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

uplanderguy

You're right about giving the Impala the 'Caprice' look the next year. I first noticed that, on the '75 Impala, with it's '74 Caprice frontal treatment. You're right, it is most apparent on the '76 Impala/'75 Caprice.

uplanderguy

When Plymouth introduced a fastback Valiant--the Duster, in '70--sales really took off. Mopar sold more compacts than Ford or GM, and that is saying something back then. At the time, I liked the '68-72 Nova styling--saw it as 90% Chevelle--but grew tired of it as they are so popular at shows and such. We had a '73, but I hated the '73 and '74 revisions. Liked the '75 a lot when it came out, although all these years later not sure I like the two doors' side window/vent treatment.

A coworker had a '72 Duster in around '81. Being weaned on GM's, I thought it was sort-of funny that the glove comparment door, instead of button with lock, had a handle you pulled on, and the fresh-air vents looked like little 'easy bake' ovens, with doors you opened, instead of pulling on a round knob. I remember this though, that Duster had a huge trunk compared to what I remember our '73 Nova having.

hpmctorque

The main drawback with all these compacts, in my opinion, was the cheap interiors. In the '60s-mid '70s Detroit equated compact with cheap (I use the term Detroit generically, to include South Bend and Kenosha). That was finally remedied by the Maverick LDO, Nova Concours and Mopar counterparts in the mid-late '70s. Upscale touches were added to the exteriors too. The prices of these more deluxe versions overlapped with the lower end mid-size cars, but they gave consumers who favored trimmer dimensions more choices.

By the late '70s someone with a thin wallet who lusted for a Cadillac Seville could buy a fancy Nova.

ateixeira

Yellow one on the curb on the DC beltway near River Rd.

Out of gas?

ab348

An uncle had a '66 Valiant and I remember noting both those points - the glove box and the air vents. The latter I thought were particularly crude.

I know that they finally got around to giving the Dart and Valiant a glove box lock, but did they ever make the air vents more elegant?

I know that in '75/'76 I saw a lot of Dart SE and Valiant Brougham models around here - they seemed to sell quite well. I suspect they would have been a better choice than our family's Maverick LDO.

uplanderguy

I saw a lot of Valiant Broughams and Dart SE's in my hometown, too....seemed like they were always maroon with a beige top and interior!

This darling redheaded cheerleader from my class, was the granddaughter of the Ford dealer in town. In high school she drove an ice blue Maverick LDO V8. Nice for a Maverick, but the Maverick, for me, was by far the lamest compact at the time...well, maybe not counting the Hornet, but....

At the risk of alienating some here, I'll respectfully disagree about 'South Bend' in the one description above! LOL I always liked the optional 'Broadcloth' interior in the 1963 Studebaker Cruiser (top line Lark):

Second post down:

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?17896-63-Interior-color-qu- estion

andre1969

My '69 Dart GT had a locking glovebox. It had a pushbutton, and the lock was built into it. I can't remember if my'68 Dart 270 did, though.

As for the a/c vents, they were always just stuck under the dash, with the three narrow vents in a row. For 1968, it seems like they went crazy with dash padding. My '68 had padding around the a/c ducts, and also thin padded shelf that ran across the whole bottom of the dashboard.

For '69, they took that extra padding off, and at some point after that, the a/c ducts were made out of black plastic rather than chrome metal, but they were always mounted under the dash.

ab348

I was referring to the kick panel fresh-air vents.

ab348

We owned a Hornet (Sportabout) and a Maverick (LDO) simultaneously for a few years in the mid-70s, so I think I can offer an informed opinion on the two.

Both cars had 6-cylinder engines (Ford's 250 and AMC's 258) and automatic transmissions. Both had power steering. The Maverick had non-power drum brakes all around while the Hornet had power front discs. Each had radial tires.

The only respect in which the Maverick was superior was in seat comfort, and that is only due to the LDO option with its Euro Capri-like seats. The Hornet had the standard knit vinyl upholstery on a bench seat and it was what you might expect for the times.

Driving dynamics were far better in the Hornet. I actually liked driving it. The steering had a semblance of road feel, and the car felt like it could handle far better than the Ford. The 258, while not a powerhouse, felt more stout than Ford's 250. The Maverick felt squirrelly on the highway above 50mph, while the Hornet was pretty stable. And although the AMC interior was pretty lousy in design, the car was built far better than the Ford, which was really a sloppily-made car with all sorts of rattles, wind and water leaks, and which rusted with a vengeance.

uplanderguy

Geez, I am sincerely sorry for slamming two of your family's cars back then!!

Hey, I'd have said I loved Maverick LDO's if it would have got me in the car with the red-headed cheerleader back then!

andre1969

The only experience I really have with a Maverick was about 12 years ago, if not more. I had driven my '89 Gran Fury to work, I remember that much, because a Maverick was parked next to it when I got off work and went out to the parking lot. I had seen it before, but this time, its owner was there. We struck up a conversation, and I asked if I could sit in it, to see how it felt.

I don't remember too much, but do remember that it didn't totally suck. Not nearly as roomy and comfy as a Dart/Valiant or my Gran Fury (which dated back to the '76 Aspen/Volare so, in a roundabout way, was still a peer), but it wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be.

My biggest beef with many Ford products of that era, and the 80's, is that the driveshaft/transmission hump seems overly large, and severely compromises the center position, both front and rear.

fintail

Saw a ~68-70 or so Eldo today, has to be the same one I saw a few weeks ago, not many of those on the road.

berri

What I remember most about Mavericks (and their sister Comet) was no glove box - just a very chintzy car. I think they had decent reliability for their time though.

andre1969

Didn't early Hornets come without a glovebox door as well? Or was that the Gremlin?

And yeah, IIRC, Consumer Reports tended to rate the Maverick pretty high for reliability. In fact, I think it often placed higher than the Dart/Valiant.

ab348

Ours was very cold-blooded. Did not like to start or even crank when it got cold in the winter. It also had chronic front-end problems.

At some point Ford got rid of the under-dash shelf and added a glove box - our '74 had one. I think it was the early Gremlins that had no glove box door or even a back seat.

uplanderguy

I seem to remember that Gremlins always had a glovebox door and early-on, you could get one with no back seat, but what I think you're thinking of is the Chevette Scooter. It definitely had no glovebox door and no back seat!

Gremlins and Hornets, at least early-on, had an open shelf under the dash also.

andre1969

Gremlins and Hornets, at least early-on, had an open shelf under the dash also.

That might be why I'm getting confused. I remember the open shelf on the AMC cars, so that might be why I was thinking some of them lacked a glovebox.

ab348

Yes, our Hornet had both a glove box door and an underdash shelf. I found it odd that the glovebox door seemed to be heavy diecast metal, while the shelf was the nastiest hard plastic material ever invented. I don't recall us using it much.

I remember when AMC updated the Hornet in '78 to become the Concord, the entire dash was redesigned and became much more conventional-looking for the times.

stickguy

I must be getting old. Back in my student days (HS into college) I had a Duster, Hornet and a Gremlin (yes, I was a glutton for punishment). I just remember very few details. stuff like having a glovebox door? Not one of them! Though I am pretty sure it had a normal one with a turn knob with a key slot in it.

back seat, they all had that!

and I have no recollection of odd air vents or footwell vent boxes in the Duster. It did have a sunroof though.

uplanderguy

100-day '57 DeSoto restoration. I'd just post the link, but someone on the S.D.C. forum had a question about color of the car you might be able to answer and I can post back for you:

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?68177-quot-Cool-quot-100-d- ay-1957-DeSoto-restoration

andre1969

I just looked at the '57 DeSoto paint chart, and I don't see that color either. The closest that I can see is what they called "Dusty Orange" on the Firesweep, or "Tropical Coral" on the Dodges.

It's been a good 20 years or more, but I knew someone whose family had a 1957 DeSoto Firedome that was sort of a coral/salmon/pinkish color, but it wasn't as pink as the '57 Firesweep in that url. And interestingly, the '57 DeSoto paint chart shows no salmon color offered at all, so I guess this particular one had been a re-paint?

Now, the Chrysler paint chart has a color called "Shell Pink", which looks like a pale peach to me, and "Sunset Rose", which looks fairly pink, but again, not as jarring as the pink on that '57 Firesweep.

I have a feeling they just picked some custom pink paint for that car, and went their own route.

fintail

If it is relatively close to looking period correct, probably no harm done with a custom color. I will admit when I see "restored" cars with colors that clearly did not exist when the car was new, questions are raised to me.



This is a pic from the local MBCA show a couple years ago. The white W111 coupe, a pristinely restored 1962 with the rare 4-speed, is in a non-original color. It was kind of a pearl white, which was not used by MB then. It works, maybe so long as it isn't in a judged show, and it suits the car. My car is correct, a type of color that maybe didn't exist much past the 60s.

Obscure cars this morning: immaculate ~90 Cavalier Z24 convertible, same nice condition ~85 Ciera woody I see now and then, C43 AMG.

uplanderguy

I like authenticity, and if it's a car I know about the colors on (most Chevys mid-sixties to around mid-eighties, and '62 and later Studes) and it's a wrong color, that's a turn off to me. My '66 Stude was a wrong color and it always bugged me the whole year I owned it, even though the car was rock-solid and looked authentic to the casual observer.

fintail

I can deal with a wrong color if it at least looks period correct. I knew a guy who had a 64 Corvair convertible, in a period looking pastel light green. I thought it must be an original color, but he told me the car was a cheap repaint in a random color. It looked OK to me, but it wasn't my car either :shades:

I would prefer a car I own to not just be a correct color for the model, but the original color of the car.

uplanderguy

I agree, fintail. When I was having my '63 Lark Daytona Skytop restored, I would have much-preferred that year's Rose Mist color over Ermine White. But I had factory documentation for the car that showed it was customer-ordered and built as Ermine White, so Ermine White is how it was repainted.

I have a couple pretty close, color pics of that car the original owner gave me from late summer '64, at Yellowstone Park. I wish I had a way to post them, but I don't.

imidazol97

> pretty close, color pics

Do you have a scanner to digitize them? Or a digital camera to take a closeup picture of the old photo and then send that digital image to the host site for your pictures?

fintail

I can deal with repaints (especially as the preservation/patina idea is only about a decade old), but having a car as it was built is important. A white car stays white.

I'd like to see those pics too, you should scan them or even take pics of them with a good camera. I wish I had similar history of my car - I have paperwork going back to the factory, and a mountain of receipts older than I am, but no photos from before I owned it.

stickguy

the car they restored was white. And very boring looking. Especially by the standards of the 1957 fin era!

might not be original, but I like the new color a lot better on that car.

must be a beast to drive with a stick and no power assist. Actually, I had a Duster just like that. And a Volvo. Both of which were considerably smaller than a Desoto!

Mr_Shiftright

That's interesting. On a vintage Ferrari for instance, a color change doesn't matter very much to collectors. I think what's going on there is this---when a car is rare, you either take what you can find or do without.

jpp75

I really like the shade of blue on your car, very nice automobile!

uplanderguy

One of the pics is on page 42 of the Feb. '11 Hemmings Motor News. They printed an article of my meeting the original owners of the car. I don't have a scanner. I'm a pretty low-tech guy. My brain gets so full of having to learn programs and such for work, that after-hours I just don't feel like learning more computer stuff!

uplanderguy

A couple questions for those of you who own old cars:

First, Andre, what model is your DeSoto? I know they usually started with "Fire..." those late'50's years--is yours one with the Dodge front clip or the Chrysler-look front clip?

Secondly--have you guys ever found anything 'old' inside of your car, a 'souvenir' so to speak? I found a 1967 University of Minnesota parking pass under the carpet of my '63 Lark when I was stripping it down to go to the restorer's, so to speak. It was sold new to a family in Moorhead, MN. A friend with a '63 big Studebaker truck, who worked for a Stude dealer in Akron, OH in his youth, used to say, "We used to sell Roy Hosee big trucks like this, I wonder if this is his". He was tearing into it once and found a pencil with "Roy Hosee Trucking" down the defroster vent! Similarly, I read online (don't know the guy) that he found a Goldwater button down the defroster vent of his Avanti.

blh7068

The '70 Electra was the last Electra convertible.

Then came the Centurion(replaced the Wildcat) for 71-73.

The mom of a long time friend of mine had a 73 that was bought new when we were kids...fully loaded 455 car. Very cool.

blh7068

At some point Ford got rid of the under-dash shelf and added a glove box - our '74 had one.

My father had a 71 Mercury Capri that had an under dash shelf.
You didnt want to put too much into it as the radio speaker was located at the top of the storage space and pointed down. Made it hard to hear the radio otherwise, lol.

It was a cool, but very quirky car.

blh7068

I can deal with repaints (especially as the preservation/patina idea is only about a decade old), but having a car as it was built is important. A white car stays white.

Im in that same camp. My restoration pet peeve is seeing a car thats basically been fully restored to factory delivered condition...only to see the dash has been cut to fit an aftermarket stereo...sigh.

uplanderguy

Ugh, I hate that too.

Another HUGE pet peeve, for which I'm made fun of, but I stand my ground:

It isn't rocket science to figure out where the factory placed various nameplates and emblems on a car. Take a damn picture before you repaint the car!

I CANNOT STAND seeing cars that are otherwise painted beautifully, with an eye towards originality elsewhere, and a nameplate is in the wrong place, or even in the right general area but six inches or even a foot off!! Aaarrrrgggggh! That can't be easily fixed!!!!!!! Not doing this correctly is simply being lazy.

Off my soapbox now.

andre1969

Mine is a 1957 Firedome Sportsman hardtop coupe. Here's an old pic, taken back in 1990, probably a week or two after I bought it:
My '69 Dart GT, which was my daily driver at the time, is in the foreground, and in the back is my Granddad's '85 Silverado, which I still have, and my uncle's '76 Jeep pickup, which I think is still around, somewhere down in Appalachia. Whether it still runs is a different story, though.

The Firedome was the cheapest "Senior" Mopar, built on the 126" wheelbase shared with Chrysler. Base price was $2958 for the 4-door sedan, whereas the Dodge-based Firesweep sedan was $2777. Base price for my hardtop coupe was something like $3083 I think. However, even on a car like that ps, pb, auto trans, radio, and heater were all optional. I spec'ed it out in one of those American Standard catalogs once, and as equipped, it was probably around $3800 new.

Personally, I never liked the '57 Firesweep. It was on a 122" wheelbase, same as the Dodges (and Plymouth wagons). However, overall length was only two inches shorter, 216" versus 218". That's because the DeSoto grille didn't mate very well to the Dodge front clip, so it jutted out more.

If DeSoto wanted a lower-priced car, I wonder if they would have been better off just taking the big 126" body, throw a Dodge 325 poly in it instead of the DeSoto 341 Hemi, and be done with it? But, at that time they were experimenting with taking DeSoto downscale, so that Chrysler could move down a bit as well, and leave more room for Imperial to stand on its own more. And, for 1958, the Chrysler Windsor would also move down to the short 122" wheelbase.

Oddly, for 1958, I thought the Chrysler grille, as well as the DeSoto grille, mated to the Dodge front clip much better than the '57 DeSoto grille did. Another thing that might have improved its looks though, is the standard quad headlights, which the '57 Firesweep lacked. Even in states where quads were legal, '57 Firesweeps only had two.

For 1959, they actually went through the effort to make the Firesweep look like a DeSoto up front, as it used a shortened version of the DeSoto front clip, instead of the Dodge clip. That probably cost them more money to do, but maybe they had some economy of scale, because the fenders and hood were shared with the Chrysler Windsor?

uplanderguy

I didn't know yours was a two-door hardtop; for some reason I had always pictured a six-window post sedan. I haven't seen one like yours for a lonnnngggg time.

andre1969

I think the last time I might have seen, specifically, another 1957 Firedome hardtop coupe, it was probably the pinkish/salmon colored one that I mentioned before, which was in a garage down in Southern Maryland. That had to have been 1992 or 1993.

Fireflites and Adventurers especially have seen better survival rates. The Fireflite because it's a more luxurious car, I'm guessing, and the Adventurer because it was an expensive, top of the line performance car, and much more valuable.

Lately I've been seeing a black 1957 Fireflite 4-door sedan showing up at the Mopar show in Carlisle. I saw it a second time this past year as well, I think in Macungie PA, but it could have been Hershey.

For some reason the '59 DeSoto has had a better survival rate than the '57-58, but it's been awhile now, since I've seen one of those. I've heard that the '59 Mopars were much better built than '57-58, so maybe that's one reason why?

Nowadays, it seems like the most common of the later DeSotos I see is the 1960. There's always a few of those that show up at the Carlisle Mopar show. Going back a few years though, it seems like the 1956 DeSoto is relatively common.

Oh, and here's a pic from the last time my DeSoto was out on a public road :sick:

Mr_Shiftright

I found a license plate from the island of Aruba under the back seat of my Peugeot 504 some years back, as well as 4 holes in the floorpan that looked distinctly like bullet holes. No freakin' idea of what all that was about. Great car, though.

fintail

Stereos are the worst, even on more recent cars. Can be really hard to reverse that damage when they cut into the doors and rear deck, too.

fintail

In the fintail I found a 60s vintage penny, a similar age Mexican coin (the car was bought new in CA), and an old 50s-60s vintage British-made "tyre" gauge hidden under the seat.

fintail

Thanks! It's more of a 10+ footer than anything else, but is very photogenic, and still going pretty strong. I sometimes wonder why I keep it, or what I should do to it, but I can't part with it.

Odd cars this morning - same Cavalier I saw yesterday, W124 E500, very nice 65-66 Mustang fastback (too far away for me to see many details), powder blue, sequential signals.

imidazol97

>sequential sig nals.

I don't recall that the sequential signals were on the 65-66 Mustang. Nor the 67. I'm not sure which, if any year, had them as an option in those early years. The Cougar did have sequential signals and it seems like it 67 or 68 when they introduced them.

fintail

I was thinking it seemed odd too - I have only noticed them on T-Birds (maybe 65-66 for those?) and Cougars of that era. A retrofit, but it looked cool.

andre1969

If a Mustang back then had sequential turn signals, it had to be a custom job I'm thinking. Those Mustangs were so cheap that, even though it looked like they had three taillights on either side, there was just one bulb behind the lens.

My '68 and '69 Dodge Darts were like that...just one bulb in there, that had two filaments. One filament lit up when you turned on the lights, and another filament lit up when you hit the brake pedal...this one would also flash when you put the turn signal on.

imidazol97

>sequential signals. T-birds.

You are right again. I had forgotten about the T-Birds.

However...I tried looking on Wiki for info about sequential kits for 69 or up Mustangs. My memory thinks there may have a kit for them.

I found this kit for a 67. So your car might have had aftermarket sequential signals.

Watch the youtube. Notice anything funny about the sequential signals?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZ0qq0mJueQ

bhill2

A little problem with the left one, which sequences in the wrong direction (inward instead of outward).

ab348

This is in Hemmings:

1958 Ponton

For the money, I think it should be a lot nicer.

I'd prefer to save $3K and buy this:

1965 Chrysler 300

berri

I'll go with the Chrysler too. The MB makes me think I'm watching a Bridget Bardot movie - where's the Eiffel Tower in that pix?, but then the Chrysler could be in any of a number of mid 60's TV shows. Of course the mid 60's was just an era of nice looking vehicles, including imports.