Project Cars--You Get to Vote on "Hold 'em or Fold 'em"

qbrozen

flood car is the first thing that came to my mind, too.

fintail

The Mustang is in Newark too...the whole ad is great.

The Mazda also has "descent" tires...does that mean they are getting flatter?

I bet the Jag had a defective fuel pump from the showroom...

The 93 Civic ad gives me that much less faith in humanity.

fintail

Here's a good boat, nice hp claim

1961?

Interesting "roadster", but it does look pretty decent, Euro car too

Another "doesn't exist" MB, but the price is OK

jlflemmons

Try 1966 on that little Healey Spridget. I owned one. Absolute piece of C**p.

The only car I ever jumped out of while it was still going down the road. The wiring caught on fire (no fuses in tail light circuit) and the electric fuel pump (factory mounted above the tail pipe)was spraying gas.

I like to tell people I kept it nine months and then got rid of it before it got rid of me!

I am pretty sure the '61 Sprite was still a Bug Eye.

xwesx

'74 Eldorado... "part trade for a laptop" Does that mean I give him a laptop and he gives me the car plus $1000? :P

andre1969

might almost be valid if you convert to gross hp. The 1971 500 had 400 hp! But it also had a 10.5:1 compression ratio. The 1974 was more like 210 hp net, with an 8.25:1 compression.

jlflemmons

These things used chains, not belts. Either way, if it breaks/slips, $2K bucks can fly out of your wallet pretty easily.

can you say blown engine?

Actually, didn't think this one through. I think they had another engine besides the Quad Four that was sometimes used on the cheapie version.

jlflemmons

registered in Louisianna.

lemmer

I feel sorry for anyone in MS/LA who wants to sell their car. Everyone seems (understandably) suspect of any car for sale with a title from one of these states.

sam_ma

VW fastback

qbrozen

I gotta say, that's really cool.

I'm not sure on the price. I mean, clearly, if its absolute original showroom condition, you'd think $5k would be a fair price for a car in such shape .... BUT, is there any kind of collector market for this car, is the real question. If the buyer wants it because they've always wanted one, then I think it could be a good buy. If purchasing for collector value and speculation, then the money is better spent elsewhere.

sam_ma

Thanks q. It was more for collector value really.

Mr_Shiftright

Yep, watch out for those....also watch out for any title from Alabama and New Hampshire, two states with very loose titling laws...

fintail

These are unusual little things

Mr_Shiftright

Good little cars. The first serious (and successful) Japanese contender for the American small car market. That and the Datsun 510. Both near bulletproof and unlike a VW bug, they went 75 mph comfortably and had a heater and defroster that actually worked.

ghulet

....a kind of 'high-end' (inasmuch as they existed in '68) Japanese car then? It's definitely a lot fancier inside (plus it's a hardtop) than a 510 (my parents had an orange '71 4-speed coupe, neighbors had an earlier sedan with a column automatic); I doubt either the Corolla or Corona was as fun to drive as a 510 (nothing has changed).

lilengineerboy

My family had a '71 Corona from about 1980 to 1989, so they got it when it was about 10 years old, were the 3rd owners, and the second owner drove it to LA and back everyday, so it had like a bazilllion miles on it. It had a floor shift automatic, I think it had 4 drum brakes, and needed front end work (bushings, tie rods).
I remember it being the first car I had ever sat in with bucket seats (the Nova and the Reliant were bench seats), it had a backwards radio (the dials were on the opposite sides of what is thought to be conventional and rotated the opposite direction), and the shoulder harness was separate from the lap belt. Oh and it had bias ply tires too.
Some guy that likes the old school Toyotas bought it and and "restored" it and takes it to shows in southern California. I am pretty sure its still worthless from an investment standpoint, but he seemed like he was having fun.

andre1969

One thing I always admired about the Japanese small cars back then is that they found a way to make a hardtop with roll-down rear windows. I don't think the domestics ever offered anything that small as a hardtop. Probably about the smallest Detroit went was the Corvair, early Falcons, and early Valiant/Lancers. And maybe the Rambler American? But those were all big cars compared to your typical Japanese car.

I also thought it was interesting that the Japanese held onto hardtop styling for a few years after the domestics did away with it. IIRC, you could get a hardtop Corolla, Sapporo/Challenger, Mazda 626, Datsun 200SX, and probably a few I'm forgetting, right up through 1983.

I think the last domestic hardtop was the 1978 Newport/New Yorker, offered both as a 4-door or 2-door (although the 2-door usually was optioned with a thick landau roof and fixed opera windows...yuck!)

There were cars without B-pillars, like the Mark V, 1979-85 Toro/Riv/Eldo, and 1980-83 Cordoba/Mirada, but they had fixed rear windows. And oddly, Chrysler had the nerve to call my 1979 New Yorker a "pillared hardtop", which is an oxymoron IMO.

lemko

Shenaningans on the Eldo! The Cadillac 472cid V-8 of 1968-70 had 375 hp. The 500 cid engines were down to 210 hp by 1974.

qbrozen

So ... what's the deal with the guy posting on craigslist while in Iraq? They all get wireless laptops with their machine guns these days or what?

I'm surprised nobody else commented on that VW posted yesterday afternoon. I was shooting from the hip, so I was curious to see what others might say about it.

jlflemmons

Anytime I see a posting about some soldier at war needing help selling something, "I'm in a battle zone and need some help" I get suspicious. I have total respect for those in uniform, but know that there are those scumbags who will use any story they can come up with to fleece someone. Soldier at war is the current version of "momma needs a surgery".

andre1969

this 1975 Olds Ninety-Eight looks pretty well-preserved. And the seller doesn't seem too off his rocker with the buy-it-now.

I actually prefer the '76 version, because I think the peaked fenders give the headlight area a bit of a swollen look, but if I had the garage space and the extra cash, I'd consider it. I like the color combo. Sure, it screams 70's, but I think it wears it well.

I dunno why I'm on a mid-70's Oldsmobile kick today, but I also like this 1975 Delta 88 convertible. For some reason though, the Delta convertible never turned me on in the same way that a '75 LeSabre or Caprice convertible does.

I think there's just something about the 1975 LeSabre convertible that makes it seem sportier somehow than the Delta of that era. Maybe it's the more flowing lines, or the slightly wedge-shaped, somewhat menacing front-end, but I always liked 'em!

qbrozen

That ninety-eight looks to be in incredible shape.

Unfortunately, the underhood of the Delta 88 really takes away from the rest of the car.

When I see a well-preserved car, I like to see the condition reflected inside, outside, and underneath. There's nothing that turns me off more than a car that looks great on the outside, then you pop the hood and think you are looking at a completely different car.

Mr_Shiftright

Maybe you've gotten too used to today's dressed up engine compartments, most of which use slick engine covers and various shields to spiff them up.

Your basic V-8 engine, as it comes out of Detroit, is usually pretty ugly, very pedestrian and industrial looking. They would put them in '75 Oldsmobiles or sell them to coal mines to pump water or something.

This is probably what spawned the aftermarket "chrome thingie" market. You needed to put a new suit on that lump of iron.

I always thought the Italian engines were the prettiest---abundant use of aluminum and alloys and all kinds of artful bends to things.

jrosasmc

Now that's why you love engines like the Alfa twin-cam four and the Ferrari Dino V-6, huh?

Speaking of Dinos, I saw one on a flatbed trailer- unfortunately the body was in pretty bad shape. I really can't imagine what repair costs would be on a Dino.

andre1969

Yeah, but that '75 Olds definitely needs some work in the engine compartment! I think the biggest problem is that it's been repainted and is all shiny on the outside, but under the hood it's faded, dusty, dirty, and a bit of rust here and there.

I've seen cars of this vintage, even ones with "uglier" engine compartments, that look much nicer when everything's cleaned and shined up.

They were all pretty messy by the 70's, but I think Chrysler did the best job of the domestics when it comes to under-hood order. At least, when I look under the hood of my '79 New Yorker, it looks like you can work under there more or less. I look under the hood of my '76 LeMans and this helpless feeling just comes over me.

I wonder if part of it might be the suspensions? The coil springs of the LeMans seem to cut up into the engine bay more than the NYer's torsion bars, which are lower and out of the way. Pontiac also had a bad habit of putting the a/c compressor in the way so that it makes it a real pain to get to the front spark plug on the passenger-side, whereas on the Mopars it seemed more out of the way. And GM cars had a bunch of crap for the HVAC controls protruding out from the cowl on the passenger side in the engine bay, whereas I'm guessing on the Mopars they got more of that stuff inside the passenger cabin?

sam_ma

link title

I was thinking about buying something small, in good shape already but easy and cheap to fix (not very experienced myself) just in case. It'd be probably only to drive it for a while and not loose too much money if I sold it shortly after. Any comment will help.
Thanks

Sam

andre1969

that Karmann Ghia. You should get it and modify it to look like this. :shades:

jlflemmons

man, that thing is pretty. That was the last year of the Delta convertable. The Cutlass conv. production ended in '72.

Mr_Shiftright

Nothing wrong with a Ghia but that one looks pretty suspicious....the flat gray paint and partially painted front bumper are all Mickey-Mouse repairs, and what's that THING hanging off the left side of the engine?

No harm in looking at it, but bring a magnet and see if it sticks to any part of the car---I sort of doubt it will.

Ghia's aren't hard to fix but body and trim parts are very expensive.

This car seems somwhat overpriced to me. Maybe $2,500 is plenty if it runs well and there isn't 50 lbs of drywall cement in the rocker panels.

fintail

Big

I think Shifty hates these

I don't know what "dippin" is, I don't think I want to know

qbrozen

If there's not rust, everything is there, and it runs as good as advertised, you might break even on it. Its biggest problem is that it automatically needs a good $4k paintjob.

My gut tells me its about a $3k car as it sits (although, as other shoppers here will tell you, pictures can be quite deceiving). So he's not asking a great deal over value.

edit: oops. was typing as shifty posted. Listen to him more than me because he knows these way better than I do (most people do as i know little-to-nothing).

qbrozen

Yeah, but that '75 Olds definitely needs some work in the engine compartment! I think the biggest problem is that it's been repainted and is all shiny on the outside, but under the hood it's faded, dusty, dirty, and a bit of rust here and there.

that's exactly what I was seeing. I mean, just look at the engine compartment in the ninety-eight for comparison. It looks as clean as I would expect based on the rest of the car.

Mr_Shiftright

That's not true. Shifty does not "hate" Jaguar Mark 10s....he LOATHES them...the car is a hodgepodge of parts...the tail end of a Type S and the grille from a UPS truck. Heavy and clumsy, ala a Mark VI Bentley, and of course diabolical in all its mechanisms.

Compare and contrast to the lovely, lithe, fast and nimble Jaguar Mark II 3.8....if Jaguar hadn't built THAT car, I might forgive the Mark X. He wants $10K? Take $5,500 and run to the bank with the check.

qbrozen

oh, come on, you know you want THIS. Forget those little economical classic compacts. This is the beast for you!

Dallas has some interesting stuff, that's for sure.

Here's an odd duck.

Dallas must be a magnet for oddball vehicles.

Shifty will hate me for this one. But when is the last time you saw one in this condition?

Could be worth a look.

sam_ma

I had seen most of them before on CL and what a collection of oddities.
In spite of the paintjob, the Datsun looks like a mess to me, what an interior!
I have lived in the States only for a few years but I had never seen a Bricklin before, is it worth that?. I have seen in the Bricklin nuts page some of the owners asking stratospheric prices for them (10K-20K$).
Craigslist has some weird stuff that's for sure.
Thanks

british_rover

Hmhh that 240z would probably be worth it if it was a straight car.

qbrozen

he claims the body is great. It looks good in those pics. Who knows?

The interior isn't that big of a deal. Pop in some new recaros and armorall the rest and you're probably good to go.
I'll tell ya, I sure wish I could find one that looked like that around here for that kind of money. I bet the crazy folks in Jersey would ask double that price if that were here (not that they'd get that much).

No, I'm pretty sure Bricklins are not worth it.

lemmer

Did you guys notice that the carbs just kind of end? It looks like it might be missing more than just the air cleaners.

If you turn your attention to the other side of the engine compartment, you might notice that there is no battery in the car.

qbrozen

well, he said it hasn't run in 5 years. I wouldn't expect miracles. Besides, a battery sitting dormant for 5 years is just a big acid-covered paperweight.

But, see, I'm mechanically inclined, but not too aesthetically inclined. So finding something with a perfect body is much more important to me than perfect mechanicals. And, especially in that car, you could yank that engine out with one adjustable wrench, a screwdriver, and a heavy chain. [yeah, yeah, i know i'm exagerating ... slightly]

british_rover

Bah not by much though. A couple of big beefy guys and you don't even need the chain.

fintail

Not many of these around anymore...looks to be about 40 feet long

ghulet

Huge, ugly car, with no interior or trunk space, that eats tires and gas.....sounds great, Greg (pardon the Brady Bunch reference).

This, on the other hand, seems like a great deal (nice colors, 5-speed), if the seller's assertions (94k miles, 'doesn't need anything') are true:

http://chicago.craigslist.org/sox/car/195463636.html

Mr_Shiftright

the 944 could be a good deal. Remember the Big Three on 944s.....clutch, water pump and timing belt....any one of which can hurt you....so if you have a history on those three items, great...if the only history is a mystery, then bend over....

fintail

One for Andre...but is it really a "Lemon"?

fintail

Might be fun if the rust isn't too bad

Looks like a survivor...I never cared for that design

Nice looking Seville

ghulet

...I like the diplomatic 'I never cared for that design' you used when describing one of the ugliest (IMO) cars on earth (the early Valiants--take every full-size car styling mistake, most of which were made by Chrysler to begin with, and apply them randomly to the 'new compact'). You're a class act for being so generous (I'm not being sarcastic).

andre1969

to admit this, but I really like that '75 Toronado! In fact, I actually prefer them to the Rivs and Eldos of that timeframe. It's hard to put my finger on why, exactly...I'll admit they really aren't the most timelessly pretty car in the world. I think part of it might be that the '71-74 style was still a true hardtop, with roll-down rear windows. And I always liked the XS model with the wraparound rear window. And the low grille was always interesting I thought. Even as a kid I really liked these.

I think the interiors were styled more nicely than the Eldorados, too. The Eldo always seemed kinda overdone and tacky on the inside to me. Meanwhile the Rivieras just didn't seem quite as luxurious. The Toro just seemed better built than the Eldo, too. One thing I've really noticed when looking at these cars up close, is that the rump of the Toro is designed to have fewer separate pieces than the Eldoorado, so there are fewer parts to not line up properly, and fewer gaps to be uneven.

I love that blue interior color on the Toro, but I think the exterior blue would look better if it was metallic. I know I'm being picky here, but I absolutely love that shade on something like a '75 LeSabre or Caprice convertible, but on something more upscale like a Toro, I think it needs to be metallic. If that thing was closer to me, I'd be all over it though!

As for that Grand LeMons, I like it alot. Really pretty color. Looks like it has cloth seats, which I don't see too often. Usually these things had vinyl like mine does. Oddly, I think the vinyl might have been the upgrade! First thing I'd do though is lose the fender skirts. Gawd they make the car look fat! Also wish they listed the engine. These things could have anything from a Chevy 250-6 or Olds 260 V-8 on up through a 350, 400, or 455. I dunno if they were putting Chevy 305's in them yet.

1962 Valiant...funny, but I always liked that 1960-62 style. I thought that the styling looked okay on the compacts, but it was when they tried to apply it to bigger cars where the styling fell apart. 1962-63 Dodge/Plymouth, for example. Or to a lesser degree, the '61-63 Imperial or '63-64 Chryslers. I think Chrysler's best looking car from 1962 was probably the Dodge Custom 880, which was just a '62 Newport with a '61 The 2-door hardtop they offered in this style was interesting. I think it used the same roof as the 4-door sedan to save on costs. But then there was no way to make a single rear window go all the way down on something with a roofline that long, so they had to put in fixed quarter window at the back, and then a smaller roll-down window.

Now a '60-62 Valiant isn't something I lust over, but I do think they're kinda cool in a twisted sort of way. I think if I were forced to choose a compact from that era, I'd take one over a Corvair or Falcon. Now compared to a '62 Chevy II, that might be a hard call.

As for ugliest car of all time, I think my vote would go to the 1961 Plymouth!

lemmer

For a $3500 asking price, I bet it needs something. I think it is possible to get a decent driver 944 for $3500, but most of them start out asking $5,000.

lemmer

I bet that MGB GT is a rust bucket. I've just noticed that I am becoming a cynic in my middle age.