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 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It actually looks a lot brighter in person, sort of an emerald green. It also doesn't help that the parking lot was cast in evening shadow, and my windshield is a bit dirty...
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Also stumbled into the last day of an "excavations" exhibit at the art museum with photographs by Patrick Nagatani, with great shots of a mummified Porsche, a dig at Stonehenge that yielded a Bentley and my favorite, "Volkswagen Beetles being exposed at Xian, Necropolis of Mt. Li".
His Model A Woody at the Very Large Array is a hoot too.
I guess the Ladas and Hyundai Pony/Stellar are all gone now, if they are going to survive anywhere, it's in the BC lower mainland. Haven't seen one.
New looking '63 Studebaker Avanti
Citroen SM with fully functional hydraulics!
There were a plethora of 'Vettes, 'Stangs and muscle cars. And cars from his dealers, a gentleman with what sounded like an Aussie accent mistook me for a BMW salesman as I was conversing with one in front of an i3 (alas, no i8. Just as well, I left my checkbook at home). Of course, I was wearing a Jaguar hat...
A favorite of mine: Bright red '04 Pontiac GTO, in the back window a sticker that said, "How do you like your Prius?"
I also tried on a Jag F-Type S Coupe. Beautiful, but not for the claustrophobic.
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
I also saw a fairly new BMW 328d wagon. Not a classic but quite obscure.
Went to the Seattle auto show yesterday, in the old cars section a few interesting things - 47 Lincoln convertible, big Dodge truck based woody, bullet nose Studebaker coupe, some custom cars.
I can go days or even weeks without seeing a K-Car these days, much less two within a short time. That's unusual. They've becoming relatively rare. I took note because, while they're not worth much, and never will be, they're of historical significance for having saved Chrysler. Also, these two particular models are among the rarest of the K-Car variants, in terms of production numbers.
When was the last time you saw a K-Car on the road?
One of my grandmother's cousins had a 1986 or so Dodge 600 sedan. She and her Mom drove it down for Granddad's funeral in 1990, and since they really weren't that familiar with the area, they let me chauffeur them around in it. Not the happiest of times, obviously, but I do remember kinda liking the car. She ended up trading it for a '92 or so Crown Vic.
I had my '79 5th Ave out today. I had to move it out of the garage to get to some junk that was behind it that I wanted to throw out. Battery was just about dead, but it charged up pretty quickly. I drove it around the "block" (about 3 miles), to give it a bit of a run, and saw a '71 or so Plymouth Satellite/Roadrunner coupe coming in the opposite direction. I pretty much "know" most of the old cars around my neighborhood, and I don't remember seeing this one before.
Spotted a later run Cimarron this morning.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
There's a K-car woody that shows up pretty regularly at the car show that Lemko, Keystonecarfan, and I go to in Macungie, PA. Lemko usually makes a joke about it being John Voight's car, which was from an episode of "Seinfeld".
As for GM J-bodies, I'll still see a later-model Cavalier, or an occasional Pontiac Sunfire now and then. But by and large, the first-gen 1982-94 styles have pretty much run their course. Back in college, one of my friends had an '89 Cavalier Z-24 coupe. That was a pretty sharp looking car, I thought. It had a nice interior, too, almost as if GM actually put, umm...effort, or something, into it?
It was good to see it since you are starting to see fewer and fewer Intrigues on the roads here. It had just over 60K miles on it 5 years ago, god knows how many now. The newest Intrigue is a dozen years old now and I imagine parts for any of the unique things they might need are unobtainium now.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I rarely see an Intrigue anymore, can't remember the last one. I still see an Alero here and there, they stick in my mind because to my eyes, the tail lights are disproportionately large.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
When my 2000 Intrepid got totaled, back in November 2009, I had thought about trying to find a 2nd-gen Olds Aurora to replace it. I really like the 1995-99 Aurora, but figured I wanted to go a bit newer for a daily driver. Plus, I think the 2nd gen was better built and more reliable, in general. I did find a few prospects online, but then stumbled across the 2000 Park Ave that I ended up buying, so I never had a chance to go and look at any of them in person.
Those Alero tail lights were indeed large; almost cartoonishly large, in that they drew too much attention to themselves. I always thought they detracted from what was otherwise a decently styled car.
I'm surprised at how many '99-'03 Acura TLs are still on the road, many of them with >200,000 miles, according to ads for used ones. The odometer of my '99 recently flipped over 150,000. It's been low maintenance and is still going strong. I considered an Intrigue at the time I purchased the TL. The Intrigue was an appealing runner-up, but I'm glad I went with the TL. Fewer issues and, most likely, lower maintenance. I still like the Intrigue, though.
Acura should be fine, just keep that transmission serviced.
I have my transmission flushed and refilled every 30,000 miles, and so far, so good. Modern automatics tend to fail catastrophically when they go. They go into limp mode, if you're lucky. The old pre-electronic ones eventually started slipping, and you could frequently nurse them along for a while, assuming you kept the fluid level up and drove with care.
Acura handled the transmission problem poorly, in that they never acknowledged that there was a relatively high incidence of failures. When a customer came to the dealership with a failed transmission, they generally quietly replaced it under warranty, sometimes even if the new car warranty had expired. Some owners had their transmission replaced two or even three times. Most cases were handled as exceptions, and the owner was made to feel as if theirs was an unusual case. Well, word got around, and Acura lost a lot of good will as a result of this lack of transparency.
Fortunately, the totally new 2004 was a hit, and by that time Acura had remedied whatever the problem was, The 2004-2008 generation TL was probably the best TL, on balance.
It'll be interesting to see whether the TLX can reignite some much needed passion in Acura cars (the crossovers and Odyssey minivan are doing well). The TLX has gotten some good reviews, but the question is whether it's too late to the party.
I read that the ILX will feature some significant upgrades for 2016. It's been kind of a dud in the marketplace, as has the RLX. Reliable and low maintenance is no longer the winning deck of cards in the luxury class. Acura used to also stand out in engineering, with double wishbone suspension, for example. Now it's lost its edge in this area, and is more or less average; okay, but not a standout. The somewhat illusive prestige factors seems to trump the attributes of Acura cars.
They nailed the Plymouth for not having a low, single unit grille or "helmet hood", and nailed the Chevy for not having any of those features.
The brochure is for sale on eBay, and you can see it at : http://www.ebay.com/itm/1939-Ford-vs-Chevrolet-Plymouth-Salesmans-Brochure-3-wq9460-LKPTTI-/370770295826 if you're so inclined.
It's also kinda cute how the illustrations of the three cars show the Ford from a low angle, so it looks more dramatic, while the Plymouth and Chevy are drawn from a higher angle, making them look more truck-like.
I'm sure though, that a Chevy or Plymouth salesman's guide would be every bit as biased!
And, other than the "baked enamel finish", I'm not sure any of those other things are true advantages, although at the time they certainly made the cars look more modern. I'd imagine that having a two-piece hood that opened from the sides actually made the engine easier to service than a 1-piece that was hinged at the back. And, I guess the low-mounted grille and lower, in-fender headlights certainly helped with the longer-lower-wider look, taking us one step further from the old radiator grille and bolt-on fenders. At least, I think that's what those old-style fenders were called, even if it's a misnomer. If you want to get picky, even today, fenders are still bolted on, even if they have an integrated look.
From what I know, Fords were faster than the competition, and had a reputation in cold climates of starting at very low temperatures, when other brands sometimes just didn't start. Now that was a real advantage to folks who happened to live in Wisconsin, for example, where I grew up. Countering that was that Fords tended to overheat and vapor lock more frequently.
Chevys were good, honest cars, but more mainstream than Fords. One of their big advantages over Ford was earlier adoption of hydraulic brakes and overhead valves, plus some lesser innovations that don't come to mind right now. The public perception was that Chevy was more responsive to buyers' desires than Ford's more "Here it is, it's a great car with a low price; take it or leave it" reputation. Related to this in understanding Chevy's success was GM's marketing muscle, and the appeal of Alfred Sloan's notion that you started with a Chevy and moved up to more upscale GM brands as your career progressed. That gave people hope for better things, and a goal to aspire to, at a time when some could dream about life beyond the Great Depression. The Mercury brand was introduced in 1939, but it was a Johnny-come-lately upscale Ford, until the ultra cool, all-new1949 Model, with more differentiated styling from Ford.
Plymouths were well built and durable, dependable, comfortable, smooth operating and long lasting. They may have been the least aspirational of the low-priced-three, and they were a little pricier than Fords and Chevys. The Plymouth brand was also introduced after Ford and Chevy. That mattered at a time when people thought of themselves as "Ford men" or "Chevy men" (women played a minor role in the buying decision, and most didn't drive), and were loyal to their brand at trade-in time.
,
And yeah, I guess even by 1939, Plymouth was viewed as a bit of a newcomer, as it had just come on the scene as a 1929 model. So Chevy and especially Ford had been long since established by that timeframe.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Other Plymouth attributes were ride and seating comfort; it was a little quieter than Ford (although Ford's flathead V8 with glasspacks sure sound sweet), for sure, and maybe Chevy too; solid build quality, plus, like Dodge, a reputation for dependability. Also, the seat fabric was good quality.
You might make a case that Plymouth was the Camry of its day, but not the top seller in its class.
Incidentally, as you may know, Chrysler Corp. outsold Ford Motor Company for a year or two just before WWII.
For 1939 models, I prefer Ford, but GM modernized it nicely by 41, and Mopar refined their style. For the 41s though, I'd take a Packard Clipper (I think maybe classified as a half year car).
The brand had some prestige, in maybe the 1988-1995 timeframe.