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
would it be feasible to just pull the engine/trans, take it apart to make sure the internals were clean (address bores if needed), and reassemble with all new seals/gaskets? Not as involved as a true rebuild, assuming the heads and all are fine.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Wow I must be blind if I missed the title in the ad. I saw the Benz, the monoblocks, and assumed it was an E55 without even reading the text. (Embarassed) Now I can see how customers would call me off my ads and ask about stuff already listed in the ad. Some people don't even bother reading the ads.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
I think it's almost a miracle that the Corvair 4-door hardtop came off looking as good as it did. IMO at least, the 4-door hardtop is a style that tends to look better as a larger car. And, since you need the whole rear window to roll down, it's simply harder to do on a car with a shorter wheelbase, which will most likely have smaller doors. Of course, you can always cheat, like how Mopar did in '56, or how GM did here and there from '57 through the early 60's...although interestingly, on bigger cars!
IIRC, Chrysler only tried 4-door hardtops on their smaller cars in 1962-64...although they were trying to pass those off as smaller full-sized cars. I believe Ford only tried it with the '70-71 intermediates. GM was a master of it though, doing it from '64-72. And nobody other than GM, with the Corvair, tried it with a compact!
I wonder though, did any imports ever try to do a small 4-door hardtop? The only foreign 4-door hardtop that pops into my mind is the Mercedes Adenauer.
Years ago when I put out a feeler ad for my 126, I got a few goofy replies, too.
Today spotted a couple of unusual R129 SLs - a pano roof equipped model, and a later "silver arrow" variant. Also saw a ~1970 Challenger in decent unrestored looking condition, and a first gen Supra.
The '69 Corvair Monza with 15 miles in the upcoming Mecum auction sold for $32K in 2012, per this article...I could live with a hobby car like that quite easily I think!
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20140325/carnews01/140329927
I was out at the mechanic's place during lunch to make another payment on my DeSoto. That '59 Edsel wasn't parked next to it anymore, but a '58 Plymouth Belevedere hardtop coupe was, in Christine wanna-be red, with a white top. It definitely looked like it was repainted, because the red just seemed too loud. And, it had just a touch of rust coming in ahead of the rear wheel opening. Wish I had the cell phone with me to take a pic of the car, but I had left it out in my truck.
Oh, and out in the parking lot in front of his shop, was a 1983 Olds Cutlass Supreme coupe. I think it was a Brougham model, as it had a leather interior. Also had a sunroof which, if factory, I guess was pretty rare back then.
Oh, almost forgot...Lemko, if you're reading this, I did ask the mechanic about that little orange piece that was on the fender lining of that Caddy. He said that he didn't know of a good source, other than trying to scout around on eBay or some other route. Sorry.
Was it one of those pop up roofs or an actual one that fully opened? It seems that most domestics from that era had those small pop ups. But I do remember old VW's had the sunroofs that fully opened into the roof with the little manual crank.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
Nah, this one looked like the type that fully opened, and went back into the roof. Now, I don't know if it was like modern sunroofs that can flip up, or slide back. Some of those older power roofs would only retract. That's how the sunroof is in my buddy's '78 Mark V Diamond Jubilee.
I just remember seeing a ton of cars from the 70s and 80s era and most had the pop up sunroofs.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
Yeah, lot of those pop-ups were aftermarket, a saw and a kit and you're done!
I think the A-specials (if that's what they were called--Monte Carlo, Grand Prix, Cutlass Supreme, Regal coupe) could be had with power sunroofs starting in '73 and right 'til the end ('87 or '88 depending on the model). They could be had with T-tops starting in '78 right through the end. Come to think of it, I'll have to check the brochures for power sunroofs in those very-late years. At GM anyway, the pop-up sunroofs seemed relegated to the cars like Celebrity at al and Grand Am et al.
The sunroof on my W126 would slide or pop - but it was metal. I guess that's the sunroof vs moonroof difference. A factory fintail sunroof slides back, manually operated.
I had a Duster in HS (I think it was a '74 or '75) that had a factory sliding steel sunroof (with the crank handle). That is the car that hooked me on them.
I assume it was a very rare option. And this was a plain jane version, so not some special package. The lady I bought it from called it her air conditioning, because it certainly didn't have the other kind! Or PS, or PB. But it did have an AM radio, and of course, a clutch and stick shift (sadly, just a slant 6).
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I looked at Monte Carlo brochures from '87 back to '83, and the '83 Cutlass brochure and couldn't find any mention of an optional power sunroof. They must have been discontinued by then, or never offered on that generation, one or the other. You mentioned a Cutlass Supreme Brougham having leather inside. I didn't remember that, and couldn't find it in the '83 Cutlass brochure. Was it that loose-pillow-looking interior?
I just pulled up the 1983 Olds Cutlass Brochure.
They don't show a pic of a car with a sunroof, or showcase it on the options page, but on page 27, buried in the fine print among all the other options, it's listed. It's listed as "Electric sliding glass sunroof (Coupe) (Reduces headroom slightly)". They also list "Genuine Sierra Leather Trim in the seating areas (Brougham models". But again, they don't show a picture of it. You'd think they would showcase something like that with a picture, rather than relegating it to the fine print in back. Also interestingly, in the brochure, there is no mention at all about the 307 V-8, other than showing it listed among the available engines, in the back. They brag about the 3.8's fuel economy, and also mention the 4.3 and 5.7 Diesel engines, even showing a picture of one of them. But no mention of the 307 (5.0). Cry of the times, I guess, as they were still on a fuel economy kick back then.
And yeah, this leather interior had the loose pillow look to it, but only on the backrests. The bottom cushion did look a bit thicker, however. And, with age, it had faded to the point that you could tell which parts were leather and which were just vinyl. The part where your butt sits, where the buttons are, was leather, but the trimming around it looked like it was just vinyl. It had a burgundy interior. The exterior was a two tone, sort of burgundy and beige, although a bit of dyslexia is setting in now and I can't remember which color was over which.
Back in the 1990's, one of my co-workers at the department store I worked at part time had a Cutlass Supreme Brougham with leather. I think it was a 1984. It was all white, but with a burgundy landau top and burgundy interior. Nice looking car. Now that I think about it, I believe you could get leather for a few years in the Regal of that generation, as well. I don't think you could get leather in a Grand Prix or Monte Carlo, though. I tried looking through www.oldcarbrochures.com, but couldn't find any Grand Prix-specific brochures from the 80's. The 1981 brochure, however, shows a 1981 Grand Prix Brougham in a beautiful 2-tone green, most likely that light-over-dark Jadestone, with a matching loose pillow velour interior. Stunning car...if that's your type of car, at least! Oh, and the Phoenix section shows a model sporting one of those pop up/removeable sunroofs.
Those were some of the last GM cars that I liked a lot. Looking through Monte Carlo brochures, it looks like they used the same car in photos from about '83 to '85--an overhead shot, taken sort-of accenting the rear of the car, with T-tops and those checkerboard aluminum wheels I just loved but rarely saw. You could never get leather in a Monte, of that I am sure. The Monte panel I liked the best was the '83-85, with non-shiny, dark fake wood inserts and gold pinstripe-like outlining. My '81 and '82 had this horrible, shiny 'plood' that looked like paint that needed mixing! LOL
I remember seeing these leather seats in Grand Prixs, '78-era...they called them "Viscount" seats:
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a279/s_holford/1978 Grand Prix/1978GrandPrix007.jpg
I just did not like the '78 Grand Prix at all when it came out. I remember seeing a light green one squirreled away out back of the Pontiac dealer in Clarion, PA, where I went to college. I was similarly horrified with the Monte Carlo when I saw one. I thought the Malibu dash was weird, but liked the Malibu Classic coupe and always said I'd have to have one with the optional Monte Carlo gauge cluster. Never did though.
Not sure about the B-O-P variants, but one think I thought seemed awfully cheap on the '78 Monte and Malibu was there was a big, visible, open space in front of the front tire, with no bracing of the fender there. It looked flimsy (and probably was). Later that model year they just put in a dark-colored splash shield there, which made things look more solid.
I think one problem with the 1978 Grand Prix might have been that they tried too hard to carry over the styling cues of the larger 1977, and it just didn't work as well. The other divisions, while they kept a brand identity, seemed to work their cues in a bit better to the new body. For instance, a 1978 Malibu still looked like a Chevy, but it didn't try so hard to ape the '77.
Normally I would give the Grand Prix some credit for maintaining the 4 headlights, which I always associated as a status symbol, as bigger cars usually had 4 lights and cheaper ones had two. But, with the turn signals mounted between them, a'la the '77, and with that narrow grille, it gave the car too much of a 6-headlight look, and seemed disproportionate. Similarly, they tried to ape the '73-77 with the dashboard and the door panels, but I don't think the result is quite as graceful on the '78. Still, I give them credit for trying to make it more unique, compared to Olds, Buick, and Chevy.
GM also took a bit of a chance with the '78 LeMans, giving it integrated, body-color bumpers. They weren't as graceful as today's bumpers, but they were a bit radical for the time. The '78 LeMans was considered a bit of a dud, saleswise, but in retrospect, perhaps it didn't do so bad. The LeMans, like most mid and full-sized cars, took a big hit in the 1974 fuel crisis. But, while other nameplates recovered, the LeMans didn't. I forget what 1974 sales were, but by 1975 they were down to around 100K, including the Grand Am variant. For 1976 it was down to around 96K, and only around 80K for 1977. Pontiac was hoping, I think, that the 1978 model would return the LeMans to its former glory, but it only managed around 120,000 units. However, I believe 1978 was a bit of a letdown year in general for GM's downsized intermediates. For the most part, I think sales were either level with their '77 counterparts, or even down. I know Buick and Olds in particular were hit hard, as the clunky Aeroback Century and Cutlass Salon models did not sell well at all. So I guess you could spin it around to say that the LeMans saw a 50% increase for 1978. I think they got up to around 136,000 units for 1979, but then that got cut to around 90K for 1980 and around 85K for 1981.
One car from that era that I wouldn't mind having, is a 1981 Grand LeMans coupe. I thought the '81 restyle, with the Trans Am looking front-end, looked really good. Unfortunately, by that time, I think every engine offered in the LeMans was a bit of a dud. 231 V-6, which was not nearly as durable in those days. 252-4bbl V-6, which was even worse, as it had thinner cylinder walls, IIRC. I think the 301 was relegated to the wagons by then. I know earlier versions were troubleprone, tending to spin bearings and whatnot, but they might have improved the later ones? There was the 265 V-8, based on the 301. It had 120 hp, and MT or C&D clocked an '81 Grand Prix at 14.9 seconds 0-60 with that engine, but on the plus side, it wasn't powerful enough to hurt itself, so apparently it was more durable than the 301. But, if it were a price is no object thing, there are any number of engines that will swap in that engine bay!
Back then we had the '78 Grand LeMans Safari dad bought new, and a bit later on I bought my '77 LeMans coupe. They actually both had the same engine (Chevy 305) but were world apart in terms of feel. While the '77 rode and handled very nicely, it was unquestionably a big-feeling car with surprisingly little room inside and in the trunk. The '78 seemed to make better use of the space for passengers (although it felt noticeably narrower inside) and felt lighter and more nimble in driving. It was faster too thanks to losing all that weight. But it felt rather willowy and wasn't particularly well made. For everyday driving the '78 was better because it was smaller, easier to park, and had better gas mileage. But if I had either one now as a hobby car, I would prefer the '77.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
The downsized '78 cars definitely made better use of space. However, I notice some shortcomings such as smaller, more thinly-padded seats, more intrusion from the driveshaft and transmission hump, more intrusion in the back seat area from the wheel wells (one way they maintained or even increased legroom was to push the rear seat further back), narrower footwell area, and more intrusion from the dashboard, mainly from that center stack area that housed the radio and HVAC controls.
However, my '76 is a Grand LeMans, so I wonder if it has thicker, better-padded seats than a regular LeMans would have? The seats are definitely comfortable for a 70's car. Not much contouring like with modern cars, but still well-padded. I remember one Consumer testing magazine (not CR, but Consumer Advocate or something like that?) testing a couple of LeMans coupes of the '73-77 generation, and they gave them high marks for seat comfort.
My '76 is a bit skimpy on headroom up front but oddly, has more in the back than you might think. However that might have something to do with where I have the power seat positioned.
Where the car comes up really short is in back seat legroom. and trunk space. Part of the trunk's problem, however, might be because of the way the decklid slopes down, plus those pontoon style rear quarters that have to cut into trunk space moreso than on something like a Malibu, Century, or Cutlass sedan. I think back seat legroom is only listed at 32.9", and trunk volume is around 14.5 cubic feet, I think? I want to say that the downsized '78 coupes had about 36" of legroom and around 16.2 cubic feet of trunk volume. The back seat is also a bit hard to get into because of the way the B-pillar slopes forward. However, one nice touch is that on my '76, the ash trays are mounted in the back part of the armrest of the front doors. On the '78 and later models, they were in the back of the front seats, right about where my knee would hit!
My '76 seems pretty nimble to drive, but at this point it's also one of the smallest cars in my fleet, so my senses might be a bit warped. It's 208" long, on a 112" wheelbase. My 2000 Park Ave is something like 206.8" long, but on a 113.8" wb. I mostly drive my 2012 Ram these days though, and with a ~140" wheelbase, and about 231" long, it makes those other two seem kinda dainty!
Overall, I think the downsized '78 cars were a good effort at the time. However, I don't think they were quite the success that GM had with the big cars a year before. I think they also went a bit too far, with some of those under-sized engines like the Buick 196 and Chevy 200 V-6. But to be fair, those engines were probably no worse than a '77 model with a Buick 231 or the Chevy 250 straight six. CR clocked a '77 Cutlass Supreme sedan with the 260 V-8 at around 21.6 seconds in 0-60. I'd guess that engine would have been good for around 14-15 seconds, maybe a bit better, on the downsized '78 models?
I think GM 'pushed the envelope' more with the '78 intermediates than they did with the '77 full-sizes. I hung around Chevy dealerships then, and I and my Dad were both turned off by the no-roll-down rear windows and mini spare tire. In four-doors, the '78 wheelbase shrunk nearly eight inches, compared to 5.5 inches in the full-size cars. I very-much still like the full-size cars, but I could also enjoy a midsize GM of that period, if I could 'order' one now like then!
A friend and I drove out to St. Louis to visit a high-school friend of ours who was going to Washington University, and we took my friends' parents' brand-new orangish-gold '78 Cutlass Salon Brougham 4-door. Yeah, it was a slantback, but I remember thinking it was quite smooth, quiet, and luxurious inside. I'll go on record--I could enjoy a two-door Cutlass slantback in the right options and colors, as you just...don't...see...them! LOL
I always found it odd that when GM downsized the intermediates for '78, they retained a full-frame body on frame design. It wasn't like they didn't know how to do a full unibody or a unibody/front stub frame combo. I guess the thinking was that body on frame retained the ride quality and noise control that buyers in that segment expected. But it seems odd in retrospect. And of course those lightweight frames were that design's kiss of death in the salty rust belt.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I've discussed this with andre here before, but I think those cars seemed like a small, big car, when the Fairmont seemed like a big, small car. I think body-on-frame was responsible for some of that.
IIRC the talk was keeping the big car ride and solidity with the frame and separate body isolated by mount pads. I had a 77 Cutlass and an 80 Cutlass. I think the 80 was marginal at keeping the large car ride. But it was better than some friends' unibody cars of that era.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Starting in 1974, Chrysler tried a compromise with their midsized cars, by making the front sub-frame isolated from the rest of the car, with rubber mounts. This would have been the midsized Satellite/Coronet/Charger, and carried over to the Cordoba/Charger SE/Magnum, and even the 1979-81 R-body. My '79 Newport, which had about 230,000 miles on it when I rescued it from the junkyard, needed those mounts replaced to pass inspection. I drove it around a bit before the inspection, and going around turns you could feel the body actually shift around, compared to that sub-frame!
I think the 1976 Aspen/Volare, and every car based on them (LeBaron/Diplomat/Gran Fury/5th Ave, and Cordoba/Mirada/Imperial) also used an isolated subframe.
I had a 1980 Malibu, 1982 Cutlass Supreme coupe, and 1986 Monte Carlo, and I thought they were all good riding cars. This isn't an apples-to-apples comparison, but they definitely had a better ride than either of my Darts, which were similar-sized cars, but just cheap compacts, or my '89 Gran Fury, which was a bit larger, but also an ex police car.
My memory says the AMC Pacer talked about isolating the front end with rubber IIRC.
I'll have check to see if I'm recalling that correctly.
The stub frame on the front of my 98 leSabre had 3 sets of rubber mounts on each side that isolated it from the passenger compartment rearward unibody/frame. I wonder how these compared to Chrysler's step forward, which I can recall from the advertising. I know one of my mounts was deteriorating from the winter salts.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
andre, you mentioned 'skimpy headroom' on your '76 Grand LeMans. At the time, I wanted a '74 Monte Carlo instead of the Impala Sport Coupe Dad chose, but he said his head brushed the ceiling in a Monte and he hated that. Ironically, in the downsized Montes he did not have that problem. He bought a new '80 and a new '84 Monte.
I think my LeMans is listed at around 52.9" in overall height, whereas the '78+ intermediate coupes were around 54.5" or so. One thing that might make a difference, is that my LeMans has a power seat, and it can get into some pretty contorted positions. None of my downsized intermediate GM's had a power seat. I think I keep the seat in my LeMans adjusted a bit higher than what the seat in the downsized cars would have been at, so that might be part of the difference. Still, I'm sure those downsized cars had more headroom.
Another interesting oddity...If I have an open palm on the steering wheel, versus wrapping my fingers around it, the tips of my fingers actually brush the windshield when I turn the wheel! That's LeMans is the only car I've ever had, where the steering wheel was so close to the windshield. It also has a tilt wheel though, and I keep it adjusted just a bit upward.
One of the worst cars I've ever seen for headroom is my buddy's '78 Mark V. I swear the seat feels like it's almost on the floor. And still, I need to recline it, to keep my hair from brushing the ceiling. It has a sunroof though, which probably makes it even worse than what they'd normally be.
The tv was on in the other room, and I just heard a car crash. Went in and rolled it back. It's an episode of "Cannon". Black 1960 Ford Fairlane 500 4-door sedan. A couple of bad guys drove it to the edge of an embankment and are about to let it go over the edge with a body in it...I have it paused now...almost afraid to un-pause. Oh, the humanity!
And, thar she blows. Literally. Cars goes over the edge, rolls, and explodes when it gets to the bottom. Somehow, that crash/explosion look familiar. I think it got recycled in an episode of "Rod Serling's Night Gallery."
Chrysler started doing that on their full-size C-body cars in '71 (I believe the Chryslers actually got it the year prior with Dodge and Plymouth waiting an extra year). "Torsion-Quiet Ride" was what they called it.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Andre, got a question about your LeMans...something I thought was very cheesy about similar-era Chevelles and Monte Carlos was, you'd open the hood, and you could see the raggedy-cut bottom of the windshield....no molding at the bottom, or anything. On the big cars, there was a piece of bright trim there. Was that a Chevy cost-saving thing, or did the B-O-P cars have that exposed bottom-of-windshield too?
I never realized that, although I guess it would make sense that Chrysler would do something like that with their bigger cars first, and then let it trickle down to the smaller ones.
I wonder if handling was sacrificed any, when they started going to those isolated subframes? I read somewhere that the Plymouth Fury/Gran Fury was usually the best handling of the lower-priced big cars, and the only thing that changed that was when GM downsized for 1977.
My 1986 Pontiac Grand Am had a pop up sunroof that could be removed and stored in the trunk, but it didn't slide back.
By the way, contrary to the reputation of domestic 1980s cars, that 4 cylinder, 5-speed Grand Am was very reliable and low maintenance, until the head gasket blew at 188,000 miles. About one week before the engine went someone bent the driver's side door in, doing quite a bit of damage and making it difficult to open the door. Although the fact that it was a hit and run bothered me it made the decision of whether to repair or junk the car easy. By that time the car didn't owe me anything.
My 1986 Grand Am's pop up sunroof came that way from the factory.
Those Mopar stick shift mechanisms were really crude, especially the 3-speeds, and far from a joy to drive. The Torqueflyte automatic was a better choice, in my opinion.
They may have been similar power wise, but the Chevy I-6 was much smoother than the GM 229/231 c.i. V6s of that era. No comparison regarding noise, vibration and harshness. Okay, the noise levels may have been comparable in terms of decibels, but those V6s just sounded cruder. They also vibrated noticeably more than the I-6.
I wouldn't mind having my dark green 1978 LeMans 4 door with the optional handling suspension (don't recall what Pontiac called that suspension package, which also included wider tires) as a hobby car. It's been years since I've seen a '78 LeMans.
I don't recall there being any issues with the shifter in the Duster. Typical 3 on the floor domestic, but IIRC it was easy to use, and had a positive action. Nothing like some of the later FWD cable jobs that felt like a stick in a bag of rubber stoppers.
Though I do remember one instance where I was in 2nd pulling to the top of a short hill, and went down for 3rd but caught 1st instead. that made a lot of noise! About as bad as the time I decided to wind out my Camaro (6 cyl, powerglide) in first and manually shift to 2nd. I thought the darned thing blew up. Never tried that again.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
My '77 LeMans was like that too, so I assume they all were. GM did the same thing with the downsized B & C-body cars beginning in '77. My '68 Cutlass has the stainless trim covering the bottom of the windshield. Not necessarily a good thing, as it can retain water under the stainless and the result is rust in the cowl.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I honestly don't know if my '76 Grand LeMans has a chrome trim piece at the bottom of the windshield or not. I'll look in the morning...it's cold as hell and snowing out right now! As for rust at the bottom of the windshield/cowl area, my '67 Catalina convertible had that. I had it fixed back in 2008, along with a bunch of other issues.
I'm thinking that my LeMans doesn't have any trim down there. At least, I remember looking at one of my cars, and noticing the exposed bottom of the windshield. I don't think it was either one of my '79 New Yorkers.
>
There's a topic on the gbody forum describing a complete '78 Olds Aeroback Salon build project. The owner says he plans to finish the car in black/gold 442 trim like the one here. At first glance all I could think was, "why?" But after a while I started to like it. Looks like he's doing almost all the work himself and he just wants something different.
This is like the aftermarket sunroofs I saw in the 70s and 80s.
Those Aerobacks aren't bad looking, in the right color, and with the rally wheels. I think the black/gold of the 4-4-2 looks pretty decent. I've also seen factory photos of a Century coupe that was black over silver, with sporty rims. I think it might have been a turbo coupe. It was pretty sharp. I think it was a 1980. I think the last time I saw an aeroback was at one of the Carlisle PA swap meets. IIRC, it was a base level Century sedan, in sort of an orangish-brown color. This was probably a few years back, now.
That orangish-brown color was the color of the '78 Cutlass Salon Brougham sedan I rode in and drove to St. Louis and back in spring '78. Pretty popular. I could like a two-door Salon Brougham in that dark plum color with Super Stock wheels. It would be different from other stuff at the cruise-ins, for sure.
Spent the day in Canuckistan yesterday, saw lots of odd private import JDM kind of stuff as to be expected - a couple Delica, Figaro, Skyline, RX7, a little 80s super tin can (maybe Honda City), and the best, a VW Golf Country, like this - super cool
In the auto show there was a small display of old cars, this blue and gold thing was the most eye catching, maybe a little overdone:
There was a Porsche display outside the auto show, these two were most remarkable:
Old rust-prone car out in the rain on the Vancouver waterfront:
And a 930 factory slantnose with official authenticity certificate - these are doing very well in the market and I predict there's still a long way for values to grow:
That cliff may have been in my hometown. A lot of scenes where cars go off a cliff near the ocean were filmed there. They made them haul the cars away afterwards which couldn't have been easy.
And to continue a previous theme, imagine a light yellow (?) Duster parked here, in front of a house that grandpa built with his bare hands:
Spotted a 1970 Ford Torino 2-door hardtop painted bright yellow to mimic a Torino Cobra. Could tell it was a "regular" Torino by the taillamp assemblies.
What a cool house! In Seattle?