Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
Of course, displacement still gives you torque of a sort, but these engines ran out of air pretty quickly once the revs went up, so by the time they shifted and wheezed up the next gear, a lot of time went by.
Also I betcha many of them sported economy differential gears.
The engineering at this time was very transitional. Emissions controls were mostly vacuum-mechanical, not computerized, and therefore lacked precision.
Ain't technology grand?
I can remember driving those mid-to-late '70s vehicles, choked by smog controls, still using single-barrel carbs, and fast pull-off automatic chokes. 2007 Toyota Camry owners think they have Drive-by-Wire hesitation issues, they should have driven some of those vehicles!
Very spooky feeling to be running that fast and feel the back end start lifting, along with the accompanying instability. A properly designed rear wing is a good thing!
:surprise:
The car actually felt pretty composed at that speed. I think the scariest thing about it was the mountains off in the distance. You know how, when you're driving along, big, far off things like mountains, clouds, etc, usually look fairly stationary? Well, even those tall, jagged mountains off in the distance seemed to be passing by awfully fast!
Then I started thinking about how little there would be left, of both the car and me, if I wiped out at that speed, so I slowed down.
I've had both of my Darts up to ~100. The '69, with its slant six, actually felt better at that speed, mainly because it had a fraction of the miles: 48K when I bought it, ~77K when it got totaled, versus the '68 Dart having 253K on it when I bought it. It didn't squeak, rattle, and buzz as much. And interestingly, while the '68, with its 318 V-8, would blow away the slant six in acceleration from a standstill, at, say 80 mph if you stomped it, there didn't seem to be much difference in power. I wonder if that's because the 318, with its 2-bbl, just wasn't able to suck in enough air for its displacement, while the slant six, even though it only had a 1-bbl, was better able to get enough air into its 225 cubes? Both of them also had the same rear end, a fairly mild 2.76:1.
I know I've had my '79 Newport up to around 100, as well. It wasn't all that fast from 0-60, but it seemed to like fast cruising. Its speedometer was off in a major way, too. 88 mph actual speed would register as 73 on my speedometer, and I got the ticket to prove it! And when that thing registered 73, it felt like it was barely moving. The speedo only went up to 85, but it pegged pretty easily.
My '89 Gran Fury, an ex-police car, would get up to 100 mph pretty easily too. It had a 2.94:1 rear, which is hardly extreme, but really seemed to let the engine do its thing better than those loafy ~2.4X rears that just seemed to hold the engine back like a caged tiger (or in the case of many 70's cars, a caged pussycat)
I'm sure I've had my Grandma's '85 LeSabre up to around 100, as well. It had an 85 mph speedo, but it would get there deceptively fast. It was a quiet car, and in overdrive it's effective gear ratio was like a 1.8X:1, so the the lack of a roaring engine combined with all the sound deadening lulled you into thinking you were going a lot slower than you were.
My Intrepid's made it to ~100 mph a few times, as well. Only thing though, is that if it encounters the least bit of load, like an incline, it'll downshift and it's suddenly pulling about 5,000 rpms. I know it can do that with no trouble, as the redline's about 6500, but I'm just not used to cars having to rev like that, so I don't like it!
This seems to have surived better than most of these tin cans
Lotsa parts, maybe some grey market stuff...manual...Euro bumpers...hmm
I've heard that these can take a Mopar smallblock under the hood without too much trouble.
And I never thought I'd say this, but I actually kinda like that little '76 Datsun pickup. I'm sure I'd hate it from a driving experience, but it looks like it has a pretty big bed, like it could hold more volume than most of the suppposedly midsized pickups of today! Unless it's just that the cab and front end are so tiny that it makes the bed look bigger? I kinda like the dashboard...IMO it looks faintly like the dash in my '76 Grand LeMans.
The door has an interesting little jig in it. Makes me think of the '60-61 DeSotos and Chryslers, where the crease for the fin started in the front door. It doesn't line up with the bed, though, so I wonder if the original bed has been replaced with something else, or if it's just an older design with an updated bed but carryover doors?
That truck looks great. I'd buy it in a minute if it were closer to me. That thing will run for the next 50 years. As for the dented fender, you can unbolt those in 15 minutes and buy a new one to put on.
Good find fintail, one of the best deals yet you've posted!
SAPPORO: You know sometimes a man has to take a deep breath, unscrew the license plates, chisel off the VIN, call the city refuse department, and walk away. (just kidding...do it right and haul it to the recycler).
First off, I don't like the color, and that interior has done that 70's thing where all the different materials have faded to different colors over the years, and the hard plastics are starting to turn brittle and powdery in places.
And for something that supposedly only has 45,000 miles on it, underneath the hood ain't too pretty. On the plus side though, it looks like it has an 8-track player!
'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
'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 friend of mine's father had a Chevy Luv that reminded me of that thing. He bought it new and drove it til 2003 or so. I guess it wasn't fit for driving over 60mph.
That Pontiac looks like it sat out in the sun for years.
Do people really drift these?
Not really, but it's cheaper than an AE86 Corolla.
Much agreed. When I saw it I thought, "Wow, that might actually be something worth buying at the asking price!" Good to know it can still happen....
You know sometimes a man has to take a deep breath, unscrew the license plates, chisel off the VIN, call the city refuse department, and walk away.
This reminded me of my holiday weekend trip down to my grandparents' house in Chugiak. I was supposed to help my grandfather diagnose and fix a bad oil leak on his '76 Ranger, but it was miserably cold (-15F is quite cold for that area, this time of year) and he had the carbeurator off so I could not start it to observe the leak. There is so much oil grime on it that it is otherwise impossible to tell just by casual observation. My first suspect (and still prime) is a valve cover gasket, which would be an easy one to replace. Anyway, getting back on track, I spent a few minutes looking the truck over in more detail since I had never inspected it real close and I am to "inherit" it this coming spring. :surprise:
I was disappointed to find that the cab of the truck has much more rust than I had previously supposed. It is not a lost cause, necessarily, but the rust points are tough, complicated spots to repair (most notably the lower front corners of both door jambs literally rotted through). When I get ahold of this thing, I am really going to need to scour it carefully to determine if it is worth putting any money into it (like the flat bed, licensing for highway use, etc) At least the mechanicals are in fairly good shape on it - I will probably need to rework the brakes, but the engine (390), tranny (auto), transfer case, and plow hydraulics are all in good working order.
Is that as in a '76 F-series with the Ranger package?
'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
'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
As it is, the 390 is the 3rd engine in that truck. The stock engine (a 360) threw a rod in '79 or '80, then my grandfather had a "buddy" put in a bored out 390 (making it low 4xx, though I cannot remember what he told me it supposedly was) with all sorts of performance mods on it. He had that engine about 6 months before it self-destructed, but he said the power that truck had was scary. His "buddy" was, conveniently, shipping out to another post right before the melt down and so was not able to be held accountable at all. Unfortunately, the current engine is not set up with the emissions controls originally installed on a '76 model. And, in Fairbanks the I/M testing is a requirement on all 1976 and newer model years. Figures. :mad:
Though, looking at it a bit, it does not look like the F150 and up trucks were held to the same standards as passenger vehicles, so maybe I will not have too terrible of a headache on my hands.
'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
But then, with all that work put into it, maybe it should be pretty reliable mechanically? I'm impressed at how well the interior has held up on it. I think the only thing that really bothers me is that rust spot on the right side. It's bad enough that the sheetmetal is actually starting to peel away from where it's welded underneath, so that could be getting into structural problems.
what did a new Si fetch back in '91?
'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
ON that car it is nearly perfect. Makes me think the seat was replaced.
if it was an S, I might be tempted to go over there with the $600 my wife gave me for my bday to buy a PS3.
I gotta wonder what he thinks on an alfa is "minor" though.
'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
As for that Si, it's in very good shape for the year and mileage. When you break it down he spend about $830/year in maintenance, or $69/month. If it's been maintained as good as they claim it to be then you should be able to get another 100k out of it.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
I'm thinking at least one regular might like this.
Dude, my Dad has an awesome set of tools...
Not like you can't find it in the mall parking lot!! Kinda neat, tho.
The description made me look.
I didn't buy it because the Honda salesman told me that these were rated as "sports" cars by the insurance folks.
I bought a red '91 Nissan Sentra SE instead for $10.3K; really wish I could have come up with the extra $2K needed at the time for a base SE-R.
'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
'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 think another reason might be that the cloth was an expensive option. At least, I remember looking up the options on a Benz in my 1985 Consumer Guide. M-B Tex was standard, while velour was roughly a $900 option, about the same as the leather. I'd imagine that if the price was about the same, most people would just go for the leather.
I wonder if one reason that the velour was so expensive was that back then they would have velour'ed everything, including the door panels, side bolsters on the seats, etc? Where with the leather, I'd imagine stuff like the door panels and such was still the same material as in the MB-tex cars?
"Rare" 1980 Celica Supra The pics make the car look like if has a general crappiness to it despite the claimed mileage. I highly doubt that those are leather seats or AM/FM wheels
Performance mods are a good investment on a 6 cyl Mustang
Decent looking Monte Carlo The seller appears to be forthright. Maybe you drive this now and restore it down the road?
Pro Street Camaro This ad lists both a 455 Buick and a 454 Chevy. Which is it and if it's a Buick, who would put a Buick in a Camaro?
Probably should have kept that bed until you found a new one Don't sell it like this now. Who wants to piece this back together for a 200,000 mile compact truck.
Another nice looking Monte Carlo These cars have escaped the price inflation of most other cars of the era.
Hot rodding base model Neons is a good investment
How do you post an ad with 2 extra zeros in the price I'd have to say that $300,000 is agressive pricing for an old Suburban
Call the junkyard and tell them to bring two haulers
100,000 mile 944 with power steering problem
I think the Buick 455 was also lighter than the Chevy 454, so maybe the guy was trying to be weight-conscious with this car? And I'm not positive, but I think the Buick 455 was more of a low-end torquer than the Chevy 454. But this thing is a Camaro, not an Electra or a GMC motorhome. So I dunno if some of the Buick 455's advantages are really worthwhile.
'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'm looking at my 1985 Consumer Guide right now, which has reviews of both a W123-class and a a 190 class. In both examples, velour is a $1073 option, whereas leather is only $1083. I personally prefer cloth, especially if it's a nice grade like what Mercedes would tend to offer, but it seems to me cloth would be a hard sell as an option when leather is ony 10 bucks more!
The velour (that I think isn't offered anymore) had a pattern that I believe dated back before the war, and I think died off with early W140 cars. It is very plush (but not in a velvet 70s American way), and I think is wool. I think it requires some kind of maintenance or cleaning. Those old option lists with cloth as a leather-priced option are actually meaning velour.
The heirarchy has been cloth-tex-velour-leather. Leather wasn't common on Euro-market cars til maybe the 70s, so you will see a lot of old lux cars there with velour. Adenauers and 600s with velour are not uncommon. I think it dates back to the days where the chauffeur would sit on leather, and the passengers in high-end cloth. Tex was standard even on S-class in NA into the 80s. It's a pretty decent fake leather, it fools lots of people (just look at classifieds with tex cars claiming to be leather). I've seen many junkyard MB with nice tex interiors.
And speaking of the door panels, yeah they will be MB tex...at least in older cars. Since the 70s MB has used door panels which are mainly molded hard and soft plastic with a little insert. The inserts tend to be leather, at least they have been in my W126 and in the C43. I think the top part of the door panels in old cars like fintails with leather might be leather, with a tex lower part. And in highline cars like W111 coupes and W112 300SE LWB fintails, they had kind of a molded armrest that was very elegant, and padded with leather.