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

fintail

Nope, it is pretty discreet - it is located just below the rear view mirror, and is pretty small. Normal people might think it is a transponder or something. I also live in a relatively low crime area, and usually park in a garage.

boomchek said:

@fintail - that's cool. Do you ever worry about leaving your dash cam in the car when parked? I don't have one but wouldn't want to leave it because it might be a reason for someone to break in and steal it.

fintail

I went to the auto auction today - lots of oddball stuff - old Volvos and Saabs, MGB, Lincoln Mk V, fintail, Cimarron, etc. I parked in front of this immaculate early 80s Regal sedan, which presented to me kind of an evolution of car design:

boomchek

Wow, it's crazy how much bigger your Benz is. The Regal was based on the G-Body platform iirc, and that was a midsize back then. I bet a modern Corolla would be somewhere close in size to that Regal.

roadburner

Everything is getting bigger and more unwieldy...

ab348

That Regal actually looks good. Reminds me a bit of a first-gen Seville.

andre1969

Just going by memory, that Regal, an '82-84, is on a 108.1" wheelbase, about 197" long. Maybe 72" wide and about 55" tall. Interior volume, around 101 cubic feet for passenger space, maybe 16 cubic feet of trunk?

Most of its measurements are still probably typical of the modern intermediate, with the exception of height. I think a lot of cars these days are more like 57-58" tall?

An '81-83 Malibu sedan, which is the same platform, has 102 cubic feet of passenger space (door panels and seats aren't as thickly padded, which increases some measurements slightly) and 17 cubic feet of trunk space (rump isn't as sloped). The EPA's cutoff for a "full sized" car is 120 cubic feet combined, so in theory the old GM A/G platform, in 4-door guise at least, missed it by just one cubic foot!

Another thing that might be deceptive about those older cars is that they had bumpers that jutted out, and while that added to the official length, it didn't contribute to making the cars look bigger. With Fintail's new car, the grille is pretty much out at the front of the car, and the rear doesn't have a jutting bumper, either.

Sometimes, those bumpers can add a good 8-10" to the length of a car. For instance, a 1967-69 Dart is around 196" long. By 1975-76, I think they were up to around 206", but to me they looked a bit shorter, because of the sloped off rear. But, the 5 mph crash bumpers that stuck out added to the length.

kyfdx

explorerx4 said:

This just showed up in my driveway.
Got to drive it.

Love those wheels. What year is that?

fintail

Per the maker (2010+ cars are essentially the same), the E is on a 113.2" wheelbase, 192.1" long, 73" wide, 57.1" tall.

The angle of the pic might make the newer car look bigger, too.

andre1969 said:

Just going by memory, that Regal, an '82-84, is on a 108.1" wheelbase, about 197" long. Maybe 72" wide and about 55" tall. Interior volume, around 101 cubic feet for passenger space, maybe 16 cubic feet of trunk?

Most of its measurements are still probably typical of the modern intermediate, with the exception of height. I think a lot of cars these days are more like 57-58" tall?

An '81-83 Malibu sedan, which is the same platform, has 102 cubic feet of passenger space (door panels and seats aren't as thickly padded, which increases some measurements slightly) and 17 cubic feet of trunk space (rump isn't as sloped). The EPA's cutoff for a "full sized" car is 120 cubic feet combined, so in theory the old GM A/G platform, in 4-door guise at least, missed it by just one cubic foot!

Another thing that might be deceptive about those older cars is that they had bumpers that jutted out, and while that added to the official length, it didn't contribute to making the cars look bigger. With Fintail's new car, the grille is pretty much out at the front of the car, and the rear doesn't have a jutting bumper, either.

Sometimes, those bumpers can add a good 8-10" to the length of a car. For instance, a 1967-69 Dart is around 196" long. By 1975-76, I think they were up to around 206", but to me they looked a bit shorter, because of the sloped off rear. But, the 5 mph crash bumpers that stuck out added to the length.

andre1969

This morning in the parking lot at work I spotted what appeared to be a 1966 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350 convertible. My guess is that it's a clone, as only four were built, according to Wikipedia at least.

berri

Nice!

roadburner

Yeah, almost certainly a clone; The Shelby convertibles were first offered in the 1968 model year. 1967 also saw the creation of "Little Red" a notchback GT500 prototype with a 428 engine and a Paxton supercharger.

stickguy

Now that I like.

texases

Shelby 350 Mustangs are pretty easily cloned, not that much body work to change, an under hood body brace, some engine mods on top of the 'hi-po' version of the 289, and I think that's about it. Oh, and relocate the upper suspension A-arm down an couple of inches.

explorerx4

@kyfdx,
Last year air cooled, 1997 I think. Super low miles and lowered euro suspension height.

kyfdx

explorerx4 said:

@kyfdx,
Last year air cooled, 1997 I think. Super low miles and lowered euro suspension height.

Very cool.. I wish I'd bought one 10 years ago.. Now, they are out of my range.

fintail

Saw all types today - first a nice 62 Coupe DeVille on correct looking medium width whitewalls, a Fisker Karma, a clean 80-83 Toyota 4x4, and a Dodge Omni. Forgot to mention I saw a clean Celebrity wagon yesterday.

ab348

For @fintail - a look back at the original brochure:

http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2015/10/06/fabulous-fintails-at-50-1965-mercedes-benz-230200-sedans-brochure/


BTW: if you right-click on each thumbnail page and open in a new tab, you get a large, hi-res scan of each.

fintail

Cool stuff - those are what I call "second generation" fintails, as the 190 and 220 series cars (like mine, a 220SE) were discontinued in the summer of 1965. These cars were mostly identical to earlier fintails, but had different engines as is mentioned, and slightly different interior trim. I've never seen that brochure before - that was around the time when MB finally moved on from wide whites, too. I like how the floor shift is touted, a mild pretense of sport, perhaps, maybe coming off the rally and racing success of the FI models.

Some inaccuracy in the article, I just can't resist pointing out - the W111 220 series cars debuted in 1959, the slightly smaller W110 190 cars, and the fancier W112 300 series cars were introduced in 1961. All are actually on the same wheelbase, save for the rare LWB variant of the W112 300SE. Definitely a different era compared to MB of today.

ab348 said:

For @fintail - a look back at the original brochure:

http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2015/10/06/fabulous-fintails-at-50-1965-mercedes-benz-230200-sedans-brochure/


BTW: if you right-click on each thumbnail page and open in a new tab, you get a large, hi-res scan of each.

fintail

Today's sightings - Mk1 and Mk2 MR2s (the latter the same car I saw last week) and an Acura Vigor.

andre1969

I know it ain't no Mopar, but Holy Chrysler!

Michaell

 mustang GT500 KR  convertible – red with white trim.  excellent condition 

tjc78

75 Monte Carlo, looked mint. Black over Red.

berri

I always liked the initial Monte Carlo's (somewhere around 1971 or 72 maybe?), but I also liked all of them through the late 70's. IIRC there wasn't all that huge of a price bump up from a similarly equipped Malibu?

kyfdx

berri said:

I always liked the initial Monte Carlo's (somewhere around 1971 or 72 maybe?), but I also liked all of them through the late 70's. IIRC there wasn't all that huge of a price bump up from a similarly equipped Malibu?

'70-'72 for the first model.

toomanyfumes

'91-'94 Mercury Capri convertible (the angular aussie import.) Looking a bit rough, but moving along the freeway at a good clip. I can't remember the last time I saw one, not a very attractive car.

berri

Pretty impressive that it wasn't rusted away in WI. Were those built in Australia, or just based on an Aussie platform?

fintail

Those Capris were Oz-built, VIN will start with a "6" I believe.

I am in eastern OR right now, a lot of old weatherbeaten material sitting around. Most unusual, a decent looking 41 Caddy coupe just sitting outside, and a 53-54 Dodge or Plymouth 2 door.

andre1969

berri said:

I always liked the initial Monte Carlo's (somewhere around 1971 or 72 maybe?), but I also liked all of them through the late 70's. IIRC there wasn't all that huge of a price bump up from a similarly equipped Malibu?

I always thought the 1970-72 Monte Carlo had an upscale mystique to it, something that it lost a bit of with the 1973 redesign and especially the 1978 downsizing. It actually looked expensive, rather than simply ostentatious like the later models.

As for the price, my old car books shows a V-8 Malibu hardtop coupe starting at $2809 in 1970, while the Monte started at $3123. So, about a 10% price premium. That doesn't seem like that huge of a premium to me, considering the nicer interior, more upscale styling, longer wheelbase (but no more interior room), and the fact that the V-8 was a 350 rather than a 307.

ab348

andre1969 said:

I always thought the 1970-72 Monte Carlo had an upscale mystique to it, something that it lost a bit of with the 1973 redesign and especially the 1978 downsizing. It actually looked expensive, rather than simply ostentatious like the later models.

I agree. The 1970-'72 models were extremely elegant looking. Around here they were not at all common either. But neither were the Pontiac Grand Prix nor the Thunderbird. The '73 looked a bit overdone to me. But as the years went on they became much more common than the 1st generation ever was. The '78-'80 is best forgotten, though the later ones in the '80s were cleaned up a lot. I remember test-driving an '84 or so GP when it was new, and it just didn't feel solid to me. I passed.

texases

I always was impressed with the length of the fan shroud when I checked the oil on a 70-72 Monte:

uplanderguy

I absolutely remember those base prices, from when I was a twelve-year-old kid about living at our Chevy dealer, andre!

I do remember the optional price of a 350 2-barrel over a 307 in the Nova and Chevelle lines was only $26!

Mid-year they came out with a strippo, base-model Chevelle. It did not have a single piece of trim or emblem or nameplate down the side. Ugh.

The first-gen Monte Carlo is about the only car I think looks like it was designed with fender skirts. They were optional but really fit into the side styling of the car IMHO.

fintail

Saw one of these today - can't recall the last time I saw one, which is saying something as I think all survivors are in the PNW:

stickguy

I loved those Corollas back in my youth. When they were new. and I was not old.

stickguy

an early vintage Audi 4000. Rare enough, but this one was driving (keeping up with traffic and everything) on the NJ Turnpike! Gray, looked a little threadbare but I did not notice any rust, though I was in a different set of lanes.

fintail

Today spotted an immaculate ~72 Cadillac hearse - apparently still in service as it was at a funeral home.

Mr_Shiftright

low miles, no doubt.

tjc78

..people just dying to take a ride in it.  (Ducking and running)

Pretty strange it would be still in service.  I'd bet it just an eccentric person using it as a driver (like the character from Six Feet Under, Claire?)

js06gv

(like the character from Six Feet Under, Claire?)

Haha, exactly what I was thinking. Hers was either a '71 or 72 as well. Awful green color.

andre1969

I'm just weird enough, I guess, that I'd LOVE a '61-62 Cadillac hearse to drive around in. Maybe not an everyday driver, but sort of a "fun" car in a twisted sort of way.

I caught an episode of the old tv show "Thriller" the other day, where an eccentric horror writer played by Natalie Shafer (Mrs. Howell) had a 1959 Cadillac hearse. It only appeared in one or two quick shots. I've only seen bits and pieces of "Six Feet Under", and definitely remember that loud green Caddy hearse.

fintail

It was a smallish town place, it might have been in the fleet. I'd rather have a last ride in that than an XTS hearse or new Lincoln or whatever is common now. I wonder if there could be a market for vintage hearses, they are a lot cooler than modern ones.

andre1969

I always wondered, if a vintage hearse happened to be in my fleet when I passed away, if I could request that it be used in the funeral procession? I wonder if a funeral home would honor that? Probably, if the price was right.

When my Grandmother passed away back in May, the hearse they used for the funeral was based on a final-generation Lincoln Town Car. It was still pretty classy, I thought.

fintail

A funeral home in a town I lived in as a kid has several old funeral service vehicles, Which can be seen here . I know the Packard at top is still in use upon request, and I suspect the others can be too, if they are up and running.

Seems like a cool idea, vintage hearses in use, classy last ride. Even a late run TC seems classier than new cars, somehow.

Mr_Shiftright

Henry Ford was carried to his grave in a Packard.

stever

Over his dead body?

stickguy

I just read that entire web site. Surprisingly fascinating stuff.

robr2

fintail said:

A funeral home in a town I lived in as a kid has several old funeral service vehicles, Which can be seen here . I know the Packard at top is still in use upon request, and I suspect the others can be too, if they are up and running.

Seems like a cool idea, vintage hearses in use, classy last ride. Even a late run TC seems classier than new cars, somehow.

What a unique way to write off a car collecting hobby as a business expense!

tjc78

My wife knows my last ride should be in a Lincoln hearse.   I don't have anything against Caddy, but I prefer Lincoln.   Naturally, I'm sure  that will be the last thing on her mind at the time.   
I also wouldnt be surprised if hearses based on the last of the Town cars bring good money.  There really isn't anything to based them off of, although they say FWD vehicles are easier to stretch and convert.  

fintail

And the best thing is, these could actually be used in the business, unlike so many other write offs that are purely for personal pleasure.

robr2 said:

What a unique way to write off a car collecting hobby as a business expense!

uplanderguy

Here's a good quiz on old-car instrument panels (all domestics):

http://www.americantorque.com/game/dash-id-54-64/

I got 41 out of 44. I thought I'd do better....LOL--when I was a kid I wasn't into sports at all but just absorbed cars and brochure info! I did poorly at early-mid '50's--sometimes I'd know it was a Mopar but I'd miss which division--same with '50's Buick and Oldsmobile.

fintail

I was born in the malaise disco era, and I got 37 out of 44, 84%. I am pleased. I am an obsessive I guess.