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

ab348

That`s true about the `68s. The 1964-67 versions were on a 115 inch wheelbase and were quite a large car. The 1968 models had a shorter rear overhang and so had a smaller trunk, and I found the front to rear length of the interiors a bit stingy.

uplanderguy

In hindsight, I think a '67 Chevelle was quite a nice car (although ours was a cheapy 300 Deluxe 4-door, six with stick). Dad thought a Biscayne next to it was too big and the Chevy II 100 next to it too small.

I can see why Chevelles sold well right out of the box. It was like a '55 all over again in size and character, for those who thought the big Chevys got just too big.

The styling of the '64 didn't do anything for me, with its blunt front and rear ends and small rear wheel openings, but I always did like the two-door wagon offered the first couple years.

ab348

Truthfully, the Chevelle from 64 to 67 always seemed to have something working against it in terms of design as compared to its GM stablemates. I had a '64 Skylark for several years that was a far nicer car than any Chevelle - no metal door tops inside, nicer trim, and better styling. Of course it was also more expensive than a Chevelle when new.

I don't care for the '64 Chevelle styling at all. The '65 as a bit better. I love the front end of the '66 but not the rear. The '67 came closest to getting it right. But the '66-'67 dash was love it or hate it. To me, the Cutlass, Tempest and Skylark of those years always looked superior.

uplanderguy

I like the '67 Chevelle exterior, but the '66-67 dash is pretty funky with the switches above the speedometer!

Of all the '64-65 iterations, I probably like the Pontiacs best; of the '66-67 I probably like the Skylark the best. That said, I could enjoy a '67 Chevelle (not an SS; I tire of those! LOL) due to the personal memories.

fintail

Saw an old guy in a 75-76 Sedan DeVille, looked to be in decent shape.

andre1969

BTW, sorry about your furlough situation. What a drag, no matter what party one espouses. Please report back on Carlisle and Hershey.

Thanks. I'm actually not hurting too bad...yet. Big question mark though is the end of the month. My company is going to stop paying for our health insurance if this goes on past October 31, so I'll have to go on COBRA. And to maintain my current policy, I think that's going to be about $600 per month!

Carlisle was this past weekend...had a great time, and I'll post pics soon. Unfortunately I'm not making Hershey this year...first time I'm going to miss it since I started going back in 2002! There's also a local show I go to in Rockville, Maryland, but I'm skipping on it this year too. It's pretty much the same cars year after year, which wouldn't be so bad in and of itself, but this time around, none of my friends are going. I went last year, by myself, and was pretty much bored and ready to roll out after maybe an hour or so. I held out though, because one of my friends was planning on coming out in the early afternoon.

And yeah, one of these days it would be great to meet up with you at one of these shows! To think that we were so close, a couple years ago, when you came out for Hershey...

berri

Andre, I'm so sorry about your situation and all because we have adult politicians in Washington acting with the emotional and intellectual maturity of a couple of elementary school kids who had a fight on the playground. Very sad how special interest monies have taken over that city.

I think whether to stay in the Defense industry can be a tough call. On the one hand it tends to pay pretty good, but that's probably because on the other hand there is little job security (it all depends on the next contract award) and you have to put up with all the (often Congressional created) micro management and bureaucracy (ie. "dumbness"). Good luck!

berri

"66-67 dash is pretty funky with the switches above the speedometer!"

I may well have remembered wrong, but I seem to recall that they did this in either 66 or 67 on the full sized Buick's also? I always liked the lines on the 65 LeMans too, although I think a lot of people criticize it's "squareness" and prefer the 66/67. When I look back at the 60's and 70's today, I think I much better appreciate Buick styling than I did back then.

uplanderguy

I think it was the '65 full-size Buick that had switches above the two large, round instrument pods below. I always thought it was funny that the '66 and '67 Buicks had about the same instrument panel, although the rest of the cars seemed completely different from one another!

For some reason, in my mind, the '65 Buick pulled off that look better than the '66-67 Chevelle. I do think the Chevelles were nice-looking cars though, outside.

ateixeira

Saw an immaculate Dodge Conquest TSI. I mean good as new.

Parked in the handicap spot at a Middle School where my kids was playing hoops.

stickguy

around town yesterday. a brown 2 door coupe d'ville (I assume). Probably about a 70. What a barge. But looked to be in nice condition.

stickguy

ran up to NY last saturday, and oddly all the old beasts I remember seeing were Fords. A red '65ish T-bird, a '70(?) Mustang (odd looking grill though...) and the rarest one, a 70-71 Cougar (the "upsized" ones with a weird butt).

fintail

Saw a fairly worn 80-83 Corolla sedan today, then 20 minutes later, an extremely clean 75-79 Corolla sedan driven by a little old lady.

hpmctorque

So, the little old lady was driving a little old car. Things will only get worse for her when, with the government shut down, she doesn't get her Social Security check next month. She'll have to choose between buying her meds, food or gas.

fintail

Sadly, many probably believe that's going to happen.

Or you never know, she could be the type who drives a little old car, lives in a little old house (which in this zipcode could still be a million easy) and has 8 figures in the bank.

The older Corolla was nice to the point where I suspect it was kept for sentimentality rather than just necessity. It was some older person's baby.

hpmctorque

You're probably right about the sentimentality factor, since the car was extremely clean. With credit relatively easily available, even in today's tighter lending environment, a person of modest means can drive a newer car. Regardless, like you I always take note of well preserved old cars.

uplanderguy

It's a factor of my age and where I grew up for sure, but I find it mildly amusing that someone would be sentimental about a Corolla.

lemko

Heck, I'm more impressed by somebody driving a well-preserved modest older car than seeing some hoodrat in a new leased luxury car. Sadly, some of those cars end up in the junkyard when granny passes away because nobody in the family wants it. I recall a story about at very well-preserved Tercel that ended up in the scrapyard because of its low value and the fact its elderly owned died.

fintail

It might have been her husband's car, or was a gift to her on their 30th anniversary 35 years ago, or something like that. I bet it has a story.

fintail

Indeed, it takes more to drive a nice old car than a new one, in this day of low down $99 leases on cheapo models, and relatively cheap credit. I read somewhere once that a new MB just takes some cash flow, but driving something like a pristine W140 take something more impressive, as you have to keep up with it, and you can't lease longterm maintenance.

fintail

Many old cars seem to either end up in the hands of destructive grandchildren, or sold to the beater market at an estate sale or auction. I remember back in the mid 90s, seeing a ~74 Impala "Spirit of America" model (white on white with red and blue pinstripes) at an estate sale. It was very clean, and they wanted $1500 for it. About a year later I saw it in town, looking down on its luck. Someone should have saved that. And we've all probably known young people who have been gifted old cars by family members, cars that survived 25 years in fine condition, not to make it another year.

Eventually, cars like that Corolla I saw will be sought by the vintage Japanese cult, which seems to be slowly gaining traction. Not many have survived (but in the PNW, they have).

Michaell

It'll be interesting to see what happens to my dad's '70 Chevy C-10. He's owned it since new, it has probably 150K on the chassis and 50K or so on the rebuilt engine.

Both my son (24) and my nephew (16) want it, when the time comes.

Me? No way. I don't think I could get the carbs adjusted to run right at altitude and the brakes (drums all around) are waaaaayyyyy too touchy for my liking.

As far as older folks go, all I have are my parents to go by. They owned a series of used cars for many years before mom put her foot down and insisted on one last new car. They bought a new Hyundai Sonata GLS V6 in 2003 and still have it. With 32,000 miles on it now.

uplanderguy

I had forgotten about the 'Spirit of America' Impala. It was cleaner-done than the Nova and Vega IMHO, and I think (pretty sure, actually) it was the only one that was available in something other than white--navy blue with white top and interior I recall.

It was a true hardtop, had Rally-style wheels (not otherwise available on a full-size Chevy then), and had the white vinyl interior that was later used in '75 Impalas and Caprice convertibles and wagons--an improvement over the '74 Impala vinyl IMHO.

Came with skirts and no side molding...clean-looking.

I can't recall when I last saw one.

fintail

I think old trucks can be easy to justify keeping around - as they are always useful as a truck. Also, easy to restore. I can understand not wanting carbs, neither do I. You'll probably inherit the Hyundai around the time it becomes a rare model

fintail

I think the one I saw might have been the only one I've seen. It was a pretty nice car, I can't recall what was under the hood, but I want to say it was big, maybe a 400? I thought it would be a nice driver to pick up but I think I was only 18 or 19 at the time, had just bought the fintail, etc, so money and time weren't on my side. IIRC the wheels were body color, or had body color trim.

I've seen a few decent cars come out of estates, but that one is memorable, can't be many left now.

Michaell

I think old trucks can be easy to justify keeping around - as they are always useful as a truck. Also, easy to restore. I can understand not wanting carbs, neither do I. You'll probably inherit the Hyundai around the time it becomes a rare model

Five or six years ago my dad did a bit of restoration. Had a local shop replace all the rubber around the windows, the faux chrome trim and had a paint job done. I think he spent around $6K total. The truck looks brand new. I'm surprised there isn't any rust given that they live only a few miles from the ocean.

When the time comes, the Hyundai will probably be sold and the proceeds added to the estate.

I'm not sure how comfortable I am with either my son or nephew driving the truck on the regular basis. Not one safety feature, and the 350 V8 may have too much power for either of them to handle. I drove that truck when I was a teen and I can remember being a hooligan behind the wheel.

lemko

My Dad had the 1981 model of this piece of crap!

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/10/junkyard-find-1982-ford-thunderbird-tow- n-landau/

fintail

I bet the truck can get tail happy. It will probably be easy to sell, too - should the need ever arise. People love that era of GM truck.

fintail

The "junkyard find" feature there is great - the site and some of its commenters can be tiresome sometimes, but the junkyard cars are a good read. That author used to be at jalopnik, and had similar articles.

For the T-Bird - horn on a turn signal stalk? That thing is malaise on wheels, the height of the bad old days.

andre1969

That Town Landau, Heritage, or whatever they called it, is actually pretty nice looking inside. We've come across those '80-82 T-birds a few times at the various shows in Carlisle, but they were always base models, and it always struck me as sad, how down-market they were inside.

I actually liked these cars when they were new, mainly because, unless my mind is playing tricks on me, you could get them with a digital dash. At least, I remember some car around 1980 offering that, and for some reason the T-bird sticks in my mind. As a kid, I thought that was really cool.

But now, looking back, the cars seem like a travesty. I can actually respect the '77-79 T-bird, and the '83 and later, but those '80-82 models were definitely the low point.

Oddly though, I find the '80-82 Cougar XR-7 version to be fairly attractive.

uplanderguy

Obviously, styling is subjective, but I detested those '80-82 'Birds. Looked like they were carved out of a block of wood. I owned new '81 and '82 Monte Carlos, and although they may not have been the pinnacle of engineering, to my eyes they looked so much better than a 'Bird. I thought the '81 Monte styling corrected many of the 'errors' in the '78-80 styling.

My parents had a new '80 Monte, and what saved it, IMHO, was the dark military green color (not unlike late-model Camry dark green), gold factory painted pinstripe, belt moldings, wide rocker trim, and Rally Wheels.

Michaell

I bet the truck can get tail happy. It will probably be easy to sell, too - should the need ever arise. People love that era of GM truck.

I know my dad has refused multiple offers over the years, in the neighborhood of $8-10K. I really thought he might sell it earlier this year, when he had hip surgery and stopped driving.

However, he decided to renew his license in August and has started driving the Hyundai again. The only person that drives the truck is my son, and even he doesn't take it too far from home.

I doubt it will leave the family - someone will want it bad enough to keep it around.

robr2

For the T-Bird - horn on a turn signal stalk?

Ford brought the idea from Europe in the late 70's/early 80's with the original Escort and expanded it across most other NA Fords.

Why? I don't know.

andre1969

I think 1981 corrected a lot of styling errors for GM's midsized cars, in general. I thought the Monte Carlo, Grand Prix, Cutlass Supreme, and Regal were all big improvements over the 1978-80 style. In the lesser ranks, I think the 1981 LeMans was a huge improvement as well. I really like the Trans Am-looking front-end with the quad headlights, and the 4-door got the nicer notchback roof, which the Century/Cutlass sedans got for 1980.

I think the 1981 Malibu was a bit of a wash though. I do like the 4-door roofline better. Up front, I don't have a preference for '80 or '81, as I think they're both attractive. But I prefer the 1980 Malibu's taillights.

AFAIK, the 1981 Century and Cutlass sedans and wagons were pretty much unchanged from 1980, while the clunky aeroback coupes were simply dropped.

Going simply by looks, if I was in the market for a personal luxury coupe around 1981-82, I'd go with a Dodge Mirada or Cordoba LS, with the regular formal-grille Cordoba coming in second. After that, I'd group GM's cars pretty close, with a slight preference for the Grand Prix or Cutlass Supreme. I'd rank the Mercury Cougar XR-7 below any of them, and the T-bird way below it.

But, factoring in reliability, build quality, reputation, and the general economic climate of the time, I have a feeling those Miradas and Cordobas might have been a hard sell.

ateixeira

My '80 Mustang was like that, horn on the stalk. What a dumb idea that was.

As for T-Birds, my dad had its clone, the Mercury Cougar, 1986 IIRC? That 3.2l V6 was running on 5 cylinders its whole life, but it still ran, LOL.

I drove it to my prom.

andre1969

One of my friends in high school and college had an '86 T-bird at one point. It was one of those designer editions, either Elan or Fila, but it just had that 120 hp V-6, which was a 3.8. It wasn't so fast from 0-60, but seemed like a pretty good highway cruiser.

I remember he got so mad one day, when he tried to race me in my '69 Dart. He thought he was all that, with his new-ish, fully-loaded T-bird, and he looked down on my old Dart. But he was pretty embarrassed when my old Dart walked his T-bird like a dog!

ateixeira

I think you're right, it was a 3.8l V6. It was only slightly quicker (before it lost a cylinder) than my 3.3l straight six in my Mustang Ghia.

Those were the bad old days. OPEC strangled big engines, and they had not figured out emissions yet. Most of those engines are boat anchors or scrap metal now.

The straight six left so much room in my Mustang's engine bay that you could almost stand in there.

fintail

My mom had a Taurus with the 3.8. Quick off the line, but ran out of breath - kind of like the GM 3.8. And it ate a head gasket, of course.

ateixeira

Saw one today, with about 20% of its paint left. To be fair, it's still running, and it must've been an early 90s model.

uplanderguy

I don't remember inline sixes in Mustangs in the post-'73 period. Hmmm.

Wasn't a Ford guy, but I liked to think I was aware of what was 'out there'.

Apparently not!

ateixeira

It was a bit of an oddball. Even the Ghia model wasn't well known, people focused on the V8 and enthusiasts on the turbo.

I think it made 91hp from 3.3 liters, giving it the specific power output of Urkel.

That was only 3 more HP than the base 4 banger, and 0-60? Yes. Eventually.

Info:

http://www.mustanglab.com/mustang-specifications-1979-1993/1980-mustang-specific- ations-performance-data/

fintail

I still like those TRX wheels, pretty modern for those dark days.

When I was a kid, my aunt and uncle had a "Cobra" version from that era, and it even had t-tops. Pretty cool to a 5 year old (although I was more impressed with the "Comutacar" my aunt won in a raffle).

andre1969

Ford didn't make much use of a V-6 until the 232 "Essex" came out for 1982, and it started replacing the 200 inline 6 in various applications. There was a German 2.8 V-6 that Ford used in the 1970's, that popped up in the likes of the Pinto wagon, Mustang II, and Mercury Capri, but when the 1979 Mustang came out, Ford used the 3.3 as the 6-cyl option. I think there were supply issues with the German 2.8 and they couldn't get enough of them.

The 232 was fairly competent for the time, initially putting out 112 hp. For comparison, the Buick 231 put out 110 hp and Chevy's 229 also put out 110, but had less torque than either. Chrysler's poor slant six, which never did adapt well to emissions controls, was down to around 90 hp and got such poor fuel economy that they dropped it in cars, and simply made the 318 standard in the few RWD cars that were left.

By the time my grandparents bought their Fairmont-based LTD, it was up to around 119-120 hp, and wasn't too bad of a performer...for the time. I logged a lot of hours on that car when I had my learner's permit, and I went to Florida with them one year and they let me do most of the driving. It was definitely quicker than my 1980 Malibu 229, or the 1982 Cutlass Supreme 231 I got a few years later. However, I think Ford used slightly more aggressive gearing. And that LTD was probably a bit lighter than my Malibu, and I'm sure the Cutlass outweighed it.

I've read that Ford reverse-engineered a Buick 231 to come up with the Essex. I wonder why they didn't just take a 302 and lop two cylinders off? That worked for Buick (the 231 is 3/4 of the old 300 V-8, but bored out so it could use 350 pistons). And it worked for Chevy, as the 200, 229, and 262 were all sawed-off 267/305/350 V-8's. It even worked for Oldsmobile, with their 4.3 Diesel V-6, which was a sawed-off Olds 350. Well, okay, maybe it didn't work so great in that respect! Chrysler also did it with their 3.9 V-6 that they started using around 1987 in the Dakota pickup, which was based on the 318.

The Ford Essex used an iron block and aluminum head right from the get-go, which might have been one reason why it tended to eat head gaskets. In those days, they had issues with the iron and aluminum expanding and contracting at different rates, and it would often blow the head gasket, or warp the head. Or both.

garv214

I actually owned a 1980 Mercury Capri with the Turbo 4 and a 4 speed...

..worst car ever...

It ate 2 turbos and a catalytic converter while I had it (along with numerous other minor niggles). It was slow, rattley, and got lousy fuel economy (I could barely get 18 mpg on the highway).

It eventually coughed up the head gasket which put it out of its misery...

I ended up buying imports for the next 25 years as a result of that car. I finally bought my first American car (Chevrolet Cruze) back in 2011... I vowed to never own a turbo again, well.... hopefully the turbo in the Cruze will prove to be less troublesome...

uplanderguy

Andre, my parents' '80 Monte Carlo was a 229. For some reason I remember it being 115 hp, as I used to tell people, "Hmmph! More hp than a Buick V6". I looked in the '80 brochure online and they had stopped listing horsepower by then.

It made inelegant noises and vibrations about the same as the Buick V6, though.

My '81 was a 267 because of it! The 267 was slow, but at least it sounded and idled like a V8!

You had mentioned how inexpensive the 267 was over the V6. I remember the variance changing through the model years, but I think it was $75 extra in my '81, and I remember at one point it was down to a $50 option! Conversely, the 305 4-barrel in my parents' '84 Monte was $375 extra..and worth every penny.

andre1969

Yeah, in 1980, the 229 had 115 hp, but from '81-84 it was down to 110. For some reason, my old car book shows the 231 as having 110 hp in the Buick, Chevy, and Olds entries in 1980, but in Pontiac it shows 110/115. So, I don't know if that was a typo, or if there was a 115 hp version...not that 5 hp would make much difference.

My book also shows the 229 as being offered in the 1980 LeMans, but I thought they only used the Buick 231? It shows the 231 being used in the Catalina/Bonneville, Firebird, Grand Prix, and Sunbird.

I think the Chevy 229 only had around 170-175 ft-lb of torque, while the Buick 231 was more like 190. I do remember my Cutlass Supreme did seem a bit quicker off the line, and was a much better highway cruiser than the Malibu was.

uplanderguy

I've heard from my friend who's there, that it is pouring rain in Hershey today and bad enough that they are leaving today, a day early.

Wondering if you and lemko are planning to see the show tomorrow at all.

My buddy told me "you picked a good year to not come along".

What a drag; I know my friend was very-much looking forward to it too.

andre1969

It's raining something fierce as well here, too. I had to cancel Hershey this year anyway, because I promised to help a friend move. But with as serious as this rain is, that may be off, as well.

I'm sure the field where they put the show cars is going to be a horrible mess. It's pretty hilly as well, so I'm sure there are going to be more than a few people getting stuck.

About the only thing car-related I might do this weekend is go see if my New Yorker will start, and at least turn it around so that it doesn't sit in the same spot for too long...

Mr_Shiftright

it's kind of a tradition to drown at Hershey, isn't it?

fintail

Sightings today - decent 63 Impala 4 door HT, early Pontiac 6000, MB 300CD, also saw a beige Volvo Amazon wagon and a Porsche 914, both in unrestored condition.