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

uplanderguy

Re.: the '77-90 GM big wagons...I like them too, although whatever year they started putting that brushed metal piece on the pillar behind the back doors--I don't like that. I liked the Chevys better when they had the Caprice emblem there and no brushed panel. I'm thinking that brushed panel was a late '80's addition.

texases

Ran across the original "The Italian Job" movie last night - fun watch, lots of good Mini action.

fintail

In the damp this evening saw a decent survivor 82-85 Accord, a still-headturning Fisker Karma, and a little old (maybe in her 70s?) lady in a ~73 Caprice 2 door HT, blackwalls on full wheelcovers, very clean original looking car. She was sitting very close to the wheel, moving along in dense traffic just fine.

roadburner

texases said:

Ran across the original "The Italian Job" movie last night - fun watch, lots of good Mini action.

But I get queasy when the Miura and E-Type are destroyed.

boomchek

uplanderguy said:

Re.: the '77-90 GM big wagons...I like them too, although whatever year they started putting that brushed metal piece on the pillar behind the back doors--I don't like that. I liked the Chevys better when they had the Caprice emblem there and no brushed panel. I'm thinking that brushed panel was a late '80's addition.

The Caprice wagon we had was an 89 or 90 model and it didn't have the brushed aluminum C pillar. Ours was a base model (Caprice Classic) so maybe they only did that on the higher trim models. I believe ours had the roll up windows, cloth interior and manual seats, and no a/c as far as I know.

uplanderguy

Just got back from about a 70-mile roundtrip to and from the Cleveland Airport. On I-71, I saw a '73 Plymouth Fury III two-door hardtop, in that typical darker olive green with matching vinyl top, driven by about a 20-year-old-guy who almost missed his exit and boy did that thing pitch and bob when steered abruptly! LOL As I got past it it looked very decent, correct wheelcovers, etc., but had a small hole at the bottom of the LF fender. Wonder if somebody got Grandpa's old car.

Then, only six miles from home, I passed a very nice light turquoise '66 Galaxie 500 convertible (top up; it's only 47 degrees here). I think I've seen that car around Kent where we live before, but it was very pretty. Today's a windy, damp-feeling, cool day--I was surprised to see two oldies out.

stever

Saw a Volvo 740 GL wagon this morning tooling around town with my sister. She had one back in the day. About the only ride I can think of that may have more "glass" would be a Pacer. This one was pretty clean, beigy brown, with some paint bubbling near the tailgate handle.

uplanderguy

Hey andre, what say you about this '66 Polara?

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?87421-Just-About-Beyond-Description

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

Hey andre, what say you about this '66 Polara?

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?87421-Just-About-Beyond-Description

I think I just threw up a little bit.

stickguy

taste. No accounting for it.

fintail

I like the headlights and the opera windows.

stickguy

mo scoops is mo betta.

fintail

I saw that same 500E again this afternoon, and 2 different BMW E32s.

Oh, saw an Audi C2 5000 Quattro the other day, relatively rare in Quattro form these days, or in roadworthy condition at all.

texases

Did they sell these here? Saw a LHD one today.

stever

Not sure if they still have it but the Ambrose Hotel in Santa Monica used to have a London taxi for shuttle use. Theirs appears to be RHD per the photo linked.

This link says ~250 were imported to the US.

robr2

texases said:

Did they sell these here? Saw a LHD one today.

For a while a company based west of Boston (London Taxis of North America) was importing and distributing them. They had the taxis federalized and started bringing them over in 2002. My understanding is that they only sold about 250 units. In 2004, the diesel engine couldn't meet federal regulations. They shut down in 2009.

At $48K, it was too expensive for the vast majority of taxi operators.

andre1969

I wonder how those London Taxis hold up, long term? I would imagine that if the car is purpose-built to be a taxi, it's probably pretty rugged and durable, compared to a regular, civilian passenger car that was pressed into taxi duty. So maybe they would become more cost-effective in the long run, in spite of the high purchase price?

robr2

My understanding is that the latest models were not as reliable as the previous models. Like the Crown Vic, the TX4 was easy to repair. But it was thirsty, uncomfortable for drivers and not handicapped accessible until recently.

The Nissan NV200 has been engineering to meet the all important 25' turning radius and has been approved for use as a London taxi. They are expected to cost about £10,000 less than the TX4 and have cheaper running costs. The did modify the look to appease the market:

ab348

Nissan seems to have a company policy that all new vehicles must be ugly.

robr2

ab348 said:

Nissan seems to have a company policy that all new vehicles must be ugly.

The taxi styling was at the request of the taxi drivers in London. The other option aside from the TX4 is the Mercedes Vito. Drivers using those say that potential fares don't hail them as the Vito doesn't look like a taxi. Hence they asked if Nissan could make it look more like the traditional taxi.

andre1969

Even in its normal guise, that TX4 is hardly a looker....

robr2

Well it's a work van...looks isn't a top priority of fleet buyers and operators.

IMHO, it's not offensive.

stever

1959 Apache with suicide doors. Just a brief "how do you do" with the owner, but he had tricked it out.

jrosasmc

Hello all -

jrosasmc here. It's been a few years since I posted on the Forums, but here I am.

This one is for Fintail in particular - I spotted a W126 300SDL in the parking lot as I was going to lunch this afternoon. I saw the owner and decided to ask him about the car. He told me that his car was an '87, and that he had two other diesels - an '84 300SD and '85 300D. Fintail - the guy said that his '87 had a turbodiesel straight-six, and not the 5-cylinders of his older cars. I'm not too familiar with the aforementioned six.

fintail

Hey, your name is familiar

Yep, the 300SDL was a short run 1986-87 only model. It's a completely different engine than previous diesels, and they occasionally have head problems, I think. On that note, the rarer 350SD/SDL of 1990-91 had some larger design flaws, and have a bad rep compared to other MBs. All are pretty uncommon today.

jrosasmc said:

Hello all -

jrosasmc here. It's been a few years since I posted on the Forums, but here I am.

This one is for Fintail in particular - I spotted a W126 300SDL in the parking lot as I was going to lunch this afternoon. I saw the owner and decided to ask him about the car. He told me that his car was an '87, and that he had two other diesels - an '84 300SD and '85 300D. Fintail - the guy said that his '87 had a turbodiesel straight-six, and not the 5-cylinders of his older cars. I'm not too familiar with the aforementioned six.

fintail

Another day in this land where old vehicles thrive...

In the workplace parking garage, saw 94-95 and 96-97 Accord coupes parked beside each other, and a Previa (dark red, of course) parked not far away, 90s time warp. After I got home, saw a black E32 (must be one of the ones from yesterday), traffic facing it was a white 190E with a period correct spoiler and gold emblems. Then I saw a later run/square light Subaru Brat with T-tops and a fitted canopy. Also 2 P38 style Range Rovers on the road, both looked immaculate - labor of love - and that same 500E again.

andre1969

Here's a bit of role-reversal you don't see every day...

Found this on the web.

jrosasmc

Fintail -

Since you're based in Washington state, I was wondering if you've ever heard of a Mercedes outfit in Bellingham called "Mercedessource." The shop is run by a fellow named Kent Bergsma and he also has his own YouTube channel, on which he posts how-to videos about almost any and every Mercedes model. Although I'm not a Mercedes man myself, I enjoy watching his videos and get a kick out of them.

Have you ever purchased parts or cars from Mr. Bergsma?

boomchek

I watched one of his videos on how to open the gas cap door when the vacuum lock malfunctioned on my 300TE wagon. Very informative and to the point as I was stuck at a gas station an unable to put in gas.

fintail

Yep, I've dealt with him many times. I went to school up there, back in the day when he had an indy shop in the "county" outside of town (his videos are still shot there, but I don't think he does repairs anymore, the internet has been very good to him). I'd take my fintail to him for various needs, as he was very reasonable and not scared of the car. I eventually rented storage space for it from him, when I bought the W126 - a car that he inspected and approved. He's a good guy, very honest and affable. I've noticed over time the cars he'll work on are moving along with time - back in my day, he'd have never touched something like a W210. He also has a MB collection, although he's thinned it out, I think. He's had things like a W112 300SE coupe and a fintail Universal.

jrosasmc said:

Fintail -

Since you're based in Washington state, I was wondering if you've ever heard of a Mercedes outfit in Bellingham called "Mercedessource." The shop is run by a fellow named Kent Bergsma and he also has his own YouTube channel, on which he posts how-to videos about almost any and every Mercedes model. Although I'm not a Mercedes man myself, I enjoy watching his videos and get a kick out of them.

Have you ever purchased parts or cars from Mr. Bergsma?

boomchek

fintail said:

In the damp this evening saw a decent survivor 82-85 Accord, a still-headturning Fisker Karma, and a little old (maybe in her 70s?) lady in a ~73 Caprice 2 door HT, blackwalls on full wheelcovers, very clean original looking car. She was sitting very close to the wheel, moving along in dense traffic just fine.

Those old Accords. I've owned one 82 (my first car), one 83 (my 4th car), and an 84 hatchback (my 5th car). The 84 was a fun beater, drove it for months without putting a penny into it and it has 300k+ kilometers on it.

imidazol97

andre1969 said:

Here's a bit of role-reversal you don't see every day...

Found this on the web.

Nice Buick.
How recently was that
picture taken?

andre1969

I don't know when that pic was taken, I found it on the web. It's cool though, seeing one of those old B-body wagons in action, doing what General Motors intended!

fintail

Spotted this afternoon ~65 New Yorker 6 window with year of manufacture plates, looked to be in very good original condition, driven by an old guy with a hat - and a 70s Datsun king cab in "survivor" condition.

berri

65 New Yorker 6 window

Seldom saw those even when they were new!

stickguy

A 1972 I think 4 door impala. Flush rear bumper.

andre1969

According to my old car encyclopedia, 6W was the only option offered in 1965 for the 300 and New Yorker pillared sedans. It only accounted for 16,339 sales in the New Yorker range, and a mere 2187 in the 300 lineup. It was outsold by the hardtop sedan, which sold 21,110 in the New Yorker range, and 12,452 in the 300 range.

The Newport offered all three 4-door varieties, and sold 61,054 of the 4W variety at $3009, 17,062 of the $3149 hardtop sedan, and 12,411 of the $3146 6W 4-door. Yep, that's right...the 6W pillared sedan was actually a few bucks more than the hardtop sedan! However, in the New Yorker range, the hardtop was pricier...$4238 versus $4104.

For 1966, the 6W design was only offered in the Newport, and only sold 9,452 units, compared to 74,964 for the 4W sedan and 24,966 for the hardtop sedan.

uplanderguy

I was not aware that there ever was a 300 4-door pillared sedan (well, until the current one!). And based on memory, you're right on the New Yorker. I only ever remember seeing the 'four window' sedan styling on the Newport in '65.

andre1969

The 300 pillared sedan was comparatively rare. In 1962, for example, the first year for the non-letter 300, my old car book lists the production breakout as follows:

Hardtop coupe: 11,341
4-door sedan: 1,801
Hardtop sedan: 10,030
Convertible: 1,848

The 4-door sedan never was a strong seller, around 1800-2400 units per year, according to my old car book, and was dropped after '66. For 1967, it looks like the 300 line was moved upscale a bit. Prices went up about $400, the 4-door sedan was dropped, and it used the same 440 engine that the New Yorker used. For '62-64 it had used a 383-2bbl, and for '65-66 a slightly more powerful 383 (315 hp in '65, 325 for '66) that I'd guess was a 4-bbl.

Something else I never realized, til just now...for 1962, the New Yorker convertible and hardtop coupe were dropped entirely, leaving just the 4-door sedan, hardtop sedan, and Town & Country wagons. That year, they also moved the 300 Letter series to the shorter 122" wheelbase. I guess these decisions could have been part of Chrysler's ongoing quest to ensure that Imperial stood more on its own, but then, maybe not. For 1961, Chrysler only sold $2541 New Yorker hardtop coupes and a mere 576 convertibles. That may have been too low-volume to keep around.

The New Yorker also had no coupe or convertible for '63, according to my old car book. The hardtop coupe came back for '64, but only 300 were produced. The hardtop coupe came back in full force for '65, but the New Yorker convertible was gone for good.

ab348

andre1969 said:

According to my old car encyclopedia, 6W was the only option offered in 1965 for the 300 and New Yorker pillared sedans. It only accounted for 16,339 sales in the New Yorker range, and a mere 2187 in the 300 lineup. It was outsold by the hardtop sedan, which sold 21,110 in the New Yorker range, and 12,452 in the 300 range.

Well, according to the Chrysler brochure for 1965 that's online, there was a 6W sedan in the New Yorker and Newport line that year, but not a 300 sedan.

http://www.oldcarbrochures.org/NA/Chrysler_and_Imperial/1965_Chrysler/1965_Chrysler_Brochure/1965-Chrysler-24

lemko

This 1967 Chevrolet Bel Air sedan is a dead ringer for my Grandpop's old car!

lemko

Here's a side view.

imidazol97

andre1969 said:

I don't know when that pic was taken, I found it on the web. It's cool though, seeing one of those old B-body wagons in action, doing what General Motors intended!

I was trying to figure out how new the Dodge truck on the trailer is. But the taillights all
look the same to me.

stickguy

I guess within last five years. And I hope that rig doesn't have to stop quick or go down a long downslope. I doubt the brakes are up to that task.

berri

Growing up in the Chicago area, full sized 60's Chevy 4dr sedans were a very common sight. I seem to recall that the browns were a bit more common in the first part of the decade where I was at least. I like seeing Bel Air's and other notch down versions of cars because these were often the ones I saw most back in the days. Thanks for posting it.

andre1969

imidazol97 said:

andre1969 said:

I don't know when that pic was taken, I found it on the web. It's cool though, seeing one of those old B-body wagons in action, doing what General Motors intended!

I was trying to figure out how new the Dodge truck on the trailer is. But the taillights all
look the same to me.

It's the 2002-2008 style of Ram, that's as far as I can narrow it down. I know that generation did a minor facelift for 2006, but I can't tell if that truck is pre- or post-facelift. However, it's the short bed truck, and I'm guessing it's just a V6. It should say "HEMI" on the side if it had the Hemi, and I think even the 4.7 V-8 had some kind of badge work on it.

The angle of that pic makes the truck look big in comparison to the Buick Estate wagon, but I imagine that Buick is more capable of towing that Ram, than the other way around. As for stopping ability, a trailer like that would have its own brakes, wouldn't it?

Back in the day, I had a great-uncle who used a '74 Impala coupe to tow around a 30-foot Terry trailer. It just had a 400 V-8, which I'd think would be a bit inadequate, but he never had any problems. My grandparents had a small trailer they would tow with their '72 Impala, which just had a 350. It was pretty lightweight though. I think it was called a Scotty or something like that, and was probably only about 16-18 feet long. I don't remember much about it though; I was pretty young when they got rid of it.

andre1969

ab348 said:

andre1969 said:

According to my old car encyclopedia, 6W was the only option offered in 1965 for the 300 and New Yorker pillared sedans. It only accounted for 16,339 sales in the New Yorker range, and a mere 2187 in the 300 lineup. It was outsold by the hardtop sedan, which sold 21,110 in the New Yorker range, and 12,452 in the 300 range.

Well, according to the Chrysler brochure for 1965 that's online, there was a 6W sedan in the New Yorker and Newport line that year, but not a 300 sedan.

http://www.oldcarbrochures.org/NA/Chrysler_and_Imperial/1965_Chrysler/1965_Chrysler_Brochure/1965-Chrysler-24

Interestingly, that brochure page doesn't show ANY pillared sedan being offered for the 300 lineup. I wonder if it was some kind of export model? My old car book is a bit sketchy with info on the 300 4-door sedan. It normally lists weight, price, and production of various models. However for '62-63, it doesn't list the weight. And for '64, it doesn't list the weight or price, only the production. Ditto the '64 New Yorker hardtop coupe. Again, for '65 the book only lists production for a '65 300 6W sedan, but not price or weight. And no mention of a 4W sedan.

In any of the years it shows up in my book, '62-66, no 300 pillared sedan is ever shown breaking the 2500 unit barrier. So, I'd be curious to know the story behind it. If it ever existed. These Consumer Guide auto books have been known to be wrong before.

uplanderguy

I initially thought that might be an export model of some kind with those numbers too, but then...as much as I enjoy thumbing through those Consumer Guide books, I'd never use them to try and verify production--I have found numerous, numerous errors in them over the years.

Did you say the book says you could get a six-window '66 Newport but not a New Yorker? That strikes me as surprising too, although I haven't checked the sales brochure.

uplanderguy

lemko, my sixth-grade teacher Frank Duncan had that exact Bel Air but with a white painted top. I know critics say the '67 Chevy got too 'hippy', but I like them. I think they have the best full-size Chevy instrument panel, probably ever.

I agree that it's nice to see lesser models well-preserved as original or restored to original, as that Chevy certainly does look. Going to car shows, one would think that only red convertibles and hardtops were ever built by any manufacturer...that, and every car was loaded with accessories. I believe you can overkill with accessories, but that's just MHO.

I never was crazy in that era, how Chevy distinguished a Biscayne from a Bel Air, outside, by adding a chrome roof drip gutter and smacking a molding right down the middle of the side of the car. Truth be told, I'd rather have a '67 Biscayne two-door sedan with whitewalls and full wheelcovers and that option that gave you chromed door frame and quarter-window moldings.

Still, thanks for posting as it's certainly a great-looking car.

berri

I thought the 67 big Chevy was a natural progression and particularly liked the coupe and 4dr HT. However, I'm not sure that either Chevy or Ford had a great looking IP during the whole decade. On Chevy, I'd probably lean toward the first half of the decade IP's. They were plasticky I suppose, but they were pretty functional. If I had to pick one from the bunch, it would probably be the '60 Chevy carryover from the '59. I think it might be that large clear plastic cover over the instruments that bothers me just a bit on the 67. Certainly not terrible though by any means. But I have to be honest, I actually liked some of Exner's early 60's Mopar IP's, so you would be within bounds questioning my IP taste