the Grand Prix's design, primarily from the roof back. EDIT: Now that I look, that's only on the bottom of the decklid apparently. I didn't like the chiseling on the '73-77 iteration either. But of course, the Grand Prix had a great instrument panel. I never cared for the 'casket handle' door pulls; thankfully, the Monte never got those on any interior.

It's all wasted space, but one thing I did like about the Chevy and Buick instrument panels was that above the HVAC and radio controls, the instrument panel was moved back against the windshield, which gave an impression of space. It was only an impression of course, though.

I like the optional cornering lights on that Monte. I always liked them on any car when the addition of them was subtle, and low on the car. Worst look of them I can remember is the '68 big Pontiacs, when they were about mid-way up the front fenders, in front of the wheel opening, with a louvered thing over them.

ab348

I think GM was trying to balance production demand to plant capacity in their engine plants back then. They were putting 3800s in a lot of their FWD models so Flint was probably running at close to max capacity. Tonawanda where a lot of Chevy engines were made was pumping out variations of the 60-degree V-6 along with small block V-8s so it was probably busy too. But when GM dropped the Olds and Buick RWD full-sizers, the Olds engine plant in Lansing had a big drop in demand, so they probably wanted to keep it busy.

fintail

That Monte reminds me of the black facelift/flush lights LS on checkerboard wheels that lived on campus when I was a student - it also had t-tops. Those wheels paired with t-tops is so 80s, and cool for it.

andre1969

The 4-speed was offered with the 3- or 4-speed with either the 262 or the 305, even in '85. At least, according to the EPA (it was quicker to look it up on the EPA's website than to go hunt down the proper page in a brochure )

Here's fuel economy ratings, at least, according to the 1985 window stickers. If you go to the EPA site nowadays, they've adjusted those numbers downward to compare to modern car ratings.

262/3-speed: 18/23
262/4-speed: 18/27
305/3-speed: 16/22
305/4-speed: 17/24

One thing I never liked about the midsized dash, is how they mounted the radio/Hvac controls low, in that jutting-out cluster in the center of the dash. It looked good, but in my opinion it pretty much ruined the center seating position. Now, to be fair, that center seating position wasn't so hot to begin with...one of the shortcomings of downsizing is that you got a bigger driveshaft and transmission hump. But, those low-mounted controls just made it worse.

It probably wasn't that big of a deal, because if someone had to regularly carry six adults around, they either bought a full-sized car, or used two cars. But, considering how hard GM was trying in those days to make the downsized cars as roomy, or even roomier in some aspects, than the mastodons they replaced, messing up the center seating position like that seems a bit contrary to their goals. After all, they were willing to forego roll-down rear windows and full-sized spare tires, and lord-knows-what-else, all in the name of space efficiency!

uplanderguy

Obviously not car-related, but today Japan surrendered, ending World War II, unequivocally the biggest series of events in the twentieth century. My mother was from NYC and remembered banging of pots and pans out apartment windows. My Dad was in the Marine Corps, stateside then (he was 16 1/2 and had entered the war by faking his birth date, not all that unusual I'm told), but I've read that every church bell in our town of Greenville, Pennsylvania rang that day.

Neat color video of V-J Day in Honolulu; music by Jimmy Durante. Old-car content here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2psMV9Ew8s

uplanderguy

This strikes me as odd, and I can't say I remember it, but according to the '85 Monte Carlo brochure, the 4-speed automatic was optional on the 4.3 V6 and standard in the HO 5.0 V8 in the SS, but not available in the 'regular' 305 4-barrel.

https://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/chevy/85monte/bilder/6.jpg

andre1969

That is odd. I just pulled up the '84 brochure. That year they were still using 229s and 231s (California), and those both came standard with the 3-speed. But, oddly, the 229 offered a 4-speed that year! That's the first time I realized they actually did put a 4-speed up against one of the carbureted 3.8s. Odd though, that the Chevy 229 would offer it that year, but not the Buick 231.

And, it looks like they did exactly what I thought they should, with the 4-speed...use a slightly quicker axle, a 2.73:1, whereas the 3-speed used a 2.41:1. Also, the regular 305, the SS 305, and even the Olds Diesel 350 offered the 3- or 4-speed automatic. Odd that they'd regress a bit for '85, only offering the regular 305 with a 3-speed?

http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Chevrolet/1984_Chevrolet/1984_Chevrolet_Monte_Carlo_Brochure/1984 Chevrolet Monte Carlo-06.html