Is it just the camera angle, or does the bed on that truck look like it's sagging a bit or bent? For $850 it sounds tempting, but I'd really want to check it out for rust and such. Back in the day, truck bodies would usually rust pretty quickly, but the frames, suspension components, and all the "important" stuff was usually durable enough that it would hold up. Nowadays though, it's much more common to find a truck with a good body but serious, fatal rust underneath. I know Ford Explorers and Rangers were famous for this in part of the 90's.
Seeing that rust at the back corner of the cab on that truck is enough to make me want to REALLY check out the structural stuff underneath.
I know the pre-'01s have some problems, but this is alot of car for the money. It may still be a bit overpriced, though, now that I think about it. Probably not by much, though.
I REALLY like that acura deal. $6k for less than 70k miles? Almost seems too good to be true. You'd have a hard time getting the honda-lovers to sell a similar Accord for that price. maybe its a misprint? does it have 168k miles? The ad does say "all highway," which is usually a statement made on high mile cars. hmmmm...
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The RL is not the sharpest tool in Acura's toolbox. It's not a "book" car and I understand that it's a hard car to unload. It's not a bargain either--that price is actually over retail, in "real world" pricing. Ask terry he'll tell ya'.
90s volvos out of warranty are problematic to me....it would have to be cheaper than that to tempt me. The price LOOKS good, but if you accurately factor in miles and door dings, etc., it's really close to average retail.
And 92K miles is just about the time a car starts to need a lot of things.
Problem is with these mid-level luxury cars out of warranty...if something electronic goes Ka-Blooey or you lose the transmission, you can be totally hosed on the deal. Pete's garage down the street is not going to be fixing your S80 for you anytime soon. You'll have to go back to....THEM.....
I predict that it's going to be a field day for us bottomfeeders in a few years...really nice older luxury cars with power windows that don't work or engine lights flashing or transmissions that downshift when they feel like it---are going to be bargains for those of us with the courage to take them on. I'd bite on the S80 for around $5,500---that gives me maybe $2,500 cushion to bail out if the car turns on me.
i don't know alot about the RLs. I was just thinking it seems low when you compare to an Accord. Is it less reliable? I know, of course, its nowhere near an accord, given different EVERYTHING. but, to alot of buyers, a honda is a honda is a honda and they seem to pay through the nose for them.
The reason the S80 price struck me as a good deal at first is because i got $5500 a few months back for my '98 S70 with 116k miles. So... i figure bigger car, bigger engine, less miles, 1 year younger ... only a couple grand more? not bad. BUT, like i said, the pre-'01s had some problems, so I've heard. The tranny being one of them. Yikes!
I predict that it's going to be a field day for us bottomfeeders in a few years
I think it may even be sooner than that. Depends on the vehicle I suppose, though. But I've seen quite a few "problematic" luxo vehicles for surprisingly cheap lately (well, maybe 'cheap' is a strong word). There's been a couple of Audi A6s of late, for instance. I also spotted an '01 540 with low miles for $22k today. Seems like alot of car for the money ... but still alot of money. What was that new, though? $55k? Then again, it IS 6 years old. That's where I'm finding my memory failing these days. I see anything '98 and up and my initial reaction is "that's young" .... then I remember we're seeing '07s out now!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The 122 series cars were the "Amazon". And I agree, a 544 wagon would be very cool...but they make a Husky look common! I've seen one in person in my life.
so i went surfing for pics on the internet (found a couple of ford firetrucks, but i have no idea if any are this particular model) .... then i ran across THIS: http://www.bradfordtricounty.com/zoomft.aspx?FT=114
Just imagine the look on the face of the Jones's when they drive by in their whimpy and ordinary consumer-grade hummer.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I get a creepy feeling when I sit in 70s economy cars---I don't know what it is exactly...the smell or the dashboards...something makes me want to leave.
FIRE TRUCK---finally, a non-military Hummer that can justify its own existence.
I like that one. Nice looking truck and I find those old pickups a blast to drive. But really, most of the fun is in getting it running again. I know... I am quite odd.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
For the price, that cap could be worth it alone if in decent shape. Those work caps are spendy new and it only takes about a week of work for them to look just like that one. As far as the truck goes, I could take it or leave it, but 1/2 tons just are not of that much use to me. Still, it looks like a good price. You could part it out, make up the investment, and keep the cap if its mechanicals are in good shape.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I get a creepy feeling when I sit in 70s economy cars---I don't know what it is exactly...the smell or the dashboards...something makes me want to leave.
A few years back there was a guy at work who had a 4-door Maverick. He was going out to his car after work and saw me putting oil in my '89 Gran Fury, and I guess that's how we struck up a conversation about old cars. This Maverick was in really good shape. Guy let me sit in it and it really wasn't THAT bad. The main thing I've noticed about compact Fords of the 70's is that it seems the transmission and driveshaft humps are huge and eat up a lot of room. The Granada's the same way, and so is anything based on the Fox platform.
The steering wheel was too close for comfort; I remember not liking that. I think back then something like a Maverick or Hornet or Granada was a big step down from a Nova and its clones or a Dart/Valiant. To be fair though, the Dart/Valiant and Nova were bigger cars; in fact over the years some magazines whined about Chrysler calling the Dart a compact, saying it was really midsized! And truth be told, my '68 Dart probably has more useable room inside than my '76 LeMans, despite being a foot shorter. The LeMans is wider inside, but I swear the Dart has about the same legroom both front and rear, and better headroom up front, and a much bigger, if shallower, trunk.
Some of those real basic 70's compacts still had a lot of exposed metal, a lot of plastic, and some of the cheapest vinyls around, so that might be part of the less-than-pleasant experience. And if they don't have air conditioning, the dashboards look really empty, without the extra vents. Darts and Valiants were never designed to have integrated a/c vents though, so they were at least spared that empty look.
That's where I'm finding my memory failing these days. I see anything '98 and up and my initial reaction is "that's young" .... then I remember we're seeing '07s out now!
I feel the same way. With more than 213K on my '96 Subaru Outback, I find myself saying "it is only a '96", then remembering that it is more than 11 years old now (mfg 08/05). :sick: The day is coming, and sooner than I would prefer.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I feel the same way. With more than 213K on my '96 Subaru Outback, I find myself saying "it is only a '96", then remembering that it is more than 11 years old now (mfg 08/05). The day is coming, and sooner than I would prefer.
I find myself starting to go through that more and more, myself. Heck, now that I think about it, this November it'll be 7 years that I've had my Intrepid! Cars just don't seem to "age" like they used to. And I'm not talking about them lasting longer. It's just that nowadays, when a new style comes out, IMO at least, it really doesn't make the previous style look aged. For instance, back when I first started driving, I had a 1980 Malibu that was 7 years old at the time. Compared to something like a Taurus it looked downright old, but even compared to something like a Celebrity or a K-car it seemed like it was from another era, being RWD, and a bit larger than your typical 1987 intermediate. By 1987 cars were starting to go for blackout trim, hiding the bumpers under a plastic fascia, and going for composite headlights.
But then by the same token, my 1980 Malibu made just about any 1973 equivalent look old, as it was more angular and sensibly sized, and upright than your typical flambuoyant, low-slung, curvy '73 model. And by 1980 hardly anybody used round headlights anymore, so that was an obvious tipoff of an old car.
But today, cars are trying to get a bit more squared-off again, and more upright. They're attempting to put more curves and creases into them at the same time though. And headlights, while still composite, are often being designed to suggest the look of an old round quad setup. These days, it's quite possible to have a 7 year old car that looks more futuristic than its modern-day counterpart!
That is a good point, Andre. I think the recent trend of the round headlights w/in composites and the creased curves will distinguish the newest cars from those of the 1990-2005 or so era, but until recently a 90's car could age quite a bit without looking or feeling "aged" per se.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
Also, I think there is a distinct smell from the outgassing of some of the types of plastics and vinyls that they used in the 70's. They also started making the cars a bit more airtight, so they didn't ventillate as well and that might keep some of the scent in.
I think another advantage that small cars of the 60's had compared to small cars of the 70's was more glass area (well, except with the Pacer) and roll-down rear windows in the 2-doors. So even if the car itself was still dirt cheap, at least you didn't feel trapped in it!
I've noticed that scent even with my '76 LeMans...it just has a certain smell to it that I associate with the 70's, or at least 70's GM. I don't get the same scent with my '79 NYer though, maybe because it has leather seats? And often when I see a 70's GM car, such as at a show or swapmeet, often I catch a whiff of that same aroma. I guess it just has something to do with the plastics and other materials they used at the time?
New cars are really bad with the outgassing though. I remember the day I bought my Intrepid. My roommate was at work all day that day, and by the time he got off I was out delivering pizzas. By the time I got home he was working his night job delivering papers. Well, he said that he came in the condo that night and smelled something. "Hey, I recognize that smell!" he said, and opened the door to the garage, seeing the new car.
Don't they say nowadays that when you buy a new car, you should drive it with the windows open for awhile? And I'm sure that, somewhere out there, is a report on how that new-car smell will give you cancer. Of course, these days, it seems EVERYTHING gives you cancer. :surprise:
Hahahah, great picture! I feel more of a brief nostalgia and a sense of thankfulness that it is not MY car. That old $2,000 coupe would make a reliable, cheap driver, but the car itself would get real old, real fast. I guess the nostalgia part is simply from having had '70s "compacts" most of my childhood.
I like my 1974 Pinto wagon though. I really look forward to making a mess out of it and having some fun. I just hope it does not become homeless before I get the chance to play with it.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I found a 1973 or 1974 Dodge Dart hardtop for sale at a local used car lot. I took it for a test drive. Really didn't need it as I had a '68 Dart hardtop. At the time I was driving an '82 Cutlass Supreme that I had just put a rebuilt transmission into. I remember the salesguy asking me if I would consider it if he'd make an even trade...my Cutlass for the Dart?
In retrospect I probably should've done it, as the Cutlass's engine went belly-up about 8 months later. That Dart had a 318 under the hood. It was sad though, how in just a few years, they even managed to ruin the Dart. While it definitely had enough power, its 318 felt nowhere near as fast as the 318 in my '68. The interior was cheaper too. Now I know that some people say vinyl is vinyl, but not all vinyls are created equally. The vinyl in my '68 Dart (and the '69 I had) was definitely higher quality and more stylish. And the headliners in the older Darts was the stitched-up stuff that looked like it was not quite fabric, but not quite vinyl. This newer Dart actually had a CARDBOARD headliner!
It also had plastic covering the top edge of the doors, which is probably better than exposed metal from a safety standpoint. But it just didn't look as stylish. And by '73 the Darts had that little beak on the front and, IMO, lost any sporting pretense that they might have had. This one was just kind of a little old lady car that happened to have a V-8.
Still, sometimes I wonder if I should've bought it, and unloaded that Gutless er I mean Cutlass?
yup. The toxic fumes emanating from new car interiors has been studied quite a bit. Carmakers are taking notice. I know Volvo, for one, has been working to eliminate these from their vehicles.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I emailed the seller about that truck. On the negative side, I found out its the 4.3 in there. I mean, its not a BAD engine, but I would have MUCH preferred to find out it was the v8.
He says the rust is just starting and the rear corners of the cab are the only spots.
He has the receipts for the tranny/engine, but can't tell me when the work was done (HUH?). I had only asked because he says 30k miles ago, and I know Jasper has warranties on their stuff (at least, that's what their website says).
And the best part of it is an old MB will still look timeless...
Seems the Taurus (or Audi 5000) started the slow-aging design trend....probably because sooner or later everyone ran to aero themes and flush lights/glazing. I'm the same way as you guys...anything from the mid-late 90s on are not "old" per se, even though cars of this era must be hitting the junkyards in droves by now.
Shoot, just buy that 560SEC for $2,800 and enjoy it, and the minute the first warning light goes on, calmly pull over, park it, and remove the license plate and walk away. If you get 9 months out of it that's cheaper than car payments.
The truck has an orange/rust colored exterior and a tan interior.
And a good thing too, to help hide the rust that is sure to eat it in short order.
My grandfather had an '85 Nissan that was identical to this one save the color. It was a great, reliable truck, but my oh my how the road salt ate that metal! He was meticulous about washing it and whatnot to keep it from falling apart, but even when he sold it in 1993, it had a fair bit of surface rust. The guy who purchased it lived just up the street, and within 4-5 years it had gaping holes in the fenders and along the bottom of the cab.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
Yeah, visually, MBs have a way of aging really well. I have never paid much notice to them, but have started to see them more and more since spending time on this board. I wonder why? :sick: :P
That '69 Ford looks good, but odd the seller should not mention whether it is a 1,2, or 300 (I think Ford still used that nomenclature in 1969). When was it that Ford abandoned the x00's for the x50's?
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
Scirocco - kinda ugly color scheme. I had a silver '78 as my first car, and I loved it. I saw its twin hauling butt down some back roads a couple of weeks ago. They have become pretty rare.
Yes, he just might. At $1000, the price is rather low (he could probably get by with selling it at double that - I know it would fetch 2000 up here). Geez, these things are so brutally harsh on a person though, I should think he is happy just to part with it!
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I think the last F-word I drove was my buddy's '04 Crown Vic. However, I'm not as brand-loyal as some of y'all might think. If that pretty blue Ford with the 390 was closer, I'd be giving it a look.
What year did they quit making the really cool, old WW-II style Power Wagon? Did that style make it up through '69? I know for awhile Dodge just stuck that name on their regular pickups.
The old style power wagon was probably made...oh, I'm guessing here...through maybe 1954 or so? I remember trying to get that stuck flathead cylinder head off one, when I was young and stupid...some old timer came up, pushed a bunch of clothesline into two end spark plug holes until no more would fit in the cylinders, then hit the starter button and POP...off it came!
I think Shifty predicted that it was only worth 3-4k. That's exactly where it ended up ($3600), but the owner put the reserve higher and so the thing didn't sell. Guess he couldn't part with his baby after all.
The advice to buy a $2800 MB and then use it until the engine light went on, and then walk away, was interesting.
I think in my life I've thought of my relationships with cars as being too much like human relationships--the ideal being that you show them a certain level of loyalty and dedication and maybe they (it) will return the favor. But cars aren't really like that. Or, maybe cars are like a few people in that they can stab you in the back when you least expect it. At that point the best strategy is to move on, I suppose. I think I've tended to hold on to cars too long. It took me nearly 3 years to ditch my Jetta and nearly 3 years to ditch its replacement (a first year Focus). In retrospect, I could have avoided those experiences entirely. At least I finally wised up.
In regard to the increasing levels of technology in cars, it's making me nervous about the new car I'm going to get sometime in the next year. I'm thinking about another Accord, maybe with the navigation system. My idea is to keep the car for its natural life (c. 15 years at 10k mi a year?), but the odds that the navi will last that long seem pretty low. I'm going to get the 8 year HondaCare warranty, but that would still leave 7 years when it could bite the dust, potentially costing 3k (?), or maybe more to fix, if it is fixable at that point. Do you think I should I avoid getting navi in a car I'm planning to keep a long time? Or just go with a neat gadget and accept the consequences?
Any hardware that requires software upgrades to stay current is doomed to failure. I could use the evolution of the PC as an example, but the point would be moot I imagine. With the rate of technology, if your navigation system still worked in 15 years, it would be quite the novelty amongst those using then-current technology. It would be like someone pulling out an operational Apple 2e or Tandy TRS-80 today. :P
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I remember when I bought my '79 Newport, it had this plug-in interface in the wiring near the Lean Burn box. It was a long, wide thing kinda like those old RS-232 interfaces, or whatever they called them. I thought it was kinda cool that it was set up to be read like that. Until one of my friends said "yeah, good luck finding the equipment that can read it!" This was around 1997.
I do remember my '86 Monte Carlo had some kind of interface under the dashboard. If you took a paper clip and bent it up and stuck the ends in the right slots, the check engine light would start flashing in code. I think if you stuck it in the wrong slots it would short something out though! :surprise:
I used to use the paper clip trick to read the codes in my 89 Bonneville. I don't think you could actually short anything out by putting the clip in the wrong slot. I know I did it wrong enough times that I would have shorted something.
uh, that looks like a kit car. With no description or history given, I would guess that's what it is. I have always been very, very afraid of kit cars as you have no idea what short cuts were taken in the build until the things disassembles itself in a heap.
Yeah, funny that a guy who stroked his Camaro to 383 CID, a famouns Mopar displacement, would start whining about Mopars! :P He's probably trying to allude to the fact that the right Mopar musclecar with the right engine (usually a 426 Hemi but the right 440 might do it too) will bring obscene amounts of money. Haven't a few fools actually paid over a million bucks for certain Hemi Cuda convertibles?
On the same token though, isn't something like those Yenko Camaros worth an obscene amount of money too?
Comments
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Seeing that rust at the back corner of the cab on that truck is enough to make me want to REALLY check out the structural stuff underneath.
Heck, Possibly even a better deal.
I REALLY like that acura deal. $6k for less than 70k miles? Almost seems too good to be true. You'd have a hard time getting the honda-lovers to sell a similar Accord for that price. maybe its a misprint? does it have 168k miles? The ad does say "all highway," which is usually a statement made on high mile cars. hmmmm...
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
90s volvos out of warranty are problematic to me....it would have to be cheaper than that to tempt me. The price LOOKS good, but if you accurately factor in miles and door dings, etc., it's really close to average retail.
And 92K miles is just about the time a car starts to need a lot of things.
Problem is with these mid-level luxury cars out of warranty...if something electronic goes Ka-Blooey or you lose the transmission, you can be totally hosed on the deal. Pete's garage down the street is not going to be fixing your S80 for you anytime soon. You'll have to go back to....THEM.....
I predict that it's going to be a field day for us bottomfeeders in a few years...really nice older luxury cars with power windows that don't work or engine lights flashing or transmissions that downshift when they feel like it---are going to be bargains for those of us with the courage to take them on. I'd bite on the S80 for around $5,500---that gives me maybe $2,500 cushion to bail out if the car turns on me.
I can't. He's been MIA for quite a while now.
i don't know alot about the RLs. I was just thinking it seems low when you compare to an Accord. Is it less reliable? I know, of course, its nowhere near an accord, given different EVERYTHING. but, to alot of buyers, a honda is a honda is a honda and they seem to pay through the nose for them.
The reason the S80 price struck me as a good deal at first is because i got $5500 a few months back for my '98 S70 with 116k miles. So... i figure bigger car, bigger engine, less miles, 1 year younger ... only a couple grand more? not bad. BUT, like i said, the pre-'01s had some problems, so I've heard. The tranny being one of them. Yikes!
I predict that it's going to be a field day for us bottomfeeders in a few years
I think it may even be sooner than that. Depends on the vehicle I suppose, though. But I've seen quite a few "problematic" luxo vehicles for surprisingly cheap lately (well, maybe 'cheap' is a strong word). There's been a couple of Audi A6s of late, for instance. I also spotted an '01 540 with low miles for $22k today. Seems like alot of car for the money ... but still alot of money. What was that new, though? $55k? Then again, it IS 6 years old. That's where I'm finding my memory failing these days. I see anything '98 and up and my initial reaction is "that's young" .... then I remember we're seeing '07s out now!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Those RLs depreciate pretty steeply anyway
The 122 series cars were the "Amazon". And I agree, a 544 wagon would be very cool...but they make a Husky look common! I've seen one in person in my life.
Well, I guess it's a "hardtop" in that the top is metal and metal is hard
i'm not usually interested in the swoopback 70s cars, but the stubby look of this one is a bit more appealing to me.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
http://newjersey.craigslist.org/car/204502934.html
so i went surfing for pics on the internet (found a couple of ford firetrucks, but i have no idea if any are this particular model) .... then i ran across THIS:
http://www.bradfordtricounty.com/zoomft.aspx?FT=114
Just imagine the look on the face of the Jones's when they drive by in their whimpy and ordinary consumer-grade hummer.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
FIRE TRUCK---finally, a non-military Hummer that can justify its own existence.
based on the limited pics i'm finding on the net, this one seems to be missing the grille badge and 2 upright pieces on the bumper.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
A few years back there was a guy at work who had a 4-door Maverick. He was going out to his car after work and saw me putting oil in my '89 Gran Fury, and I guess that's how we struck up a conversation about old cars. This Maverick was in really good shape. Guy let me sit in it and it really wasn't THAT bad. The main thing I've noticed about compact Fords of the 70's is that it seems the transmission and driveshaft humps are huge and eat up a lot of room. The Granada's the same way, and so is anything based on the Fox platform.
The steering wheel was too close for comfort; I remember not liking that. I think back then something like a Maverick or Hornet or Granada was a big step down from a Nova and its clones or a Dart/Valiant. To be fair though, the Dart/Valiant and Nova were bigger cars; in fact over the years some magazines whined about Chrysler calling the Dart a compact, saying it was really midsized! And truth be told, my '68 Dart probably has more useable room inside than my '76 LeMans, despite being a foot shorter. The LeMans is wider inside, but I swear the Dart has about the same legroom both front and rear, and better headroom up front, and a much bigger, if shallower, trunk.
Some of those real basic 70's compacts still had a lot of exposed metal, a lot of plastic, and some of the cheapest vinyls around, so that might be part of the less-than-pleasant experience. And if they don't have air conditioning, the dashboards look really empty, without the extra vents. Darts and Valiants were never designed to have integrated a/c vents though, so they were at least spared that empty look.
I feel the same way. With more than 213K on my '96 Subaru Outback, I find myself saying "it is only a '96", then remembering that it is more than 11 years old now (mfg 08/05). :sick: The day is coming, and sooner than I would prefer.
I find myself starting to go through that more and more, myself. Heck, now that I think about it, this November it'll be 7 years that I've had my Intrepid! Cars just don't seem to "age" like they used to. And I'm not talking about them lasting longer. It's just that nowadays, when a new style comes out, IMO at least, it really doesn't make the previous style look aged. For instance, back when I first started driving, I had a 1980 Malibu that was 7 years old at the time. Compared to something like a Taurus it looked downright old, but even compared to something like a Celebrity or a K-car it seemed like it was from another era, being RWD, and a bit larger than your typical 1987 intermediate. By 1987 cars were starting to go for blackout trim, hiding the bumpers under a plastic fascia, and going for composite headlights.
But then by the same token, my 1980 Malibu made just about any 1973 equivalent look old, as it was more angular and sensibly sized, and upright than your typical flambuoyant, low-slung, curvy '73 model. And by 1980 hardly anybody used round headlights anymore, so that was an obvious tipoff of an old car.
But today, cars are trying to get a bit more squared-off again, and more upright. They're attempting to put more curves and creases into them at the same time though. And headlights, while still composite, are often being designed to suggest the look of an old round quad setup. These days, it's quite possible to have a 7 year old car that looks more futuristic than its modern-day counterpart!
I think another advantage that small cars of the 60's had compared to small cars of the 70's was more glass area (well, except with the Pacer) and roll-down rear windows in the 2-doors. So even if the car itself was still dirt cheap, at least you didn't feel trapped in it!
I've noticed that scent even with my '76 LeMans...it just has a certain smell to it that I associate with the 70's, or at least 70's GM. I don't get the same scent with my '79 NYer though, maybe because it has leather seats? And often when I see a 70's GM car, such as at a show or swapmeet, often I catch a whiff of that same aroma. I guess it just has something to do with the plastics and other materials they used at the time?
New cars are really bad with the outgassing though. I remember the day I bought my Intrepid. My roommate was at work all day that day, and by the time he got off I was out delivering pizzas. By the time I got home he was working his night job delivering papers. Well, he said that he came in the condo that night and smelled something. "Hey, I recognize that smell!" he said, and opened the door to the garage, seeing the new car.
Don't they say nowadays that when you buy a new car, you should drive it with the windows open for awhile? And I'm sure that, somewhere out there, is a report on how that new-car smell will give you cancer. Of course, these days, it seems EVERYTHING gives you cancer. :surprise:
I like my 1974 Pinto wagon though. I really look forward to making a mess out of it and having some fun.
In retrospect I probably should've done it, as the Cutlass's engine went belly-up about 8 months later. That Dart had a 318 under the hood. It was sad though, how in just a few years, they even managed to ruin the Dart. While it definitely had enough power, its 318 felt nowhere near as fast as the 318 in my '68. The interior was cheaper too. Now I know that some people say vinyl is vinyl, but not all vinyls are created equally. The vinyl in my '68 Dart (and the '69 I had) was definitely higher quality and more stylish. And the headliners in the older Darts was the stitched-up stuff that looked like it was not quite fabric, but not quite vinyl. This newer Dart actually had a CARDBOARD headliner!
It also had plastic covering the top edge of the doors, which is probably better than exposed metal from a safety standpoint. But it just didn't look as stylish. And by '73 the Darts had that little beak on the front and, IMO, lost any sporting pretense that they might have had. This one was just kind of a little old lady car that happened to have a V-8.
Still, sometimes I wonder if I should've bought it, and unloaded that Gutless er I mean Cutlass?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
He says the rust is just starting and the rear corners of the cab are the only spots.
He has the receipts for the tranny/engine, but can't tell me when the work was done (HUH?). I had only asked because he says 30k miles ago, and I know Jasper has warranties on their stuff (at least, that's what their website says).
There's also a Nissan listed today ... but older ... and smaller, of course. I wonder which would be the better junkyard hauler.
http://newjersey.craigslist.org/car/204592529.html
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
How the mighty have fallen (actually, it tempts me just a bit)
Seems the Taurus (or Audi 5000) started the slow-aging design trend....probably because sooner or later everyone ran to aero themes and flush lights/glazing. I'm the same way as you guys...anything from the mid-late 90s on are not "old" per se, even though cars of this era must be hitting the junkyards in droves by now.
And a good thing too, to help hide the rust that is sure to eat it in short order.
My grandfather had an '85 Nissan that was identical to this one save the color. It was a great, reliable truck, but my oh my how the road salt ate that metal! He was meticulous about washing it and whatnot to keep it from falling apart, but even when he sold it in 1993, it had a fair bit of surface rust. The guy who purchased it lived just up the street, and within 4-5 years it had gaping holes in the fenders and along the bottom of the cab.
That '69 Ford looks good, but odd the seller should not mention whether it is a 1,2, or 300 (I think Ford still used that nomenclature in 1969). When was it that Ford abandoned the x00's for the x50's?
Looks kinda cool...OK,I like the goofy side decal
Low point for mopar?
From what I can tell in a 5 second google, Ford offered x00 and x50 designations concurrently, at least F100 vs F250.
Guigaro is the designer he can't remember.
i'm trying to arrange an appointment with the guy now, but no answer on the number he gave me.
In his email, he claims "due to the great response i've received already, i may have to rethink my asking price."
he could very well rethink himself right out of a sale.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
(Personally, I think he's holding out for a nice '69 Power Wagon. :shades: )
I think the last F-word I drove was my buddy's '04 Crown Vic. However, I'm not as brand-loyal as some of y'all might think. If that pretty blue Ford with the 390 was closer, I'd be giving it a look.
What year did they quit making the really cool, old WW-II style Power Wagon? Did that style make it up through '69? I know for awhile Dodge just stuck that name on their regular pickups.
Good heavens.
-Mathias
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1,1&item=29002556408- 6&ih=019&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
I think Shifty predicted that it was only worth 3-4k. That's exactly where it ended up ($3600), but the owner put the reserve higher and so the thing didn't sell. Guess he couldn't part with his baby after all.
The advice to buy a $2800 MB and then use it until the engine light went on, and then walk away, was interesting.
I think in my life I've thought of my relationships with cars as being too much like human relationships--the ideal being that you show them a certain level of loyalty and dedication and maybe they (it) will return the favor. But cars aren't really like that. Or, maybe cars are like a few people in that they can stab you in the back when you least expect it. At that point the best strategy is to move on, I suppose. I think I've tended to hold on to cars too long. It took me nearly 3 years to ditch my Jetta and nearly 3 years to ditch its replacement (a first year Focus). In retrospect, I could have avoided those experiences entirely. At least I finally wised up.
In regard to the increasing levels of technology in cars, it's making me nervous about the new car I'm going to get sometime in the next year. I'm thinking about another Accord, maybe with the navigation system. My idea is to keep the car for its natural life (c. 15 years at 10k mi a year?), but the odds that the navi will last that long seem pretty low. I'm going to get the 8 year HondaCare warranty, but that would still leave 7 years when it could bite the dust, potentially costing 3k (?), or maybe more to fix, if it is fixable at that point. Do you think I should I avoid getting navi in a car I'm planning to keep a long time? Or just go with a neat gadget and accept the consequences?
As for the loyalty of cars, I'd like to parphrase Mark Twain:
"the primary difference between a car and a dog is that a dog won't bite you if you feed it".
I do remember my '86 Monte Carlo had some kind of interface under the dashboard. If you took a paper clip and bent it up and stuck the ends in the right slots, the check engine light would start flashing in code. I think if you stuck it in the wrong slots it would short something out though! :surprise:
It is pretty cool, but how about a pic with the tires on the ground?
" The spoke hubcaps that are on this car are sold on the web for $600 each" - uh I think you mean $6.00 each. I would love to see how this thing would take to biodiesel
Monster trucks are good investments
Something is fishy about this one
Nice car but what's his point about mopars?
Why why why did you restore a 79 F150??
Yeah, funny that a guy who stroked his Camaro to 383 CID, a famouns Mopar displacement, would start whining about Mopars! :P He's probably trying to allude to the fact that the right Mopar musclecar with the right engine (usually a 426 Hemi but the right 440 might do it too) will bring obscene amounts of money. Haven't a few fools actually paid over a million bucks for certain Hemi Cuda convertibles?
On the same token though, isn't something like those Yenko Camaros worth an obscene amount of money too?