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

jljac

When speaking of maintenance on the MG, I do not see any reason to make simple things more complicated and expensive. Why does a car need two six volt batteries wired in series to get twelve volts? (My 1963 Norton motorcycle has this battery system too).

It should be easy to change an oil filter. Either you put a cartridge inside a round metal container and close the top (oil partial flow) or you screw in a cartridge. The MG has a fitting with its oil lines between the metal container and the place it attaches to the engine so that you are under the car trying to seal two gaskets with the starter motor in the way. I see no point to doing things that way.

Every starter motor I have seen pushes the gear out and into the ring gear of the flywheel or torque converter. Why make the starter motor longer by going to the opposite side of the ring gear to pull the starter gear toward the starter motor?

Time after time the British come up with revolutionary ideas and products which other countries later refine and sell for a profit. In the 1950s, a foreign sports car was probably an Austin Healy, Jaguar, MG or Triumph. Now it is Japanese or German product. Same is true of British motorcycles (Norton, Triumph, BSA) .

In 1999 the Mini was voted the second most influential car of the 20th Century (despite its horrible drag coefficient of 0.48). But VW Golf and Honda Civic sold by the millions based on that design. The British pioneered disc brakes too http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_brake

My point is that early technological triumphs often fail at first until someone later figures out how to make the system reliable and easy to maintain. (i.e., Fuel injection, disc brakes, overhead valve engines, monocoque construction.) American cars were reliable and easy to maintain until government regulations took over in the 1970s.

Therefore, when Berri said that he did not want to work on the Jaguar or MG, I agreed with him based upon performing maintenance tasks on an MG that should have been simple. That is also why I enjoyed maintaining my mother’s Ford Mustang (despite its terrible drag coefficient of 0.46) instead of my ex-wife’s MG.

Mr_Shiftright

I hear what you're saying but the MG is just 'different' in small ways, but it's certainly not complicated. It's one of the most primitive simple cars on earth to work on IMO. Ever try to replace ball joints on a Mustang? Good luck.

Working on a Jaguar is an entirely different animal---complicated and bizarre engineering.

But the MG engineering is elegantly simple and functional. It's really one of the most reliable cars ever made.

texases

"I think the '70 is about my least favorite Riv, up until the shrunken 1986 models"

Sounds like a recipe for a car that'll get no attention - or are you going to 'drink it pretty'?
:P

andys120

Brit sports cars, I was treated to the sight of a red TR-3A this morning. I saw it flash by as I was waiting at a light and took off after it. It was in good driver condition with disc wheels and driven by 30ish guy with the top down and tonneau cover over the right seat.

As a former Triumph owner ('66 TR-4A) I will echo previous comments about British cars. Although mechanically simple they can be devilishly hard to keep in shape. Even a simple task like changing brake pads can prove surprisingly hard. I was attempting this once and found that it was impossible to remove the used pads which seemed to be welded to the calipers by rust when my Mom suggested applying olive oil. :confuse:

By that point I'd tried everything so you can imagine my surprise when that worked.
:surprise:

I don't think there was a single part on that car with a design life of over 35K miles or 3 years.

uplanderguy

Wouldn't "matching numbers" on this car be the same as, say, a Corvette? With a GM long VIN, aren't there digits that match with engine size, and date codes in the engine number itself that would pre-date the date of mfg. as noted on the door jamb sticker? I don't know that there's a way to prove that that very engine came with that car new, without a build sheet as is available with a Studebaker or Pontiac.

I doubt it has much more than 70K miles or I don't think those bucket seats would look as good. Of course, rust is more visible on a white car.

I'm with Andre...I can't think of a pre'86 Riviera I like less than a '70!

I think something seems odd about the side molding having the black insert. I thought I remembered that the insert was body-colored, no matter what color top the car had, but I'll have to look online further for this.

texases

Sorry Andre, I skipped the title to your Riv post, read it as 'I'm thinking about bidding....'

Been a long week....

andre1969

Sounds like a recipe for a car that'll get no attention - or are you going to 'drink it pretty'?

Eh, I don't think any amount of drinking can seduce me into getting excited about a '70 Riv. And I know my taste in cars is a little, umm, offbeat, but the Riv just bothers me. I think part of it is that the '66-69 was so beautiful IMO, and for '70 it's like they changed it for the sake of change, but it went from sleek and sporty to looking like a Skylark on steroids, and kinda stodgy and old-fogey looking. I think 1970 was actually when the Riv hit its peak hp, though.

Edit: just saw your last post slip in...yeah, it's a friend of mine, a guy who evidently makes a lot of money, but spends it even quicker. He's always buying and selling something, but manages to come out ahead. Or, so he says. :P

ab348

Not a fan of this one. Don't like the '70 styling - a rare miss for GM in that era - and the Edelbrock junk under the hood devalues it greatly in my mind. Plus I am not a fan of the color combo and as others have said, some aspects just don't look right. Besides, why would you buy this when you could have something like this:





I just love the looks of this year of the Riv. Those are wheel covers, BTW, made to resemble Buick road wheels.

jwilliams2

But the MG engineering is elegantly simple and functional. It's really one of the most reliable cars ever made.

Certainly not my experience, based on the new one I bought for the wife back in the 70's (she thought it was "cute"). Engineering elegantly simple? Maybe in an agricultural kind of way. Reliable? Not this one. It had more glitches and down time than any car I've owned in over 50 years. :sick:

jljac

But the MG engineering is elegantly simple and functional. It's really one of the most reliable cars ever made.

Call me old fashioned, but I see no reason why a four-cylinder car has to have two six volt batteries under the back seat and a starter motor that looks like this http://cdn1.autopartsnetwork.com/images/catalog/wp/full/W01331612197BOS.JPG and an oil filter assembly that looks like this http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h117/viejo442/Oilfilterparts.jpg which you get to try and make oil tight while laying under the car.

These do not seem elegantly simple and functional to me.

andre1969

Well, my buddy said he saw the car, but passed on it. Was worth about $4,000 in his opinion. He noticed the missing trim, weatherstripping, a little bondo, and it turns out the paintjob was a cheapo Earl-Sheib re-spray.

andys120

Call me old fashioned, but I see no reason why a four-cylinder car has to have two six volt batteries under the back seat and a starter motor that looks like this

I believe the odd battery arrangement had to do with weight distribution. It would certainly work better than the single six-volt my '65 Beetle had (under the rear seat!) or the twelve volt that sat directly behind and just above the engine on my '66 TR (ideal for absorbing engine heat, I got less than a year out of batteries ion some cases.). :sick:

explorerx4

The ability to open the door from the back seat is a pretty interesting feature.

uplanderguy

Typically I'm not a huge fan of the '66-67 Riviera, but I'm loving the interior. What a great instrument panel. I was always fond of the light and dark turquoise exterior colors offered those years, and the beautiful light turquoise interior color such as this car has. It's cooling/refreshing to my eyes...sort-of like looking at a spruce tree or something. I chose a similar, although two-tone, light jade over dark jade, with light jade interior, in my very first new car, an '81 V8 Monte Carlo.

Mr_Shiftright

One on each side of the car for weight balance. MGs were raced you know. I suppose we could put the battery in the fender like Packard? That was fun. Or put the oil filter in a devilish cartridge holder like the early Chrysler Hemis? Or put the rear brake drums on a Plymouth on about a 4 inch keyway, requiring them to be cut off with a torch? Tell me about it.

Most people with experience with British cars, unfortunately, either bought clapped out neglected ones, (like me at first) and got what they deserved for that, or they put the cars in the hands of incompetent people (like me at first).

Here's a good explanation of the merits of the MGB and a frank discussion of some of its faults: It's interesting reading!

http://www.sportscarwarehouse.com/mgb-buying-restoring.html

I mean, really---a generator, ignition points and a 4 cylinder pushrod engine? How hard is that?

Go get one while they're cheap!

TR3s and 4s -- now THERE is a car I could agree is somewhat troublesome and cheesily built. The TRs were always a bit faster than the MGs, but nowhere even close to the build quality of a B especially.

I've owned 'em all, and the MGB proved the easiest to fix and by far the most reliable. The Jaguars I had were gorgeous and diabolical.

Alfas are another car that gets a bad rap it doesn't deserve. Especially desirable for their reliability are the Spiders 1982-90.

ab348

That particular Riv has made a few appearances at local car shows - owned by an older gentleman who found it in one of the southern states - and every time I see it I fall in love with it. Those pics don't do it justice. I see that thing and am instantly transported back to the late '60s, cruising down the Interstate in the summertime on vacation, a "big nasty redhead by my side" as per Randy Newman, enjoying the good life. Fantastic.

uplanderguy

I'm not a Buick expert, but I wonder if those wheel covers were really available back then. I remember them on '70's Buicks, but not in the '60's. Still, a beautiful car, and an unusual color combination with the white vinyl top. I know cars are more reliable now, supposedly, but I sure miss the ability to custom-order a car for appearance like you used to be able to...not just pick one of six colors, with two usually being extra-cost.

hpmctorque

Saw two first generation Olds Auroras on the yesterday. I rarely (well, infrequently may be more accurate) see one anymore, much less two.

jljac

I was looking at that fine blue Buick Rivera and noticed that it looked like the Oldsmobile Toronado. I knew the Cadillac Eldorado was much the same car but I did not know the Rivera was. So I looked up the Toronado and found that the all three cars were based on the same platform as early 1966, and that the Toronado it was the first post-war front drive American car. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldsmobile_Toronado. (The L-29 Cord had front wheel drive as early as 1929) . The Toronado was also the first GM car to have torsion bar suspension.

I also found this interesting because I was under the impression from earlier posts that body-on- frame construction was old technolog long before 1966, but found the opposite was true..

The Toronado was GM's first subframe automobile, which means it was partly unitized, and used a subframe that ended at the forward end of the rear suspension leaf springs, serving as an attachment point for the springs. It carried the powertrain, front suspension and floorpan,
allowing greater isolation of road and engine harshness (the design was conceptually similar to the Chevrolet Camaro and Pontiac Firebird that would debut for 1967).

I liked the Oldsmobile Toronado (and the later Aurora) and was sorry to see Oldsmobile go out of production. I actually went to the local dealer and took a few images for future reference.

ab348

Yes, the wheel covers are correct. I had never seen them before, but they are shown in the '67 brochure HERE.

uplanderguy

Thanks for posting. That is the farthest back I've ever seen those Buick wheelcovers.

uplanderguy

To this day, I like the looks of that first-generation Aurora. There was a pale green/aqua color available, with dark turquoise interior, that was a neat throwback to the '60's. You could get one with cloth interior too, although quite rare. I never liked the second generation styling at all.

andre1969

To this day, I like the looks of that first-generation Aurora. There was a pale green/aqua color available, with dark turquoise interior, that was a neat throwback to the '60's.

I LOVED that color combination on the first-gen Aurora! Years ago, there was a lady at work who had one in that color. She let me drive it one day. I gotta admit, I was a bit disappointed in the way it handled, and thought it would be bigger inside. It handled adequately, but just seemed to have that numb, disconnected, soft, isolated feeling to it. Basically, my 2000 Park Ave in a sexier wrap. Again, it was adequate, but I was just expecting more I guess.

But, knowing the limitations of the car, I wouldn't mind having one. And the Aurora was one car I searched for when I was looking for replacements when my Intrepid got wrecked. Only problem is, most of the first-gen examples were really miled up. And 2nd-gen examples just seemed pricey, given the age/mileage/options.

Actually, I think I started off looking at Pontiac Bonnevilles, but then someone suggested the Aurora. Found a few Bonnevilles that seemed about right with regards to options/age/mileage, but then I just happened across the Park Ave.

ab348

FYI: someone bit on the Buy It Now price of $8900 for the Polara. Wow.

jrosasmc

http://dallas.craigslist.org/dal/ctd/2179953960.html

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300524155402&viewi- tem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT

That Volvo looks tempting to me but it's way over the top!

uplanderguy

That price confirms to me what I've noticed in several years of heavy-eBay-watching--that an authentic, original car or original-appearing car appeals to a lot of people, even if it's a low-line model. You just don't see them anymore and it reminds people of their past--like that black '73 Bel Air six-cylinder 3-speed we talked about a few weeks ago that did better-than-expected on eBay.

kyfdx

I was pumping gas, yesterday.... could just see the front fender of a crappy car on the other side of the pump.. then, noticed the badge... Firenza Cruiser. Olds version of a Cavalier, I think..

Didn't realize that they still used the Cruiser moniker on little wagons like that... found it amusing...

fintail

Wow, that Volvo is pretty wild.

I think I remember the Firenza Cruiser. An uncle of mine had a Firenza back in the day...I thought it looked a lot nicer than a Cadavalier, and it was pretty plush inside.

stickguy

neat Volvo, but pricey. I see that the shift lever and knob is exactly the same as what our 1969 144S had. Only 6 MYs apart, but seems more like 40 considering how much they changed (on the surface at least).

And man, I love that Alfa. Great colors.

Mr_Shiftright

I still hope they put a big block in it. "Sleeper" rods are very popular among builders right now.

Mr_Shiftright

The Volvo 544 is a fun car to own and drive but $18K is pretty far out there---I would think for that kind of money you'd want a better restoration as well as installation of a B20E engine with fuel injection. I'm thinkin' maybe $10,000--$12000 is all the money here. I saw a beautifully restored one with B20E engine, gorgeous interior, custom alloy wheels sell for $16K, and *that* took a year to sell.

the '89 Alfa Spider looks quite nice, and the hardtop is worth an extra $1000, but with a "starting bid" of $10000 and a "reserve not met", I think the seller is dreaming on this one, since it's an older "rubber spoiler" type and not the more attractive 91-93 model. It does have AC though, which is good. I figure it's worth maybe $8500. Depends on how the synchros are and whether it has rust in the rocker panels---two bugaboos on this otherwise delightful car.

andre1969

I still hope they put a big block in it. "Sleeper" rods are very popular among builders right now.

A big block would be cool, but what about something like a crate 318 or 360? those things put out some pretty healthy power, and without the added weight of a big-block.

Mr_Shiftright

Well you need real power. A stock Polara with a 318 is a bit of a slug, and if you want to have any fun at all with your ride you'd have to get some real grunt under the hood.

explorerx4

Alfa looks really good. I find it kind of strange that it has Goodyear Triple Tread tires on it.

Mr_Shiftright

hardtop, AC and leather are all desirable options. You could buy these Generation 3 Alfa Spiders as Graduates (stripped model), Veloce and Quadrafoglio. So a stripped down '86 Graduate would be worth less than a high-option '89. Probably the last year 1993 is worth the most, since cars that are old but not really classics follow used car rules, not classic car rules (that is, used cars are worth more the newer they are, and classic cars generally the other way 'round).

If you want something with more soul and character than a Miata, this is the way to go. But, by all means, get yourself settled in with an Alfa shop before you buy, so you have a place to get parts and advice.

explorerx4

Are those Alfa Convertibles related to Fiat 128 convertibles? I know a guy who had one way longer than I would have thought anyone have had one.
I thought it would be toast after a couple of years.
I saw a 928 going the other way on the highway today. A pretty rare sight any time of the year.

Mr_Shiftright

No, Alfas were much more substantial cars than Fiats and I don't think shared much of anything with them---maybe some switchgear and such.

lemko

...very nice white 1967 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 396 on Napfle Street near Rising Sun in NE Philly.

kyfdx

'80s era VW Fox

mid-'80s BMW 528e

E39 BMW M5

Saw those three within a mile, this morning, on my commute..

stickguy

I saw a fox recently too. pretty beat looking (think, duct tape ratty), but from what I recall, they came like this from the factory.

kyfdx

Yeah.... I think that is the South Philly package..... lol

jljac

...very nice white 1967 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 396 on Napfle Street near Rising Sun in NE Philly

Was it behind a plain brown Studebaker? (Inside joke from the Studebaker forum.) :shades:

I actually saw a 1967-68 MGB-GT yesterday, tan color right in front of me at a stop light. I wish I had my digital camera handy. It was very nice and clean. That was a fun car to drive. I forgot how small it was.

fintail

The other day a local highline lot had 3 R107 SLs (70s-80s) in front of the showroom. Two were no doubt 560SLs, but there was also an odd car, a Euro model of unknown model (I didn't look at the rear) It had headlight wipers - I don't recall noticing these on a 107 before, must be very rare. Car looked pristine, albeit from the same distance my fintail looks mint too.

andys120

I got a glimpse of an original Mini-Cooper in traffic, white over blue with white hood stripes in very nice shape, cute, perky and very tiny.

explorerx4

I walked right by a black Alfa 164 L today. Didn't look like it had ever been in an accident. Showed wear as I got closer.

Mr_Shiftright

They don't wear well, those cars.

andre1969

Temps are supposed to get into the 70's today, so I figured I'd get the Catalina out of dry-dock...


Kinda dull and dreary outside right now, but it's supposed to be nice and sunny a bit later. It feels a bit strange, because there are still a few snow piles here and there! Thankfully most of the salt has been washed off the roads, though.

lemko

Aaaah! I just noticed your license plate! :surprise:

It will be a while before I bring my Brougham or DTS out. They're calling for rain and possibly snow in Philly this weekend and into Monday. The weather right now is nice. The twelve-foot snow banks in front of my property are almost gone. Good thing we didn't get much more snow after that January storm. I ran out of places to put it!

andre1969

Aaaah! I just noticed your license plate!

Oh, that's a little photoshop work. Although there are enough pics of my cars online where you can see the license plate, I probably shouldn't have even bothered.

When I got historic tags for my Silverado a couple years ago though, the first three numbers were "666"! I'm just waiting for the day that some devil worshipper rips off those plates.

texases

Here's a question - why obscure the plates? I know it's done all the time, but what is the purpose? 'Bad guys' can see all the plates they want, just by driving around. :confuse: