Have had a chance to take a close look at the Relay ... not a chance in h*** that it will compete with the GC, Odyssey, Sienna, Quest, etc. Seats don't fold flat, for one.
About the only positive, if you can call it that, is that the DVD entertainment system is standard.
But, it's also the first Saturn to not have the polymer panels <sniff>.
for the Relay is that it's not as nasty looking in person (or, at least driving past at 55 mph) as I thought they would be! But still, it looks like a 7 or 8 year old minivan with a wanna-be SUV front-end grafted on. And nowadays, aren't minivans starting to come with roll-down windows in the sliding side doors? I know they're not the norm yet, but I thought they were at least starting to become more common?
Almost forgot, yesterday I saw a 1969 Dodge Coronet 4-door out in the parking lot. Bright, medium metallic blue that I think is referred to as "B5 Blue" (the paint code, I'm guessing) Even for just being a 4-door car, I always thought these were good, tough-looking cars. I've seen this car around before, and I think I know who owns it. A guy not too far away who years ago had a '78 or '79 Volare with a 360-4bbl that he only wanted $500 for. Sometimes I kick myself over that one, as it was, believe it or not, rust free (did have a big hit in the rear quarter, though). But I was broke at the time, so even free would've been too much! And if it's the guy I'm thinking of, he also has a sand/beige colored '73 NYer 4-door hardtop.
I also spotted a '71 or '72 Plymouth Roadrunner 340 coming back from lunch today. Lime green with flat black accents, and looked to be in really good shape. Looked too nice to be a daily driver, but considering how nasty the weather is today, I was surprised to see it out!
of looking at a Buick Terraza every blessed day of the week! Last spring, one of my housemates and me went to a GM test drive event, and one of the things they gave away was a calendar. Well, for December they have a picture of a Terraza on it, and that calendar is displayed prominently on my fridge. My roommate uses it to mark down when he goes to the gym and other appointments and such. Yuck! I wish they had passed out calendars that had cute little kittens or flowers or something like that on it, instead! ;-)
...the "Blues Brothers" was on AMC the other day. What are the real specifications of the 1974 Dodge Monaco police version? The only thing Elwood really gives is that it has a 440 V-8. What would've the horsepower and torque been? 0-60 times, differences from the civilian version, etc...
was on www.allpar.com. In '74, it looks like the top police engines were the 250 hp 400 and 275 hp 440.
A '72 Polara 440 copcar would do 0-60 in 7.5 seconds and hit a top speed of 130. Oftentimes, police cars really aren't all that quick from 0-60, because they were built more for top speed. Also, a lot of the 0-60 times quoted by the likes of the Michigan State Police seem low because of the way they test the cars. They put two cops in the car, and then just take off, and take a 2-way average time. They don't manually hold low gear, power brake, or stuff like that. In fact, I think most police cars actually have a first-gear lockout. At least, the M-body Gran Fury did, although it was easy to defeat...just something in the steering column that kept you from shifting all the way down to first. The place I bought my Gran Fury from got rid of it.
But anyway, the MSP tested the '89 Gran Fury at 0-60 in something like 11.89 seconds. The Crown Vic was similar, regardless of whether it had a 302 or 351, and the Caprice 350 was the only one to break 10 seconds, at 0-60 in around 9.89 seconds. Now I'm sure if Motortrend or C&D got ahold of these cars, they'd be getting much better acceleration times!
"1969 was the year of the ultimate squad; for a quarter century afterwards, nothing could match its performance capability - the 1969 Polara Pursuit. This was the apex of the high-power era, the last year before lower compression engines and tightening emisions requirements. The 1969 Polara Pursuit, with its 375 bhp 440, sleek new "fuselage" bodystyle, and standard 3.23 axle, could do 0-60 in 6.3 seconds, the quarter mile in 14.3 seconds (at over 99 mph), and run out to a top speed of (or, by some accounts, above) 147 mph!
It took a 25 years, a Corvette engine, and a four-speed transmission for any other police cruiser to match these figures. In LAPD use, the 383-engined Belvedere Pursuit was extremely successful and well-liked, gaining the (accurate) nickname 'four-door Roadrunner'."
Copcars got really bad in the late 70's though, performance-wise. From the tests I've read that the Michigan State Police did, the last time a sedan-based (as opposed to those Camaro and Mustang, and similar interceptors) did 0-60 in under 10 seconds was '78. That year, the '78 Catalina 400 and '78 Fury/Monaco 440 made the high 9's. There may have been others as well, but for some reason only those two stick out. (disclaimer: the '79 Malibu did 0-60 in 8.9 and the '79 Volare/Aspen 360 in 8.7, but the MSP didn't test those...I think it was the CHP). In '79, the fastest car the MSP tested was either a Newport or St. Regis 360, at 10.1 seconds. The next year, 1980, I think they did test an Aspen or Volare 360 (my copcar book is packed away right now), but that year they cut the hp a bit, and they were more like 11-12 seconds which, sadly, was still about the quickest of the copcars!
It wasn't until 1989 that the MSP got a sedan-based police car to break the 10 second barrier again. That year it was a 1989 Caprice, which did it in 9.89 seconds.
Overall though, if those figures for the '69 Polara are accurate, I'd say that's pretty darned impressive. A Chrysler 300C Hemi is only good for about that same range in 0-60, yet it had 35+ years of technology and a 5-speed automatic transmission, and a few hundred lb less weight on its side!
Anybody doing 147 mph in a 69 Dodge Polara has a death wish. I don't think it's possible anyway. Not enough HP for the aerodynamics in the real world. Probably that speed was calculated mathematically but I doubt it could be done. Every 10% increase in speed does not require 10% more HP, but exponentially more. I'd guess maybe 125?
Most factory stock 60s American cars unless they are set up rock hard and modified for oval racing ala NASCAR, are very very scary at even 110 mph. the slushy steering, high road height and poofy tires would probably kill you at 147 mph IMO. I don't imagine a trained cop would be that dumb to try it.
but a Dodge Polara police car would most likely have "Firm Feel" power steering, which is anything BUT mushy. My '89 Gran Fury had it, and it had a nice weight to it and good road feel, roughly equating to a modern car. The sway bar in back, and thicker sway bar up front, and extra-wide 15x7 copcar wheels, in an era where most rims were probably more like 4.5-6", at best, also helped tremendously.
BTW, according to MSP tests, my '89 Gran Fury, with just a 318-4bbl and 2.94:1 rear-end, and aerodynamics that are probably even more brick-like than a '69 Polara, would still hit around 125 mph. So considering how much more power a '69 Polara 440 would have, not to mention gearing that probably helped it breathe a bit better, is an extra 22 mph really that far out of reach?
But yeah, point well taken. Even if it COULD do 147 mph, I sure wouldn't want to do it!
Well, me, I believe a speed when it's clocked by a machine on a two way run. Otherwise, it's just talk over a beer (which is fun, by the way, I'm not knocking it).
These 60s cars were WAY overpowered for their suspension brakes and steering. That's why it took Ford a gazillion dollars to win Lemans by building a British/American hybrid. No Corvette was going to do it, nor was any production American car going to win European races with the technology under the body.
I hit 110 MPH in my mother's '72 Lincoln, with only a one mile run-up... 460 ci.. I know that wasn't clocked two ways, but pretty accurate... Also, had a '71 Electra 225 blow right by me when I was doing about 105 MPH on a Honda 750...
I really don't think those big body cars with all that horsepower had any trouble hitting 130.. but, I'm sure the aerodynamics were like hitting a brick wall shortly after that..
My '84 911 had an estimated top end of 140 MPH.. that was from the owner's manual...
I'm almost ashamed to say, was in a 1991 Honda Civic! It was a rental car, and I was out in Cali on spring break back in '92. On a long downhill stretch of I-15, I think it was, called Cahoun pass, IIRC, I got it up to 115. It wouldn't do it on flat ground, but given a long enough downhill grade it would!
My Gran Fury, with it's "certified" police speedometer, I discovered, was off a bit. When it read 91 mph it was actually doing 100, according the the speedometer calibration place I took it to after getting a ticket. Now out on the highway, I had gotten that speedo up to 100, which would signify at least 110 mph. And it felt like it was barely loafing at that point.
Well it wasn't loafing. The old type pushrod is working very hard at 110 I think. They show peak power at a fairly low rpm, after that you are just wasting gas trying to raise the rpm. You don't get any more power because of valve float and cylinder head flow etc. Most of the 60s muscle cars couldn't break an honest 120 mph no matter how much power they had. Gearing and aerodynamics and the characteristics of the engine just wouldn't allow it. Even the legendary Hemi would barely do that. This is why the "top speeds" you read about are theoretical, as if the engine could produce more and more HP as the rpm went up. Not so on those designs. This is also why say a 1955 Mercedes Gullwing with a measly 6 cylinder would catch and pull away from a 400 HP American car in the dust after 130 mph. Higher revs, better aero, more stable.
However, with lowering, bellypans, the right tires and suspension and considerable work to the engine's breathing capacity, I'm sure you could get a 60s American locomotive to go pretty fast.
The greatest fear I always had with the older Porsches, like my '69, was "lift" at high speeds, since there is no engine up there. The 928 with the V-8 up front seems rock solid but I'm not going to test its potential top speed, which is supposedly considerable. It's got that stupid 85 mph speedometer, and I've bent the needle on that peg already.
When I was a stupid kid, I'd max out any car that I got into.. But, I bought that 911 in '90 and sold it in '94, and never had it over 105 MPH.. I guess that was the wallet talking....
IMO it was loafing, because it wasn't like I had the pedal mashed to the floor at 100-110. Now if I'm doing the math right, a car with 235/70/R-15 tires and a 28" tire diameter (according to tirerack.com), and a 2.94:1 axle and 1:1 direct drive (no overdrive) would be doing about 2200 rpm at 60 mph.
120 mph, then would be about 4400 rpm. Peak hp on a 318 usually comes around 4800 rpm, IIRC, and redline is around 5500, so as long as long as it can suck in enough air (and a 4-bbl is probably overkill on most 318's, shouldn't it be more or less fine right up until it hits its peak hp?
And again, the 125 mph figure I got is from the Michigan State police, not a couple guys sitting around drinking beers. Although I dunno if they do that during their tests or not! ;-)
Shifty- How about the older Alfas from the late '60s/early '70s? I hear those cars have a pretty high top end and can have a great top speed if you tried. Isn't it possible to cruise in a Duetto at 5000 rpm all day?
...with a 350 V-8 up to 100 mph, but then I got scared. My Seville STS will do way over 100 mph and you won't even notice it until you look out the side window and see telephone poles flying by like a picket fence. My 1994 DeVille was just as decent a performer.
As for recently spotted obscure cars, I saw a 1960s Volvo 1800 S sports coupe and an odd minivan-looking vehicle called a Mitsubishi Expo.
You can run old Alfas up to 8,000 rpm or so, but anything more than that and you risk bent valves.
RE: Your 318---the pedal travel isn't an indication that the engine "has more to give". You could mash the pedal another 6 inches and get nothing for it. If an engine can't rev and can't breathe it's not really going anywhere after 4400 rpms. Besides, those old iron pushrods dont' like to be run at high rpms for extended periods of time. There's a lot of piston weight at the end of those connecting rods, you have to consider that.
Don't ask for explanation but I can say from experience that taking rpm at 60 and extrapolating to 120 just doesn't work. The '02 Vette is doing 1500rpm at just under 70, say 69mph, and the red line is 6000rpm. Can the car go just under 240mph? Fly in the ointment is Shifty's reference to drag, the wind really takes a lot of push. Turns out that top speed in a C5 is in the 170's and that is in 5th gear since it supposedly won't hold speed in 6th at top end. I've seen 148mph once! It had more but I didn't.
I forget the exact numbers but basically to go from 150 mph to 200 mph without aero changes you have to practically double the horsepower, something like that....there is a formula. I doubt a stock 60s car could go 200 mph with 1,000 horsepower.
Shifty- Hope you're having a great holiday out in California and to the rest of the members here, Merry Christmas!
On another note, I saw a rare car in my neighborhood today- a '90 Corvette ZR-1. Looked immaculate for its age too. I wonder what they are worth today in prime condition.
ZR-1's if you hang out in the Corvette world always get extra attention but at least in Calif. are out there if you look. Saw a couple last year listed for mid $20's for later models up to the end in '95(?). They usually are in great shape since very few will get them unless they are into it for the exclusivity. I've even seen a few that people still take to the road tracks, one at Sears Point driven by the wife of a couple where the mobile home pulled her ZR-1 and he followed in his Z06, yes it was a diesel pusher, not a little one.
Thank you, great holiday out here in California although Christmas always feels a bit weird with no snow. Actually we did have snow in the Bay Area in 1913.
Saw a slammed Open Kadett station wagon today! Also, anyone remember a Honda called a Wagovan or something like that?
Did an appraisal on a kind of interesting car---a 1955 Cadillac Series 62 two-door hardtop, one original lady owner, 75,500 fully documented miles. Ran great, looked like it had been repainted a long time ago, but well done re-spray (took me a while to discover this), otherwise it looked just like GM built it. Trunk mat a little ratty, no dents no dings at all, chrome mostly very good but some tarnishing here and there that could probably be buffed out. Ran really well, kind of a light film of dirt on the engine and road dirt under the chassis, like a used car maybe 6-7 years old.
I pegged it as $14,995 asking and take anything from $10K-12.5K Too bad it wasn't a convertible---I would have had to beat people away from the door.
She's 80 something, just stopped driving this summer.
No, I think '53 is the car everyone wants. When you start pushing $15K on a 50s closed coupe type of American car, you start running into much more interesting 60s cars you can buy---which are more roadable and fun to drive. 50s cars are very "classic" but really not much fun to drive....this Cadillac was a barge to take even around the block. I'd tire of it quickly, but that's just me I guess.
I think $12,5K is what we'd call "good for the buyer, good for the seller" for a #3 automobile of this type. You might get $15K if you waited long enough, but more than that and you run into VERY pretty '55s with no needs.
A concours Pebble Beach '55 coupe might be worth $25K so do the math.
I don't know... $9900 seems like a lot to me.. A local dealer had an '86 Targa with only 64K this past summer for $16,900... That one in the ad looks pretty rough...
On another note... how the heck do you have a car like that BMW and only drive it 13K in 20 years? I've had "third" cars before, and still manage to put at least 3K/yr on them...
$10k doesn't seem like such a bargain for a roughish thirty-five year-old Porsche to me, though admittedly I don't know what a really nice one would go for these days, but I don't think a whole lot more than that. In any case, I don't see how you could come close to breaking even on that thing, it needs $10k in work easy ('tired engine', body and interior need restoring?). Just pick up a nice one and be done with it.
Nice BMW, though not $40k nice, even for an M-spec. 635s were nice cars at the time, but with only 13k, it probably needs most or all of the stuff a car that's basically sat around for twenty years would need. The miles alone don't justify a 100% premium over the next nicest example I've seen!!
the entry-level Caddy back in the 50's? I'd guess it would be worth less than a '55 Coupe DeVille, which would probably be the one that more people would want.
What was it about the 53 that made that year so appealing? I think they're handsome cars, but I think they just about perfected the look for '55 and '56.
I remember on "CHiPs", they had a recurring character, this little old lady who drove a '55-56 Caddy coupe. In one episode she got it facing the wrong way on an exit ramp somehow, and either Ponch or Jon had to turn it around for her.
"..What was it about the 53 that made that year so appealing? I think they're handsome cars, but I think they just about perfected the look for '55 and '56."
I agree Andre, the '53 IMO was a styling preview of '55-'56. Possibly the collectors put a premium on the '53s for a couple of reasons:
1)IIRC it was the 100th anniversary of Cadillac and the year the first Eldo was introduced.
2)It could be argued that the '53 was the last Caddy to be completely distinguished from the rest of the GM lines by it's styling and features. By '55 and '56 even Chevy had deluxe features as well as tailfins, wraparound windshields and high compression v8s, none of which it had in '53.
The 1970 911T is not a good buy at all, and I'll tell you why I think so. The engine is "tired", which means theoretically, the car is worth absolutely nothing. The engine rebuild will cost more than the car is worth.
The 911T is the smallest and weakest HP engine of the T, E and S series, and therefore the least desirable. Seats are collapsed, car is dented. I'd say the car as shown is worth about $2,500 at best. If it weren't for the sun roof, it might even be a parts car. Figure $10K engine, 1K seats, $2K miscellaneous, $3K body work.
The owner of the 635CSi is out of his mind and will own that car until he's in his grave. Look, it goes like this. If the car is worth $10,000 with 80,000 miles on it, it isn't worth 4 times as much with low miles. Also he screwed it up by blacking out the chrome. I'd say $15K-18K if he found one of those 3 buyers in America who really needs the world's nicest 635CSi coupe.
...there was a Series 61 in the early 1950s including a very nice "sedanette" fastback. I've ridden in a 1956 Series 62 and it hardly seems like a plain jane compared to a DeVille. Fast forward to 1967 and the Cadillac Calais, (the Series 62's sucessor) seems more like a Buick LeSabre than a Cadillac. I heard one guy refer to it as "the working man's Caddy."
Saw a few odd ones, but nothing spectacular. Went home for Christmas, and the old people a block down still have their showroom looking 70s Hondamatic Civic and another old couple has a creampuff early (76 or 77 I believe) Accord. I spotted a 30s firetruck the day after Christmas, I think it was a 'Howe' or something. I saw a c.46 GMC dump truck at a used car lot. I saw several Fox-body Mercury Capris, never liked those. I spotted a pristine looking 1st series Mazda 929 cruising down I5...you don't see those much anymore. Also saw a lovely 64 Impala SS 2 door and a nice 67-69 Camaro RS/SS
There are also some old people who live down the street from me...they too own a pristine older vehicle, an '89 Toyota 2WD pickup. No frills at all and this truck only has 58k original miles on it. Barely sees the snow either. I'm surprised that it hasn't rusted away yet, something the older Toyota trucks were quite good at.
Sort of a cult car. Some people really like 'em. i think they are weird looking but they are pretty fast and AWD. Expensive parts though.
I almost bought one two years ago but after half an hour or so I realized I was still in an early 90s Japanese car. Also they didn't make a stick shift. They had problems with overheating transmissions but by now most people have cured that. But you can get a fair price for a nice one.
since I've seen an SVX. The other day though, I did see a Subaru XT. I used to think they were cool, like something out of the future. But now, looking at a used one, it makes me think of watching an old sci-fi movie that tried to depict the future, but ended up being way off course.
I saw an XT broken down alongside I5 yesterday. I also saw an 80s Regal coupe (the kind on the same platform as a Monte) that suffered some kind of massive front end failure, and the front drivers wheel was wedged way up into the body.
I kind of liked the SVX, with its Delorean front windows and all.
a very straight and complete looking (down to the original wheel covers)Dodge DartSwinger, white with black vinyl top and thin whitewall tires, ca '69-'70.
Comments
About the only positive, if you can call it that, is that the DVD entertainment system is standard.
But, it's also the first Saturn to not have the polymer panels <sniff>.
Almost forgot, yesterday I saw a 1969 Dodge Coronet 4-door out in the parking lot. Bright, medium metallic blue that I think is referred to as "B5 Blue" (the paint code, I'm guessing) Even for just being a 4-door car, I always thought these were good, tough-looking cars. I've seen this car around before, and I think I know who owns it. A guy not too far away who years ago had a '78 or '79 Volare with a 360-4bbl that he only wanted $500 for. Sometimes I kick myself over that one, as it was, believe it or not, rust free (did have a big hit in the rear quarter, though). But I was broke at the time, so even free would've been too much! And if it's the guy I'm thinking of, he also has a sand/beige colored '73 NYer 4-door hardtop.
I also spotted a '71 or '72 Plymouth Roadrunner 340 coming back from lunch today. Lime green with flat black accents, and looked to be in really good shape. Looked too nice to be a daily driver, but considering how nasty the weather is today, I was surprised to see it out!
A '72 Polara 440 copcar would do 0-60 in 7.5 seconds and hit a top speed of 130. Oftentimes, police cars really aren't all that quick from 0-60, because they were built more for top speed. Also, a lot of the 0-60 times quoted by the likes of the Michigan State Police seem low because of the way they test the cars. They put two cops in the car, and then just take off, and take a 2-way average time. They don't manually hold low gear, power brake, or stuff like that. In fact, I think most police cars actually have a first-gear lockout. At least, the M-body Gran Fury did, although it was easy to defeat...just something in the steering column that kept you from shifting all the way down to first. The place I bought my Gran Fury from got rid of it.
But anyway, the MSP tested the '89 Gran Fury at 0-60 in something like 11.89 seconds. The Crown Vic was similar, regardless of whether it had a 302 or 351, and the Caprice 350 was the only one to break 10 seconds, at 0-60 in around 9.89 seconds. Now I'm sure if Motortrend or C&D got ahold of these cars, they'd be getting much better acceleration times!
http://www.kraftfoods.com/om/what.htm
WVK
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
"1969 was the year of the ultimate squad; for a quarter century afterwards, nothing could match its performance capability - the 1969 Polara Pursuit. This was the apex of the high-power era, the last year before lower compression engines and tightening emisions requirements. The 1969 Polara Pursuit, with its 375 bhp 440, sleek new "fuselage" bodystyle, and standard 3.23 axle, could do 0-60 in 6.3 seconds, the quarter mile in 14.3 seconds (at over 99 mph), and run out to a top speed of (or, by some accounts, above) 147 mph!
It took a 25 years, a Corvette engine, and a four-speed transmission for any other police cruiser to match these figures. In LAPD use, the 383-engined Belvedere Pursuit was extremely successful and well-liked, gaining the (accurate) nickname 'four-door Roadrunner'."
Copcars got really bad in the late 70's though, performance-wise. From the tests I've read that the Michigan State Police did, the last time a sedan-based (as opposed to those Camaro and Mustang, and similar interceptors) did 0-60 in under 10 seconds was '78. That year, the '78 Catalina 400 and '78 Fury/Monaco 440 made the high 9's. There may have been others as well, but for some reason only those two stick out. (disclaimer: the '79 Malibu did 0-60 in 8.9 and the '79 Volare/Aspen 360 in 8.7, but the MSP didn't test those...I think it was the CHP). In '79, the fastest car the MSP tested was either a Newport or St. Regis 360, at 10.1 seconds. The next year, 1980, I think they did test an Aspen or Volare 360 (my copcar book is packed away right now), but that year they cut the hp a bit, and they were more like 11-12 seconds which, sadly, was still about the quickest of the copcars!
It wasn't until 1989 that the MSP got a sedan-based police car to break the 10 second barrier again. That year it was a 1989 Caprice, which did it in 9.89 seconds.
Overall though, if those figures for the '69 Polara are accurate, I'd say that's pretty darned impressive. A Chrysler 300C Hemi is only good for about that same range in 0-60, yet it had 35+ years of technology and a 5-speed automatic transmission, and a few hundred lb less weight on its side!
Most factory stock 60s American cars unless they are set up rock hard and modified for oval racing ala NASCAR, are very very scary at even 110 mph. the slushy steering, high road height and poofy tires would probably kill you at 147 mph IMO. I don't imagine a trained cop would be that dumb to try it.
BTW, according to MSP tests, my '89 Gran Fury, with just a 318-4bbl and 2.94:1 rear-end, and aerodynamics that are probably even more brick-like than a '69 Polara, would still hit around 125 mph. So considering how much more power a '69 Polara 440 would have, not to mention gearing that probably helped it breathe a bit better, is an extra 22 mph really that far out of reach?
But yeah, point well taken. Even if it COULD do 147 mph, I sure wouldn't want to do it!
The word was, 135 MPH was no problem at all...
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
These 60s cars were WAY overpowered for their suspension brakes and steering. That's why it took Ford a gazillion dollars to win Lemans by building a British/American hybrid. No Corvette was going to do it, nor was any production American car going to win European races with the technology under the body.
I really don't think those big body cars with all that horsepower had any trouble hitting 130.. but, I'm sure the aerodynamics were like hitting a brick wall shortly after that..
My '84 911 had an estimated top end of 140 MPH.. that was from the owner's manual...
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
My Gran Fury, with it's "certified" police speedometer, I discovered, was off a bit. When it read 91 mph it was actually doing 100, according the the speedometer calibration place I took it to after getting a ticket. Now out on the highway, I had gotten that speedo up to 100, which would signify at least 110 mph. And it felt like it was barely loafing at that point.
However, with lowering, bellypans, the right tires and suspension and considerable work to the engine's breathing capacity, I'm sure you could get a 60s American locomotive to go pretty fast.
The greatest fear I always had with the older Porsches, like my '69, was "lift" at high speeds, since there is no engine up there. The 928 with the V-8 up front seems rock solid but I'm not going to test its potential top speed, which is supposedly considerable. It's got that stupid 85 mph speedometer, and I've bent the needle on that peg already.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
120 mph, then would be about 4400 rpm. Peak hp on a 318 usually comes around 4800 rpm, IIRC, and redline is around 5500, so as long as long as it can suck in enough air (and a 4-bbl is probably overkill on most 318's, shouldn't it be more or less fine right up until it hits its peak hp?
And again, the 125 mph figure I got is from the Michigan State police, not a couple guys sitting around drinking beers. Although I dunno if they do that during their tests or not! ;-)
As for recently spotted obscure cars, I saw a 1960s Volvo 1800 S sports coupe and an odd minivan-looking vehicle called a Mitsubishi Expo.
RE: Your 318---the pedal travel isn't an indication that the engine "has more to give". You could mash the pedal another 6 inches and get nothing for it. If an engine can't rev and can't breathe it's not really going anywhere after 4400 rpms. Besides, those old iron pushrods dont' like to be run at high rpms for extended periods of time. There's a lot of piston weight at the end of those connecting rods, you have to consider that.
On another note, I saw a rare car in my neighborhood today- a '90 Corvette ZR-1. Looked immaculate for its age too. I wonder what they are worth today in prime condition.
And another AMC dealership sign in Elko, NV.
a black and silver 1955 Oldsmobile 88 sedan
a black 1965 Chevrolet El Camino with Cragar wheels.
Saw a slammed Open Kadett station wagon today! Also, anyone remember a Honda called a Wagovan or something like that?
Did an appraisal on a kind of interesting car---a 1955 Cadillac Series 62 two-door hardtop, one original lady owner, 75,500 fully documented miles. Ran great, looked like it had been repainted a long time ago, but well done re-spray (took me a while to discover this), otherwise it looked just like GM built it. Trunk mat a little ratty, no dents no dings at all, chrome mostly very good but some tarnishing here and there that could probably be buffed out. Ran really well, kind of a light film of dirt on the engine and road dirt under the chassis, like a used car maybe 6-7 years old.
I pegged it as $14,995 asking and take anything from $10K-12.5K Too bad it wasn't a convertible---I would have had to beat people away from the door.
She's 80 something, just stopped driving this summer.
If it wasn't a continent away I'd consider it myself.
I hope everyone had a great Christmas like I did.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I think $12,5K is what we'd call "good for the buyer, good for the seller" for a #3 automobile of this type. You might get $15K if you waited long enough, but more than that and you run into VERY pretty '55s with no needs.
A concours Pebble Beach '55 coupe might be worth $25K so do the math.
Of course you'd have to be nuts to buy an early 911/901 without haviing a pro go over it thoroughly.
This OTOH is nice but ridiculously expensive (note low mileage)
http://hemmings.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/classifieds.cardetail/id- - /2171164
This looks sportier than most early Falcons because of the colr scheme but is otherwise representitive of the breed.
http://hemmings.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/classifieds.cardetail/id- /2166530
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
On another note... how the heck do you have a car like that BMW and only drive it 13K in 20 years? I've had "third" cars before, and still manage to put at least 3K/yr on them...
For the asking prices, I'd take the Falcon..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Nice BMW, though not $40k nice, even for an M-spec. 635s were nice cars at the time, but with only 13k, it probably needs most or all of the stuff a car that's basically sat around for twenty years would need. The miles alone don't justify a 100% premium over the next nicest example I've seen!!
What was it about the 53 that made that year so appealing? I think they're handsome cars, but I think they just about perfected the look for '55 and '56.
I remember on "CHiPs", they had a recurring character, this little old lady who drove a '55-56 Caddy coupe. In one episode she got it facing the wrong way on an exit ramp somehow, and either Ponch or Jon had to turn it around for her.
I agree Andre, the '53 IMO was a styling preview of '55-'56. Possibly the collectors put a premium on the '53s for a couple of reasons:
1)IIRC it was the 100th anniversary of Cadillac and the year the first Eldo was introduced.
2)It could be argued that the '53 was the last Caddy to be completely distinguished from the rest of the GM lines by it's styling and features. By '55 and '56 even Chevy had deluxe features as well as tailfins, wraparound windshields and high compression v8s, none of which it had in '53.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
The 911T is the smallest and weakest HP engine of the T, E and S series, and therefore the least desirable. Seats are collapsed, car is dented. I'd say the car as shown is worth about $2,500 at best. If it weren't for the sun roof, it might even be a parts car. Figure $10K engine, 1K seats, $2K miscellaneous, $3K body work.
The owner of the 635CSi is out of his mind and will own that car until he's in his grave. Look, it goes like this. If the car is worth $10,000 with 80,000 miles on it, it isn't worth 4 times as much with low miles. Also he screwed it up by blacking out the chrome. I'd say $15K-18K if he found one of those 3 buyers in America who really needs the world's nicest 635CSi coupe.
63 Falcon---fair enough.
I saw a cream puff Cimarron last week.
Kyle
I almost bought one two years ago but after half an hour or so I realized I was still in an early 90s Japanese car. Also they didn't make a stick shift. They had problems with overheating transmissions but by now most people have cured that. But you can get a fair price for a nice one.
I kind of liked the SVX, with its Delorean front windows and all.
300D way more betta' or get yerself a gas fintail and you can at least hear yourself think when you drive.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93