Chronic Car Buyers Anonymous (Archived)

breld

Friend of mine came over a couple weeks ago with his classic Mustang. He’s had it since he was a teenager.

28firefighter

I wonder what it feels like to hold a car for that long.

qbrozen

breld said:

Friend of mine came over a couple weeks ago with his classic Mustang. He’s had it since he was a teenager.

nice. stick or auto? does it have the pony interior? Does it currently match its build sheet?
Important question: does it have the correct gas cap? lol

Michaell

@breld - I see what you did there!

oldfarmer50

breld said:

Friend of mine came over a couple weeks ago with his classic Mustang. He’s had it since he was a teenager.

Those surprisingly don’t drive that well unless you do a full restomod on them. It’s amazing how you get so used to modern handling and drivability that old school seems barbaric. Still, I wouldn’t turn one down if offered.

explorerx4

@breld, How old is he now? We've had out Mustang for 32 years.

roadburner

I've had the Club Sport for 28- one of 94...

venture

A friend mentioned a lady whose brother I used to know. I said I remembered that he had a yellow '67 Corvette coupe.

My friend said she just sold it - FOR $21,000!!!!

roadburner

Had to be a fright pig to only bring $21k

venture

roadburner said:

Had to be a fright pig to only bring $21k

I know. I suspect she either didn't know what she had, or my friend is grossly mistaken.

The last time I saw it, admittedly many years ago, it was fine.

graphicguy

oldfarmer50 said:

breld said:

Friend of mine came over a couple weeks ago with his classic Mustang. He’s had it since he was a teenager.

Those surprisingly don’t drive that well unless you do a full restomod on them. It’s amazing how you get so used to modern handling and drivability that old school seems barbaric. Still, I wouldn’t turn one down if offered.

My sister has an ALL ORIGINAL 1964.5 Mustang Convertible. Light "Mustang Blue" color. Only changes are a new top, and new tires and battery. The rest is original. 67K original miles. 289- 4bbl, Manual trans. Manual Steering and Brakes. Drives like a tractor.

Not all that fast, either. You have to work to drive it....I mean really work. Stand on the brakes to get it to stop, and prepare to brake way earlier than you think you should. Manhandle the steering wheel to turn. Clutch takes some serious leg presses to engage.

It's a beast. But, no rust and aside from some checking on the paint and a few pits in the chrome, it's in pristine original condition.

She's had it since the mid '80s. Will never part with it. She drives it in parades and around the block a few times a year. Other than that, it sits in temp controlled garage.

breld

qbrozen said:

breld said:

Friend of mine came over a couple weeks ago with his classic Mustang. He’s had it since he was a teenager.

nice. stick or auto? does it have the pony interior? Does it currently match its build sheet?
Important question: does it have the correct gas cap? lol

It's an auto, but I didn't take note of any other particulars (as I wouldn't really know what to look for anyway ).

qbrozen

graphicguy said:

My sister has an ALL ORIGINAL 1964.5 Mustang Convertible.

et tu, GG? Using a half year on the Mustang is a pet peeve of mine. It is a '65.

explorerx4

To tell the difference between the 1964 1/2 and 1965 Mustang, you can look for the following differences:

The 1964-1/2 will have three extra vents for the battery on the core support, for 1965-66 those three vents are missing.

The grille design also helps to distinguish the years; 1964-1/2-65 had a honeycomb pattern whereas 1966 had a slotted pattern.

The headlight extensions on a 1964 1/2 had a beveled edge, which was eliminated for the 1965 year.

The lettering on the hood that says “MUSTANG” was a little shorter, 4 3/8″ instead of 5″ on the '65’s

qbrozen

They made changes but all produced (and VIN confirms) were '65 model year. 64.5 is an unofficial designation made up by fans. Since no vin nor title can indicate a half year, I object to any vehicle claimed to be a half year. Like I said, a pet peeve of mine. I know it is widely accepted, but I don't have to be one of the accepting. :b

stickguy

And a generator, right?

More accurate to call them early run 65s.

corvette

While we're talking about old Mustangs, I was surprised to see this 1965 AWD prototype at the Tampa Bay Automobile Museum a few years ago. I had no idea such a thing existed.

roadburner

When did Ford switch from the Falcon instrument cluster to the bespoke Mustang cluster?

jmonroe1

corvette said:

While we're talking about old Mustangs, I was surprised to see this 1965 AWD prototype at the Tampa Bay Automobile Museum a few years ago. I had no idea such a thing existed.

————————————————
Very interesting.

I think Ford was right in not wanting to create another Mustang model with AWD and adding $500 (in 1965 dollars which is about 5 grand today) to the new Mustang models price.

$500 was a good hunk of change in 1965 and Ford must have figured since the Mustang wasn’t broke they didn’t feel it needed fixing.

jmonroe

roadburner

Price aside, AWD was yet to be seen as an asset performance- in the US at any rate. It was Audi -and to some extent Porsche- that made AWD popular in the enthusiast community.

corvette

Apparently the Cobb tune for the Ecoboost Maverick is $625. They claim some decent horsepower gains, but also claim a 0-60 time of 5.5 seconds, which is only 0.4 to 0.5 second better than stock when running premium. No ethanol tune, although there is a different company that will sell you an E50 program for the Cobb dongle. You have to reflash when switching from the Cobb 87, 91, or 93 octane tunes, as well as going back to the factory tune, which is potentially annoying. More intriguing is that they offer transmission mappings which are said to be improved from the stock TCM programming (which isn't bad to begin with, but I'm willing to listen, and others have said it's the most noticeable improvement from the tune).

sda

corvette said:

Apparently the Cobb tune for the Ecoboost Maverick is $625. They claim some decent horsepower gains, but also claim a 0-60 time of 5.5 seconds, which is only 0.4 to 0.5 second better than stock when running premium. No ethanol tune, although there is a different company that will sell you an E50 program for the Cobb dongle. You have to reflash when switching from the Cobb 87, 91, or 93 octane tunes, as well as going back to the factory tune, which is potentially annoying. More intriguing is that they offer transmission mappings which are said to be improved from the stock TCM programming (which isn't bad to begin with, but I'm willing to listen, and others have said it's the most noticeable improvement from the tune).

As well and quick the Maverick runs out in standard form leave well enough alone.

stickguy

I vote for this. when I had mine, I never found a time where I thought it needed more power. even having to do a quick merge, it got right up and boogied.

oldfarmer50

corvette said:

While we're talking about old Mustangs, I was surprised to see this 1965 AWD prototype at the Tampa Bay Automobile Museum a few years ago. I had no idea such a thing existed.

“ As a result, Mustangs would continue to slide in the rain and in the snow.”

Isn’t that the whole point of owing a Mustang? As kids we couldn’t wait for the first snow so we could slide our RWD cars around every turn. Empty parking lots were like amusement parks.

au1994

roadburner said:

When did Ford switch from the Falcon instrument cluster to the bespoke Mustang cluster?

66 unless you went for the pony interior option, then you got the bespoke cluster.

graphicguy

qbrozen said:

graphicguy said:

My sister has an ALL ORIGINAL 1964.5 Mustang Convertible.

et tu, GG? Using a half year on the Mustang is a pet peeve of mine. It is a '65.

I get it. But, I've seen the title. That's how it's described on the title....a '64.5. Who am I to argue with the "govment"?

qbrozen

graphicguy said:

qbrozen said:

graphicguy said:

My sister has an ALL ORIGINAL 1964.5 Mustang Convertible.

et tu, GG? Using a half year on the Mustang is a pet peeve of mine. It is a '65.

I get it. But, I've seen the title. That's how it's described on the title....a '64.5. Who am I to argue with the "govment"?

really??? I have to see this! The VIN should indicate the year, which would be '65.

jmonroe1

graphicguy said:

qbrozen said:

graphicguy said:

My sister has an ALL ORIGINAL 1964.5 Mustang Convertible.

et tu, GG? Using a half year on the Mustang is a pet peeve of mine. It is a '65.

I get it. But, I've seen the title. That's how it's described on the title....a '64.5. Who am I to argue with the "govment"?

————————————————
You’re GG, of course. You can’t believe everything the government tells you. They try to tell you how to do your taxes but that’s only a suggestion to some of us.

jmonroe

explorerx4

1964.5 Mustang VIN decoder. 1965 includes same date codes and more.
https://www.cjponyparts.com/resources/1964-5-mustang-vin-decoder#date-codes

graphicguy

qbrozen said:

graphicguy said:

qbrozen said:

graphicguy said:

My sister has an ALL ORIGINAL 1964.5 Mustang Convertible.

et tu, GG? Using a half year on the Mustang is a pet peeve of mine. It is a '65.

I get it. But, I've seen the title. That's how it's described on the title....a '64.5. Who am I to argue with the "govment"?

really??? I have to see this! The VIN should indicate the year, which would be '65.

I'll ask her if she can send it to me.

andres3

oldfarmer50 said:

What is the groups opinion of the Genesis models?

I’ve been running into a few of them at work, mainly G70s and G80s. They seem nice, sufficient power and good interiors. Comfortable ride but I wondered do these stand out in some special way?

Also, does the Elantra N Line have some good features that make it special? I ran across one of those as well and it didn’t seem to be unusually fast.

N-Line is the "pretender" N model. The real N's are faster. The N-Line is faster than a standard model though, but how many people brag about their car being faster than a base Elantra?

It was OK.

andres3

stickguy said:

occasionally a car is relocated. That obviously changes the shipping cost. Plus that is a "market pricing" deal that can change daily.

They can change the price minute to minute and I don't have a problem with that (unless you've started the purchase process they give you 30 minutes to complete).

andres3

breld said:

Finally got my youngest son a new car and the 2012 MDX has been officially retired after 155k faithful miles.

Unlike his older brother (and much of the buying population), he really keyed in on sedans, liking the sleeker style over an SUV. His mom insisted on AWD, so that narrowed the choices down considerably. We considered the Altima, Legacy and a Mazda3 before landing on a Kia K5. After testing all these options, he was clearly most enthusiastic about the Kia, and I couldn’t blame him. Handsome styling that you don’t see every day, the 1.6T engine, a traditional 8-speed auto and a nicely tuned suspension make it a very impressive vehicle for the price.

All our kids like and appreciate their vehicles, but my youngest is the only one who shows the kind of enthusiasm that could carry on our family obsession tradition.

Very nice first vehicle. Much better than my Neon. I'll take bets with anyone and everyone here this K5 roundly beats the Neon for reliability too. Is it a lease? If so, take multiple photos of the multiple key fobs.

andres3

nyccarguy said:

OK guys, so as you all know, I’ve been searching far and wide for a nice decent quality used vehicle for my son who just got his license. I believe the best contender would have been that 2007 matrix, but as the old saying goes, I literally came up a day late. Most of what I found was cars with under 100,000 miles are priced at $12,000 and up, while most of what I saw that had between 120 and 150,000 miles was not worth the price. So yes, @qbrozen , I went over my budget. $1105 (includes broker fee) due at signing, plus $3150 in MSD, $350 a month for 36 months/10,000 miles per year. My name is Bradd and I am a Chronic Car Buyer.

A black new shiny Toyota pickup truck for a teenager makes me think of Marty McFly and Back to the Future.

andres3

graphicguy said:

Congrats for your son Bradd.

@breld …nice. Congrats to your son, too. Looks eerily similar to my lamented and departed Stinger.

Lamented? Did I miss the story on the Stinger? I remember that you got a good deal on it dollar wise.

andres3

stickguy said:

My eco boost Maverick it made no practical difference since any change was at higher revs/boost where I generally did not go. Basically the extra speed was wasted since I never needed to use everything the base tune offered.

no mileage/economy penalty?

andres3

corvette said:

Hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth on a Maverick-specific board when I posted my real-world results of premium vs. regular fuel: "How come you bought a truck, when you really want a racecar? Doing a "pull" in a truck is not what they are built for, and they suck at it as a result."

I'm considering a Cobb Stage 1 tune, but need to to more research on it.

Anyone mention the myth "speed kills?"

I'd respond with "better to know facts than stick head in sand."

stickguy

andres3 said:

stickguy said:

My eco boost Maverick it made no practical difference since any change was at higher revs/boost where I generally did not go. Basically the extra speed was wasted since I never needed to use everything the base tune offered.

no mileage/economy penalty?

not that I could tell. I averaged something like 28 MPG while I owned it.

explorerx4

My wife's 22 Corsair has the 2.0 ecoboost with the 8 speed trans.
So far, averaging 27.5 overall. One trip she took, she got 32+ mpg's.
Just about 6 months and about 5k miles on it. RUG only.

nyccarguy

Since the driveway is getting redone, we can’t have the garage looking all cracked and decrepit now.

jmonroe1

nyccarguy said:

Since the driveway is getting redone, we can’t have the garage looking all cracked and decrepit now.

————————————————
I don’t even want to think what all that costs plus you got your son a new truck. You must have an oil well out back.

jmonroe

oldfarmer50

andres3 said:

breld said:

Finally got my youngest son a new car and the 2012 MDX has been officially retired after 155k faithful miles.

Unlike his older brother (and much of the buying population), he really keyed in on sedans, liking the sleeker style over an SUV. His mom insisted on AWD, so that narrowed the choices down considerably. We considered the Altima, Legacy and a Mazda3 before landing on a Kia K5. After testing all these options, he was clearly most enthusiastic about the Kia, and I couldn’t blame him. Handsome styling that you don’t see every day, the 1.6T engine, a traditional 8-speed auto and a nicely tuned suspension make it a very impressive vehicle for the price.

All our kids like and appreciate their vehicles, but my youngest is the only one who shows the kind of enthusiasm that could carry on our family obsession tradition.

Very nice first vehicle. Much better than my Neon. I'll take bets with anyone and everyone here this K5 roundly beats the Neon for reliability too. Is it a lease? If so, take multiple photos of the multiple key fobs.

Well, since the two cars are separated by 20-30 years of improvements, I’d hope so.

28firefighter

Anyone else want to jump on the M240 Convertible bandwagon? Best color combo right here. https://www.carmax.com/car/24720046

au1994

Yeah, thats nice!!

nyccarguy

More garage pics

laurasdada

28firefighter said:

Anyone else want to jump on the M240 Convertible bandwagon? Best color combo right here. https://www.carmax.com/car/24720046

Yes! Wonder if Caxrmax would do a straight trade, want the chocolate interior, prefer the smoky aluminum (aloominium)... Price isn't bad...

Reality, I'm good with what I brung.

stickguy

Might be able to get the wife to trade the Acura for that!

A few concerns though, especially at that price. One being it’s out of warranty in 2 months. And can’t tell if it has BLIS (because it definitely has a huge blind spot!)

And unlike many of you, I don’t consider the extra $ big engine a real bonus. AWD too, that just seems odd for a convertible that will never touch snow!

Lovely colors though.

28firefighter

stickguy said:

Might be able to get the wife to trade the Acura for that!

A few concerns though, especially at that price. One being it’s out of warranty in 2 months. And can’t tell if it has BLIS (because it definitely has a huge blind spot!)

And unlike many of you, I don’t consider the extra $ big engine a real bonus. AWD too, that just seems odd for a convertible that will never touch snow!

Lovely colors though.

That's why you get the CarMax warranty.

laurasdada

Mine doesn't have BLIS, a bit of a surprise to me. For some reason, I just had to (and pay for it) have the I6. And, while mine may not touch snow, it will be driven in winter. I'm not sure I want to have 3 cars long term, we have the practical wheels with the X3. But, the A7 is just such a fab cruise missile, and I enjoy the tech. Beautifully screwed together, notably the interior.

stickguy

With lane keep assist, how much more would it cost for the BLIS indicators?