Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Yeah, but I want to say that the grille mesh was vertical?
I figure it takes a lot of work to adapt SL panels to a Lebaron of all things.
This should have been a sequel to the TC by Maserati.
It should be called "SL by Chrysler and Bob's Autobody"
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
On the way back to work, I saw circa 1969 Ford fastback. I'm guessing it was a Torino. Could you get just the Fairlane in a fastback? It was all black, and really sharp looking. It was also stalled out at a traffic light! But he did get it running.
Oh, I also spotted a Pontiac G8, in that coppery color. I think this might be the first time I've actually seen one out on the street.
I also saw what was apparently a stock daily driver '63 Chevy Impala coupe w the faux-convertible H/T. The maroon paint badly needed to be compounded but there were no dents or rust. Chromed Torq-Thrust style "mags" completed the period look though they looked almost tiny (14"?) on such a big car.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
husband and lawyer conference, we reluctantly agree, however we are asking xyz in return. :P
A what?
Fixer upper
Odd little gnat
Should be very reliable...
Unfortunate engine choice
Stepside
This guy has to be related to lemko
Nice lowline W111
Another one of these got preserved
Fuelie Part II
also, a local car dealer with a small museum, the same one with the turbo trans am i posted about last week, brought an orange superbird, a sassy green challenger hemi(1 of 12), a black AAR cuda, a gold GTO judge, a GT 350 shelby, and a 65 silver corvette coupe.
252ci translates to 4.3 litres, which means 3/4 of a gm 350?
252ci translates to 4.3 litres, which means 3/4 of a gm 350?
Actually the 252 was a 4.1 V-6. Similarly, the Caddy 249 was a 4.1 V-8. The 4.3 V-6 that was 3/4 of a 350 was actually a 262.
The 262 was/is a good engine, although I guess they're getting a bit long in the tooth by now. However, the 252 was a mess. It was a bored-out version of the 231 V-6, and from what I've heard it was very fragile. Supposedly it really wasn't meant to be bored out that much! The 252 was only produced from mid-1980 through 1984, and thankfully not too many of them ended up in the big Electras, Ninety-Eights, etc. It was fitted with a 4-bbl carburetor and had 125 hp. It has the same hp, but more torque, than the Caddy 249 V-8 of the time. So I wonder in cases where you could get the V-6 as a credit option, if it might have actually been the better performer?
It's a shame that Electra's equipped with that engine. Other than that it's a nice car...nice color, too. I guess if you take care of it though, and don't abuse the engine, it might be good for many more years of leisurely cruising?
There are a bunch of old "Motor's" repair manuals (big blue books) in my grandmother's garage that cover from something like 1953-1976. When I was a little kid, I used to like looking at the pictures of them. They had pictures of all the grilles of the cars, for identification. Sometimes they'd show just the grille and bumper, sometimes they'd show the headlights and more of the front-end of the car. With the '58 Pontiac, they just showed the grille.
I remember thinking what a beautiful piece that '58 Pontiac grille was. It seemed kinda sleek and modern, and just very pleasing to the eye. I imagined that such a beautiful grille would have an equally beautiful car built around it.
Boy was I disappointed when I finally was what a '58 Pontiac looks like!
I guess it made the car appear longer from certain angles though, since the jutting headlights lengthened the fenders. I imagine these cars were easily damaged, since the headlights and taillights jutted out beyond the bumpers.
I still think it's more attractive than a Buick or Olds from that era, but among GM cars I think Chevy and Cadillac were by far the nicest looking. That color scheme, the two tone blue, really looks good on the car.
Oh, as for 1958 cars and style, Shifty, you and I are going to disagree on the Mopars, so I won't even go there. :P However, I can think of one United States car that wasn't over the top in 1958. The Studebaker Scotsman. It's sort of a boring, hum-drum ilttle car, but inoffensive enough IMO. The pricier Studebakers got big fins and pretentious grilles that looked like they were swiped from a '57 Chrysler, and they also had these hideous pods tacked on up front, in order to fit quad headlights into single-headlight fenders. The Scotsman looks like it's just a carry over from 1957, though. The front-end makes me think just a bit of a '57 T-bird.
This is the only '58 Detroiter I can think of, not much chrome or contorted shapes.... it's got big fins but by '58 even the high dollar Euros were sporting fins.>
It's worth noting that the '58 300D was nearly identical to the '57 300C, which many consider the best-styled of the Chrysler letter cars. I myself prefer the '56 300B but then I think '56 was generally Detroit's finest year for style.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
You mean to say a 58 "Packard" isn't a tasteful car? :P
Or maybe a 58 Lincoln or Olds :P
I'm not a big fan of useless appendages on cars I guess. I like purposeful design, which is why 1958 is a particular problem for me. Air scoops should scoop air, landau bars should lower roofs, knock off hub cabs should knock-off, blah blah.
Well, the fins on the Chryslers and DeSotos (not sure about the Dodges and Plymouths) did help give the cars stability at higher speeds. :P I heard you had to get up to about 80-90 mph to really see any benefit, though.
Also, if you want a clean, simple, unadorned 1958 car, Chrysler would have been more than happy to sell you a monotone car with a minimum of chrome. Something like a single-tone '58 Firedome or Saratoga was very clean and unadorned...almost TOO clean for 1958!
Chrysler really was the master of the tailfin back then, though. Especially with the DeSotos and Chryslers, they actually integrated them into the design, rather than just tack them on. Oh, and as for benefits, well they aided in parallel parking or backing into a tight spot, letting you see where the car ended! And some designers took advantage of the fins, and put the taillights higher up, for better visibility.
And from a visual standpoint, when done right, they do give the car a more aggressive stance, making it appear low in the front, simply by adding more height to the back. It's not such a far fetch from modern cars, which have low front-ends, beltlines that kick up towards the rear, and tall rear decks.
Probably the only stability fins provide is the extra weight on the rear wheels.
The cars having some following will be encouragement enough to keep up on mine, too.
I saw one of these an hour ago (fakey-doo, Shelby, whatever - it was rumbling nicely). It's about 38°F out and I think the guy was having fun, but it was hard to see his face to tell. He was decked out in a wool cap and an Isadora Duncan scarf.
Some of the 30s cars had these "naive aerodynamics". They were styled to look like they could beat the wind, but in fact had all kinds of headlight pods and trumpet horns and front frame irons to slow the car way down.
I think a lot of that even holds true today...a lot of cars might look sleek, but then something minor like the shape of the side mirror ends up throwing it off. Anyway, some sleek looking shapes actually aren't, while some brick-like shapes are sleeker than you might think. These days though, I think most cars fall between 0.30 and 0.35, although some of them are down to 0.25.
Wikiepedia mentions that the 1935 Tatra T77 is 0.212! I wonder what the Chrysler Airflow's CD was? The car actually was wind-tunnel tested, so it actually was aerodynamic for the time. Probably why it was so ugly, because it followed natural law moreso than a stylist's eye! I haven't been able to dig up any numbers for it though.
I've heard that the horizontal fins on a '59 Impala could make it do weird things at high speeds in the right wind conditions, but I don't think they contributed to any sort of slick aerodynamics.
According to an article I read, they ran a '59 Impala thru a wind tunnel to see how much lift it developed at the rear and found out that the lift-drag numbers were similar to other cars of the same size and weight from that era.
Another urban legend bites the dust.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Of all the things to preserve
"Limo"
Not pretty
Racy
"Super"
Motorhome
License plate says it all
Amusing claims there, Pinocchio
Wagon
Bordello on wheels
Ambitious project
Not so elegant
Good luck with that price
Nice fintail, and its even my color
I can see Buford T. Justice in this
Unusual
You can still buy a new Olds
"748 original miles. Driven 50-80 miles per year for the last 19 years."
LOL! Musta been poor at math as a child!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------
RE: 1980 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham D’Elegance (de Concours Cote D'Azur Parisienne??)
Oh, Cadillac, thanks for the laughs....
RE:1958 CHRYSLER GHIA. -- now write this down. Never give a design assignment for a real car to a maker of toy automobiles.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
RE: 76 Dodge Charger -- I see he has it chained off to keep the crowds at bay. Wise move.
That Ghia is indeed ugly, externally, but the interior is nice.
The '78 Fiat Brava was feisty and fun to drive, rode well, and was very roomy, especially for a RWD compact. However, it was much better suited to European driving and maintenance habits than to the American ones, so it didn't hold up well here.
I'd worry about the engine, though. "V-6" and "Quadrajet" make me think it's the Buick 4.1 V-6, which wasn't known for long life. The 3.8 back then was bad enough, but boring it out to make the 4.1 only made it worse. I've heard it was pretty torquey, though, and the 125 hp it put out was approaching some V-8's of that time.
That must have been a really sorry time to have to buy a car. I think the only engine choices on the LeMans that year were the Buick 231 V-6, Buick 252 V-6, Pontiac 265 V-8, and the Olds Diesel. My old car book also lists the 301 V-8, but only as an offering for the wagon.
That 1980 Fleetwood is gorgeous in that color scheme. It's still a pimpy car, but I think that dark blue really suits it. Just imagine if it was red!
My great-grandparents had a Whippet back in the day. My grandmother remembers it from her childhood. It was underpowered, and the joke at the time was when you came to a steep hill you had to get out and whip it!
Checker Ghia: the Fiat inspired styling really hides the mass of this car.
Fiat Super Bravas will always bring out good memories (unless I own one). When I was 4 or 5 years old in Poland my dad's freind bought one and imported it. One day he pulled up to our house. I thought it was the sportiest looking sedan at the time, and when he showed us how the power windows work I thought it was the coolest thing in the world! :surprise:
The Buick motorhome looks like it came from Cuba.
Mozelle Caddy: cost $500k to build. Yeah, I think a luxury mansion back in 1974 cost that much to build.
1980 Fleetwood: I like the color combo on it as well, and the huge lazy boy style seats. However I prefer the slopy roofline of the 77 Fleetwoods, along with their shorter grille and headlights for some reason. Also hard to believe this style lasted till early 90s.
76 Charger Daytona: All his other stuff is overpriced as well inclduing the Rams. I don't think even Andre would drop $40k on that ride if he wanted to, would you Andre?
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Seems Mr. Welk was loyal to Dodge even after they ceased being a sponsor. One interesting image was a picture of the band leader with a new 1977 Royal Monaco
Oh, that poor 1958 Chrysler! Looks like they grafted the front end of a 1972 Gran Torino on it:
I too like the earlier version of the downsized Fleetwood more...the one with the funky non-parallel B-pillar, and I want to say the earlier versions had better engines too.
Good comparison on that Torino.
Those Charger Daytona/SEs and Cordobas really don't do much for me, one way or another. Now the '78 Magnum is a different story...one of those can get me hot and bothered! But still, not to the tune of $40K!
Cruising happily along.
Memorable Quote:
"A bad XJS will rip at your wallet the way an actual Jaguar tears flesh from a gazelle
In pretty good shape..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
But so beautiful. Many's the man who has willingly paid to be around such beauty, even while he knew the slut was robbing him blind. Sometimes it's worth the cost.
But my main gripe about them has to do with Jaguar's abandonment of its LeMans heritage, and in no longer making affordable sports cars for the middle classes.
Turning to building these incompetent luxo-barges was their doom IMO.
To give you perspective, consider that "quality control" by Ford was considered a major improvement.
At least we might presume that the cruel mistress would do SOMETHING well. :P