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

jpp75

Mr_Shiftright

stickguy said:

A triumph Frumpmobile. 1960.

if not that, maybe a Herald convertible?

Now there's a car you might want to stay away from. When you drive it, it feels exactly as if someone built it in their backyard.

fintail

Hey isellhondas, this was at the MBCA gathering:



You may notice it is a Euro spec model, this one from 1976, in very nice condition.

berri

It seems like in some browsers you have to go inprivate (Ctl+Shift+P) and paste in the web address. I've had problems on a computer with Edge, but not another even though the ad, pop up and security levels are the same. Seems nuts to me, but this workaround seems to work for the time being if you experience an issue trying to log in. Will probably change next week

PS - on my compute changing pop up or other security settings had no effect in resolving the problem. Then I explored the inprivate browsing Edmunds talked about and for now at least it seems to work.

andre1969

In my case, I had typed up a pretty long message back when the subject had gone to Ford Panthers, as it does from time to time. But, it just sort of hung up there, and when I'd hit "post comment", I'd get a message saying that it was awaiting approval from the moderators, or something to that effect. But, I just deleted it, and then typed in the quick blurb above, and the damn thing went right through.

Oh, and yeah, welcome back to Edmunds, Lemko!!

kyfdx

andre1969 said:

In my case, I had typed up a pretty long message back when the subject had gone to Ford Panthers, as it does from time to time. But, it just sort of hung up there, and when I'd hit "post comment", I'd get a message saying that it was awaiting approval from the moderators, or something to that effect. But, I just deleted it, and then typed in the quick blurb above, and the damn thing went right through.

Oh, and yeah, welcome back to Edmunds, Lemko!!

I get that same message when the system slows down. Probably wasn't related to our sign in issues from earlier.

tjc78

fintail said:

Someone in my office parking garage has a 90s T-Bird as a daily driver, I think it is a mid-facelift one from 1994 or so. I suspect the 3.8 was the downfall of most.

My mom had a 96 Pacific Green over beige.   Nice car, but the 3.8 was underpowered.   By then Ford fixed the head gasket issues and hers was fine for the almost 10 years she had it. 

berri

I remember my father had a maybe mid 90's Sable with the 3.8 and I had a 2000 Taurus with the 3.0. They didn't seem all that different. What was different was when I traded the Taurus for a 4 cylinder Camry that blew it away. I also owned a 97 Windstar with the 3.8. It was a total POS with all kinds of issues coming on fairly early and never ending. That eventually got traded for an Odyssey. Again, night and day experiences. At least the Taurus was a pretty reliable car even if my kids referred to it as a Ford Tortoise

iluvmysephia1

Hi! Been away a long time.

Howdy, lemko. Long time, no see!

fintail

What year is it accepted that the 3.8 was fixed? Must have been after my mom's 93 Taurus failed before 90K.

On the road today - 1985 Camry (composite lights, no CHMSL), and the hen's tooth of a first gen Jetta.

thecardoc3

63 Ford Falcon Ranchero 170 cu. in. 6 cyl.

stickguy

those wheels just don't look right to me on that car. Kinda cute, but lots of rust. Would probably be really ugly after a media blast.

andre1969

I know I've asked this question before, but can't remember the answer. But, why is it, when the head gasket goes bad in the Ford 3.8, it pretty much ruins the whole engine? I knew two people who had head gasket failures in Cavalier Z-24s. On one of them, an '87, my friend's Dad simply replaced the gasket. On the other, an '89, that friend did get rid of the car, but by then it was getting old, wasn't worth much, and they just wanted a newer car.

The Mopar 2.2 was pretty famous for head gasket failure, as well, as the aluminum head and iron block would expand and contract at different rates, play hell with the gasket, and they hadn't quite figured out how to make that work yet. In fact, the 2.2 turbo in my ex-wife's LeBaron ended up with a warped head and bad gasket. I don't know if one caused the other, or it happened at the same time, or what. But, it was around the 115,000 mile mark...and that car had been abused. I do remember she got someone to put a used head and a new gasket on, but it still wasn't right. Eventually she gave it to me and I sold it for parts.

Anyway, is there something about the dssign of the Ford 3.8 that made it extra-vulnerable when the head gasket would fail? Or, is it just a toss of the dice, with any engine? Where, sometimes a head gasket failure is a fairly simple fix, but sometimes, like if you're at highway speeds, it might be more catastrophic?

kyfdx

@thecardoc3 Is that a stock hood?
Can we drop a 302 crate motor in it?
With a stick-shift?

thecardoc3

I'm not sure if that is a stock hood or not. The guy has plans for it. He is going to redo it to look like this model.

It has a three on the tree right now, he didn't say anything about changing that, but he already put a Maverick rear axle in it and did say that he is planning on putting in a 250 6cyl. He was on his way to Rhode Island for a get together of Ranchero owners. http://www.northeastchapter.com/news.htm

Three on the tree, I've rebuilt a number of those steering columns over the years.

kyfdx

Interesting.. I'm still voting for a V-8 with floor shift.

thecardoc3

andre1969 said:

I know I've asked this question before, but can't remember the answer. But, why is it, when the head gasket goes bad in the Ford 3.8, it pretty much ruins the whole engine?

Anyway, is there something about the dssign of the Ford 3.8 that made it extra-vulnerable when the head gasket would fail? Or, is it just a toss of the dice, with any engine? Where, sometimes a head gasket failure is a fairly simple fix, but sometimes, like if you're at highway speeds, it might be more catastrophic?

Not that I am aware of. I have done dozens of those head gaskets (several needed new heads) and the rest of the engine was fine.

andre1969

I knew two people at work who had Windstars, and I think one was even a late 90's model. When their head gaskets went, they ended up getting new engines. I guess though, it's possible that they were duped into it? Back in my pizza delivery days, one of the drivers had an '89+ T-bird, and when its head gasket went, he junked the car. This would've been around 1996-97, so it's possible that the car simply wasn't worth enough to fix.

I also worked with a guy who had an '87 or '88 T-bird, with the 3.8, and he got to well over 200,000 miles with that one. Was the older "Essex" known for head gasket failure too, or just the newer, more powerful ones?

My grandparents had an '85 LTD and an '89 Taurus LX, both with the 3.8. I do remember the LTD overheated when it was about 2 years old, and by late 1993, the Taurus would stall out every once in awhile. Other than that, I don't think either car was too bad, although they usually didn't keep cars around long enough for some of the older-age problems to creep up.

berri

Maybe cars were just more of a crapshoot back then. A lot of inconsistent quality. Worked with a person who owned the identical 83 Olds to mine. Mine was so unreliable I got rid of it after just a couple of years. Their's was very reliable and they held onto it for a long time. Both were made in the same Doraville Georgia plant.

fintail

I think a big issue with Fords of that era was depreciation - I suspect an 80K mile car could be depreciated to the point where a repair exceeded the value of a good car, and people just cut their losses.

It might be kind of amusing that the 3.8s are prone to headgasket issues, and if that doesn't get them, I think all V6 engines of first gen cars could suffer premature transmission failure. I remember I was in my uncle's 86 3.0 car when the transmission failed.

tjc78

Aluminum head/ iron block was Ford’s 3.8 problem.  

My 93 Taurus blew its gasket around 60k IIRC.  

@fintail
Pretty sure it was 98 when it’s largely recognized to be gone.   In most of my reading 93-95 was the worst of it. 

fintail

Good to know, that's why people run from early Windstars.

Speaking of old Fords, my grandma's last car was an 03 Taurus SEL with the basic Vulcan, which she drove until a few years ago, when she voluntarily stopped driving (heading for 90, worried about spatial awareness). I think she put under 40K on it, gave it to my uncle, and it promptly needed some kind of transmission repair, but not a full failure IIRC. He's still driving it, has had no other real issues.

tjc78 said:

Aluminum head/ iron block was Ford’s 3.8 problem.  

My 93 Taurus blew its gasket around 60k IIRC.  

@fintail
Pretty sure it was 98 when it’s largely recognized to be gone.   In most of my reading 93-95 was the worst of it. 

andre1969

fintail said:

Speaking of old Fords, my grandma's last car was an 03 Taurus SEL with the basic Vulcan, which she drove until a few years ago, when she voluntarily stopped driving (heading for 90, worried about spatial awareness). I think she put under 40K on it, gave it to my uncle, and it promptly needed some kind of transmission repair, but not a full failure IIRC. He's still driving it, has had no other real issues.

My grandparents ended up replacing their '89 Taurus LX with a '94 GL, which had the 140 hp 3.0...I guess it was the same engine that your Grandma's '03 had? Granddad bought it, because Grandmom was getting sick, and he wanted something new and reliable to be able to take her to the hospital, doctor's visits, etc in, and the '89 had begun to stall every once in awhile. Sadly, Grandmom passed about 7 months later.

Granddad kept driving though, until 2004, and decided to give it up just short of his 90th birthday. He offered to give me the car, but I really didn't need it. Plus, I had driven that car more than a few times, and wasn't so crazy about it. It also always seemed to smell of antifreeze, although it never puddled up or anything. I think it only had about 40,000 miles on it. One of my cousins ended up getting it, and sadly, didn't take very good care of it. I saw it once more, in 2009 I think, and it was looking pretty ratty. I forget what it was, that finally went on it, but I think they got rid of it around 2011-2012, and it made it to around 85,000 miles.

fintail

Same engine I think, yes, a little low tech, but apparently durable, I sometimes see them at the janky local auto auction with ~200K on them, and they probably haven't had fastidious maintenance. As a weird side note, I think it might also be one of the last cars sold in this market with a mechanical odometer. My uncle still drives my grandma around in it, and I cleaned it for them earlier in the summer - it's holding up fine for what it is, a cheap full sized car.

I liked the 92-95 refresh, which aged well in my eyes. My mom really liked her 93 (white on blue, they don't make em like that anymore), and was sad when her mechanic told her to cut her losses. She had few issues with it until that point. But now she drives a Camry, and loves it too.

andre1969 said:

My grandparents ended up replacing their '89 Taurus LX with a '94 GL, which had the 140 hp 3.0...I guess it was the same engine that your Grandma's '03 had? Granddad bought it, because Grandmom was getting sick, and he wanted something new and reliable to be able to take her to the hospital, doctor's visits, etc in, and the '89 had begun to stall every once in awhile. Sadly, Grandmom passed about 7 months later.

Granddad kept driving though, until 2004, and decided to give it up just short of his 90th birthday. He offered to give me the car, but I really didn't need it. Plus, I had driven that car more than a few times, and wasn't so crazy about it. It also always seemed to smell of antifreeze, although it never puddled up or anything. I think it only had about 40,000 miles on it. One of my cousins ended up getting it, and sadly, didn't take very good care of it. I saw it once more, in 2009 I think, and it was looking pretty ratty. I forget what it was, that finally went on it, but I think they got rid of it around 2011-2012, and it made it to around 85,000 miles.

Michaell

Saw this while out running errands today. 

omarman

1974 Buick LeSabre Luxus convertible. Looks like Buick rallye wheels. And dual exhaust so maybe stage 1 option 455. Not likely to have a trailer hitch if only the base 350 engine.

ab348

Straight pipe dual exhausts are inappropriate for a stately car like a '70s fullsize Buick. I seriously doubt any possibility of a Stage 1 455 in that thing.

At least the interior is a proper color for a convertible.

sda

fintail said:

Same engine I think, yes, a little low tech, but apparently durable, I sometimes see them at the janky local auto auction with ~200K on them, and they probably haven't had fastidious maintenance. As a weird side note, I think it might also be one of the last cars sold in this market with a mechanical odometer. My uncle still drives my grandma around in it, and I cleaned it for them earlier in the summer - it's holding up fine for what it is, a cheap full sized car.

I liked the 92-95 refresh, which aged well in my eyes. My mom really liked her 93 (white on blue, they don't make em like that anymore), and was sad when her mechanic told her to cut her losses. She had few issues with it until that point. But now she drives a Camry, and loves it too.

andre1969 said:

My grandparents ended up replacing their '89 Taurus LX with a '94 GL, which had the 140 hp 3.0...I guess it was the same engine that your Grandma's '03 had? Granddad bought it, because Grandmom was getting sick, and he wanted something new and reliable to be able to take her to the hospital, doctor's visits, etc in, and the '89 had begun to stall every once in awhile. Sadly, Grandmom passed about 7 months later.

Granddad kept driving though, until 2004, and decided to give it up just short of his 90th birthday. He offered to give me the car, but I really didn't need it. Plus, I had driven that car more than a few times, and wasn't so crazy about it. It also always seemed to smell of antifreeze, although it never puddled up or anything. I think it only had about 40,000 miles on it. One of my cousins ended up getting it, and sadly, didn't take very good care of it. I saw it once more, in 2009 I think, and it was looking pretty ratty. I forget what it was, that finally went on it, but I think they got rid of it around 2011-2012, and it made it to around 85,000 miles.

Mom had a '87 Taurus LX, with sunroof. Kept it for about 10 years. Traded it because the rack and pinion and ball joints needed replacing. This was at 60k, otherwise running fine, looked good.

Mr_Shiftright

ab348 said:

Straight pipe dual exhausts are inappropriate for a stately car like a '70s fullsize Buick. I seriously doubt any possibility of a Stage 1 455 in that thing.

At least the interior is a proper color for a convertible.

AND he should be wearing a hat for that bald spot!

omarman

ab348 said:

Straight pipe dual exhausts are inappropriate for a stately car like a '70s fullsize Buick. I seriously doubt any possibility of a Stage 1 455 in that thing.

At least the interior is a proper color for a convertible.

Doubt any possibility? Wow you must be new here!

In 1974 Buick did offer the 455 stage 1 for "that thing." And it came with "inappropriate" dual exhausts too!

I don't know if they are as rare as the '74 Super Duty 455 Trans Am. But following the Yom Kippur war and OPEC embargo in '73 there was a lot less demand for high performance big block Detroit anything.

Re: the bald spot

Recently there was a politician at a rally who caught a glimpse of himself on-screen and said, "Oh, boy. Oh, I try like hell to hide that bald spot, folks. I work hard at it.”

andre1969

Out of curiosity, I looked up some horsepower ratings for 1974. Not surprisingly, it wasn't pretty. They had a 455-2bbl that was choked down to 175 hp! According to my old car book though, it was only offered in the Electra wagon and Century. The LeSabre was offered with a 150 hp 350-2bbl, 175 hp 350-4bbl, 210 hp 455-4bbl, and the Stage 1, with 245 hp. I wonder how many of them were actually equipped with the Stage 1, though? Considering the oil embargo, I'd imagine, not too many?

Actually, I imagine a LeSabre with 245 hp could still be fun, presuming they at least gave it appropriate gearing to take advantage of that power.

fintail

The only issue (other than head gasket) I remember in my mom's car is that it had strut issues around 30K - I remember driving it once and it was creaking a lot, I told her to take it in, and that was the verdict. Decent local dealer made it an easy warranty repair, if I remember right. I remember the car had these very 90s looking wheels:

sda said:

Mom had a '87 Taurus LX, with sunroof. Kept it for about 10 years. Traded it because the rack and pinion and ball joints needed replacing. This was at 60k, otherwise running fine, looked good.

omarman

1974 Buick LeSabre Luxus convertible for sale at $15500 USD negotiable.
Vin # decodes as 1974 Buick LeSabre Luxus convertible with W code 8-455 4 Bar. Carb., Stage I.
Lots of options too. Maybe would make a good cruiser. Andre-mobile?

andre1969

That looks like a pretty nice example...but I think the '74 is probably my least favorite of the '71-76 LeSabre. There's just something about that headlight treatment that bothers me. Style-wise, I think my favorite is the '75, which I'm sure is probably a turnoff to a lot of people. And, I can see an evolution...basically it's just as if they pushed the headlights together, raised the grille, and changed its texture, but I find it attractive.

The '75 LeSabre also looks just a bit Mopar-ish to me, up front. I thought the '74 Dodge Monaco looked awfully Buick-y, but then for '75 it seemed like the LeSabre copied the Monaco's front end just a bit.

Normally, I tend to go for Pontiacs, but when the '71s came out, I think Buick became my favorite of the big GM cars. The Pontiacs were just going too far with their over-styling, with all the curves and such, and trying to ape the Grand Prix while at the same time conjuring up the late 30's...it was fitting, I guess, that the Stutz Bearcat revival was based on a Pontiac. Chevies were decent, but just seemed too, well, "common". Although I guess it would be a stretch to really think of the LeSabre as really being a step up from an Impala...they were all getting to be on a fairly equal footing by that time. Still, I thought the Buicks tended to have a clean, upscale look about them...almost sporty, for this class of car. Meanwhile, the Oldsmobiles just seemed to be more conservative in their style.

I think the one year I'd pick an Olds over a Buick in that timeframe would be '74. While that year's LeSabre (and Electra) is my least favorite of that generation, I actually find the Delta 88, and Ninety-Eight, to be really attractive.

berri

I liked the 71 Buick and Chevy. I believe 85 was the last year for full sized, factory built GM convertibles other than the Eldorado went a bit longer.

andre1969

Yeah, it was '75 for the Caprice/Grand Ville/Delta 88/LeSabre. Oh, and the Corvette. The last Eldorado was '76. As I recall, the final Eldorado convertible was somewhat popular...but it was also the last of its kind around, so for anybody who still wanted a big convertible, that was really the only game in town.

I did start liking the big Pontiacs again, in '75-76. Style-wise, at least. I thought the more squared-off styling worked well on them. But, by that time, performance was nothing to write home about. And I think I still would've taken a LeSabre or Delta 88 over a Catalina, and while the Bonneville/Grand Ville were pretty nice, the Ninety-Eight and Electra were just soooo much classier. It wasn't until the '77 downsizing that Pontiac became my favorite big GM car again.

ab348

Even though I'm an Olds guy, I never cared for the '71-'76 full-size Oldsmobiles all that much. Especially in the first few years when they had the pointed headlight bezels.

berri

The pan I always heard on the latter year Pontiac's was the 307 V8. Don't really know though and never owned a vehicle with that engine.

andre1969

Ah, yes, the Pontiac 301. My understanding of it is that as long as you take care of it and aren't too rough on it, it'll be just fine. But, it can't tolerate much abuse, so if you let it run low on oil, overheat, stomp on it too much, or otherwise stress it out, it just can't take it. I think it tended to spin bearings, or something like that?

From what I've heard, Pontiac went to great extremes with the 301 to reduce its weight, giving it the same treatment, essentially, as the Buick 231. I know those engine weight charts are to be taken with a grain of salt, but most of then numbers I've seen put it at around 450 lb, versus something like 500 for the Ford smallblock, 525 for the Mopar 318 (for some reason, the 360 was listed at 550 though), and the Chevy smallblock was a comparative porker, around 575 lb.

I've read that the problem with the Chevy smallblock is that when it was first designed, while it had low reciprocating mass, the block itself was very weak. But, rather than re-engineer it from the ground up, Chevy just braced it up here and there, and the result was a heavier engine than if they had engineered it "right" from the get-go.

I forget what the Olds block weighed. I believe it used a lot of nickel mixed in the iron, so that made it stronger, yet lighter, than if it was simply iron. But the down-side was you couldn't slack off on coolant changes, otherwise the iron would react with the deteriorating coolant, and cause problems.

Anyway, even though the Pontiac block was very lightweight, the technology just wasn't there yet to mass produce it and have every example be consistently durable. When the 301 turbo came out, its block was beefed up, but I'm sure it had other issues, as turbo technology wasn't quite "there", yet.

I think engine choices are one reason why big Pontiacs from '77-81 don't seem to have the survival rate of other GM cars. Too many of them had the 231 V-6 or the 301...and the 231 was pretty bad in those days, as well. That probably sent many of them to an early grave. The Buick LeSabre also used the 231 and 301, but being a more upscale car, was probably a bit more likely to be ordered with a 350, or even a 403 in '77-78. Oldsmobile used the 301 one year, 1977 I believe, but then got smart and started using Chevy 305s for a few years until the Olds 307 was available. And, again, being considered more upscale, a Delta 88 was probably more likely to have a 350 or 403, while the Catalina/Bonneville were more reliant on the 5-liter range engines.

I believe the Catalina/Bonneville started using Olds 307s sometime in 1980, and by the '81 model year, they phased the 301 out of the B-body altogether. There was also a 265 CID version, offered in 1980-81, that had 120 hp. From what I've read, it was more durable than the 301, but that was because it didn't have enough power to hurt itself!

Every once in awhile, I'll see a Pontiac 301 at a classic car show or swap meet. While I'm still leery of them, I guess if the survivors have made it this far, and are still running well, they shouldn't be anything to be afraid of? As long as you keep up on maintenance, at least?

andre1969

ab348 said:

Even though I'm an Olds guy, I never cared for the '71-'76 full-size Oldsmobiles all that much. Especially in the first few years when they had the pointed headlight bezels.

I never cared for the pointy headlight bezels either. I also didn't like them when Dodge tried them on the '73 Polara. Chevy tried it to a degree on the '70 models, but that didn't bother me, I think, because they didn't have a center divider piece between the headlights. And that might be why I like the '74 Oldsmobiles...they got rid of those peaked headlights!

berri

I came close to owning a 79 Pontiac Grand Prix with that 301, but the Chevy dealer just offered a much better deal on my 79 Monte Carlo with a 4bbl 305. Didn't have any issues with that engine, but it was interesting because when I heard about the Chevette transmission in V8's the dealer claimed no way did I have that because of the 4bbl. Some years later after I had traded it in on an 83 Olds, I got documents from the US attorney's office that my VIN did indeed have it and I was entitled to a free extended warranty. Same luck as on my 76 Cutlass. Many of them had a substituted Chevy 350, but mine didn't, so I didn't get the $500 check on that one either.

My favorite Pontiac of the late 60's/early 70's was the Grand Prix (68-72 I think). Just thought it was a nice looker, but it was indeed pricey for the times. A fellow lieutenant owned one (his dad was a GM exec in Michigan) and I liked how it rode and handled for its size (it wasn't small, that's for sure). When GM downsized the big cars in 77 I always thought Buick and Pontiac had the best looks inside and out of those. I think I noted before that there were multiple times I wanted to buy a Pontiac, but where I lived at least, the deals weren't there. Always ended up with a Chevy or Olds instead.

andre1969

I had an '82 Cutlass Supreme coupe with the 231 V-6, and oddly, it had the "good" transmission, the THM350! From what I heard, GM often put the beefier transmission behind the weaker engines, but then gave the THM200 to the larger ones. The rationale, I heard, was that the smaller engines didn't drag down the CAFE averages, even with the beefier transmissions, but the bigger engines needed all the help they could get.

IIRC, the THM200 was "officially" rated to deal with GVWRs up to around 6000 lb, and torque ratings of up to around 260 ft-lb. So in theory, that would cover anything up to the 301/305/307 CID engines, and once they started downsizing, I think the only cars approaching a 6000 lb GVWR would have been the B-body wagons. Or maybe a C-body, if it was equipped for towing?

Only problem is, theory and real life don't always match up, and the THM200 had a high failure rate. Oddly, even the THM350 in my '82 Cutlass acted up, and I had it rebuilt around the 61-62K mark. I had bought it as a used car though, in 1993, and only paid $800 for it. So who knows how it had been maintained in the first part of its life.

Supposedly the 4-speed version, the THM200-R4, was much beefier. And there were versions that were beefier still, as that's what the Buick Grand National used. I'd imagine 80's B-body wagons that were equipped with the 307, and set up for towing, used a beefier version of it as well.

My Mom wanted a LeMans coupe in 1980. But, she ended up with a Malibu, instead. I don't know what the deal with that was...whether she got a better deal, or what. I think there was about a $100-150 difference in price between a LeMans and Malibu back then, and times were kind of tight, so that might have made some difference. Or it could have just been availability. The LeMans wasn't such a hot seller by 1980, but the Malibu still sold well, so I wonder if you might have been able to get a better deal on the LeMans? Anyway, I'm glad she ended up with the Malibu...I never really cared for the front-end style of the '78-80 LeMans. I liked the '81 though, with its front-end that looked a bit Firebird-ish.

fintail

The friend of mine who had an 83 Monte Carlo with a 305 of course had a THM200. It failed around 100K miles, but by that time the car was 18 or 19 years old. He loved the car, so he replaced it and kept driving.

thecardoc3

Those were two of the easiest transmissions I ever rebuilt.

Mr_Shiftright

omarman said:

1974 Buick LeSabre Luxus convertible for sale at $15500 USD negotiable.
Vin # decodes as 1974 Buick LeSabre Luxus convertible with W code 8-455 4 Bar. Carb., Stage I.
Lots of options too. Maybe would make a good cruiser. Andre-mobile?

245HP

texases

A very nice looking XJS cabrio in the turn lane, blinker working and everything!

kyfdx

Volvo 940 wagon...

I think it was a '93, as it had no trim designation.

Looked pretty good

stickguy

I saw an XJS cab recently too. Moving under own power and everything.

Mr_Shiftright

texases said:

A very nice looking XJS cabrio in the turn lane, blinker working and everything!

I bet he's flipping it on and off by hand, though!

I just finished up a huge car collection appraisal...there were 4 XJS in the group and the # of running ones?

None.

andre1969

Yesterday, on the way home after stopping off to pick up some fried chicken, I spotted this, less than 2 miles from my house...



It's a 1955 Buick, and I believe it's a Special. At least, I think it's a Special. That year, I believe the Special was the only Buick that got 3 portholes, while everything else got 4? I'd imagine the 4-door hardtop was pretty rare...IIRC, it came out in mid-year 1955, and only on the Special/Century (and the Oldsmobile models).