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
Yikes! It looks like a weird little spaceship. The subtle continental kit isn't too bad, but everything else is - the chrome trim, faux side pipes, skirts, curb feelers, baby moons, rear window, wow. It's like a Pep Boys/JC Whitney show car. The money spent on that could have probably been used to restore an actual cool old car.
The PT was kind of wasted potential - it was cool when launched, but was allowed to wither on the vine.
This was my wife's. Not the actual car, but a dead-on double.
http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Ford_Thunderbird/1978_Ford_Thunderbird/1978_Thunderbird_Brochure/1978 Ford Thunderbird-03.jpg
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
Those PT Cruisers remind me of old Chrysler Airflows.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
@bhill2 , @fintail ;
I loved those '77 to '79 Thunderbirds when they were new. Almost had dad convinced to buy one in '79, white with brown front and rear half-vinyl roofs and bucket seats/console inside. I want to say the interior was white but I can't recall for sure. Funny though, when I see one now I don't like them much. That rarely happens with cars I liked when I was young.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Not bad, I like the wheels. I seem to remember my teacher's being a reddish copper color, but it's been about 30 years now. I don't remember the wheels.
Maybe not strange for people here, but maybe for "normal" people, I can still recall the cars of teachers from second grade onward. Also, the cars of neighbors going back to my earliest memories.
I saw the same car at a cold car show on a cold Saturday. I realized afterward I talked to the owner who was a retiree nonteaching staff from BSU (Ball State U, my alma mater) in beautiful Muncie, Indiana. He mentioned his wife had passed away from some awful disease. So time on his hands.
There's more to it than meets the eye: a fireplace in the form of a TV showing flames for your camping trip. And then I assume it has satellite or DVD.
And lots of chrome under the hood. Note the etching of the car's profile in the chrome plate on the underside of the hood.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I like the angular design - but as typical for period Fords and many cars, the huge overhangs can be kind of iffy. I'd pick a highline model with t-tops, biggest engine available, in a metallic silver blue with similar interior (a beige interior might work, too), and wheels like in the car bhill posted. Of course, I might hate driving it.
Here's a nice one on youtube - shocking that a malaise beast has so many views.
When I was a little kid, my mother had the gargantuan previous style Bird, white on white. I have no attraction to those, they are just too big and maybe kind of silly.
Well, I can give him credit for going all the way, anyway
I have always liked those Turbine rims.
Does This Count?
If that Z-28 was in nice shape, and had a 4 speed, i would want it bad.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Yes, I would recommend that if someone is going to go for one of these, get the biggest engine you can; the car if fairly heavy. As far as driving it, it is pretty much the 'driving your living room sofa' sort of car. That is not meant as a dig, it was a wonderful freeway flyer. As a canyon carver, not so much.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
Sure, the Ford 400 had adequate power, but sucked gas as if it had one day to live. I know, because I once had a Mercury Montego wagon with that engine. And, it only had a 2-barrel. It made my Olds 98 with the 455 4-barrel seem economical, by comparison.
After being accustomed to newer Benzes, you might not like the Thunderbird experience. However, it might not be too bad, for the period. My guess is that the experience might not be all that different from my '76 LeMans. My LeMans is shorter, 208" on a 112" wb, whereas the T-bird is on a 114" wb, and I think about 215" long. So definitely, more overhang there.
I really don't know how Fords of that era handle, though. My only real 70's experience is the LeMans and my two '79 New Yorkers. The LeMans actually handles fairly well, although it rides a bit harsh. Its suspension was beefed up at some point in its life, though, so I'd guess it was mushier when it was new? The New Yorkers aren't too bad, either, especially for their size...118.5" wb and 221.3" long. They give up a bit of ride quality because of their leaf springs, though. And somehow, they manage to feel a bit less bulky to pilot around than the external dimensions would suggest.
The one thing I remember about sitting in a few of those '72-79 era Ford midsizes, was that the seating position seemed really low. So did the '71-79 Mopar intermediates. GM's '73-77 midsized cars seemed to have a higher seating position.
@andre1969 - !970s Fords (excepting the Fox platform cars) were really Novacaine to drive - steering very numb (though not quite as feather-light as Mopar and Cadillac) and generally very soft springs and minimal roll control in the suspension. They rode nice but that was their main advantage. Not an engaging driving experience in the twisties, that's for sure.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Ahh yeah, that's one other shortcoming with the Mopars...that overly numb steering. My New Yorkers are like that...it seems like it's fairly fast and responsive, but still numb. The LeMans seems to "communicate" with the driver a bit better.
When I was learning to drive, I logged a lot of miles on my grandparents' fox-based '85 LTD, as well as Mom's '80 Malibu coupe, which became my first car. Even though I didn't have much driving experience, I liked the way the LTD seemed a bit more responsive, nimble, and was easier to parallel park. The Malibu rode a bit better though, and just had a more substantial feel to it. Felt more like a "real" midsized car, whereas the LTD felt more like a compact trying to pass as midsize, but not quite making it.
It seemed like every Ford car review of the '70s and '80s had the phrase 'numb steering' in it...
Funny you say that. When Dad was shopping for his '78 LeMans, I was all gaga over the new Fairmont thanks to the long-lead articles in the car magazines. Since both came in wagon form (which he wanted) we drove them both. What a difference! Mom described the Fairmont as "tinny", while the LeMans seemed like a big GM car, quiet and smooth, just scaled down. I remember when we drove the Fairmont, it was raining. We stopped at an intersection and happened to be under some overhead wires. Every now an then a big water drop would fall off the wires and land on the roof of the Ford. It made a huge clanging sound - the roof panel seemed to have absolutely no insulation in it. That's when I knew what "tinny" meant.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Also, I don't know if there's anything to this, or it was just my imagination...or giving into GM's marketing. But, my '86 Monte Carlo seemed like a more substantial car than my '80 Malibu coupe. And the '82 Cutlass Supreme I had seemed more substantial, still.
I know the Monte and Cutlass were longer, even though they were on the same wheelbase. And probably a little heavier. The Cutlass had those Olds Rally wheels that were color-keyed to the body, whereas the Monte just had steel 14" rims with hubcaps, as did the Malibu. I wonder if those Cutlass Rally wheels were wider than the Chevy wheels, and maybe that just made the car feel better-planted?
The Cutlass also had nicer interior materials...a dash made out of a more leathery-textured material that seemed softer and less prone to cracking than the Chevies (which did crack). And the corduroy-look of the cloth seats looked better than the wet rat-fur look of the Monte. But, again, those were just minor details, and I don't think they'd make any car feel more substantial than the Malibu. I guess the Monte and Cutlass may have had more sound deadening? The Monte also had a 305, so it was probably beefed up, compared to the Malibu.
Back in the '60s and '70s there was a noticeable difference in both materials and build quality between a Chevy and the more upmarket brands in GMs lineup. You saw more dash pads cracked in Chevys later on in their lives than you did in Olds and Buick. The upholstery was better. Chevy used anodized aluminum trim where the others used stainless. The other brands engines were better than the SBC. Hell, even sometimes the body structure was different - a buddy is restoring a '71 Cutlass and needed a roof section at the top of the windshield. He discovered that the internal reinforcements under the headliner were far more substantial in the Olds version of the A-body than in the Chevy version. The list goes on and on.
When GM corporatized divisional engineering a lot of those differences may have gone away and instead things were driven by the cost accountants. And we know where that led GM...
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I am used to old MBs too, and I am sure even the fintail handles like an M3 compared to that T-Bird. Might be annoying in aggressive city driving or on a winding road, but probably lovely for 65mph cruising.
Maybe somewhat like a younger Clarkson's somewhat whiny take on malaise era American cars (but they were still better than most same era British cars...)
Ha ha ha - that Lincoln front end could have come off of a Mercury Grand Marquis and that steering wheel was probably plucked off of the Crown Vic assembly line. I think they were powered by the generic Fomoco 302 as well. Yep, that fine tradition of Lincoln Luxury
Wait a minute...dude is whining about 70's cars, yet he's showing off an '85 or so Town Car? And he wants to whine about the hairstyles back then, yet he's sporting that poodle-fro?
If the 302 is what was in my 1970 Mustang, I have to say it was the worse engine I ever owned. Pollution control hell. Weak.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
By '85 the 302 wasn't bad. It was fuel injected, although in retrospect I'm not sure if it was TBI or PFI. I was pretty sure my 1985 Consumer Guide said the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis 302s were PFI, but could be wrong. I remember it had 140 hp, something like 250 ft-lb of torque. With the optional package that gave you the dual exhaust, quicker axle, and traction-lok rear end, they got a Crown Vic to do 0-60 in 10.5 seconds. I remember that was a ~$227 option. They also tested a Grand Marquis, but without that package. They didn't list a 0-60 time, but gave it a 4 out of 5 rating. They didn't list the threshholds for their ratings, but I remember them giving a Cressida a "4" for doing 0-60 in 9.6 seconds, and a 3.8 Regal a "3" for doing 0-60 in "about 13 seconds", as well as a few other cars that scored in the low 13 range. So I would guess their "4" category ranged from something like 9.5-12.5 seconds?
Oddly, the 302 was rated 140 hp, whether it had dual exhaust or not.
For comparison, the Olds 307 was rated at 140 hp, 255 ft-lb of torque. The Chevy 305 was rated 150 hp in midsized cars, 165 in full-sized cars and trucks. The 165 hp version had 245 ft-lb, not sure about the 150. And obviously, all of these engines were offered with more power in cars like the Mustang, Mark VII LSC, Monte Carlo SS, Camaro, 4-4-2, etc.
I also find it amusing that poodle-boy is whining about how poorly domestic cars were put together back then, and again, using this Town Car as an example. Consumer Guide didn't test a Town Car in the issue I have, but the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis received ratings of 4-5 (on a scale of 1-5) for build quality components, which put it on par with the better Japanese and German cars. As for the British cars in 1985? Well, there weren't any around for Consumer Guide to even test, so that must be saying something... I guess a few years later, maybe they would have tested a Sterling, but in that case, Honda showed them how to build the thing and they STILL didn't get it right!
I had a 302 in a 99 Explorer and all it did was ping, even on premium. Ford techs and field reps had no other ideas. It was also a pig, except it did have a lot of pulling torque if someone wanted to tow with it.
On the subject of 70's engines...I think by '77, they were starting to get a handle on emissions controls, and perhaps the engines weren't too bad. At least, I remember CR testing a '77 LTD-II with a 302, a Fury/Monaco with a 318, and an Impala with a 305. The Ford and Mopar topped two tons as I recall, and the Impala was probably around 3800. I think all three managed 0-60 in around 12.5-13.5 seconds. Not too bad for the time. They also tested a Cutlass sedan, but it only had a 260, so its time was really bad, around 21.6 seconds.
By '79 though, the feds tightened controls again, and performance/driveability suffered again. That year, CR tested a 305 Caprice, a 318 St. Regis, and a 302 LTD. The LTD came in the best, at 13.9 seconds. The Chevy was 15.4, and the St. Regis mustered a pathetic 15.9!
Horsepower had dropped a bit in those intervening years. The 305-2bbl went from 145 to 130 hp. However, a 4-bbl version with 160 was introduced. However, I think it just went in the midsized cars. For 1980, the 2-bbl was dropped, leaving the 4-bbl 305 as the only choice. The 318 dropped from around 145-150 hp to 135. And I think the 302 went from 140 hp to 129.
I think by 1983, the domestics were finally starting to get the bugs worked out in reaction to that second wave of emissions controls, and performance started to improve again. One telltale sign, I guess, is that all those undersized V-8's, like the Ford 255, Chevy 267, and Olds 260, got dropped after '82.
You're right, I have a plot of 0-60 times over the years, '72-'82 were pretty uniformly bad, but they've been improving pretty much every year since then, starting with a big drop in '83.
Looks like the owner freed up some trunk space by relocating the spare tire.
One comparison that always sticks in my mind, to show just how bad cars got during the second fuel crunch, was this... in 1955, Consumer Reports tested a 1955 DeSoto Fireflite, with the 291-4bbl Hemi, 200 gross hp, and a 2-speed automatic. It weighed about two tons. In 1980, Motortrend tested a New Yorker 5th Ave with a 318-2bbl that was choked down to 120 hp, but it had a 3-speed automatic. It was close in weight to that DeSoto.
Well, the DeSoto managed 0-60 in about 13.3 seconds. The New Yorker...about 14.1. So, that's 25 years of progress for ya!
Oh, and on the police car front, the last year a full-sized police cruiser was able to break 10 seconds in 0-60 was 1978, according to the Michigan State police. That year, a Catalina with a 400 managed around 9.9, and a Fury or Monaco (marketed as a midsized, but hardly a lightweight) was good for around 9.2 with a 440. For 1979, a St. Regis with a 360 came close, at 10.1 seconds. It wasn't until 1989, that the 10 second barrier was broken again, and that was with a Caprice 350 TBI. It barely broke it, something like 9.8 seconds. Now, there were small cars, like Mustang and Camaro interceptors that were pretty quick during that time. And I'd imagine that the few years they put the 165 hp version of the 302 in the small LTD, it might have broken 10 seconds. But, with "standard" sized police cars, it would be a decade before performance really returned.
Oh, a '79 Volare 360 managed 8.7 seconds, and a Malibu 350 was good for 8.9, but the Michigan State police didn't test those...I think Road and Track got ahold of them and ran that test. I think the Volare managed to hit 100 mph in about 23 seconds, a number that still looked respectable among police cars around 2004 or so. Supposedly the Michigan State Police is the holy grail of copcar tests.
I had the 302 in a '78 Ford Fairmont, but that was a pretty light car. It was a great engine, although FE wasn't great by today's standards - maybe low 20's in town or on the road. But it handled well.
But not a "classic" by any means. I do see a survivor around SoCal every now and then.
The 302 stretched out the timing chain, so if you drove one that was miled up, they got very doggy. But you can build a fresh 302 with FI and some mods and it'll go pretty good.
Well, the DeSoto managed 0-60 in about 13.3 seconds. The New Yorker...about 14.1. So, that's 25 years of progress for ya!
>
Well the shoot-'em-up 50s horsepower wars did become a heavily regulated CAFE derby by 1980, so I'll give ya that. Still, there are significant trans gearing and final drive specs separating those two cars. I'll bet that '55 Fireflite could easily spin up to 65-mph or above without even shifting out of 1st gear to trip the 60mph mark. But that 1980 NYer probably had to make an upshift to reach 60-mph even with a 2:45 final drive. My old '71 Mustang with a 302/210 gross hp and C4 automatic couldn't hit 60-mph with upshifting either. But weighing a half ton less, it could easily outrun either the DeSoto or NYer. Some physics lessons never change.
Saw something unusual today - Ferrari 365GT 2+2, late 60s. Also an early 70s 911, the same red Volvo 544 I see now and then, and a couple W123s.
My first car was a '70 Galaxie coupe with a 302.. Timing chain did me in..
2nd car was a '77 Mustang with a 302... no issues with the engine in that car (just everything else).
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Mecum is in Seattle this weekend - lots of obscure cars listed
And maybe some on the road too, as tomorrow is the big annual "Leavenworth Drive" - a Euro themed event usually featuring about 1000 cars. Much of it will be VW fans, but there will be other stuff too. I am debating taking the fintail, a little leery of taking it on the pass - but a guy I know is taking a 240D without fear, I should be as fast as that anyway.
As long as these old buggies don't overheat, they'll make it...just stay in the right lane, keep the revs up and read a magazine.
I was just out in the old beast - all seems well, but if the weather is bad, I'll make the drive in climate controlled comfort rather than go on a daring adventure in an unrestored half century old car.
Saw an E28 M5 while I was out, probably out getting ready for the event tomorrow.
Took the Magnette out for a local run just now and tried to identify the rattle coming from in the dashboard - a sort of "plinky plonky" noise, which had developed over the last few days.. Anyway about two miles up the road the noise disappeared - "great" I thought - and then I noticed that the speedometer, which has been rattling for many years, with the needle swaying by about ten or fifteen mph while running along, was now dead steady. "Great " I thought again.
About five miles down the road I realised what had happened - the speedo is now working fine - but the odometer isn't turning at all - so no new miles are now being registered. It all comes off one cable, so the fault is internal to the unit not just a loose cable..
It isn't illegal to have a speedo that doesn't register miles travelled but unfortunately it is a requirement of my insurance as I have a fixed mileage policy, so that is going to mean some fiddling now - I have a spare unit (luckily) but that hasn't been used since the early 1970s and I think that it was faulty then - so I am getting a quote for having that one stripped and fixed and will then change it for the functioning one that just forgets how many miles I have done...
I went on the "Leavenworth Drive" yesterday and had a good time. Quite a few odd cars on the drive - several E30 M3s and at least one E28 M5, several BMW E21 including a cool 80s custom one with Ronal wheels and rear louvers, a few 2002s including at least one tii, 911/930 targa (don't know if real), a couple Vanagon Syncros and VWs of every kind, 80s Audis - a Euro event, so mostly Euro cars along for the drive.
Maybe the rarest thing there, this Opel - these just didn't survive:
This guy has a fun sense of humor, and the car apparently made the long drive without incident:
The area where I parked, nice mix - RHD Skyline, nice 190E 2.3-16, my lovely old beast, a very nice 240D, modified Golf, 300D turbo, VW pickup:
nice Opel. In college I had a 1975 Manta. Green. Fun car to drive. when it was running (that dog got towed. A lot)
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
That Opel looks like the one I drove in high school over in Germany. Nice car and a lot of fun.
Spotted a pretty rough classic boater's car yesterday - a 4WD Toyota Tercel SR5 wagon, circa 1985 or so. Appropriate since we boated the Rio Grande Racecourse section yesterday (and swam). My paddling skills are as rusty as the Tercel was.
I used to have one of those when I had a house in Hawaii. Purred like a mashed cat.
Those 4WD Tercels are still frequently seen on the roads in WA and OR - kind of a hippie car these days. I remember a teacher I had in 4th grade drove one, back when they were late model.
The allure of them escapes me. I liked their practicality but they are gutless. What good is 4WD if the engine can't pull the skin off rice pudding?
Thanks. That was my laugh for the day.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Found a couple pics online
The pre-drive meeting at the event I attended on Saturday - a few obscure cars visible (and a familiar one a little in the background):
The E21 I mentioned earlier - I don't care for the "stanced" cliche/adjustable suspension look, but this was a cool car otherwise:
Still looking for a pic of the 930 Targa.
the BMW just looks plain silly slammed like that. does not work aesthetically at all.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.