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

hpmctorque

@kyfdx said:
2 Litre Gremlin? That is the one you don't want...>

American Motors sourced that 2.0 from Audi. It was a little weak, especially in terms of torque, due to the Gremlin's weight, but I don't know that it was a bad engine for its day.

kyfdx

@hpmctorque said:

Not a bad engine, but the previous choices were 3.8 and 4.2 litre inline-six or the 5.0 litre V-8

fintail

Cheap car, cheap accommodations. The owner had a fun story too - 75 year old guy, he had a Minx and a Husky as used cars in the 60s. He liked them a lot, but eventually moved on. About 10 years ago he found this car, and decided to restore it as a labor of love. He even found a NOS windshield in the small town where the show was held. Pretty cool, I can admire his sentiment.

@hpmctorque said:
I like the Terraplanes. I see some resemblance with some of the European styling from that era.

fintail

Car show part II - I think I'll just post the rest of the pics.

First off - my favorite car there, and it wasn't even really in the show, just in an adjacent parking lot. I am not sure if this is a 55 or 56, but I am sure it is unrestored. I am pretty certain the chrome and glass are original, and I have a strong suspicion even the paint is original. This is a real preservation style car with many flaws and a lot of appeal, and it was just amazing to me in person. I took a lot more pics, but here's just a couple:

Stylish sidemounted Century:

Pretty wild custom flat top Olds, with wire wheels and bright white interior:

I think this is the car I saw on the road:

50s style with unusual looking intake:

I don't know if this is a factory color:

Reminds me of the fintail, just a few degrees brighter:

Air cooled/horse collar Franklin, I've been aware of this exact car since I was about 11, always saw it at local shows as a kid. Unrestored, 65 year old brush paint job:

Unusual looking engine:

Same story here, I am certain this is a car I often saw on the street as a kid:

And walking back to my car, I spotted these - the one in the front has to be virtually extinct these days:

ab348

Both of those Datsuns were pretty much biodegradable here in the northeast.

bhill2

@fintail said:
Car show part II - I think I'll just post the rest of the pics.

First off - my favorite car there, and it wasn't even really in the show, just in an adjacent parking lot. I am not sure if this is a 55 or 56, but I am sure it is unrestored. I am pretty certain the chrome and glass are original, and I have a strong suspicion even the paint is original. This is a real preservation style car with many flaws and a lot of appeal, and it was just amazing to me in person.

With those brows I'm about 90% certain that Caribbean is a '56. There weren't many other differences in the exterior.

Mr_Shiftright

That's a '56 Caribbean. I think I know that car---if it has factory AC then I'm almost sure it's a 2004 restoration because there were only 10 built with AC and the one I know is the same exact color combo.

fintail

If it's the same car, they stored it in a damp cave or something for 10 years. Paint (although appearing to be excellent quality) had many imperfections, some patched, rear window was cloudy, top was missing a button or two and didn't fit right, much of the chrome was pitted or faded and some kind of bent, wire wheels were a little neglected, passenger side window was cracked and clouded at the cracks, interior was pretty decent but had patina. I have a pic of the interior, but it didn't turn out well. I don't spot AC, but I see steering wheel wear. I can't imagine it being the same car. Even without AC, it has to be pretty rare.

@Mr_Shiftright said:
That's a '56 Caribbean. I think I know that car---if it has factory AC then I'm almost sure it's a 2004 restoration because there were only 10 built with AC and the one I know is the same exact color combo.

fintail

And in cleaning out my phone, I found 2 other cars I thought enough of to take a pic.

First, a handsome 442:

And no show in the PNW would be complete without a Metropolitan - lots sold on the west coast. This is an early car, 1954:

fintail

Still plenty of 510s out west, but I can't recall the last time I saw a B210 sedan.

@ab348 said:
Both of those Datsuns were pretty much biodegradable here in the northeast.

hpmctorque

@kyfdx said:
Not a bad engine, but the previous choices were 3.8 and 4.2 litre inline-six or the 5.0 litre V-8

The sixes were good, durable workhorses, although because of the Gremlin's combination of short wheelbase and no trunk, they made the car front heavy, compared with competing subcompacts. This hurt traction on slippery roads. All-in-all, though, either of those sixes were the best engine choices for the Gremlin. The V8 just exacerbated the car's front-end heavyness, adversely affecting traction and handling. The V8 wasn't a good choice, in my opinion, especially since fuel economy was supposed to be one of the Gremlin's attributes. I'm sure it was fast off the line, though, if you could control rear wheel spin.

hpmctorque

@fintail said:
Car show part II - I think I'll just post the rest of the pics.

...- my favorite car there, and it wasn't even really in the show...>

I agree that the Caribbean is nice, but my first choice would be the Buick Century, arguably Detroit's first muscle car. I can't think of a pre-WWII mass market car that could outperform it. In addition, it had nice styling.

andre1969

I was always impressed at how well Packard was able to update their 1951 body, to where it still looked fairly modern by 1956 standards. I'm sure the suspension, technology, etc, was getting a bit long in the tooth, but style-wise I think it still looked good.

I don't think there were any other 1951 cars that would have updated as well, at least not without some substantial redesign, although I think the 1952 Studebaker design also weathered the years very well.

The main thing that betrays the '56 Packard as an older design, IMO, is the high beltline, relatively small windows (even by 50's standards), and something about the shape of the C-pillar/rear window area, that just seem a bit old fashioned.

Mr_Shiftright

I have spent quite a bit of time in those 55-56s, as my family owned them--they are very silent, smooth, very floaty-boaty cars. Zero road feel, pinky-steering, a rather typical 50s large car I guess. An old man's car in many ways, as befits the prosperous upper middle class in 1955.

Back in 1955, Packard still had prestige---no buyers, unfortunately, but lots of nostalgia still remaining in the public's consciousness of what Packards once were in the past.

Jay Leno has a Carib I believe, that he drives regularly.

fintail

The beltline catches my eye too. I wonder why that couldn't have been lowered a little, but I don't know about the structural limitations of cars from that era.

The rear window is definitely related to the 48-50 cars, IMO. Doc Brown's lovely 1948 model shows it well:

I've read that during filming, this particular car behaved perfectly and was enjoyed.

@andre1969 said:

The main thing that betrays the '56 Packard as an older design, IMO, is the high beltline, relatively small windows (even by 50's standards), and something about the shape of the C-pillar/rear window area, that just seem a bit old fashioned.

lemko

I probably would've been one of those guys driving a Packard back then and would've switched to Cadillac after 1956. I could easily see myself behind the wheel of a stately Patrician or Four Hundred. I wouldn't have been caught dead in a 1957-58 Packardbaker. They would've had the same effect on me toward Packard in 1957 as the downsized FWD GM C-body cars did in 1985.

andre1969

Looking back at them through modern eyes, I could actually tolerate something like a '57 Packard. Even a '58 Starlight hardtop coupe, in the right color. But that's because today, I can appreciate their kitsch factor, obscurity, etc. I'm sure that if I was a new car buyer, back in the day, I would have stayed far, far away.

I've often wondered, if I was a new car buyer back in those days, how I would have felt about Chrysler products. While I love the Forward Look Mopars these days, I wonder if I would have bought something like a '57 DeSoto, got burned bad by how badly it was built, and never bought another Mopar again, as long as I lived?

roadburner

@andre1969 said:
I wonder if I would have bought something like a '57 DeSoto, got burned bad by how badly it was built, and never bought another Mopar again, as long as I lived?

That's exactly what happened to Dad; he had driven DeSotos almost all his life but his '57 racked up huge repair bills and by 1960 it had depreciated by something like 85%...

andre1969

Just out of curiosity, do you know what the trouble spots were on your Dad's DeSoto? In the past, I'd heard that '57 Mopars were excellent cars in every respect, with the exception of their propensity to rust. But in retrospect, I think they were slamming them together so quickly that even components that Mopar is usually good about, such as engines, transmissions, and the torsion bar suspensions, could be hit or miss.

That was also the first year for the Torqueflite transmission and the torsion bar suspension, so I'm sure they both had teething problems their first year out.

I always wondered if Mopar would have been better off holding off another year, getting the bugs worked out, and introducing those cars in 1958 instead? It was a recession year, so sales wouldn't have been so hot. But at the same time, they wouldn't have had the bad quality reputation, at least. Even though a lot of new cars came out for '57, such as Ford/Mercury, and Buick/Olds/Cadillac, the only one that was really a hot seller was the Ford. The public didn't really take to well to the bigger, blockier, more expensive Mercury. And Buick was starting to fall pretty hard, hurt by a bad quality perception itself, as the '54-56 models had been too popular for their own good, similar to the '57 Mopars, and slapped together just as quickly as they could be built. And on top of that, a lot of people complained about Buick/Olds/Cadillac in general as not looking new enough. Even though they were all-new cars, they didn't look that different from the '56 models.

So, who knows? Maybe Mopar could have gotten away with just facelifting the '56 models for '57? I'd imagine that the engine/transmission changes would have gone through anyway, for better or worse.

roadburner

I seem to remember transmission issues were the big thing. IIRC he paid @$350 to fix it(a BIG repair bill in 1960) and then the dealer offered him something like $500 for it in trade.

andre1969

Wow...yeah, $350 was a lot of money back then! I plugged that into an inflation calculator, and that's about $2800 today! And the funny thing is, nowadays, you can have a Torqueflite 904 or 727, or your typical General Motors THM350 or 400 transmission rebuilt for under $1,000. But, that early Torqueflite was called the 488, so I don't know how different it is, compared to the later ones. I know it has the pump at the rear, which allows the car to be push-started if the battery is dead; I guess there might be other differences as well?

One thing I discovered that was kind of interesting, is that on my DeSoto, there's an adaptor plate between the transmission and the engine, rather than a direct connection. I didn't know that, until I saw the car all apart, at the mechanic. He told me when they stopped using those adaptor plates, but I can't remember if it was when Mopar switched to Wedge Head engines, or when they switched from the 488 to 727 transmission? I wonder if the adaptor plate caused any loss of efficiency?

roadburner

My best friend's dad had a 1929(I think) and a 1955 DeSoto. We drove the '55 around some in the '70s. Pretty cool ride for the time.

andre1969

My Granddad bought a '53 DeSoto Firedome from his brother in law around 1977-78. I think he paid $100-200 for it. I was around 7-8 at the time, and I think that's what got me turned on to DeSotos. I wanted it to be my first car when I turned 16, but Granddad sold it the summer I got my learner's permit, in 1986. Said he didn't want me driving it, because I'd bring it back to him to fix every time it broke down! But, he didn't get off the hook, because I ended up doing that with my Mom's 1980 Malibu, which I got instead.

If it wasn't for that '53, which put DeSoto in my mind, I wonder if I would have still ended up with my lusting for the '57-58 DeSoto? It wasn't until "Christine" that I got turned onto the Forward Look Mopars, but even then, it was mainly the '58 Plymouth. A '57-58 DeSoto wasn't even in my mind until I was 15. That Christmas, my Mom bought me a book called "The Complete History of Chrysler: 1924-1985" or something like that. When i saw the '57 and '58 DeSotos pictured in that book, it really got me wanting one. Even if Granddad had never bought that '53, I think I still would have ended up with something from '57-58, although not necessarily a DeSoto. DeSoto may have still held a bit more mystique for me though, since it was a brand before my time.

I wonder if the likes of Oldsmobile and Plymouth hold any allure for today's youth, who may have been little kids when those brands died off? Or if the likes of Pontiac, Saturn, or Mercury ever will, in the future?

ab348

Went to lunch today and parked in the restaurant lot next to a Fiat 500. When I came out, it had gone and was replaced by a 1970 Dodge Challenger convertible with the top down.

I had to pause and give it a look-see. It was repainted a few years ago as the paint was really the best part of it. The bumpers were still shiny but the one in back had a dent in it. Magnum 500 wheels with white letter tires. With the top down, I could see that the interior is what let it down. The dash pad was cracked in a couple of spots, the steering column needed repainting, there were a few things hanging from under the dash, the backs of the bucket seats were all beat up, and the door panels were faded and looking tired. The owner had a couple of stereo speakers in carpeted wooden boxes on the rear seats which also looked really tacky to my eye.

It had a V-8 emblem on the fender but no other engine ID so I assume it had a 318. It was painted that ubiquitous dark green metallic that Chrysler used on so many of their cars in the early '70s, with a green interior, which I had not seen in a Challenger before.

So from 20 feet away it looked like a "Wow!" car, but up close the interior really let it down. I wonder how much something like that would bring?

Mr_Shiftright

probably around $17,500 or so, for a low #3, high #4 car with a 318 and no R/T or T/A option. 5% add on for a 383, almost 50% add on for a 44 cid.

The value of these cars is all about the engine and transmission combination. The rest is just icing on the cake.

@ab348 said:
Went to lunch today and parked in the restaurant lot next to a Fiat 500. When I came out, it had gone and was replaced by a 1970 Dodge Challenger convertible with the top down.

I had to pause and give it a look-see. It was repainted a few years ago as the paint was really the best part of it. The bumpers were still shiny but the one in back had a dent in it. Magnum 500 wheels with white letter tires. With the top down, I could see that the interior is what let it down. The dash pad was cracked in a couple of spots, the steering column needed repainting, there were a few things hanging from under the dash, the backs of the bucket seats were all beat up, and the door panels were faded and looking tired. The owner had a couple of stereo speakers in carpeted wooden boxes on the rear seats which also looked really tacky to my eye.

It had a V-8 emblem on the fender but no other engine ID so I assume it had a 318. It was painted that ubiquitous dark green metallic that Chrysler used on so many of their cars in the early '70s, with a green interior, which I had not seen in a Challenger before.

So from 20 feet away it looked like a "Wow!" car, but up close the interior really let it down. I wonder how much something like that would bring?

texases

@ab348 said:
Went to lunch today... there were a few things hanging from under the dash...

Pet peeve of mine - what's it take to get a few zip ties and get the wire up under the dash? That way they don't get snagged/broken, either...

ab348

Well, one of them was the cowl vent control, so the plastic bracket had obviously broken. Might not be easy to find another, I dunno.

I figured $15K for this assuming a 318 under the hood and although it was a convertible, I just don't get it. I could not live with it with the interior in the condition it was in. But maybe that's just me. It was certainly eye-catching from a distance.

stevedebi

@hpmctorque said:

I had the 232 in my 1972 Gremlin, and I had to be careful off the line or the wheels would spin. I can't imagine what a V8 would have done. I always preferred the early Gremlin styling to the later models.

Mr_Shiftright

You could be right on as you've seen it and I haven't. But we are pretty close in agreement.

What a difference the "right" engine makes on these cars! (and the right VIN tag, of course).

@ab348 said:
Well, one of them was the cowl vent control, so the plastic bracket had obviously broken. Might not be easy to find another, I dunno.

I figured $15K for this assuming a 318 under the hood and although it was a convertible, I just don't get it. I could not live with it with the interior in the condition it was in. But maybe that's just me. It was certainly eye-catching from a distance.

isellhondas

@Mr_Shiftright said:
Looked at a nice '63 Buick Riviera--been in the same family all its life, and the claim is that it was the first '63 Riv sold in San Francisco.

A few odd things about it---it's white with tan leather (which doesn't quite work for me), and it doesn't have AC, which is a shame.

I used to own a '63----white on white with AC--loved that car but I could never cure the overheating problem at high speeds, nor could all the King's horses and all the King's men. I took that car to automotive Legends and the final verdict was an engine tear down and probable block replacement. For a young man in his first paying job after school, that was too forbidding a prospect, so I sold it.

A few years back a poster got upset with both of us when we argued with him that they didn't put 401 engines in '64 Rivieras only 425's.

I've owned a pair of '65's and they are fantastic cars for a number of reasons. Just don't stray too far from a gas station!

Mine didn't overheat but I once paid a lot of money for a new radiator in one of them only to have the harmonic balancer decide to come off by itself a week later and launch itself through the new radiator!

I had to chase the balancer down a hill! It was straightened, reinstalled and it stayed put after that.

Go figure!

isellhondas

@omarman said:
Hard to look at but here's a link to a 1967 Mustang which seller claims was sold new, dealer-equipped with white vinyl top, wire hub caps, wood grain applique and a continental kit. Only good news? No fender skirts.

For the money that Mustang buyer spent on those hideous add-ons he could have added air conditioning!

hpmctorque

@andre1969 said:
Just out of curiosity, do you know what the trouble spots were on your Dad's DeSoto? In the past, I'd heard that '57 Mopars were excellent cars in every respect, with the exception of their propensity to rust. But in retrospect, I think they were slamming them together so quickly that even components that Mopar is usually good about, such as engines, transmissions, and the torsion bar suspensions, could be hit or miss.

That was also the first year for the Torqueflite transmission and the torsion bar suspension, so I'm sure they both had teething problems their first year out.>

My dad bought a new '57 white New Yorket sedan shortly after they were introduced, and drove it 104,--- miles, then traded it for a '63 Olds Dynamic 88 4-door hardtop in summer of '63. No major problems with the New Yorker, in terms of major component failures. The 392 Hemi 4-barrel, TorqueFlite and suspension held up well, although the engine used some oil when he traded it. The car resided in Wisconsin, so the rocker panels rusted, and had to be repaired or replaced once, but just once. There was some rust when he traded it, but I'm guessing that it was a good transportation value for whomever bought it from the Olds dealer.

That New Yorker was the best car my parents ever owned. It was a real head turner in its day, and a strong performer. The '57 Mopars didn't ride as silky smooth as its GM and Ford counterparts, but they delivered the best overall ride/handling combination among the domestic brands, in my opinion.

The Olds was also reliable for the six years and 94,--- miles my parents owned it. No problems with the Slim Jim Hydramatic. The Olds rusted about the same as the Chrysler, but by the early 1960s they used more salt and less sand to treat the roads in the Upper Midwest.

isellhondas

@fintail said:
I visited the small town car show today, and was surprised at the amount of cars and variety. I took a bunch of phone pics - I will post them in a few bactches. Here's the first group:

One of my favorites in the show, an as-new Hillman Minx:

Something for Andre - 73 Hurst/Olds, this has to be pretty rare:

Unrestored Terraplane with cool Buck Rogers hood ornament:

Wild custom 54 Ford, done in the 60s I think:

Neatly done 58 Ford bus conversion:

"2 Litre"

Neat little SS with a 6:

More to come maybe tomorrow.

Hey Fin,

I've seen a similar Hillman convertible around here a few times.

The red Nova shows up at the Triple X once in awhile.

fintail

That's cool, so it's being driven. I was out on the coast.

@isellhondas said:

imidazol97

Spotted a Bonneville at the gas station today. A wagon. Don't know the year yet, but it is a beautiful blue green pearlescent color.

It looks perfect and original down to the wheels. It's being used for travel and I wondered if they're going to a car show somewhere. They're from Mi and are about 3 hours at least south in Ohio. AC works judging by drips under the car and windows up as the 4 people start to move.

For closer look, click links:
http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k110/imidazol97/DSC00211_zps352e1a8c.jpg

http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k110/imidazol97/DSC00212_zps6a48b2bc.jpg

http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k110/imidazol97/DSC00215_zps0b0c4469.jpg

http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k110/imidazol97/DSC00213_zps57bd2218.jpg

andre1969

That's a '66. Good looking car.

ab348

Saw something in traffic today that is unusual for up here in salty Nova Scotia: an absolutely like-new late-'80s Mercury Grand Marquis LS. It didn't even have any parking lot door dings. Paint was shiny, chrome looked perfect... heck, everything looked perfect. Black vinyl roof over what I think was a non-metallic light gray paint, wire wheel covers, whitewalls. It had temporary tags on it and was being driven by what I presume was the new owner, a 30-something guy in a ball cap. It must have been an older person's car, always garaged, never driven in winter. You just don't see those up here any more. I would have liked to own it myself.

explorerx4

ab348, Probably was owned by a former family member who lived in Florida. I see cars like that from time to time.

imidazol97

@andre1969 said:
That's a '66. Good looking car.

Thanks for telling the year. I checked the brochures and those are the right wheels.
Beautiful on that car.

It has a "421" emblem on the lower front fender.

fintail

That wagon is pretty sharp. GM sure was on their game.

Recent oddities - early Celebrity coupe in very nice condition, Diamante wagon moving along fine and not smoking, and at the specialty dealer adjacent to my indy MB mechanic, a 67 T-Bird with 22K miles on it. I'll post a couple pics later.

lemko

Here's a really nice 1966 Pontiac Catalina wagon I spotted at my local mechanic.

andre1969

@ab348 said:
Saw something in traffic today that is unusual for up here in salty Nova Scotia: an absolutely like-new late-'80s Mercury Grand Marquis LS. It didn't even have any parking lot door dings. Paint was shiny, chrome looked perfect... heck, everything looked perfect. Black vinyl roof over what I think was a non-metallic light gray paint, wire wheel covers, whitewalls.

>

I remember some of those Grand Marquises having a thicker C-pillar with a more upright, formal rear window, basically the same treatment that Mopar did to distinguish an M-body 5th Avenue from a Diplomat or Gran Fury. Or, I guess, what GM did with the '86-90 Caprice Classic Brougham LS.

Was that C-pillar treatment standard on the Grand Marquis LS in the later years, or an extra-cost option, I wonder?

I like those boxy, 1991 and older Grand Marquis/Crown Vics. They seemed nicer, and plusher, than the aero 1992 and newer models. And, over the years, sadly, Ford de-contented these cars, and the more recent models are about as ritzy inside as a taxi cab or police car. Even the more recent Town Cars don't seem all that luxurious inside.

stickguy

At the beach this week on vacation. In a town where the money is obscene. Not fir me of course. But great for car watching. Mostly new stuff (like the house with a gently and two masseratis). And the nice Aston Martin just street parked.

In the old range, a nice early barracuda and old school land rover with the top off. But the nicest is an early looking jag xk120. A red FHC. Sweet looking. Just sitting in a driveway usually under a car cover. Looks nicely restored.

ab348

@andre1969 said:
I remember some of those Grand Marquises having a thicker C-pillar with a more upright, formal rear window, basically the same treatment that Mopar did to distinguish an M-body 5th Avenue from a Diplomat or Gran Fury. Or, I guess, what GM did with the '86-90 Caprice Classic Brougham LS.

Was that C-pillar treatment standard on the Grand Marquis LS in the later years, or an extra-cost option, I wonder?

This one had the regular roof treatment. One of the things I noticed was that the rear window used the standard 1960s/70s Detroit trim method, with a metal molding held on by hidden clips surrounding the window. But by this time what had been a polished stainless molding was now black. Sort of a transitional era old meets new treatment.

I like those boxy, 1991 and older Grand Marquis/Crown Vics. They seemed nicer, and plusher, than the aero 1992 and newer models. And, over the years, sadly, Ford de-contented these cars, and the more recent models are about as ritzy inside as a taxi cab or police car. Even the more recent Town Cars don't seem all that luxurious inside.

This one had the revised nose with the square corners knocked off. I actually liked the originals even better. I don't like the later '90s versions not because of the styling but because of the decontented interior. They used a hard plastic door panel that invariable creaks and squeaks terribly, the dash looks cheaper, and it is generally taxi-like... which makes sense since I think the majority went into taxi or police service.

explorerx4

A white AMX with a couple of red stripes running from front to back, parked right outside the front door at work. I saw it mostly from the back, so I don't know what engine it had.

texases

A '60s MGB, in motion, looked in good shape. Guy I was with remembered his MGB, how much fun it was, how rough it rode compared to modern cars, and the time his boss had to push when they ran out of gas (gauge didn't work)...

fintail

Here's that T-Bird I saw. I am willing to wager it is an original miles/paint/interior car - who would restore one of these? Paint was definitely an old non-clearcoat job, and I suspect original as it had just a little age. I can hear the front suspension wearing and gas being slurped through the 428 (or maybe 390?) from here:

roadburner

That model and the Cigar Birds were my favorite T Birds prior to the 1983 aero redesign. I loved my 1984 Turbo Coupe- it even had three pedals!

Mr_Shiftright

Nice interior. This is the kind of car that a distinguished 90 year old might choose to drive through a laundromat on a Sunday.

explorerx4

I like that T Bird other than the wheels and tires. I'm struggling to go through the 2nd tank of gas this driving season in my Mustang.