Are you a current Michigan-based car shopper? A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/2 for details.

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

135363840411306

Comments

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    How is the suspension on the 300D? Has it been rebuilt or maintained? That's always my biggest worry on high mileage MBs. If it has been maintained, the mechanicals don't worry me a lot, but a car with a tired suspension and worn steering system is as unpleasant as a car can get. I had most of the fintail's front end rebuilt, and the steering box and bushings overhauled, and was amazed at the difference. Maybe you should advertise the car elsewhere if you really want to sell it, and if it is that nice.

    If the DKW guy is ignoring specific mechanical and structural questions, I would be worried about him hiding something.

    I have been tempted to buy a car on ebay now and then. but as I have only one good parking spot, I stop. I don't want to keep a cool vintage car out in the rain all the time. The insurance on oldies can be really good. I pay about $2.50 a month for the fintail, even at my age.

    I got a free car from a friend of the family when I was 18...a semi-decent Datsun 510 wagon. It was a one owner car, and seemed to be in OK shape. But I never could get it to run right, so I sold it for $500. That probably made up for the windshield I replaced and the entire weekend it took me to install it.
  • jlawrence01jlawrence01 Member Posts: 1,757
    In 1999, I had two cars with over 120k miles in my driveway as I did not have a garage in Cleveland. As we both had long commutes (20+ miles), we decided to pick up a third car as a back-up. That means, when my wife's car wouldn't start, she would take mine and I would have a car to get to work.

    MISTAKE, MISTAKE, MISTAKE.

    It is expensive to own a third car. Even with two drivers (and three cars), you get no break on the insurance, and you have a lot of fixed costs like licenses, etc. And there is NO guarantee that #3 won't need as much repair as #1 and #2.

    We did that experiment for one year. At the end of the year, we sold #3 and used Enterprise RAC as our #3 car. If either car would not start, I had a standing order with the ERAC for a vehicle. I could get WHATEVER car he had available for $22 per day which was the rate he gave the shop where I had my cars worked on. Sometimes, I found myself crammed in a Ford Aspire while other times, I was hauling to work in an F-150. You can easily rent a car for 30+ days for the cost of having a third car!
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    As they say, YMMV, but our 3rd car has been a dream. You have a car to loan to guests, and we have lots of those. Plus, they can serve different purposes: I have a Forester for the rain and snow, and a Miata to open the top for sunny days. What one car could do both as nicely?

    Clutch went out on the Miata. If it were my only car, I'd have paid $400-600 for a new clutch, plus rental fees. Instead, I was able to take my time, do some research, and fix it for $10.74 (clutch slave cylinder rebuild kit). Paid for a whole year's insurance right there.

    My insurance is about $500 per year, plus $70 licensing. That $10.74 is a grand total for repairs over the 3+ years I've had it. :-)

    I alternate them, but neither car spends more than 3 days parked without use, unless we get a snow storm.

    -juice
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    fintail----here's one for you:

    http://www.craigslist.org/sby/car/20863133.html
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    That's a bargain, you could part it and easily double your money. Bumpers, glass, chrome, and radio are worth that much alone. Shame it's not a 220SE, I'd almost be tempted. But someone will rescue it.

    Here's a highline fintail on ebay in Germany. I'd call this one above average condition, but it doesn't look too special. Already approaching the NA high end for a 300SE in that condition, and in Germany it will go for more.

    http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2447399710&- amp;category=18303
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I doubt you could double your money out here--$1,800 in parts?--don't think so. Thing is, fintails are plentiful and cheap in California.

    There's another that looks even better than the first for $500 but it apparently doesn't run. Guy can't get rid of it sounds like. Call him up and offer him $100.

    http://www.craigslist.org/sby/car/20625557.html

    I could find you these all day long if you've got a flatbed truck and think you can get any money for them somewhere else. You could bring back 4 at a time! I even see them still in junkyards but somewhat picked over. Plenty of W123s in yards. I got a pair of yellow fog lights for $12. Be glad to forward all sightings if you can find a use for these cars.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    That's the beauty of the internet. You don't have to only sell locally. Fintails were pretty skilled at rusting, and lots of fintail enthusiasts live in damper climates. Good bumper sets, headlight bezels, highline chrome pieces etc sell for decent money. You'd also get several hundred for the body panels, interior, engine, etc. You'd profit. You won't be able to get it if you have a yard sale, but if you work at it, you could.

    The W110 fintails like that 230 always bring no money. They are pretty austere. The higher line cars....220S/SE have more demand, better trim.

    The only one I really want is a LWB W112 300SE, and it has to be a nice original at least as good as my 220SE. However, if you run across any old Becker radios, accessories like passenger side mirrors, headrests, center console covers/armrests, heated rear windshields for fintails...etc....I'd be interested.

    I am also looking for a set of chrome 15" flat face MB wheels which would have been stock in the late 80s, or a period aftermarket set like these:

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item- =2447504624&category=38662
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Unfortunately, all Becker radios are broken when I find them. They are pretty dismal excuses for a radio. But I know how to send them back to Becker for fixing if you need to know how to do that.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    My fintail has a Becker Europa TR...I like it. Very strong AM and competent enough FM. Becker is still around in NA as far as I know, lots of work servicing old radios I am sure.
  • jlawrence01jlawrence01 Member Posts: 1,757
    First, the way that the liability issues are in the US, I would never lend a car to ANYONE as I am not willing to take the risk in case they get into an accident.

    Second, if I am spending about $23 per day to get a car delivered from Enterprise, I can have a car in the shop 20-25 days before the 3rd car make sense. And I have only needed a rental for one day tn the past four years.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I'm afraid we'll have to face facts that any old German sedan with serious needs is definitely going to the wreckers, because they are simply getting too expensive to fix with no upside in the marketplace. I'm seeing more and more being recycled for this reason. I think those two fintails are going to heaven and will donate their organs. You can tell from the ads that the people have had zero luck selling them.

    Even the 280SLs, 350SLs and 450SLs are starting to be parted out if they have bad engines, because it now costs about $12,000 to rebuild one (just the engine) and a shabby SL (except a 300) isn't worth $12,000 anyway as a whole car.

    So I'd say the only sure candidates for restoration will be 50s and some 60s(not all) Mercedes coupes and certainly all convertibles. I notice some Pontons are being saved if they aren't too badly off to begin with.

    This follows the standard rule---the more common the car, the faster it disappears. Since sedans are made in larger numbers than coupes or converts, this is why this happens.

    American 4-doors are somewhat less prone to this rule of extinction because they are so cheap to fix up, being rather simple cars and often with a very strong aftermarket parts industry.

    So really restoration costs decides who stays and who goes.

    Best possible world for an old Benz sedan is to never have deteriorated...a "survivor" that never went downhill. These cars will be saved I think, as long as they are still running well and looking good.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    What kind of guests do you host? ;-)

    In my case, I'd have to rent a roadster on every sunny day. Or a 4x4 on every rainy/snowy day.

    Like I said, YMMV. We use all 3 cars regularly.

    -juice
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    You are right on your statements about MB sedans. But hey, it means more parts in the long run.

    Nice sedans are already just as rare as coupes and convertibles, if not moreso. And that will only increase as time goes on.

    My old car is a survivor, and it will stay that way. I have been tempted to restore parts of it, but I never go that far. Patina isn't a bad thing, and the costs would be crazy. I wonder how few of these cars will be left in 10 or 20 years. A 6cyl fintail is already an 'obscure' car, and it will just be more so. I have had mine for almost 10 years now. When I got it, I would get a look now and then, but not all the time. Now I get comments and turned heads all the time.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I like patina and I like obscure cars. Both things are their own rewards.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    And even better when they can be enjoyed cheaply and reliably

    I saw an old Audi 5000 wagon today. It was in awful shape, I swear it even had a bullet hole.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Didn't win the DKW auction. The guy pulled the car in the middle of the bidding.
    Oh well, I guess my career as a mosquito abatement officer will have to wait.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    Damn...what a shame. Oh well, maybe you can save your skills for a nice NSU or Borgward or Wartburg or something
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    time for the wrecker.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,015
    Packardbakers almost looked kinda like Chrysler's Forward Look gone hideously wrong! At a quick glance, the Packard version for '58 almost looks kinda DeSoto-ish, while the Stude version has a bit of '57 Chrylser in its smile. The rooflines are pure Mopar, while the fins are a poor facsimile thereof.

    Now the Eldo Brougham, that is sweet! And to think they actually had magnetic shotglasses in that car...now that took guts. Guess it was okay to drink and drive back then, eh? ;-)
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    It's actually 100% a Studebaker. There's not a Packard part on a 1958 Packard that I'm aware of.

    Magnetic shot glasses? I never knew that!
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    My coworker has a poop green Porsche 944? I don't know exactly which kind, but the really tiny targa top ones from the 70's that look like an old fashioned credit card machine.,
  • lancerfixerlancerfixer Member Posts: 1,284
    You mean a 914?
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    That window line on the Packard does kind of look like one of those DeSoto coupes c.57-58. But if you look at a Studebaker, you see where it is really from. The low grille/mouth and Hawk like front end must have seemed kinda sporty for the day, but the fins look tacked on and unfinished.

    Wasn't the inside of the glove box lid made to hold those magnetized glasses in the Eldo? That' a pretty cool car, and nice looking too. It has that exotic upmarket 50s look also seen in the big Facel Vega sedans, like this.

    image

    image

    Porsche 944 came out in 1983...so it would probably be a 914
  • magnetophonemagnetophone Member Posts: 605
    Yeah, a 914. I think
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    914 is a pretty neat little car, still quite ferocious in SCCA racing, and a great handling car. Needs more power but that can be done. While it does use a VW pancake engine from a 411, the transmission and front end are 100% Porsche. Most of these cars unfortunately have fallen into the hands of people who cannot afford to maintain them, and so are often "beaters". But a nice 2.0 liter version in good shape is a lot of car for $6,000 or so. Still a sports car bargain but prices are rising quickly. A "beater" is a $1,000 car all day long.

    The Packard Hawk was generally thought to be hideous when it was introduced and I don't think time has changed most people's opinions. Seeing it in real life is a bit of a shock.
  • stumack1stumack1 Member Posts: 56
    ...is an odd duck alright, but it has a degree of period "charm"...okay, maybe that's not the right word! I think it actually looks alright in the dark colour, most examples and the period artwork show it in a two-tone beige that does nothing for it. Saw both a Packard Hawk and a '58 Hardtop at the same show in Orillia, Ont. this summer...the first time I'd come across either one in person. No question the hardtop and the equivalent Stude were a take off on the '57 Chrysler and DeSoto.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Lucky for the '58 Hawk that most other cars in 1958 were equally garish and awkward. I suppose one could legitimately look upon the excesses of a certain era as charming, sure why not, but it's when you compare a car to the long chain of automotive history, and to the lovely cars that came before and after 1958, that cars like the '58 Packard fall down pretty hard.

    There is simply no excuse for a car to look that bad. The '57 Studebakers aren't too bad to look at, and even the boxy 60s models were okay. Somebody at Studebaker should have stopped this car from ever being built. It did neither Packard nor Studebaker any good whatsoever.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Brougham - that was funny in Donnie Brasco the way they pronounced that.

    -juice
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Yeah, GM was famous for bogus-classy vocabulary taken from 19th century horse carriages. Somehow a big-biceped dockworker in a Bro-Gam just doesn't work, or Big Joey the Vest in his Biarritz. Oh, lord.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    The Packard Hawk isn't all bad when you realize it isn't Packard at all. Just one last breath for a once grand marque. It's memorable, anyway. At least they didn't make a Packard Lark.

    When I look at what I know about 1958 cars, it seems that year was really garish. Chevy ditches the nice proportioning and classic details of the 55-57s for the short-lived 58 style. Olds and Buick get really big, fat, and busy. Lincoln gets huge and weird, much different from the cleaner 56-7 models. Cadillac gets even busier and more ostentatious, a sign of what will come in another year. Ford ditches the froggy headlights for quads and a faux hood scoop, and gets rid of the nicer 1957 fins for something that seems more Edsel-like, IMO. The T-Bird doubles in size (and sales too, I believe). Mopar might have had the cleanest lineup that year.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,015
    a beautiful bodystyle, but in the case of the Packard version, that elongated, tacked on front-end just doesn't work. Considering that the style first came out in 1953 (here's an example: http://www.msu.edu/~rottiert/1953hardtop.jpg) I think the Stude version, at least, was still handsome. Heck, they actually milked that design through 1964, and it still looked pretty good by then!

    Not too many other cars introduced in 1953 would have still looked good by 1964 standards! Stylewise, that was probably one of the biggest changes in automotive history. Not like today, where some 10-15 year old cars almost look more modern than the current models!
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Everything is retro now. First the New Beetle, then the PT Cruiser, the T-bird, now the SSR, and HHR and Nomad will be next.

    -juice
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    Yeah that Loewy Studebaker (Starliner?) was a classic design. Hard to believe that is 50 years old.

    I wonder if the new Nomad will be decent
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,015
    I don't think it was THAT bad, for the most part. To me, 1959 is the year that it all went to hell. If anything, some of the Mopars in '58 actually looked better than their '57 counterparts! Mainly Plymouth and Dodge, which looked better with standard quad headlights and more coherent grille themes. The '58 DeSoto was a bit more glittery than the '57, while Chrysler actually toned down their big, imposing grille for a more DeSoto-like affair for '58. No doubt that was one reason that DeSoto sales fell quicker than Dodge or Chrylser that year, as Chrysler started to crowd downmarket in an attempt to let Imperial fly alone.

    I'm probably one of the few that prefers the '58 Chevy to the '57! I just like the lower/longer/wider look and the better proportions that come with it. That's also one reason I prefer Pontiacs in '55-57 to their Chevy counterparts. Same-sized greenhouse but a longer body overall gives the car better proportioning, although Chevies usually had cleaner grilles. I'd say the two biggest offenders for '58 were Olds and Buick. Both were basically enormous, chrome-laden bricks...about as squared-off and blocky as a 1958 car could get. Of the two, I'd say Olds is the worst, and should get a special mention considering how attractive the '57 was in comparison!

    Over at Ford, I don't think things were too bad. The '58 Ford front-end looks like it's trying to ape Chrysler/DeSoto just a bit, and is a pleasing style overall, except for the colon-shaped taillights. The Mercury that year was also pretty blocky looking, but not as chrome-laden as a Buick/Olds. And okay, Lincoln was pretty nasty that year!

    But then in '59, all the Mopar divisions started getting garish. It's like they were running out of good ideas on what to do with the gorgeous '57 body shell, so they dug some of their rejected ideas out of the trash!

    I don't think the '59 Pontiac and Olds are bad looking cars...probably the cleanest styles of that year. And the Buick is so ugly it's almost cool, but the Chevy and Caddy are too much for my tastes.

    And all things considered, I don't think the '59 Ford was bad looking. They did a good job hiding the fact that the '57, 58, and '59 Fords were all the same body. It was busy and glittery, but somehow pulled off that Thunderbird-inspired look fairly well. I also kinda like the style of the '59 Mercury, although strangely by this time, I think the 4-door hardtops were better looking than the 2-doors!

    I think the key to whether something looked good or bad in '58-59 had to do with whether it was designed into the car, or just tacked onto it! In the case of the Packard Hawk, that front-end was just tacked on, and it shows.
  • stumack1stumack1 Member Posts: 56
    ...1958 was the peak for bloated garish designs, with the exception of the Mopars. I've always thought the '58 DeSoto was one of the cleanest designs ever, slightly better than the '57. I agree that the '59 Mopars were a step backward. C'mon, you gotta love the '59 Buick Batmobiles!

    Not only did those '58's not help Stude-Packard, they practically finished them off. I think they were about ready to shut the doors, but the money held out just long enough to get the Lark out, and delay the inevitable for another 7 years.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    The retro trend is very bizarre in how it is being done. They steal from the past but without any logical dialogue with the past. It's like they borrow from past talents but don't understand that talent at all. How else can you explain the Prowler except as totally missing the point.

    Basically what retro is doing today is killing the creativity of the automaker's styling departments.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,365
    Good point...1959 competes with 58, yes. When you point out such eyesores as the batwing Chevy, things weren't all good. I like the 58 more than that thing, anyway.

    1960 was also an odd year....another wide redesign or at least big facelift, and lots of cluttered designs. I like the Fords the most of that year...very clean design, almost European. You see cues of the upcoming Continental and future Euro and UK Fords.

    The 58 Plymouth (Christine) was a very nice design. I remember watching that movie as a kid and thinking how nice that car looked. Great long hardtop window line, copied by the also pretty Ford Starliner of 60-61.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Nomad is supposed to get a forced induction 4 cylinder powertrain, so maybe they still don't get it Shifty.

    -juice
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,015
    is that it seemed to bring a much more youthful image to Buick, at least for a little while. Sure it was still massive and menacing, but also had a sleekness to it, that the hulking '58 just didn't have. The '58 just looked like an old man's car to me, whereas I could see a younger guy being proud to own a '59 Buick! In '60 though, it started looking a bit stodgy again, but throughout most of the 60's, I thought big Buicks were good looking cars. Conservative, but tasteful and definitely not old-fogey!
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    No they still don't get it, that's right. A 50s rod with a V-6 automatic? A '50s retro pickup that doesn't hold anything? And now a Nomad with a wheezer engine. Well, slap my forehead!
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Instead of the retro Nomad, GM should have built that Chevy concept pickup that came off the WRX platform, I forget the name right now.

    A Nomad should have a V8, right? If you think about it, the Dodge Magnum is more of a Nomad than the new Nomad!

    -juice
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,015
    I saw that movie when it first came out, in late 1983. I was 13 years old. I think it's what first turned me on to old Mopars. I think it was also about the most foul-mouthed movie I had ever watched, up to that point in my life...I believe it taught my sheltered little mind a few new words! ;-) It was hysterical when they finally aired it on tv...it was editted out so badly it was almost incoherent!
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,662
    50s styling trends all went over the cliff....

    Instead of making cars bigger they made them REALLY HUGE. A '57 Chevy isn't much bigger than it's '47 counterpart but a '58is way bigger.

    The sleek wraparound windshields of '54-'57 got even wider and started to wrap into the rooflines.

    Instead of chrome and tailfins they just slathered chrome onto every surface (esp. Buick/Olds) and started making the fins into very strange shapes, the Chevy is a good example (sorry Andre)

    '58 was the first year for the widespread adaption of four headlights. It's pretty obvious that many cars were not originally drawn with these in mind, the Packebakers being good examples. There's nothing inherently wrong with four headlights but it took stylists a couple of years to figure out they had to get them off the fendertops and into the grillework.

    Actually, I don't think '58 was the worst year. '59 and '60 were even worse! Don't you know '59 was the year my Pa decided to get a new car </:^(

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    1958 brought a storm of criticism down on US automakers, and was probably the catalyst for turning people more toward foreign cars. It seems no coincidence that VW and Renault starting selling lots of cars right after this and within a few years American automakers, stinging from rebuke, starting offering "compacts" (by American standards).

    1958 is generally regarded by historians to be one of the low points in American automotive history.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,015
    that, more than anything else, drove people to imports and brought on the criticisms. If they'd been building 1958-style cars, say, in 1955 when the industry was riding high and everyone thought the prosperity would go on forever, I'm sure nobody would have complained about them and they still would have sold in record numbers.

    Some cars did start shrinking for 1960, but that trend didn't last for long. That year's Mercury was really an incarnation of the previous year's Edsel, which in '59 was a much smaller car than a Mercury. The big Buick Electra and Olds 98 were a bit shorter for '60, and would shrink even more for '62. Dodge came out with a whole lineup that was Plymouth-sized for '60, and only sold a handful of its more traditional, 1959-sized cars. For '62 the Dodge and Plymouth downsized, about 15 years too early, to cars that are only about the size of an Intrepid today. They sold poorly. DeSoto, in the process of being phased out, dropped all the 126" wheelbase models for '60, leaving only 122" wb cars. For '63, Chrysler would do the same.

    Where the pounds started getting put on though, were in low-end cars. Chevy bulked up considerably for 1959, and Ford did for 1960. In 1965, the Big Three all redesigned their big cars, and while some kept previous wheelbase dimensions, they were all much bigger. Again though, the biggest, upper-end cars really didn't balloon up much, it was the low-end cars.

    In 1957, I think the longest regular (non-limousine) car was the Lincoln, around 227" long. Imperial was around 225", and Caddy came in two sizes...216" and 221" (the overwhelming majority were 221"). The next biggest cars were probably the senior DeSotos and Chryslers, at around 218-219" and the biggest Buicks were probably around that, too.

    In contrast though, I think a '57 Chevy is about 200", a '57 Ford's about 202", and a '57 Plymouth is about 207".

    By 1976 though, a full-sized Chevy, Ford, or Plymouth was pushing 220-222", so in 20 years, some of them had gained close to two feet, and close to a half-ton in weight. In contrast, the biggest cars...the 98's, Electras, DeVilles, and Lincolns, had only put on a few inches to a foot, ending up around 230", and weights hadn't shot up nearly as much. Heck, a '76 Lincoln Continental sedan might actually weigh less than a '57!
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,015
    were in the pipeline by around '57. Not that the automakers necessarily saw a recession coming up, but the Beetle was beginning to gain in popularity, and so was the Rambler. Studebaker had to have been planning for a few years too, considering they launched the Lark in '59. But then, the Lark was little more than a truncated standard-sized Stude, so it probably wasn't that hard to throw together.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,662
    a Stude that went into a crusher and then came out
    before it was completely squashed. They should've called it
    the "Udebak" :^)

    Good point about the reaction to the little Rambler, Andre. Before the Rambler and the Bug, Detroit wasn't interested in small cars but it was then, in the middle 50s that the still prevailing philosophy of covering all segments began.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,015
    what the towing capacity of a Lark would be? Only reason I ask is that I saw an episode of "Mister Ed", where Wilbur and Carol were riding in a Lark hardtop with their neighbors the Addisons in the back seat, and were pulling a horse trailer with Ed in it!

    Now I know that's pure Hollywood, but would a Lark have been able to pull a horse in a trailer, plus 4 grown adults? Funny, the things you can think of when you're just trying to zone out in front of the tv! ;-)
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,662
    You could get the Lark with a Studebaker 289. I know people have towed horse trailers with 289 Mustangs, Rancheros and Fairlanes.

    The Lark could be had with the Supercharged 289 as well. It was something of a pocket rocket compared to most other early compacts.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

This discussion has been closed.