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

fintail

Ha, the Bonneville scene, I remember laughing at that even when I was a kid, when the car changes - nice that they filled in the rear quarter windows anyway, some attention to detail. I guess the budget didn't allow for the destruction of too many new Bonnevilles.

Jackie Gleason was unbelievable in all of those, even the sometimes lamented third installment.

uplanderguy

Crosby, Stills, and Nash!

fintail

C8 shows that someone at GM still cares - the Corvette name has to move with the times now and then, or it is really going to have a Harley-style issue in the not-too-distant future. Fortunately, anecdotally anyway, I seem to notice more interest in Corvettes by the under-60 crowd, and that's the point.

uplanderguy said:

I haven't seen many C8's out and about at all. I still think it's interesting and appealing, for a domestic builder and at the price point.

I went to a 'rolling car show' in my small, depressed, but still-dear-to-me hometown a month or so ago, and there was a C8 there!

explorerx4

@uplanderguy,
That's your best post ever.

kyfdx

uplanderguy said:

Crosby, Stills, and Nash!

🙄

andre1969

fintail said:

Ha, the Bonneville scene, I remember laughing at that even when I was a kid, when the car changes - nice that they filled in the rear quarter windows anyway, some attention to detail. I guess the budget didn't allow for the destruction of too many new Bonnevilles.

Jackie Gleason was unbelievable in all of those, even the sometimes lamented third installment.

I'd be curious as to how many Bonnevilles, and how many Trans Ams, GM supplied for "Smokey and the Bandit II". According to the IMDB, because the original "Smokey and the Bandit" was so successful, and in anticipation of the second one being a hit, Pontiac supplied 10 Trans Ams and 55 Bonnevilles. But, I really suspect that number. They really didn't put the Bandit's car, or Buford's car, through the same kind of abuse they did in the original It's been awhile since I've seen Part II, but I think the only thing really strenuous the Trans Am did was that jump in the scene I posted. I do remember the Bonneville taking a dive over a low retaining wall after knocking down the roller coaster, and the front-end sticking up pretty seriously. The Trans Am had sailed over that wall a bit more gracefully, but I'd imagine still took a bit of damage. And, towards the end, I recall the Bonneville getting clipped in the rear by a tractor trailer, spinning around a bit wildly (probably with the help of some stunt work, guide cables, or something...it didn't look "natural"). And at the very end, when Buford tries to drive over the tractor trailers parked side by side, and they start to pull out and leave a gap, you see the car going airborne...but not the result of it landing. From what I can remember, every other scene where Buford's car had something serious done to it, it was the '75-76 standing in for it. And at the very end, when they show the car crunched into sort of an A-frame before it goes into the swamp, it looks like it might be a '71-72.

Incidentally, I also remember Gaylord's and Reggie's LeManses turning into '71 or so AMC Matadors, when they met their demise!

I've seen conflicting info, but for the first "Smokey and the Bandit", GM furnished either 3, 4, or 5 Trans Ams, and 2 LeManses. They did a pretty good job, all things considered, of keeping the cars consistent, although I do remember one scene where a '75 or so Coronet/Fury was in pursuit, but it wiped out on a curve, and turned into a LeMans when it went backwards into a lake.

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

Crosby, Stills, and Nash!

GO TO YOUR ROOM!

uplanderguy

LOL.

Looks like I'm still going to the Hershey show to see my buddy and his '63 Riviera. If you see a red-on-red Riv there, I should be near it. Short, stocky, hat, blue windbreaker most-likely with red 'Studebaker' ball on the back. If you're there, hope to at least say 'hi', andre. I'll look for the tall guy near the Mopars and Pontiacs!

fintail

This is a good pic, talk about a hard landing:



I think in all 3 Smokeys, one can find continuity issues with the destruction of vehicles, especially Smokey's car.

The IMCDB page is pretty good, and I think shows some of those AMCs

andre1969 said:

e, even the sometimes lamented third installment.

I'd be curious as to how many Bonnevilles, and how many Trans Ams, GM supplied for "Smokey and the Bandit II". According to the IMDB, because the original "Smokey and the Bandit" was so successful, and in anticipation of the second one being a hit, Pontiac supplied 10 Trans Ams and 55 Bonnevilles. But, I really suspect that number. They really didn't put the Bandit's car, or Buford's car, through the same kind of abuse they did in the original It's been awhile since I've seen Part II, but I think the only thing really strenuous the Trans Am did was that jump in the scene I posted. I do remember the Bonneville taking a dive over a low retaining wall after knocking down the roller coaster, and the front-end sticking up pretty seriously. The Trans Am had sailed over that wall a bit more gracefully, but I'd imagine still took a bit of damage. And, towards the end, I recall the Bonneville getting clipped in the rear by a tractor trailer, spinning around a bit wildly (probably with the help of some stunt work, guide cables, or something...it didn't look "natural"). And at the very end, when Buford tries to drive over the tractor trailers parked side by side, and they start to pull out and leave a gap, you see the car going airborne...but not the result of it landing. From what I can remember, every other scene where Buford's car had something serious done to it, it was the '75-76 standing in for it. And at the very end, when they show the car crunched into sort of an A-frame before it goes into the swamp, it looks like it might be a '71-72.

Incidentally, I also remember Gaylord's and Reggie's LeManses turning into '71 or so AMC Matadors, when they met their demise!

I've seen conflicting info, but for the first "Smokey and the Bandit", GM furnished either 3, 4, or 5 Trans Ams, and 2 LeManses. They did a pretty good job, all things considered, of keeping the cars consistent, although I do remember one scene where a '75 or so Coronet/Fury was in pursuit, but it wiped out on a curve, and turned into a LeMans when it went backwards into a lake.

kyfdx

uplanderguy said:

LOL.

Looks like I'm still going to the Hershey show to see my buddy and his '63 Riviera. If you see a red-on-red Riv there, I should be near it. Short, stocky, hat, blue windbreaker most-likely with red 'Studebaker' ball on the back. If you're there, hope to at least say 'hi', andre. I'll look for the tall guy near the Mopars and Pontiacs!

Pretty sure you just described 80% of the attendance at every car show..

uplanderguy

The Ohio Region Studebaker Drivers' Club logo on the back of the jacket will be the distinguishing feature, LOL!

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

LOL.

Looks like I'm still going to the Hershey show to see my buddy and his '63 Riviera. If you see a red-on-red Riv there, I should be near it. Short, stocky, hat, blue windbreaker most-likely with red 'Studebaker' ball on the back. If you're there, hope to at least say 'hi', andre. I'll look for the tall guy near the Mopars and Pontiacs!

Oh wow, that's going to be what, about 3 weeks, now? Where has the time gone?! As far as I know, we're still going, so we'll definitely look for you!

andre1969

fintail said:

I think in all 3 Smokeys, one can find continuity issues with the destruction of vehicles, especially Smokey's car.

The IMCDB page is pretty good, and I think shows some of those AMCs

Yep, sure enough, here's the pic I'm thinking of!



One thing I never noticed before, was that Reginald's red LeMans turned into a '75-78 Dodge/Plymouth midsize just before they crashed; it was only Gaylord's white one that turned into a Matador. I guess I just never paid that close of attention to the scene, and whenever I did, always focused on the white car.

roadburner

My wife spotted a 1971 Malaga '02- she saw it before I did. We both miss our '75

andre1969

Yesterday I went with my housemate to drop his Murano off at the dealer for a repair. I spotted a white '63-64 Cadillac 4-door hardtop driving past. I think it was a '64, but didn't get that good of a look at it. Oddly, when we went to pick his car up that evening, I saw the same Caddy, and again, only at a quick glimpse.

There's an auto repair shop near the dealer, that usually has a pink '59 Caddy parked behind it, so I have a feeling it's associated with that shop. Just too much of a coincidence, to see two Caddies of that era in such close proximity, otherwise.

I went to Google street view to see if it showed anything interesting. No Cadillacs, but here's something interesting, nonetheless...



Can anyone identify the white car? It's not something I recognize, but it looks kind of French to me.

explorerx4

Too bad Google fuzzed out the logo on the white car. It looks Italian to me. Ferrari or Maserati.

andre1969

Here's a shot of it from the side, towards the rear...


And yeah, the more I look at it, it might be too tasteful to be French!

**Edit...just figured it out by accident, in googling pictures of random old European cars. I won't give it away just yet, in case anyone wants to take a guess.

stickguy

Post it on the mystery cars thread.

uplanderguy

RE.: Crosby, Stills, and Nash groaner--

Could also be labelled "Crosby and Stills at the Metropolitan"!

fintail

Today in Spokane spotted: Porsche 356 cabriolet, a few 60s era pickups in nice driver condition, Suzuki Verona, saw a couple Mark IV Supras on I90 this morning, 25th anniversary Vette, immaculate looking early run Knight Rider style Trans Am.

fintail

Today: Daewoo Lanos, early MB W124, early Chrysler Laser/Dodge Daytona, 2x blue Cutlass Cieras, 1st gen CRX Si.

stickguy

I like the white one behind it.

fintail

This was an alarming sight on I90 (dashcam capture while zooming by at 75, excuse the clarity):



It's a W110, mine is a W111, and I think this one is slightly newer, but the color appears right, and the car appeared to be pristine (rain can do that). Crazy.

explorerx4

@fintail,
I really thought you were going to post that it was a picture of your car being transported.
Don't see wide white wall tires, though.

fintail

Via an incident with the fuel injection's cold start system, been there, done that:

uplanderguy

Unusual spot in Kent, OH today, out driving on East Main St.: Red '66 Mercury Comet Cyclone GT, lettered with the 'Official Pace Car' Indy 500 lettering on the side. Nice-looking car I've not seen around town before.

Reminded me that my mother-in-law from FL called a couple nights ago to ask my opinion if she should update to a new lease on a RAV4 as she got a letter offering for her to turn her '18 with 8400 miles in six months early and could lease a new one at the same rate, or should she buy her '18 in six months. I told her if I were her, I would lease the new one, and she called last night to say she had the new one home already.

Anyway, she told me her first husband always bought Mercurys that were a year or two old, and she was comparing her pushbutton start in her new RAV4 to a Mercury they had that had a pushbutton start to the left of the wheel, and that her husband didn't like it as he'd reach his right hand through the wheel to start it.

I did a brief Google search about it today, as I'd never heard of such a Mercury. I did see something about some late '50's Mercs having pushbutton automatic transmissions; I wonder if that's what she's remembering, or if it were somehow related to that.

fintail

Quick search shows maybe 49-51 Mercurys had it, perhaps others? From what I can find, a 58 Mercury had a pushbutton transmission to the left of the steering wheel, called "Keyboard Control", not sure about other years.

That made me think of old MB diesels with a pull knob to start - and you had to pull hard, it had an industrial feel. Not long ago on a Youtube car auction video, the presenter found a late 60s/early 70s diesel at an auction, and couldn't figure out how to start it - he wasn't pulling hard enough.

Michaell

fintail said:

Quick search shows maybe 49-51 Mercurys had it, perhaps others? From what I can find, a 58 Mercury had a pushbutton transmission to the left of the steering wheel, called "Keyboard Control", not sure about other years.

That made me think of old MB diesels with a pull knob to start - and you had to pull hard, it had an industrial feel. Not long ago on a Youtube car auction video, the presenter found a late 60s/early 70s diesel at an auction, and couldn't figure out how to start it - he wasn't pulling hard enough.

I don't remember that on the '72 220D my folks owned.

It had a glow plug, but a regular key.

fintail

Interesting. Here's a car of the same series with an apparent key ignition:

https://youtu.be/-CTCtNVGLGk

But here's one with a pull knob:

https://youtu.be/0N9XpOvFFek

And one of the same year and model:

https://youtu.be/qW7Rx-xdxG8

Fintails had it too:

https://youtu.be/wWLmRkc54s8

Maybe no surprise, Pontons were very different compared to later or modern cars:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiqv-9TVfbc

Michaell said:

I don't remember that on the '72 220D my folks owned.

It had a glow plug, but a regular key.

Michaell

fintail said:

Interesting. Here's a car of the same series with an apparent key ignition:

https://youtu.be/-CTCtNVGLGk

But here's one with a pull knob:

https://youtu.be/0N9XpOvFFek

And one of the same year and model:

https://youtu.be/qW7Rx-xdxG8

Fintails had it too:

https://youtu.be/wWLmRkc54s8

Maybe no surprise, Pontons were very different compared to later or modern cars:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiqv-9TVfbc

Michaell said:

I don't remember that on the '72 220D my folks owned.

It had a glow plug, but a regular key.

It also had the choke lever, and the round gauges.

stickguy

I remember the manual choke knob on the '69 Volvo. Not really a knob, it was a half-circle T pull. Very finicky too IIRC

ab348

Our '73 Volvo had a manual choke from the factory as well. The carbureted engine didn't like to idle smoothly because it was so leaned out for emissions. We learned to leave the choke pulled out slightly after it warmed up to give a smoother idle.

uplanderguy

A buddy just sent me this link. He is drooling about the car, and I have to say I like it a lot too. I love low-mileage originals. I would like a coupe better, and a coupe of that era without the vinyl top is even rarer. IIRC, they did a funky fiberglass or plastic type surround around the quarter window with no vinyl top.

Nice packaging I think. Personally, I didn't miss the '76 big GM cars when they did such a nice job, IMHO, overall, on the downsized 'big' cars in '77-79.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1979-Oldsmobile-Ninety-Eight-Regency/174451317868?hash=item289e1bdc6c:g:RN0AAOSwb7BfbgNo

roadburner

The only car I owned that had a choke was my SPL311.

Michaell

My sisters '84 RX-7 also had a choke.

fintail

I'm not an expert on cars of that era, I wonder if there was an option, or something changed at a certain point in time. The pull knob starter seems pretty quaint to still exist into the 70s.

Speaking of chokes, I have no clear memory of ever using one, but I swear I recall riding in a car with one, but with so many driving videos online now, it could be memory issues. I am pretty sure all of my dad's old Fords had automatic chokes, and none of the family cars when I was a kid had a manual choke.

Michaell said:

It also had the choke lever, and the round gauges.

sda

uplanderguy said:

A buddy just sent me this link. He is drooling about the car, and I have to say I like it a lot too. I love low-mileage originals. I would like a coupe better, and a coupe of that era without the vinyl top is even rarer. IIRC, they did a funky fiberglass or plastic type surround around the quarter window with no vinyl top.

Nice packaging I think. Personally, I didn't miss the '76 big GM cars when they did such a nice job, IMHO, overall, on the downsized 'big' cars in '77-79.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1979-Oldsmobile-Ninety-Eight-Regency/174451317868?hash=item289e1bdc6c:g:RN0AAOSwb7BfbgNo

Very nice Olds. Pretty much a base Regency. No power locks, 2way elec seat, no rear defroster, cornering lights, etc. I like it.

fintail

I always wonder how and why such cars were preserved. Estate keeping it as a sentimental item? Eccentric enthusiast? I like how the car isn't over-detailed.

uplanderguy said:

A buddy just sent me this link. He is drooling about the car, and I have to say I like it a lot too. I love low-mileage originals. I would like a coupe better, and a coupe of that era without the vinyl top is even rarer. IIRC, they did a funky fiberglass or plastic type surround around the quarter window with no vinyl top.

Nice packaging I think. Personally, I didn't miss the '76 big GM cars when they did such a nice job, IMHO, overall, on the downsized 'big' cars in '77-79.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1979-Oldsmobile-Ninety-Eight-Regency/174451317868?hash=item289e1bdc6c:g:RN0AAOSwb7BfbgNo

imidazol97

fintail said:

I'm not an expert on cars of that era, I wonder if there was an option, or something changed at a certain point in time. The pull knob starter seems pretty quaint to still exist into the 70s.

Speaking of chokes, I have no clear memory of ever using one, but I swear I recall riding in a car with one, but with so many driving videos online now, it could be memory issues. I am pretty sure all of my dad's old Fords had automatic chokes, and none of the family cars when I was a kid had a manual choke.

Michaell said:

It also had the choke lever, and the round gauges.

I _think_ my Dad's 1960 Ford Fairlane 6-cylinder had a manual choke.

I can't recall if my 1962 Ford Fairlane 260 cu in engine had one or not.
I may try to find instrument panel pics for both to see.

ab348

uplanderguy said:

A buddy just sent me this link. He is drooling about the car, and I have to say I like it a lot too. I love low-mileage originals. I would like a coupe better, and a coupe of that era without the vinyl top is even rarer. IIRC, they did a funky fiberglass or plastic type surround around the quarter window with no vinyl top.

Nice packaging I think. Personally, I didn't miss the '76 big GM cars when they did such a nice job, IMHO, overall, on the downsized 'big' cars in '77-79.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1979-Oldsmobile-Ninety-Eight-Regency/174451317868?hash=item289e1bdc6c:g:RN0AAOSwb7BfbgNo

You don't see too many of these black on black. I wonder if it was a funeral home car?

That is a really nice example, a real time capsule. The paint is very shiny, the bumper fillers aren't deteriorated, the plastichrome on the exterior looks brand new. Same with the woodgrain decals on the door tops inside which always wore prematurely, especially on the drivers door, and the thin aluminum molding on the sides of the seat backrest and bottom cushion, which always bend and come loose with use. These were unfortunately at the peak of GM's cheapening-out era when they were still making cars with lots of bright trim and fake wood, and it did not make the transition to "value engineering" very well.

uplanderguy

I think the big GM's got worse-looking, generally, with the '80 model year, while the mid-size specialty coupes got better-looking with the '81 model year.

I know it's subjective, but a '79 Grand Marquis just doesn't do it for me like this car does, and the imports had nothing at all like it then.

uplanderguy

andre, the show at Hershey was cancelled yesterday. Not surprised, but I am disappointed.

fintail

I think that 98 definitely seems more upmarket than a Grand Marquis, which in my eyes might compete more with an 88 or LeSabre.

I don't think the imports competed with something like that until the 1995 Avalon - even the prior Cressidas weren't really similar. If it was 1981, and I was an affluent car shopper, I'd choose a new M-B 300SD without hesitation.

uplanderguy said:

I think the big GM's got worse-looking, generally, with the '80 model year, while the mid-size specialty coupes got better-looking with the '81 model year.

I know it's subjective, but a '79 Grand Marquis just doesn't do it for me like this car does, and the imports had nothing at all like it then.

andre1969

Damn, that sucks about the Hershey show getting canceled, but yeah, at the same time I'm not surprised.

As for the Grand Marquis, there was a brief moment in time when it overlapped with the Ninety-Eight and Electra, price-wise. In 1974, last year for the Monterey, it was priced about the same as a Delta 88, starting around $4400. The Marquis started at $5080 for the base trim levels, and $5519 for the Brougham models. The Ninety Eight had a stripper 4-door hardtop that was $5303. Then there was the Luxury Coupe/Sedan, for $5514/$5607, and the Regency coupe/sedan, for $5776/$5869. Interestingly, they list the Luxury Coupe as a hardtop, but the Regency as just "coupe", so that might have been the first year they started phasing in fixed rear windows on the coupes. Gotta love it, pay extra, for stationary rear windows!

For '75, the Monterey was gone, and the Marquis started at $5063 for the base coupe/sedan, around $6000 for the Marquis Brougham, and around $6400-6500 for the Grand Marquis. The Delta 88 started a bit cheaper, at around $4800-4900 for the base models, $4900-5050 for the Royale ($5200 for the convertible). The Ninety Eight started at around $6000 for the cheapest model, the "Luxury Coupe/Luxury Sedan" and around $6300 for the Regency. However, even though the Marquis Brougham and Grand Marquis were in range of the Ninety-Eight and Electra, in those pre-downsized years at least, they just looked like the cheaper cars, just with nicer interiors and more trim. But with an Electra or Ninety-Eight, you got a car that looked notably different from a LeSabre or Delta 88. It still had the family resemblance, but was a larger, more luxurious car.

Once the big Fords downsized, they were nowhere near the Electra/Ninety Eight in prestige. A '79 Marquis was around $6300 for the base model, $7000 for the Brougham, and around $7800 for the Grand Marquis. In contrast, a Ninety Eight was $8700 for the base "Luxury" model and around $9300 for the Regency.

Also, in '79, the sales split of the Ninety Eight was roughly 9,000 of the Luxury model, 120,000 of the Regency, showing that these cars were definitely attracting a more moneyed buyer, rather than someone trying to look expensive on the cheap. With the Marquis, sales were split more like 42,000 base model, 35,000 Brougham, and 43,000 Grand Marquises, so they were more evenly spread out.

I think the Grand Marquis tried hard, to be a luxury car, but it was just held back by really just being a nicer trim level of a more mainstream car. To their credit, they did have some pretty nice interiors, as well.

andre1969

With GM's big cars, I thought the C-bodies actually looked a bit nicer for 1980, but the B-bodies, not so much. I think the proportioning was cleaned up a bit, with the lower hoodlines, raised rear decks, and thinner C-pillars on the sedans. But the coupes lost all their individuality, going for sort of a personal luxury coupe look with a small rear quarter window, thick C-pillar, and formal, upright rear window. I think they were still handsome enough, just not as unique.

andre1969

fintail said:

I don't think the imports competed with something like that until the 1995 Avalon - even the prior Cressidas weren't really similar. If it was 1981, and I was an affluent car shopper, I'd choose a new M-B 300SD without hesitation.

That's probably about right. Even though the Cressida was a very nice, upscale car, it was just too small to compete head-to-head with something like a Ninety-Eight, Electra, etc. I just looked up the specs of the '95 Avalon, at the EPA's website. 106 cubic feet of passenger volume, 15 cubic feet of trunk. In contrast, a '95 Olds 98 was 108/20, while an Eighty-Eight was 106/18.

The Cressida was actually considered a compact! The '92 is only rated at 89/12! Actually, even way back when the Camry came out, it was larger inside than the Cressida. IIRC, the Cressida was really tight on legroom in the back seat, and that might be what hurt its interior volume index. The Camry was actually quite roomy in legroom and headroom, but was tight in shoulder room, basically making it a comfy 4 seater.

In a way, I thought of those early Camrys as sort of a 1980s Dodge Dart...a car that, while marketed as a compact, actually rivaled some midsized cars in some interior aspects.

kyfdx

Camry FWD
Cressida RWD

Explains rear seat room.

‘92 Cressida was an old body style. If you are comparing it to a Camry, then compare to the ‘88-‘91 model. Camry was all new for ‘92.

Just a different era. Of course, way smaller than the GMs.

uplanderguy

"I can't recall if my 1962 Ford Fairlane 260 cu in engine had one or not."

Our six-cylinder '62 Fairlane had a manual choke. Last car we had with one, and the last Ford product my Dad every owned.

andre1969

kyfdx said:

Camry FWD
Cressida RWD

Explains rear seat room.

‘92 Cressida was an old body style. If you are comparing it to a Camry, then compare to the ‘88-‘91 model. Camry was all new for ‘92.

Just a different era. Of course, way smaller than the GMs.

Something else that just hit me...in those days, the Cressida used an inline-6, right? That's going to take up a bit of room under the hood. And, looking at the specs, a 1985 Cressida was only on a 104.7" wb. The '81-84 was slightly shorter, at 104.1". So yeah, a combination of RWD, a stubby wheelbase, and an inline-6 engine probably all contributed to the cramped back seat.

Those Cressidas did have nice interiors, though...


Sort of like what you might expect if GM had put the Ninety-Eight on the Calais platform.
Or, if Chrysler put the New Yorker on the K-platform. Oh, wait...

uplanderguy

I know, I know, I'm old-skool, but to me Japan's efforts to make luxury cars back then seemed about just stretching their compacts' wheelbases a few inches and putting fancy seats but leaving the rest of the interior largely as-is, LOL.

Not based on any hard facts, just my perceptions, right or wrong. And I of course realize that thinking is anachronistic.