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

andre1969

I remember years ago, like 2002 or 2003, seeing a 1958 Adventurer convertible that still had its fuel injection intact. I'm thinking it was sort of a metallic green. I remember it was kind of a rainy, dreary day, and I remember some priss hollering at me to move because he wanted a picture of it and I was in the frame. Not between him and the car mind you, but on the other side of the car, and in his view.

I'm not sure how many '58 Adventurers had fuel injection, but I think only 12 or 13 Chrysler 300Ds got it. So for the Adventurer, I'm sure even fewer. I think they only made 82 Adventurer convertibles for '58, so this one had to be rare as hell. The fuel injection was unreliable, and most of them were converted to dual quads.

I don't recall seeing a gold supercharged DeSoto though...wonder how I would've missed something like that? BTW, 2002 was the first time I went to Hershey, so if it was before that, that would explain it!

imidazol97

I'm trying to discern if these posts mean that only certain cars which meet a prequalification criteria check are to be posted here on the forum?

Does "patina" mean it has to have a certain characteristic and otherwise shouldn't be posted?

I reread the defining first post in the thread by magnetophone and it says:
"I think I needed to create a message board where we talk about crazy old obscure cars that we saw on the way to work, in the neighborhood, or at the junkyard. "

uplanderguy

Now that you mention it, it was Fuel Injected, not supercharged. My mistake. I'm thinking it was gold. Anyway, it was beautiful. Of the Mopars of that era, I do like the tower taillights of the DeSoto with the round lights going up it, best.

uplanderguy

I use the word 'patina', but I'm a little loose on the definition. I think it's a nice word for 'wear' or at least, 'light wear'!

I think any old car one sees unexpectedly on the street or in a parking lot, a beautiful or unusual old car at a show, or a goofy or really nice old car on eBay, can and is shown here! Any make, any model. Room for all opinions here.

andre1969

That could have been the same car then! I looked at a paint chart, and there was a color offered in 1958 called "Adventurer Gold", which looks kind of greenish to me. And then there was "Spanish Gold", which looks more like a "real" gold to me.

1958 DeSoto paint chart

fintail

I am very inclusive when it comes to old cars. I will appreciate a factory fresh preserved Pacer as much as a pretty seven figure exotic speculation object of some hypocritical 1%er. Cars do not have to be historically significant, sporty, beautiful, to be interesting or charming.

Back in the day, it seemed anything would be rescued, "restored" (more for shine and roadworthiness than accuracy) and then appreciated for its vintage quirks. Then the money came in, and some noses turned up as it became a competition for sketchy born on third base types. Many cars like that stripper Chevy are "rare but who cares", but that doesn't mean credit shouldn't be given for what's there. Accurate restorations are important for some cars, and some cars are legitimate historical objects - but others have value too.

I am also happy to see patina is valued today. The way machines age is interesting, and it removes pressure to do any expensive restoration work on my own patina-laden 15-footer (seen here this past Sunday)

uplanderguy

I'm pretty sure that Spanish Gold was it. I was standing next to the owner of Westmoreland Restorations, who did the driver restoration of my '63 Lark Daytona, and his solid black perfect '57 Golden Hawk he had done, and the owner of the DeSoto asked me to not stand so close to his car...not that I'd brushed up against it or anything! He was just nervous I might (never would have happened). Even after that, I still thought his car was gorgeous!

Mr_Shiftright

Having all the desirable equipment stripped out of it doesn't make it the least bit "obscure" IMO---it's just a common car with some things removed from it.

uplanderguy

Whatever. I'm exhausted.

uplanderguy

I will appreciate a factory fresh preserved Pacer

Me, too. Sometimes car shows I think distort the reality of life 'back then'. We didn't all drive tri-power GTO's and Bel Air convertibles then.

andre1969

We didn't all drive tri-power GTO's and Bel Air convertibles then.
Ooh, that reminds me. I need to upload some pics I took at a local car show this past weekend. My Catalina was parked next to a 1960 Catalina hardtop with Tri-Power and a 4-speed. That had to be a rare car!

uplanderguy

A '60 Catalina hardtop with Tri-Power and 4-speed would be a very nice car!

A friend of my Dad's had Pontiacs all through my growing up years. I remember '60 and '66 Bonneville convertibles. My sister's boyfriend drove his parents' '65 Grand Prix. All this while we had a '62 Fairlane and four-door '67 Chevelle (sigh).

I was always very impressed with the choices in Pontiac's full-size lineup, which to me was the greatest for Andre's model year, '67....Catalina, Ventura option on Catalina, 2+2, Grand Prix including the one-year-only convertible, and on the longer wheelbase, Executive, Bonneville, and Bonneville Brougham--even a Brougham convertible. Man, I miss the choices offered in the old days, but that's for another board.

Back to the '60--over the past thirty or more years, I am aware of TWO '60 Pontiacs turned into El Camino-like vehicles!

fintail

Reality, and it is "obscure", as in uncommon or seldom-seen. A lot of boring relatively worthless ugly old cars are "obscure".

A mint bottom of the line 71 Chevy counts for this. Probably has a survival rate lower than cars that are far more valuable and exciting, simply because it was made to be thrown away when eventually used up. How many remain in pristine condition? It's obscure. Once seen on every street in every town, but now, extinct.

Also, time marches on, and for some, some cars don't seem very old, but they are. We're to the point where 80s cars are hitting 30 years old, and for better or worse, those are old cars.

andre1969

Hopefully this link works okay...Photobucket changed their format and IMO screwed it up. But, here goes

I didn't get very many Chevy pics, because they had them all crammed together in the bottom of the valley, facing each other, so it was hard to get good pics. Weather was a bit odd. Started off nice and sunny, and I thought my Catalina looked kinda neat warming up, with the smoke coming out the back. But then it clouded up fast. Fortunately no rain, and it got sunny later in the day. Probably too cold to reasonably drive around with the top down, but I did it! And so did a few others!

Mr_Shiftright

Sorry I'm just not getting it I guess. If you take a common car like a '69 Chevelle and put a 6 cylinder engine and a column shift on it, it becomes "obscure"?

What I might say about it, if anyone asked me, was that the drivetrain was obscure. The car is still a '69 Chevelle.

uplanderguy

A '69 Chevelle with six and stick is far, far less obscure than a GM B-Body of '71 with a stick shift. Far more '69 Chevelles have been restored than '71 B-bodies, as well...regardless of the transmission.

A quick look at '69 Chevelles versus '71 full-size Chevrolets on eBay would promptly reveal that one just cannot find an original or even authentically restored full-size '71 Chevy, regardless of engine and trans, although there would be many Chevelles on eBay. For instance, I bet it's been thirty years or more since I've even seen a dash cover on a '71 big Chevy that hasn't been cracked from front to back--that Bel Air's is perfect.

Mr_Shiftright

Ah well, not how I see it, say from a judge's or appraiser's point of view---- neither one is obscure. They are merely both common cars with uncommon transmission options.

Now, a car like a Studebaker Scotsman Wagon is obscure but not because it was de-contented. It's obscure because it's a separate model, and a rare specimen of a separate model at that--- and was marketed as a such, with numerous features to distinguish it from other Studebakers of the line--painted bumpers, no heater, painted hubcaps, cardboard door panels, etc.

fintail

Judges or appraisers don't really care about obscurity though, they are either judging authenticity or value. A lot of obscurity doesn't add much value.

An oddly equipped car is obscure, even if it is a more common model. A 58 Olds with air suspension is obscure. A Euro W126 with a 5-speed is obscure. A 63 Galaxie with a 427 and every single option is obscure. All are much less common than what is usually seen - I don't want to be a semantics [non-permissible content removed], but the word "obscure" doesn't demand the model itself to be rare, to my eyes. I see a feature making a car obscure.

Maybe it's just a matter of personal interpretation.

hpmctorque

Nice! I didn't go to the Rockville show this year. Next year my '88 ZX will qualify.

fintail

Nice stuff, very diverse showing. Not always easy to find a show with both foreign and domestic, and with more than a few makes and models.

imidazol97

>Hopefully this link works okay

Thanks for sharing the pictures. Lots of great cars there.

stickguy

lots of nice cars. I had one horrible flashback though, when I saw the Opel Manta. I had a '75, and it scarred me for life.

uplanderguy

Very nice assortment of cars, thanks for sharing.

imidazol97

The rare pics that caught my eye:

1954? Lincoln, color is unusual.



Elegant styling and colors.



And the barely cream color that was used on some GMs for a time and it looks great on that convertible. The daylight caused the color to appear slightly off in this picture.

andre1969

GM actually used two creamy yellows around that timeframe. I think the most common one is what people call "Butternut", which is what I think Chevy called it. It was called other things by the other divisions though. It's a bit darker than the other one, which is on my '67 Catalina. I think Pontiac calls my color "Capri Creme".

Here's a pic I took at the GM show in Carlisle back in 2009, which I think shows the contrast in the two colors pretty well:


That early morning pic I took of my car that you referenced above definitely makes it look like it's the darker "butternut" color.

I happened to see this '67 Olds for sale at a local car lot, and took a pic with my Catalina's front-end just jutting into the pic. It shows just how different the colors are once you see them, side by side.

uplanderguy

Capri Cream looks almost identical to Studebaker's Ermine White, which my '63 Daytona was, which is almost identical to Ford's Wimbledon White of the period.

I always liked the front styling, especially, of the '67 big Ponchos.

uplanderguy

About the '67 and '68 big Olds--while I like the interior of the rarely-seen "Delta Custom" of that year, I think the exterior styling is cartoonish compared to Pontiac's. It looks like a Cutlass on steroids, or a slightly shrunken Toronado...just IMHO of course.

Mr_Shiftright

Wimbledon White doesn't have that yellow in it. It has brown in it. You might be thinking of "Springtime Yellow" another popular Ford color of that period.

lemko

Most people had something like that stripped 1971 Chevrolet Bel Air. I like seeing the kinds of cars people drove back in the day versus some over-restored trailer queen marred by stupid Continental kits and cruiser skirts. Heck, that 1971 Chevy resembles Mr. Gallagher's old car. I remember it as he complained to my Dad that I was sitting on the rear bumper when I was 8 years-old. My Dad smacked my [non-permissible content removed] and made me apologize to Mr. Gallagher for sitting on his car. Mr. Gallagher's been dead about 30 years, but I still remember his car!

lemko

...primer black 1962 Cadillac Coupe DeVille outside a restorer's shop on Oxford Avenue near Rising Sun in NE Philly. Also saw a yellow Nash Metropolitan undergoing a restoration outside another shop near Bingham and Magee.

Mr_Shiftright

If I had to walk through a car show filled with '71 Chevy 4-doors, I'd probably get bored...and fast. Glorification of the Ordinary is entertaining, for about 3 minutes.

uplanderguy

Wimbledon White is the SDC-long-recommended match for the off-white wheels ("Pebble Sand") that Studebaker used on all cars from '62-66. On my Ermine White car, the body paint matched the wheels exactly. It's a creamy white. In '64 Stude went to an exterior color that they called Astra White, and it was as bright white as a refrigerator.

Here is Wimbledon White on an early Mustang:

http://www.mustangmonthly.com/featuredvehicles/mump_0311_1964_ford_mustang_conve- rtible/photo_01.html

imidazol97

These aren't cars I've seen in my lifetime, nor am I likely to see one tomorrow.
I like seeing cars that are ones that I might have seen in my lifetime.

uplanderguy

While I can certainly appreciate cars like the ones imidazo presented, they are not ones that make me smile and want to go over and look closer as they won't elicit fond memories for me. But hey, that's me.

uplanderguy

I don't want to be a semantics [non-permissible content removed], but the word "obscure" doesn't demand the model itself to be rare, to my eyes. I see a feature making a car obscure.

Excellent point IMHO. I owned a white '63 Studebaker Lark. They built and sold 75,377 1963 Larks. But it had factory air, factory sunroof, and factory Avanti engine (non-supercharged). I loved it one time in particular, at a nearby cruise-in, two guys just coming back and back to it, commenting they'd never seen one. I'd even get that at Stude meets--the 'never seen one' was in response to the sunroof and Avanti engine, particularly on the same car. That was an obscure Lark. I did the build order research myself, after someone had already researched what exact serial numbers of '63 Larks had "Avanti" engines. Only 14 with an Avanti engine and a sunroof were built, and ours was the first serial number. I think that rates as obscure, although a '63 Lark in and of itself isn't obscure (although I guess it may be compared to all other domestic compacts at the time!).

Second pic down in this link was taken by a friend, through the sunroof. The car wasn't perfect but was an authentically-restored driver. You can see the NOS upholstery for the car that my wife bought for around $300 total as a Christmas gift from South Bend in around '95 (sadly you can also see my factory dash crack!):

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?42028-Greenville-PA-Herita- ge-Days-Cruise-In-Main-St.-downtown-July-3&highlight=greenville%2C+show

fintail

A Lark is pretty obscure anymore - don't see many even at shows. Avanti engined sunroof car very obscure, most have never seen one.

Why didn't you keep that car?

uplanderguy

I knew it was starting to need some stuff. I had had it restored as a driver from '93 to '95 and had put about 17K miles on it since that time. It leaked oil (like most Studes) and it idled rather lumpily, which some told me was the racing cam in an R1 engine. I had a daughter going to Miami University a year down the road, and a fellow from Australia in the club wanted the car. I put out a price I felt was on the high side, and he immediately accepted. I didn't even have it 'on the market' so to speak. I do miss the car, although he told me he rebuilt the engine...it needed a head gasket and while he was 'in there' he did this, that, and the other thing.

You can't see it in the photo, but '63 Larks had all instruments, no idiot lights. Where the clock would be, mine had a factory tach (part of the Avanti engine package). Kind of weird, but so Studebaker, was that in '63 the clock/tach was in the center position in a Lark, and the speedometer was on the right. They changed that around in '64. The speedometer should be in the middle--LOL.

It looked nice under the hood--brushed metal air cleaner, chrome valve covers and valley plate and dipstick handle.

fintail

At least it went to a good home. I know what you mean about needing stuff, my old car is like that too - but it still runs and drives pretty well with its needs, and tending to them all would be far greater than the value of the car. So I just fix things when the need becomes serious.

Back then a tach was a sign of an actual sporty car. Now, most cars have one.

uplanderguy

I gotta say, Stude somehow, in their Lark, Hawk, and Avanti, found ways to squeeze all the instruments in the cluster in front of the driver. No clocks attached to the top of the dash, or tach strapped to the steering column or out on the hood, or gauges down on the floor console!

uplanderguy

Do you do your own work? I clean the car and keep it preserved...and that's it. Finding a local guy to do the work was getting harder. That's one reason I bought a '66--thought the Chevy engine and flanged rear axles were serviceability things. I just didn't like the car as much as I thought, though, even though it was very rare too (not as interesting, though!). I sold it to a different guy in Australia just a few weeks ago who pursued me about it. Sometime I'd like a '66 Cruiser 4-door or another '64 Daytona Hardtop. I had the latter but it was way misrepresented when I bought it long-distance. The fellow who bought my '66 also bought my '64 last year.

fintail

I do minor adjustments and cosmetic maintenance. Anything too involved goes to a local independent shop who isn't scared of the car. At least you could get a tach - not even an option on my car no matter the transmission.

Funny the cars went to Australia - there must be a cult for them there too.

andre1969

I never liked the front-end of the '67 Olds. I think the widely-spaced headlights on the Delta 88 were the worst, but I wasn't so crazy about the Delmont or the 98 front-end, either. I do like the cars from the side and the rear, though. But just don't like the front-end. It does seem a bit reminiscent of a '67 Cutlass, but it also looks a bit Mercury-ish to me.

I guess '67 was where we first saw the birthing of the Olds split grille, as that beaky center section seems totally at odds with the outer parts. And then, for '68 the center section would shrink and become body-fill.

I think the big '68 Oldsmobiles were a lot better looking, and better still for '69 and '70.

I never was really all that crazy about the '67-70 full-sized Buicks, either. They're okay, I guess, and better than the '67 Olds. Interesting that Buick started trying out the split grille theme around that timeframe as well, but then reverted back, while Olds stayed with it.

ab348

The one really good feature on the '67/'68 full-size Olds are the full-radius wheel openings front and rear. I also like the fastback roof on the 2-doors.

I am not such a fan of the '67 through '69 Olds fullsizers, but I love the 1970. I am a big fan of the entire fullsize Buick line from '67 through '70 though - a 1970 Wildcat would be a good car to find.

ab348

I'm not a fan of Wimbleton White - it always looks a bit dirty to me. Our '74 Maverick was Polar White, which, despite the same, had a fair amount of tint in it. It wasn't quite as non-pure white as Wimbleton, but when contrasted with a pure white paint it was surprisingly unwhite.

explorerx4

My 1991 Mustang is Oxford White, which is a more pure white color.
Little did I know at the time we bought it, one of the kids would go to school in Oxford, Ohio. Of course, they refer to it as OxVegas Ohio. :surprise:

andys120

I saw a couple of rarely seen cars on a short drive to/from the town dump:

-A '49-'51 Mercury two-door in fabulous shape. Unlike most "Lead Sleds" this Merc appeared completely stock and unmodified. It was obviously restored and featured perfect chrome and glossy black paint that was probably better than what it left the factory with.

-'63-'64 Studebaker Avanti in driver condition. Maroon paint needing a shine and door slightly out of line, good chrome. Didn't see the front so don't know if it was a '63 (round headlights) or later (square headlight surrounds).

uplanderguy

Yesterday I saw a pea green early '70's International Travelall, good condition, black vinyl top and woodgrain side panels, drive down our street. The guy lives one town over in a beautiful old farmhouse surrounded by subdivisions, and he stopped here once when I had the garage door up and was out doing something on my Lark. Later in the afternoon I saw a '53 or '54 Mercury hardtop (couldn't see it from the rear to determine--looked stock and nice). And then lastly, on the way home from dinner at the Italian club in Akron, I passed a weathered but still-nice-looking steel blue '60's Jag XK-E.

Mr_Shiftright

Yep it's a white with a kind of slight brownish warmth to it---I used that very color to match the color on my '61 Mercedes and it was pretty darn close, with just a bit of tinting here and there. It's a very nice shade of white to use.

stickguy

out local today, a nice yellow '68 chevelle passed me. Looked brand new. then a block down, a same vintage Buick Skylark (clean, but not as snazzy looking) parked in a lot.

uplanderguy

Re.: GM B-bodies in the '67-68 period..

I like how you could get luxury interiors in a car with a fastback roof then (Bonneville Brougham, Wildcat, Delta Custom). In later years those two things seemed mutually exclusive for some reason.

I'm typically not a fan of skirts, but IMHO the Bonneville of that period takes the styling 'cake'. I like the Wildcat, too, but wasn't a fan of that big bright 'hockey stick' piece of trim that ran along the bottom of the sides and up onto the front fender. And the Olds--I generally think full rear-wheel cutouts 'lighten' a car's looks (good thing), but I think the Olds was the 'swoopiest' of the hippy (not 'hippie') styling of those cars and just seems too big to me to be carrying that styling. I did see a nice light turquoise (whatever they called it, I don't know) '67 Delta Custom 2-door hardtop for sale a year or two ago online, and it was an unusual car.

Seems like one saw far more Catalina, LeSabre, and Delmont 88 2-door Hardtops of that era than Bonneville, Wildcat, and Delta Custom 2-door Hardtops, so I would rate those last three (especially a Bonneville Brougham 2-door) as 'obscure'.