Tell you what. I'll pay the dealer's asking price of $19,000 (which he has generously reduced from $21,000) for the Sport Disc wheels if he throws the car in for free. Now, that's an offer he can't refuse ;-)
What is it about these Sport Disc wheels that appeals to me so much? As I said before, take these wheels off this car and it's a real yawner in terms of it's visual appeal. Still, with only 44,000 original miles, it'd be a nice car to have. But, only at a reasonable price.
I doubt any of you folks have ever had the occasion or need to purchase a set of the Sport Disc wheels produced by Oldsmobile in 1964 and 1965 - like the one's on the car/link in the previous post. But, perhaps you have experience with fairly limited production run items of similar ilk?
I'm curious as to how much a nice set of these wheels would cost. Is it possible a set could cost as much as $1,000? This would partially explain/justify a strong price for this car.
Check Hemmings. I can't imagine an Olds wheelcover, even a rare spinner, costing $1000 for a set. Maybe $50 each would be my guess although I've been out of that market a while. I just wholesaled some hubcaps to a dealer and the only one he was excited about was a '64 Super Sport cover, what I think they call a tri-blade spinner. I wish I could remember what he said it was worth retail, maybe $50, and apparently that's the Holy Grail of hubcaps. I don't have his phone number offhand but it's Mr. Hubcap in San Jose CA. He's in the online yellow pages.
A rare wheel (not just a wheelcover) could easily cost $1000 for four, something like the Pontiac Rally Is optional on early GTOs.
The Olds Sport Disc is kind of a combination of hub cab and wheel. In that, the exterior (ie., what you see) is directly bolted to the wheel underneath. The wheel itself is specific to this cover. So, they're a matched set (ie., you need both for each tire).
I've heard stories how mechanics ruined these sport discs trying to pry them off not knowing they were bolted to the wheel underneath. Probably why they quit making them.
I check Hemmings and couldn't find them. I think these Olds Sport Discs are fairly rare.
That sounds like the spinners used on early Rivieras, and for the same reason--a spinner that heavy must generate impressive centrifigal force.
If memory serves the Rivi spinner has four(?) prongs cast into the back side. Each prong goes through a slit in the wheel. I think the end of each prong is threaded so the wheelcover can be secured to the wheel with a nut on each prong. However it's done, they're on there good. I found this out the hard way.
If that's what the Olds spinner is like it still doesn't sound like anything special but I could be wrong. Rare, but not necessarily valuable except to a handful of people. I honestly can't see anyone paying a grand for any Olds covers even if they were gold plated.
Call a local shop that specializes in old hubcaps. Most of the online sources deal only in newer wheelcovers. Or call my man Mr. Hub Cap & Wheels at (408) 294-4304. He'll know but call quick, he's not getting any younger.
What's the general consensus as to what the market impact will be on classic Oldsmobiles once this marque is finally killed off?
Personally, I don't think the demise of Olds will result in a "run" on folks buying old Oldsmobiles in the hope that their values will skyrocket.
On the hand, if I had a choice, between an Olds 98 and a Buick Electra (both in the 1965-66 vintage) and assuming both were in nice condition, similar color appeal, etc., would there be much incentive/motivation to give the nod to the Olds based purely on it's defunct status?
No, I can't see any effect except hype and beer talk.
The desirable Oldsmobiles will stay desirable and the also-rans will continue to also-run. Just like Packard and Hudson and all the rest of the orphans.
I don't think it's going to have much of an affect on antique Oldsmobiles, just Oldsmobiles that are still making up the newer end of the used car market. Nobody's going to look at their 1970 4-4-2 and suddenly think "God, what a loser I have!"
Cars from the period where Oldsmobile was still a winner, it shouldn't make a difference. Now that 4-year old Intrigue? That's a different story! Maybe I could get a good deal on a first-gen Aurora now? ;-)
No, W-30s aren't slower than they were before GM pulled the plug, but I wonder about the effect on ordinary Olds. A '56 88 or a '66 Starfire may have had a positive image when new but not that many people seem to know or care now. The image, and therefore the appeal, is relatively weak and I don't know how big a hit it can take.
If only Olds would die more quickly and less publicly.
The collector car market is remarkably unaffected by current/public events. It's much more influenced by economic conditions and by the changing patterns of the collectors (as they age or come of age). Everybody pretty much knows at this point in time what the "great" cars are. it's not like some car will suddenly be discovered and become "hot" or "cold". It doesn't seem to work that way. Everything in the collector car market is rather gradual, and it's not too hard to spot trends and fads.
I'm not suggesting that Olds prices are going to tank overnight and, in fact, I may not know what I'm talking about.
I'm just wondering out loud how secure an already marginal nameplate like Olds is. Again, I'm talking about run-of-the-mill sedans like the very clean '62 Dynamic 88 two-door hardtop I saw today, not something hot like a W-30.
Now an Olds is what might be called a mid-range collectible, a car without either positive or negative connotations to the vast majority of old car buyers. It's rarely a buyer's first choice but it's an okay alternative to the more sought-after and expensive makes because no one's going to laugh if you bring one home--and that's basically the bottom line with a lot of these cars.
What I'm suggesting (and only time will tell) is that perhaps the fact that Olds was still a going concern is what kept it elevated above bottom-rung '60s collectibles like say, Studebaker, Corvair and the BOP compacts. Cars that people point at and laugh (and I've had more than my share of these cars).
If I'm seeing it in these terms then maybe other people are too, and it wouldn't take too many of us to soften values--the pool of buyers for Olds was pretty small already.
On the other hand, there are always the hopeless optimists who see this as a bonanza for Olds values, but I can guarantee that these are sellers not buyers.
Where is it that you folks live that you get to see cars like a '62 Dynamic 88? That's why I never contribute to the "what did you see today" forum. Because, I never see Bo-Diddly.
With regard to appeal, I don't think Oldsmobile is any worse or better than a Buick, any non-SS Chevrolet and most Pontiacs (unless, of course the PMD example has a 4 speed, tri-power or the letters GTO on the body).
Well, I don't see this ridiculous $19,000 asking price dropping dramatically anytime soon. Certainly not down to Corvair territory. But, he may lower it slightly before too long only because it's been awhile since it's initial "price reduction" - yeah right, like no one saw that coming.
Like I said, he'll have to make up his mind someday that he really wants to sell the car. I could sell that car in three days if he'd let me, because I know what the fair market value is. He does, too, of course, but he's hoping for a killing.
Well let me ask. What would you realistically expect to sell this car for if it were yours to sell? In other words, what do you think the fair market value of this car really is?
The fair market value depends a lot on the condition of this car, which I can't tell from the ad.
I suppose if it were faultless beyond belief it might be worth $12,000. I suspect it is not that faultless and so is worth about $10,000.
The point is, it's STILL a 1965 Oldsmobile '98 convertible, original or restored or whatever. About the only thing that could elevate out of it being a 1965 Oldsmobile 98 would be some kind of celebrity status. Otherwise it has to be worth what a '65 Oldsmobile 98 is worth. It's not a GTO and it's not a Chevrolet SS, and for the kind of money he's asking you start running into the price range of much more desireable cars.
Might be. Near as I can tell from auctions, he owned between 3 and 4 thousand cars, and gave at least another 10,000 away--LOL!
Actually, celebrity status is very tricky. People do get sucked into buying a "celebrity car" only to find out that without the star's name on the registration or without photos of them driving the exact car, the market really doesn't care about the Pontiac station wagon used by Frank Sinatra's gardener in 1973.
It looks like the unthinkable happened. That '65 Olds 98 convertible at Duffy's sold. This weekend, I was actually thinking about calling up there to re-inquire about this car, but realistically figured we were just too far apart on price.
Well, I'm actually kind of glad it sold. Now, I can let go of the delusion that Duffy's would actually consider selling this car for a price commensurate with its market demand. Looks like he finally found that needle in the haystack.
However, I am curious as to what this car sold for. Short of calling up there and asking, does anyone have any ideas as to how I can find out what this car sold for?
...unless you know someone at either the buyer's or seller's financial institutions, usually you have to 'take their word for it', that is, if they're even willing to discuss the subject. There are plenty of times people have lied about what they've paid for something.
Yeah, that thought crossed my mind. But, the seller will surely try to sell if for more than what he bought it for - which I'm guessing was around $15,000.
At that price, the car surely wasn't purchased for speculation &/or a quick resale.
In any event, given the new owner's investment, if it does show up again, the asking price won't be any bargain then either.
I was thinking that these type of sales often 'back themselves out" when the naive buyer gets the news that he paid double. This is presuming he got anywhere near asking price.
Of course, to be fair, I haven't seen the car, so maybe it was the world's best and could be worth $15K. Seems impossible, but I've eaten my hat before on these deals---not often, but now and then there's a surprise in the marketplace.
Regardless of what the man paid, that does not set a new price for '65 Olds 98 convertibles.
Maybe this car will show up at Spring Carlisle 2003. The late April weather in southern Pennsylvania puts buyers in the mood for convertibles. And based on the photo, this car is in much better shape than most of what is offered for sale at Carlisle.
Buying a low mileage original car really puts you on the horns. If you drive it, you lose the very thing you paid over retail for. If you don't drive it, you don't get to ever enjoy it. If you restore it, you've paid for it twice. In a way, a low mileage original is the worst kind of car to buy unless you are running a museum or you own a large static collection.
that's a good point. A problem I've had with a few cars is buying one that's too original. In the case of muscle cars (for example) you find yourself in a position where you can't stand to make improvements. Anymore, I'd think I'd rather start with a straight '69 Camaro with a 307 and buy a bunch of cool stuff rather than feel like my hands are tied because I couldn't stand to put aftermarket seats, or headers, or aluminum heads, or handling stuff on something like a Z/28.
Back in the good ol' days...before cheap consumer goods become icons...an SS or Z/28 or Boss 302 or whatever was a deal because you got a handling package/strong rearend/HD trans/etc...it was cheaper to buy a car with a 12 bolt than to install one.
You want to just enjoy the car exactly as it was new, drive it anywhere from 2-5,000 miles a year, and STILL have a pampered , low mileage original worth at least as much as you paid in say, 5 years. That's what I'll do with my 62 SS Impala. It now has 44K+ miles. I drive it around on fair weather days, wherever I feel like it. It's like a brand new 62 Chev 40 years later. It really needs nothing just the way it is, so I figure I'll just drive it, enjoy it-and-after 5years or so, it'll still be a low mileage original with maybe 60,000 miles. Meanwhile, I have 3 other cars to play with and use for everyday transportation. The SS is fun every time I take it out for a spin-usually anywhere from 20-40 miles.
but I think cars from the 60's cry out for modification/improvements. The sure way to suck the fun out of a Chevy of that era is to retain things like Powerglides, crummy brakes, spongy rubber bushings, zillion turn non-power steering, etc.
At the very least, it makes sense to improve things that are hidden...Pertronix systems, better shocks, urethane suspension parts and the like.
I suppose a big difference in approach is whether you use older cars for your exclusive driver or as a weekend-only kind of thing.
well all this is presuming no harm comes to the car during those drives--that's the risk you take by driving it. One good smack (and may it never happen!) and there goes the originality.
Personally, I think it's worth the risk because in the case of your car the originality is not such a big factor in value, because everybody knows what a '62 Impala is supposed to look like from the factory.
Nowadays car shows are starting to do a good thing...have a special class only for original cars, so that they don't have to compete (and lose to) over-restored ones.
I am disappointed that this car at Duffy's sold. But, I'm not exactly sure as to the source of my disappointment.
I don't know whether I'm disappointed because this car was available and that I theoretically had a fair shot at it (just like everyone else) and didn't take the bait - as outrageously, high-priced as it was.
Or, I could be disappointed that I didn't feel I could realistically afford to pay their asking price.
My plan was to wait until late January (figuring Duffy's would know that anyone with Xmas bonus money would've already tried by then) and approach them again in the $10,000 to $12,000 range - hoping that he was tired of playing the waiting game. Of course, my plan was dependent on no one coming along that REALLY wanted this car. Thus, I rolled the dice and lost - sort of. But, this would only be true if Duffy's would have agreed to relinquish their high hopes for a killing on this car which he probably wouldn't have agreed to do.
So, whether I could've done anything about, I don't know. But, I am sorry this one got away. This car may not have had mass appeal, but for some reason I really liked it.
You took a calculated risk and lost but sometimes it just isn't meant to be. In fact, you could make a good case that you won--you didn't get reamed like the guy who has the car now. As stubborn as Duffy apparently is I don't see how it could have been a win-win situation and that's how it's got to be to make sense.
Parm, I was disappointed that it sold, and I wasn't even remotely interested in buying it! I'm disappointed that someone was willing to pay an inflated price for this car (nice as it is), thereby encouraging far too many sellers to keep holding out for that one person willing to pay much more than a car is really worth. Duffy's isn't the only old car seller who wants to make a killing. It will be interesting to see if this car shows up at Spring Carlisle 2003.
I disagree with you. Carnut's '62 Impala would be a fun car to drive. There is nothing wrong with a Powerglide and the brakes will stop the car just fine.
The steering will work as it did in 1962...just fine.
Micky Mouse it up enough and it won't be a '62 Impala anymore. It'll look the same but the "improvements" will make it something it was never intended to be.
Now...if he intends to drive it everyday at freeway speeds, that might be another story although it would do that task quite well too.
You just can't drive one of these like a modern car. You can't tailgate someone at 75 MPH or take a off ramp at 20 MPH higher than the posted speed.
And the people who own and drive these cars are well aware of this and drive accordingly.
the main point was that you shouldn't feel tethered by originality...it's just a manufactured good after all. It's easy to get in the bind of having to buy only OEM appearing batteries, hose clamps and lines, and OEM tires. (Just what I need, a bunch of Goodyear redlines).
Personally, I think that 1960's cars should be driven (and beaten up) as daily drivers, not garage queens or some sort of parade car. A few judicious improvements can make all the difference. It's kind of sad to see all the faster cars be putted around down to a Sonic or In and Out Burger for cruise 'nite' in whatever town.
While I'm thinking about it...about the only place I see muscle cars anymore is at local car shows. Just the place to hear distorted fifties music and see too damn many fuzzy dice, Cobra replicas, and wives who bear a more than passing resemblance to the Michelin Man.
I'm no fan of trailer queens. At car shows I'm most attracted to nice original cars that are driven and enjoyed by their owners.
I don't care about radiator hose clamps being "correct" or the color of the windshield washer fluid.
I was only trying to point out that a '62 Impala is a perfectly drivable car as equipped from the factory. There is nothing wrong with the Powerglide or the braking system or anything else.
The 327 engines were great engines. They don't need to be yanked out and replaced with a "better" 350.
I like to remember old cars as they were, not as someone else thinks they should be "upgraded" to.
And, again, they do need to be driven in a manner that takes into consideration their shortcomings as compared to modern cars.
Well I can see both sides of the coin. Drum brakes on a big old 60s car flying downhill is no fun....or, a whole lot of fun depending on the situation and your driving skills. In California we run tours only for drum brake cars, and they go pretty fast, too---but mostly on flat desert land.
I see no reason to feel reluctant about modifying mass-produced 1960s cars, if it is done tastefully and with genetic material. If it's a very rare model, perhaps not (putting a 350 in an original fuelie '57 chevy---nah!) but for 99% of all 60s cars, I agree---they should be driven, modified, banged up, raced and enjoyed to the fullest. Most of these cars look rather silly all dressed up with no place to go. Every museum who wants a 62 Impala has one, so the rest can be risked in the big bad world, no problem.
I think there's something to be said for preserving the original driving experience, as inferior as it may be to modern performance. Usually the original experience is mushy and uninspiring but not always--I'm thinking of my '67 GTO with the $6 HD suspension and quick-ratio manual steering. That car had Nova-sized drums that would fade instantly at 80 but even that could be mitigated with metallic linings or Skylark aluminum drums.
On the other hand, I can see how someone who regularly takes their family in the car for long cruises might want the benefits of sharper suspension and better brakes. Or someone who wants a sleeper.
It bummed out the magazines too, although as I recall most test cars had the optional discs by the late '60s.
Mopar intermediates had the 12"(?) drums off the fullsizers as standard. So did the first SS 396 that came out in '65 but that was a low-production high-option car. Gran Sport had the 9" drums but in finned aluminum, a Buick tradition since 1958. Sintered metallic linings were an option on most cars except those with aluminum drums; the hard linings would have demolished the drums. I remember seeing high-mileage metallic linings that were still in great shape but had worn out the iron drums. The downside was that metallic linings took extra pedal effort and were reluctant to stop until they warmed up. Apparently that first stop in the morning was exciting.
My guess would be that most fullsizers had drums in the 12" range but I'll check my shop manuals when I get home.
...is that Slant Six compacts usually had 9" drums, and V-8 compacts had 10". I don't know what my '67 Newport had...didn't have it long enough to mess with the brakes. Actually, I don't know what the DeSoto has either. It's been ages since I've fooled around with its brakes.
My '79 Newport had 10" drums on the back, so evidently some of the intermediates had 10". My '79 NYer and '89 Gran Fury have 11" drums on back. I'm sure there was a 12" drum in there somewhere, though!
Most modern drum brake systems work fine. The only problem with drum brakes is overheating (often avoidable) and getting soaking wet (sometimes not avoidable).
...with drums all the way around, do they? I know there are still alot of front-disk/rear-drum setups, but I thought the drum/drum setups went out with point-ignition systems.
Since the front brakes do most of the work, I really don't see that big of a deal what's in the back, as long as it works.
I think drums are still more prone to lock-up, perhaps because they overheat more quickly than discs. Maybe with ABS standard on everything with four wheels this isn't as big a deal these days.
Comments
Tell you what. I'll pay the dealer's asking price of $19,000 (which he has generously reduced from $21,000) for the Sport Disc wheels if he throws the car in for free. Now, that's an offer he can't refuse ;-)
What is it about these Sport Disc wheels that appeals to me so much? As I said before, take these wheels off this car and it's a real yawner in terms of it's visual appeal. Still, with only 44,000 original miles, it'd be a nice car to have. But, only at a reasonable price.
I'm curious as to how much a nice set of these wheels would cost. Is it possible a set could cost as much as $1,000? This would partially explain/justify a strong price for this car.
Gentlemen, your thoughts?
A rare wheel (not just a wheelcover) could easily cost $1000 for four, something like the Pontiac Rally Is optional on early GTOs.
I've heard stories how mechanics ruined these sport discs trying to pry them off not knowing they were bolted to the wheel underneath. Probably why they quit making them.
I check Hemmings and couldn't find them. I think these Olds Sport Discs are fairly rare.
If memory serves the Rivi spinner has four(?) prongs cast into the back side. Each prong goes through a slit in the wheel. I think the end of each prong is threaded so the wheelcover can be secured to the wheel with a nut on each prong. However it's done, they're on there good. I found this out the hard way.
If that's what the Olds spinner is like it still doesn't sound like anything special but I could be wrong. Rare, but not necessarily valuable except to a handful of people. I honestly can't see anyone paying a grand for any Olds covers even if they were gold plated.
Call a local shop that specializes in old hubcaps. Most of the online sources deal only in newer wheelcovers. Or call my man Mr. Hub Cap & Wheels at (408) 294-4304. He'll know but call quick, he's not getting any younger.
Personally, I don't think the demise of Olds will result in a "run" on folks buying old Oldsmobiles in the hope that their values will skyrocket.
On the hand, if I had a choice, between an Olds 98 and a Buick Electra (both in the 1965-66 vintage) and assuming both were in nice condition, similar color appeal, etc., would there be much incentive/motivation to give the nod to the Olds based purely on it's defunct status?
The desirable Oldsmobiles will stay desirable and the also-rans will continue to also-run. Just like Packard and Hudson and all the rest of the orphans.
I could see it negatively affecting values. Olds has that loser orphan image now. Some people find that intoxicating but not many.
So, you're saying it could be a month or two (wink, wink) before the market catches up to the $19,000 asking price of this '65 Olds 98 convertible?
Cars from the period where Oldsmobile was still a winner, it shouldn't make a difference. Now that 4-year old Intrigue? That's a different story! Maybe I could get a good deal on a first-gen Aurora now? ;-)
If only Olds would die more quickly and less publicly.
I'm just wondering out loud how secure an already marginal nameplate like Olds is. Again, I'm talking about run-of-the-mill sedans like the very clean '62 Dynamic 88 two-door hardtop I saw today, not something hot like a W-30.
Now an Olds is what might be called a mid-range collectible, a car without either positive or negative connotations to the vast majority of old car buyers. It's rarely a buyer's first choice but it's an okay alternative to the more sought-after and expensive makes because no one's going to laugh if you bring one home--and that's basically the bottom line with a lot of these cars.
What I'm suggesting (and only time will tell) is that perhaps the fact that Olds was still a going concern is what kept it elevated above bottom-rung '60s collectibles like say, Studebaker, Corvair and the BOP compacts. Cars that people point at and laugh (and I've had more than my share of these cars).
If I'm seeing it in these terms then maybe other people are too, and it wouldn't take too many of us to soften values--the pool of buyers for Olds was pretty small already.
On the other hand, there are always the hopeless optimists who see this as a bonanza for Olds values, but I can guarantee that these are sellers not buyers.
With regard to appeal, I don't think Oldsmobile is any worse or better than a Buick, any non-SS Chevrolet and most Pontiacs (unless, of course the PMD example has a 4 speed, tri-power or the letters GTO on the body).
Well, if Olds start to sell for Corvair prices you heard it here first.
Well, I don't see this ridiculous $19,000 asking price dropping dramatically anytime soon. Certainly not down to Corvair territory. But, he may lower it slightly before too long only because it's been awhile since it's initial "price reduction" - yeah right, like no one saw that coming.
I suppose if it were faultless beyond belief it might be worth $12,000. I suspect it is not that faultless and so is worth about $10,000.
The point is, it's STILL a 1965 Oldsmobile '98 convertible, original or restored or whatever. About the only thing that could elevate out of it being a 1965 Oldsmobile 98 would be some kind of celebrity status. Otherwise it has to be worth what a '65 Oldsmobile 98 is worth. It's not a GTO and it's not a Chevrolet SS, and for the kind of money he's asking you start running into the price range of much more desireable cars.
Actually, celebrity status is very tricky. People do get sucked into buying a "celebrity car" only to find out that without the star's name on the registration or without photos of them driving the exact car, the market really doesn't care about the Pontiac station wagon used by Frank Sinatra's gardener in 1973.
It looks like the unthinkable happened. That '65 Olds 98 convertible at Duffy's sold. This weekend, I was actually thinking about calling up there to re-inquire about this car, but realistically figured we were just too far apart on price.
Well, I'm actually kind of glad it sold. Now, I can let go of the delusion that Duffy's would actually consider selling this car for a price commensurate with its market demand. Looks like he finally found that needle in the haystack.
However, I am curious as to what this car sold for. Short of calling up there and asking, does anyone have any ideas as to how I can find out what this car sold for?
At that price, the car surely wasn't purchased for speculation &/or a quick resale.
In any event, given the new owner's investment, if it does show up again, the asking price won't be any bargain then either.
Of course, to be fair, I haven't seen the car, so maybe it was the world's best and could be worth $15K. Seems impossible, but I've eaten my hat before on these deals---not often, but now and then there's a surprise in the marketplace.
Regardless of what the man paid, that does not set a new price for '65 Olds 98 convertibles.
Back in the good ol' days...before cheap consumer goods become icons...an SS or Z/28 or Boss 302 or whatever was a deal because you got a handling package/strong rearend/HD trans/etc...it was cheaper to buy a car with a 12 bolt than to install one.
At the very least, it makes sense to improve things that are hidden...Pertronix systems, better shocks, urethane suspension parts and the like.
I suppose a big difference in approach is whether you use older cars for your exclusive driver or as a weekend-only kind of thing.
Personally, I think it's worth the risk because in the case of your car the originality is not such a big factor in value, because everybody knows what a '62 Impala is supposed to look like from the factory.
Nowadays car shows are starting to do a good thing...have a special class only for original cars, so that they don't have to compete (and lose to) over-restored ones.
I don't know whether I'm disappointed because this car was available and that I theoretically had a fair shot at it (just like everyone else) and didn't take the bait - as outrageously, high-priced as it was.
Or, I could be disappointed that I didn't feel I could realistically afford to pay their asking price.
My plan was to wait until late January (figuring Duffy's would know that anyone with Xmas bonus money would've already tried by then) and approach them again in the $10,000 to $12,000 range - hoping that he was tired of playing the waiting game. Of course, my plan was dependent on no one coming along that REALLY wanted this car. Thus, I rolled the dice and lost - sort of. But, this would only be true if Duffy's would have agreed to relinquish their high hopes for a killing on this car which he probably wouldn't have agreed to do.
So, whether I could've done anything about, I don't know. But, I am sorry this one got away. This car may not have had mass appeal, but for some reason I really liked it.
The steering will work as it did in 1962...just fine.
Micky Mouse it up enough and it won't be a '62 Impala anymore. It'll look the same but the "improvements" will make it something it was never intended to be.
Now...if he intends to drive it everyday at freeway speeds, that might be another story although it would do that task quite well too.
You just can't drive one of these like a modern car. You can't tailgate someone at 75 MPH or take a off ramp at 20 MPH higher than the posted speed.
And the people who own and drive these cars are well aware of this and drive accordingly.
Or at least they better!
Personally, I think that 1960's cars should be driven (and beaten up) as daily drivers, not garage queens or some sort of parade car. A few judicious improvements can make all the difference. It's kind of sad to see all the faster cars be putted around down to a Sonic or In and Out Burger for cruise 'nite' in whatever town.
While I'm thinking about it...about the only place I see muscle cars anymore is at local car shows. Just the place to hear distorted fifties music and see too damn many fuzzy dice, Cobra replicas, and wives who bear a more than passing resemblance to the Michelin Man.
I don't care about radiator hose clamps being "correct" or the color of the windshield washer fluid.
I was only trying to point out that a '62 Impala is a perfectly drivable car as equipped from the factory. There is nothing wrong with the Powerglide or the braking system or anything else.
The 327 engines were great engines. They don't need to be yanked out and replaced with a "better" 350.
I like to remember old cars as they were, not as someone else thinks they should be "upgraded" to.
And, again, they do need to be driven in a manner that takes into consideration their shortcomings as compared to modern cars.
I see no reason to feel reluctant about modifying mass-produced 1960s cars, if it is done tastefully and with genetic material. If it's a very rare model, perhaps not (putting a 350 in an original fuelie '57 chevy---nah!) but for 99% of all 60s cars, I agree---they should be driven, modified, banged up, raced and enjoyed to the fullest. Most of these cars look rather silly all dressed up with no place to go. Every museum who wants a 62 Impala has one, so the rest can be risked in the big bad world, no problem.
My beloved '62 Impala SS 327/300 had no trouble stopping, steering or cornering.
The drum brakes were non-power and had no trouble safely stopping that big Chevy.
Of course, a modern set of disks would be better and much more fade resistant but at least, in my case, I wouldn't need them.
I would remember what I was driving and would drive accordingly.
And I wouldn't feel unsafe nor would I baby the car. I just wouldn't drive it like I do my modern cars.
I'm no stickler for total originality but I hate to see something Mickey Moused up too.
Other opinions will vary but that's mine for what it's worth.
On the other hand, I can see how someone who regularly takes their family in the car for long cruises might want the benefits of sharper suspension and better brakes. Or someone who wants a sleeper.
It always bothered me when I heard that GM intermediates, even with muscular engines, came with 9.5" drums standard!
Mopar intermediates had the 12"(?) drums off the fullsizers as standard. So did the first SS 396 that came out in '65 but that was a low-production high-option car. Gran Sport had the 9" drums but in finned aluminum, a Buick tradition since 1958. Sintered metallic linings were an option on most cars except those with aluminum drums; the hard linings would have demolished the drums. I remember seeing high-mileage metallic linings that were still in great shape but had worn out the iron drums. The downside was that metallic linings took extra pedal effort and were reluctant to stop until they warmed up. Apparently that first stop in the morning was exciting.
My guess would be that most fullsizers had drums in the 12" range but I'll check my shop manuals when I get home.
My '79 Newport had 10" drums on the back, so evidently some of the intermediates had 10". My '79 NYer and '89 Gran Fury have 11" drums on back. I'm sure there was a 12" drum in there somewhere, though!
Since the front brakes do most of the work, I really don't see that big of a deal what's in the back, as long as it works.