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

andre1969

I found this '67 Catalina 2+2 convertible that looked tempting, until I saw that non-original looking ribbed vinyl interior.

Also, I thought the 2+2 came standard with a 428? This one just has a 400.

texases

"a 65 Riviera gliding through traffic like a big shark"

Good description! Reminds me of a 1970 or so article comparing US and European styling of the time - they used a running tiger to describe US styling, and a fat man on a donkey for the European image. Overstated, but there was some truth to it at the time...

Mr_Shiftright

Bidders do not seem too impressed with the "PROV-EE-NONCE" of this '67 Catalina. Pretty stiff price for a fairly homely automobile. My theory? The bigger the car, the less valuable the 4-speed manual transmission. If this were a GTO bidders would be all over it and punch it through the roof.

imidazol97

I notice they call the price "investment pricing." What is that?

Also I noticed andre said the 2+2 came with 428. That's what I found on the first website I checked. It has a 400. How did a 2+2 end up with a 400. Or is it a Cataline with 2_2 markings put on it?

Mr_Shiftright

Anytime I see "investment" in a used car ad, I just chuckle.

It's a car that demands very close scrutiny as a "real" 2+2 is worth considerably more than a fake one. Given the shovelfuls of BS from the dealer, and the fact that a politician owned it, one can only advise a cheerful skepticism.

andre1969

Y'know, I'm thinking now that the car IS just a Catalina, and not a 2+2. I think I just happened to see it, saw it had the console, and immediately thought it was a 2+2. Doesn't actually SAY 2+2 anywhere in the ad, or on the car that I can see, so I think that was my goof. So that engine is probably just a plain 400-4bbl, which should have around 325-330 hp. Should still be a fun car with the 4-on-the-floor, but it still ain't no 428!

Also, while I think the car looks great with them, I don't think Pontiac started offering the Rally 2 on big cars until 1968, or possibly even 1969. So it's probably technically incorrect in that regard. Although I have to confess I bought a set of those rims at the Fall Carlisle swap meet last year, and as soon as I have the money I'm going to get new tires and then put them on my car. Beats the heck out of the stupid little 215/75/R14 tires that are on there now! And the hubcaps that the car keeps throwing. The last time it lost one, it ended up in a poison ivy patch. And naturally, I'm highly allergic. :mad:

Oh, and one more comment about that eBay Catalina...that eBay "Discount" of $3870 is more than what I paid for mine in the first place!! :P

lemko

...silver and maroon 1975 Chevrolet Caprice Classic 4-door hardtop behind a former synagogue on Roosevelt Blvd. and Large Street in NE Philly.

The current edition of "Collectible Automobile" has articles on the 1969-73 full-size Dodges and the downsized B and C body GM cars of 1977.

fintail

Funny that the downsizers are now in a special interest publication. Even I can remember when they were still in production!

Regarding that shark Riviera discussion, that's very true regarding American vs Euro design in the 60s. American designs were very attractive in an aggressive way, while most Euro cars were pretty old looking and often a little dumpy. I don't think a fintail is as bad as most...maybe a minnow compared to an American shark or barracuda.

Mr_Shiftright

American design was very "vital" in the 50s and 60s, even if some of it was great and some was ugly---it had life and strong expression. This of course all went to hell in the mid 70s.

The 1930s was also a period of great energy for American stylists, then with some exceptions another "dry period" 1940-1954.

I guess it just goes in cycles.

andre1969

Funny that the downsizers are now in a special interest publication. Even I can remember when they were still in production!

Yeah, it's amazing how fast the time goes by. I guess I'm stuck in a time warp because I still think of a 30 year old car as having tailfins, rather than being the frontrunners of domestic downsizing.

Cars just don't show their age like they used to, though. Back in the day, even if a car was well kept so it didn't rust and still looked nice and shiny, the style would just become dated after a few years. In the 70's especially, for example, when cars started going to rectangular headlights, I thought that made the models with round headlights look dated almost immediately. And once cars started becoming more crisp and angular, such as GM's downsized cars, it made the earlier, rounded styles look old.

If we had never had an oil embargo, and if the gov't had never stepped in with the EPA and CAFE requirements, I wonder what the next wave of full-sized cars would have been like? Almost since the dawn of automotive history, the cars kept getting bigger with every redesign, but I'm sure a limit would have been hit eventually. And maybe we were hitting it by the early 70's. And in many cases, I think the only reason a lot of 70's cars were bigger than their late 60's counterparts was because of those jutting 5 mph bumpers. I saw some specs on a '76 Bonneville that listed it at something like 226.7" overall. My old '69 Bonneville was 225". However, the '76 had massive, protruding bumpers both front and rear, whereas my '69 had bumpers that were integrated into the design. So if you didn't count the bumpers, I guess my '69 might have actually had a bigger body!

Similarly, I don't think the '74-78 Mopars were any larger than their '69-73 predecessors. Not sure about the Fords, though. I think the '73-78 Ford LTD was "only" 220 inches long. While not exactly dainty, that's not huge for a pre-downsized big car.

I'm guessing that the cars would have been redesigned to a more sensible size eventually, but the oil embargos and the gov't sure hastened things along.

fintail

I find 30s cars to be very interesting. It was hit and miss just like the 50s and 60s, but there was a quantum leap in design between 1930 and 1940, possibly the most of any decade. It's also of interest to me how European styling had its own course up until maybe the late 70s, and from then on it seems to determine the path of most styling.

fintail

Cars became dated much faster then indeed, even if it didn't fall apart as fast as most. A lot of 8-10 year old cars don't look ancient today, and many hold up very well with only factory recommended maintenance. 30 years ago, this was not the case.

I think those early 70s styles were about as large as they could reasonably get.

texases

"A lot of 8-10 year old cars don't look ancient today"

I'm thinking of that right now with my '96 ES -



It's not obvious to me that its styling has aged, but that may just be my own wishful thinking....I particularly like the front end/headlights...

imidazol97

That era of cars is a very pleasant design. The newer Camries, the previous and the current design, both are not pleasing. The 1998 Camry had the cleanest style of all the group.

andre1969

I remember when that style ES came out, I thought it was gorgeous. Even today, I think it's a good looking car. So was the style that came after, which ran from 1998-2002, I believe? I thought they mucked it up when the ES330 came out, though. It just started looking fat and bufoonish. They cleaned it up with the ES350, but I still think those old ES300's were much better looking.

I think part of it is just that in my mind, at least, features such as a low beltline, generous glass area, a rakish windshield, and a low, sloping front-end will always look modern. And generally, cars that are longer, lower, and a bit narrower tend to just look more modern than stubby, chunky, upright cars.

fintail

I agree, those and the more angular version that followed (97-01 or 02 I think) were very smooth homogenous designs. Some cars age very gracefully, I think a lot of MB and some other Euros age well too.

texases

"I think a lot of MB and some other Euros age well too. "

Yes, I even think some of the older S class have done better than some of the newer ones. That article I mentioned was about the everyday cars, not the special ones.

fintail

The W126 S-class aged very well, to the point when it was 10 years old Toyota gave it flush glazing and called it a Lexus LS

The W140 doesn't look too bad either (and spawned another Lexus) ...the coupes are kinda weird though. The W220 is pretty forgettable, but the C215 still looks OK. The W124 E-class still looked goot at 10 years old, and there are many cues of a 1996 E-class that can be seen in a 2008 model. That helps a car age gracefully.

The SLs age well too, usually because their platforms have insanely long lifespans.

jrosasmc

You won't believe what I saw today: A late '80s Saab 9000 driving around Arlington, VA. Yes, it was actually moving under its own power. It was a 9000 S 5-speed, not a high-end Turbo. Here's the thing- this car was in perfect, immaculate condition, I swear. When was the last time you saw a mint-condition 9000?

Fintail, any older Saabs still running out where you live?

parm

Well, this past Labor Day weekend, I was standing right next to this '67 2+2. It went across the block at the Kruse auction at Auburn, IN. This dealer in St. Louis bought it. I saw the Speaker of House himself drive it into the line. I knew this car was going to be in the auction and wanted to check it out because of its 4-speed. In short, while this car looked like it would be a fun weekend cruiser, I wasn't "ga-ga" over it. I'm not enough of an expert on this particular model to know the subtleties and thus can't comment as to whether it is a "real" 2+2. But, I did notice that some of the trim/script pieces were missing. The thick wood steering wheel is a 3rd party accessory, etc. Just some niggling things that held it back in my mind. Surprisingly, the car sold for not that much less than what the dealer is asking for it. You can check the Kruse website to see the actual purchase price, but I think it sold for around $22,500 - more than I thought it should.

Any-who, that was my "brush" with greatness.

Mr_Shiftright

The 1930s was a Golden Age...we saw the first "turret top" cars, that is, where the steel roof was actually one large stamping and didn't have a wood frame in the center; the first mass produced V8 engine; the first "styling departments"; first durable paints; supercharging became more common, we lost running boards and we lost the headlights as they melted into the fenders and the trunk melted into the passenger compartment. The 1930s produced the first truly "modern cars" as we know them today. We even saw automatic transmissions and AC just before the war broke out. Some 30s cars are true works of art.

andre1969

I'm not enough of an expert on this particular model to know the subtleties and thus can't comment as to whether it is a "real" 2+2. But, I did notice that some of the trim/script pieces were missing. The thick wood steering wheel is a 3rd party accessory, etc. Just some niggling things that held it back in my mind.

Admittedly I'm not much of an expert on the 2+2 either, so I did a little digging online. Looks like the standard 2+2 engine was a 428-4bbl with 360 hp for 1967. As for badging, it should have a "2+2" badge on the fender ahead of the wheels. It should also have fake vents on the fenders, fairly high up, just ahead of the doors. According to Wikipedia, a 2+2 would also have full gauges, and by that I don't think they mean the aftermarket-looking things stuck on under the dash!

I'm not sure where they would have stuck the extra gauges on a '67 2+2. The earlier models had extra round gauges in the center of the dash, that were angled to the driver. So on this particular model, I guess they could have put them in that center section above the radio, where it has the "Pontiac" badge, between the clock and the glovebox. My '67 has air conditioning, so it has a duct in that spot. I dunno where they'd put the extra gauges on a car with a/c.

That '67 on eBay also looks like it just has the standard 120 mph strip speedometer. I don't know for sure, but I'd guess a 2+2's speedo would go higher.

If the car was a real 2+2, I could see it losing some of the trim pieces during its long life, possibly during a re-paint. And I guess it's conceivable that the 428 blew up and a 400 was put in? Or maybe it really is a 428 and the seller doesn't know that? AFAIK, Pontiac never really offered a "true" big-block, but more of a medium block, and as a result everything from the 326 on up to the 455 looks the same externally. I think even the later 301 and 265 look about the same, too. But I'd imagine that the dash could be a giveaway. Unless Wikipedia was wrong, and full gauges (oil and temp...they came standard with an amp gauge) were an option? I'd be curious to know this car's story.

bryan

I too live in Arlington, VA--is the car you saw forest green 4-door? If so, I may know the owner--absolute obsessive maniac about car care. If it's the same guy, he had a BMW model 2002??? (mid-70s/early 80s?); and it looked showroom new everytime I saw it parked in the garage at work. His car always looked just washed/waxed, even in the winter!

fintail

I can think of quite a few 30s cars I wouldn't mind having...seeing that it is 70-75 years ago, that's saying something.

Mr_Shiftright

I want this....badly...

andys120

Oh yeah, ' 34 Fords have always been favorites of mine. :shades:

fintail

I think a lot of us would treasure that car. I also like the 'victoria' bodystyle offered through 34 IIRC. Speaking of Fords, I have always liked the 1937s as well, for their art moderne front end. And even the 32s, with their pioneering V8, have a rounded evolution to the model A that isn't displeasing.

I like these as a woody too

Mr_Shiftright

Packard woodies were for the Connecticut suburban tennis set; Fords were (at that time anyway) for the outdoorsman and tradesman. I find the Fords more honest as commercial knock-arounds, and less formal. Later on, in the late 40s, they all became "Holly-Woodies" and were no longer bargains compared to regular sedans.

Woodies were made by Murray and later in the Ford Iron Mountain plant in Michigan. Fords used birch and maple, and later went to laminate because the old growth trees were becoming scarce after WWII. The panels are installed and removed all in one piece for each door/tailgate, not individual pieces. In the 40s Fords, if you want to take the wood off the front doors, you have to literally bust the doors apart due to interference and bracketing from the roll up windows.

Later woodies used red gumwood and mahogany veneers, which I find very handsome.

Then of course came the 50s and plastic fako wood grain....blech!

fintail

I guess I am an elitist then :P ...but I like 30s woodies and I like Packards, as I see the marque as kind of an American Mercedes (at least up until WW2), and I find the styling to almost always be elegant and sound, until the bathtubs anyway. I also wouldn't mind a 37 Ford, with the sleek front end, but the wood was still traditional.

Woodies must have been somewhat of a bargain indeed given all the work involved in making one, even at period wages.

Here's a nice 37...and I even like the color

andys120

Sweet, like the '37s too.

andys120

I'm partial to the postwar Packard woodies>

jrosasmc

Bryan, yes that Saab 9000 is forest green. It has Florida plates on it- is it the car that you mention? This morning I saw it while waiting for a bus at the King St metro station in Alexandria. If I see again tomorrow morning I'm going to ask the guy about it.

oregonboy

"manual BMWs"

decent big-bumper 2002 runner

but I would rather have this (despite Shifty's disdain)

Here's a cheap E36 M series. Have to wonder how messed up it is.

I like this despite the odd-colored leather. You KNOW the dealer will cut the price to the bone on a manual 5-series.

Another "hard-to-sell" manual 5-series w/o sunroof. This will gather dust on the lot, but I LIKE it.
:shades:

james

kyfdx

I like the 2002 and the 318ti.. (why consign it? Some person could have scored a good deal around $6K, but now that dealer is going to get a cut..)

The M3 is likely a nightmare...

That leather!!?? I don't even know what to call that color.. :surprise:

The last one is pretty nice... stick and sport package.. but, I didn't even know you could get a 5-series that late in the model run without a sunroof..

oregonboy

That leather!!?? I don't even know what to call that color..

"Goofy Grape" :P

andre1969

A few of the offices here at work had some leather furniture in a similar shade of purple. I think, by itself, it's not a horrible color. But it doesn't belong in a silver car with an otherwise black interior.

kyfdx

Good answer!

But, now that I think about it... It might be aubergine..

andys120

Yep, it's Aubergine and, personally, I like it!

I doubt manual Fivers are slow sellers, my local Indie who sells all over New England stocks mostly manuals and he's been successful for over a decade.

bryan

The guy I'm referring to lives in VA and the car is also tagged with VA plates. So, now there are two of these immaculate late '80s Saabs in Northern VA. Amazing!

fintail

The woody and the convertible were the only bathtub Packards that looked decent. I never cared for the sedans. I really like the convertible (I think a 49) as seen as Doc Brown's 1955 car in Back to the Future, when I first saw that as a kid, that car stuck in my head.

Mr_Shiftright

I don't think the wood on that Packard is structural anymore, it's just bolted on. It's a curiosity but I wouldn't call it a good looking car personally. And straight 8 flatheads are more about torque The Ford V-8s are actually fun to drive. However, you could get that Packard with overdrive manual trans, power windows and AC. So that's nice for highway cruising.

BMW 5 series manual trans -- not a pleasant car to drive with a stick IMO. Very big, heavy car with (how irritating) that usual lack of room. Why do you have to buy a 7 series to get comfortable in a BMW? This is no sports car---put it in D and go. :P

318s -- I like the later ones okay. Early 318s had a lot of rough edges IMO.

andys120

BMW 5 series manual trans -- not a pleasant car to drive with a stick IMO. Very big, heavy car with (how irritating) that usual lack of room.

Which generation of Fivers are you referring to? I'm not aware of any that feel big or heavy. As for comfort, I think my E39 is pretty cushy.. up front.

imidazol97

What kind of wood did they use for the woodies? How was it finished to keep it from rotting and molding?

I had looked on Wiki but didn't find anything about the woods.

andys120

Good question, I seem to recall something about Ash being the preferred wood for Automobile exteriors.

Mr_Shiftright

I was thinking of a 1999 E39 I drove recently. It drove very well indeed but it felt large and sedate to me, and yet rather claustrophobic inside. My usual BMW gripe--not enough leg room. I think I need a car I can fling around more, bang around more, with better MPG. It doesn't fit my driving style, is my point.

WOODS: Speaking for the Fords, they used birch and maple. Chrysler used ash and mahogany or so I read. I have more hands-on experience with Ford woodies. Ford had a whole forest of their own for this purpose at Iron Mountain in Michigan. Murray coachbuilders, who used to make the earliest Ford woodies for Ford, used maple and birch from Kentucky.

lemko

...I think it was up to the owner of the vehicle to go through a ritual every spring varnishing the wood and sealing the joints to keep the wood from rotting. A lot of people didn't want the hassle and, as a result, many woodies just deteriorated. A neglected woody will soon collapse in on itself.

Mr_Shiftright

A little booklet on care and varnishing came with most woodies. Garaging the car was also recommended, but this of course was before the owner got married and had to share the garage :P

The woodwork was done on special jigs on huge machines and then hand-fitted and spray varnished.

Duplicating the wood is a challenge even for the skilled cabinet maker, inasmuch as one needs to have mastered not only the art of complex joinery, but also compound curves and in some cars, steam-bending and laminating. (those barrel-backed sedans or convertibles).

it's really a job for an expert boat-builder, not a carpenter. Even a humble woody like a Morris Minor is a challenge.

oregonboy

BMW 5 series manual trans -- not a pleasant car to drive with a stick IMO. Very big, heavy car with (how irritating) that usual lack of room. Why do you have to buy a 7 series to get comfortable in a BMW? This is no sports car---put it in D and go.

I find it hard to believe that driving experience of a car with ANY sporting pretentions at all, would not be enhanced by a manual transmission. But hey, what do I know?... I drive a 5-spd pickup truck. :P

james

Mr_Shiftright

Well it's kinda off topic but a car's weight, engine behavior and torque characteristics are a factor---added to the expense a manufacturer endures to cater to the 2-5% who wouldn't mind a stickshift in what is essentially a GT sedan. Besides a Toyota Yaris has more legroom than a BMW 5 series, and I'm a big guy.

SPOTTED--- an old Toyota Corona "1900". That would be what....a late 60s model sedan. Nice shape, with a big red tow-away sticker on the windshield.

andre1969

Besides a Toyota Yaris has more legroom than a BMW 5 series, and I'm a big guy.

Where, in the back seat? :confuse: I've been able to fit fine in just about every BMW 5-series in recent memory, in the front seat at least, with plenty of stretch-out room for my legs. In contrast, the Yaris is more like driving a bus or an old 50's pickup truck, where my legs are practically tucked up under me.

I always thought the Germans tended to build cars for bigger drivers, anyway, since Germans were traditionally big-boned? Heck, I remember even with a VW Golf I sat in recently, the legroom was incredible. The seat was low to the floor, and the footwell was kind of narrow, but there was so much room that I could sit with my legs almost straight-out.