Yeah i think 7k for the 240 is only if someone is using a certain substance for medicinal purposes. I would guess somewhere south of half that amount would be more likely.
Ferrari 308. The guy's about $10,000 too high on the car. Engine needs to be dropped. The drive belts alone are $100 bucks a pop just to buy them, and they all need replacement after 14 years of no service. (7 of them as I recall). So it needs belts, timing belt, service, sensors, electrical work.....yeah, $10K easy, easy. I think just the power windows alone are 8 hours labor a side. Soooo, at $125/hr, go figure.
And if that timing belt goes, you can add another $35,000 to the bill...
I'd take a roll on it for $10K, because I know Ferrari mechanics.
PS: Our dirty little secret. A MINI Cooper S would humiliate this car.
About that MB...last time I checked, fuses don't wear out when a car sits. I bet it has other issues. Seeing as 4K will buy a pristine one of those...always buy the best old MB you can afford.
You know, I have always liked the Rivieras and Toronados from that era. They were smooth, quiet cars that were just a nice size. Not too big and clumsy and pretty nimble.
Wow Isell, for some reason I thought you hated that style Riv/Toro!
I always liked them, myself. The Toro has often been criticized for that front-end, but I've always liked it, probably because, back in that era of pretentious, upright grilles, it was different.
Now I never cared for the Eldorado, because it just seemed TOO flashy and its interior was too pimpy and gaudy, but in contrast, I thought the Toro had a clean, sleek look to it, while the Riv was a nice blend of 1979 modern and neoclassic.
It's been awhile since I've been in one, but I remember them being roomy suckers inside, too. Not so much in shoulder room, but they were a more capable 4-seater than most cars of today.
And, this is a silly thing to remember, but I recall one other thing I liked about the Toro in particular. It had a temperature gauge. Standard. Something that wasn't all that common on a car back then!
The 1986 redesign, which made them look too much like a Calais for twice the price, ensured the line would die off, and since people knew it was coming, they up enough 1985's to make that one of their best, if not THE best, sales years the Toro ever had.
Who knows? Maybe if Olds kept building them this way, they would've had a much brighter future?
I kind of like that Toronado pictured above as well. Is that the famous 307 V-8 in there?
Oldsmobile did have some really nice cars before Roger and his goons started to monkey with Dr. Oldsmobile's winning formula. "This is not your father's Oldsmobile!" My Dad's Oldsmobile was a beautiful 1955 Ninety-Eight Starfire convertible! Cars like the Quad 442 and the Calais looked more like my mentally-disabled cousin's rides.
I kind of like that Toronado pictured above as well. Is that the famous 307 V-8 in there?
I can't remember for sure, but I think by 1985, the 307 was made standard on the Toro and Riv, although if you were masochistic enough, the Diesel was still available! The 4.1 V-6 was dropped after 1984, and it was rarely ordered in the Toro/Riv anyway, so they probably just made the V-8 standard for that last year.
Now, I don't think a car like the Toronado would have lasted forever, as the times and tastes did change, and personal luxury coupes ultimately became extinct. However, they could have come up with something more substantial as a replacement, something more along the lines of the Mark VII, I'm thinking, but I guess it would've had to have remained FWD in the Toronado tradition.
They did have a tendency to lose a transmission around 100,000 miles.
Oh yeah, that's right, I forgot that GM was still experimenting with their 200R-4 4-speed automatic at that time. Experimenting on the public, that is! To their credit, I think they got the bugs worked out of it quicker than Ford did with their 4-speed AOD tranny. I forget what year they finally got it more or less right, but by 1985 I think it was pretty durable. And possibly a year or two earlier.
If something like this had the overdrive tranny and it fried, would it be hard to swap in an older THM350?
I think that swap is easy. A friend of mine has an 83 Monte Carlo with a 305 that originally had a 200R4...he is gentle with his cars, he bought the car when he was 16 and the car had about 50K on it. About 6 years ago, the car had 150K on it, and the transmission finally died. He had it replaced with the 350, apparently it just dropped in.
Mechanically, that car has held up fairly well otherwise, but the paint and trim are really bad now. Of course, at 24 years old, it should be, even here. A local car from new, it has no rust anyway.
These were some of the most powerful engines ever produced by Olds, and were grossly underrated to keep the management (no olds shall have more than 1HP per 10lbs of weight) off engineering's backs. I have read reports where these engines would dyno out to 430-460 HP. Yowza!
Cool...I guess it would make sense that the drop-in would be pretty easy, since on the big cars at least, GM used THM350's before the 200R4 came out, anyway.
I've had three cars with 200 transmissions, and I guess I've been lucky, because I've never had any problem with them. The first was a 1980 Malibu coupe with the 3-speed 200 tranny. Mom bought it new, and I sold it with around 100,000 miles, and saw it a year later, with 115,000. But then, it only had the 229 V-6, which probably wasn't strong enough to strain the tranny, and that was a fairly lightweight car. Plus, back then we usually changed the transmission fluid every 12,000 miles, so that probably helped out some.
My Grandma's '85 LeSabre had the 200R4, and it was fine when we got rid of it in 2002, with 157,000 miles on it. But again, Granddad was pretty anal about servicing it. Every 12,000 miles. Once he died though, I don't know how well Grandma took care of it. And I never had it serviced during the 3 years I had it, but by then, it was a spare car, sat around a lot, and I think only got about 12-13K miles put on it in those 3 years.
My Mom's 86 Monte had that tranny too, and was still fine when I got T-boned, with roughly 192,000 miles on it. I have no idea how she and my stepdad maintained it, although I know my stepdad could be pretty anal about it.
But then on the flip side, I had an '82 Cutlass Supreme, 231 V-6, with a THM350! Odd that they'd put the beefier tranny up behind the weaker engine. :confuse: And I ended up having to have that tranny rebuilt around 62,000 miles. To be fair though, that car was 11 years old when I bought it, and it could have been neglected.
GM did a terrible thing when they decided to drop that flimsy transmission into Caprices and Monte Carlos that had V-8's. The Turbo 350's didn't give trouble but the 200's couldn't take it.
GM has made some of the best automatics and some of the very worst. From 1957-1961, Chevy offered the Turboglide as a "upgrade" to the Powerglide. These were junk.
Buick Specials from 1961-1963 used the Dual Paths that were crap and the Roto Hydramatics that Olds and Pontiac used in the early sixties were garbage too.
I wonder if the tranny issue was a design or a quality control issue? I had a '79 Cutlass Calais (RWD) with a 305 and the TH200. From day one the tranny had a slight whine when winding it out. The tranny guy in Dad's shop listened to it, told me what he thought it was (I forget) and said not to worry about it. Four years and nearly 80K later, the car still ran great, shifted the same, and had no problems. I dunno.
I think I read somewhere that in theory, the THM200 could handle up to 250-260 ft-lb of torque and up to 6,000 lb GVWR. Of course, theory and practice are two different things!
IIRC, once GM started downsizing, the heaviest GVWR cars were usually the B-body station wagons, at around 5600-5700 pounds. However, 250-260 ft-lb would limit you to something around 5 liters, like a Pontiac 301, Chevy 305, or Olds 307. I think the 350's usually put out around 270-290 ft-lb, while the 400's, 403's, and 425's were over 300.
Also, I think with the Caprice/Impala, if you got the straight-six, it still came with a 350 tranny, while the 267/305 V-8 (and later 229 V-6) had the 200 tranny. Downsized Malibus used a V-6 from the get-go, so there you were stuck with a THM200 no matter what engine you got, although I'd imagine the rare '78-79 Malibu ordered with a 350 got the 350 tranny. At least, I'd hope so!
And IIRC, Novas were spared the 200. I think Novas got the 350, no matter what engine you ordered.
I have a sales brochure for a 1979 Malibu, and one of the bragging points about this "Fresh New Slice of Apple Pie" was that the service interval on the transmission was 100,000 miles! No WONDER the things failed so frequently!
I knew a guy back then that had a transmission shop. he was one of the old timers. He could overhaul a Dynaflow or an Ultramatic in his sleep and he even had the parts in stock to do the job.
He told me he had attended a class on the new,at the time 200's. The guy conducting the class started out by saying..." Guys, you are going to make a lot of money fixing these"
It was just a light duty transmission. If a 350 and a 200 were sitting on a bench together, the diffeence was dramatic.
Of course, they didn't all break. Some actually held up?
I always thought it was weird that our 250/6 Nova had a TH350 (and a performance rear end??). I kept telling my dad it was so when some 16 year old got the car (me), they could put a 5.7l in there. Alas, he took the car away and I ended up with a 2.0l 4 cyl. Can't blame a kid for trying. At least I got a stick that way.
compare the 4L60E (1/2 ton rwd) and the 4L80E (3/4 ton rwd)
My uncle's '97 Silverado is on its 3rd 4L60E. The first one crapped out sometime around 2000 I guess. It was rebuilt (or replaced, can't remember which) at the dealer, for free, covered by an extended warranty he had purchased. I forget how many miles he had on it at the time, but I'd guess around 60-70,000.
Well, that transmission started to crap out early last year, with around 108,000 miles on it. I remember it lost reverse and two forward gears. IIRC, it would start off in first, and upshift to third, but lost 2nd and overdrive. We took it to a local transmission shop, a place that I use to service my car trannies. Years ago, they rebuilt the crappy transmission in my '79 Newport. Piece of junk died prematurely at around 230,000 miles! :P
Anyway, cost of the rebuild was about $1800. I wonder how long this one will last? He doesn't drive the truck so much these days. I think it has about 120,000 miles on it, if that, and uses an '03 Corolla as his daily commuter.
I had thought about buying his truck if he ever decided to get a new one, but that whole transmission fiasco just makes me leery. I think I'll stick it out with my old '85, with its simple, durable THM350, which in the rare event that it does die, is only around $800 or so to rebuild.
There was a run of bad gears, I think they call it a sun gear, that failed in a lot of the 4L60E. I don't know how you could tell the difference between a 'good' one and a bad one, but some of these tranny's will run way beyond 100K without a problem. But the only thing the 4L80E had in common with it's little brother was the name "transmission".
that I've heard of called the THM700R4, or something like that. It was used in the beefier RWD cars in the late 80's/early 90's, stuff like the Caprice police cars, or Broughams with the 350. How did it compare with the other transmissions?
I think it ultimately got phased out in favor of the 4L60E, which was used until the B/D body got phased out after 1996.
I recall hearing some overdrive transmission being referred to as essentially a THM400 with an overdrive gear. Maybe that was the 700R4?
Naah, the 700R4 was the TH350 with an overdrive 4th, and the 4L60E is basicaly a computer-controlled 700R4. GM renamed the TH400 to 3L80 in 1987, but didn't bother adding an overdrive 4th until it became the 4L80E.
RE: '85 Mustang - how can a dealer decidedly claim that a car like that is "unmolested?" I mean, if it was an original or 2nd owner car, I can see that claim having some merit. From a dealer, though, sounds more like a gimmick.
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 like that '72 Cutlass hardtop. You don't don't see too many of the 4-door hardtops around anymore, but then in midsized cars, I don't think the 4-door hardtop was very popular, anyway.
There is a certain clunkiness in the style, though. It's obvious the car was designed with the coupe in mind, while the sedans were kind of an afterthought. It seems like it's harder with smaller cars to do a good looking 4-door hardtop, although not impossible, as GM showed with the beautiful 2nd gen Corvair.
That '72 isn't the type of car that I'd buy and restore to showroom condition, but I wouldn't mind buying it, driving it around, and just having fun with it.
I think that '64 Catalina is neat. I love that color...even if it needs to be repainted! Funny how some colors, once they start to deteriorate, just look awful and make the car look junky, but I think that aqua just seems to pick up a patina, and some extra character. But then, I guess the line between art and junk is a fine one.
Intersting paint job on that Valiant. I'd like to see the other side to see how bad the body damage is. Also, the guy mentions "Super Six". There was a performance package back in the early years for the slant six, called a Hyper-Pak, which added a 4-bbl carb. You could get it on the tiny 170 slant six, where it boosted gross hp from 101 to 148, or on the larger 225, where it bumped it from 145 to 197. But a Super Six is just a '77-79 slant six with a 2-bbl carb and a slightly different cam to broaden the torque curve, bumping the net hp from 100 to 110.
'71 Hornet & '71 Road Runner -- both sellers are asking very top dollar. Looks like they 've been reading the price guides. These cars had better be truly flawless at those prices----but at least they are somewhat grounded in reality. Why anyone would pay $17.5K for a Hornet is another question. At least the Roadrunner kinda sorta looks like a Mopar muscle car.
...left the light truck game way too early. They could've really cleaned up in the 1990s with the pickup and SUV boom. They had one of the earliest SUVs in the Scout and their own version of the Suburban called the Travelall.
be hard to find parts for? My '85 Silverado developed an oil leak from hell, so I haven't been driving it much. Just waiting until I can get it into the shop and have my mechanic look at it. When the Silverado gets to the point that something major goes wrong and it's not worth fixing, I've thought about getting an older truck, like maybe a late 60's Chevy or GMC.
I like that International, though. Although if I had something like that, I think I'd build up the sides of that wooden bed so it's more level.
Would something like that International be hard to find parts for?
Not so much hard, just more obscure. A good auto parts store with an old guy who's been around a while should be able to handle it. Tricky thing about IH is they didn't always do things the same way that Chevy or Ford did.
I don't see why, especially with the right gearing. My '89 Gran Fury would do 125 or so, and that was just with a 175 hp 318-4bbl. Don't take my word for it, because I never got mine up that fast. The Michigan State police did, though. :P
Of course, a 1989 car is far more efficient and aerodynamic than those 60s barges, but still 126 mph requires quite a bit of horsepower. Also such a speed in an '89 Gran Fury would be mighty scary.
Of course, a 1989 car is far more efficient and aerodynamic than those 60s barges, but still 126 mph requires quite a bit of horsepower. Also such a speed in an '89 Gran Fury would be mighty scary.
Yeah, but technically, a 1989 Gran Fury isn't a 1989 car. It's essentially a 1976 body with a 1964 V-8 and a 1960 transmission, and a GM carburetor that's about three days older than God!
Oh yeah, it turns out I was a bit off with the 1989 Gran Fury's top speed. I just pulled out my police car book, and it looks like the '89 Gran Fury topped out at 120.2 mph in the MSP test, while the identical Diplomat hit 119.1.
I looked in my old car book, and it looks like the last year for the 383 was 1971. That year it had either 275 hp or 300. I'm guessing that was 2-bbl/4-bbl? For some reason I was thinking there was still a fairly high-output 383 around that timeframe, but I guess by 1971 you really needed to get the 440.
Oh, my police car book does list a 1978 Dodge Monaco, with a 255 hp 440-4bbl, topping out at 133 mph. But when you figure that's net hp and the 1971 numbers were gross, that 1978 440 was more powerful than any 1971 383!
A lot of the published numbers you see are theoretical, calculated according to gearing of the car (at so many rpm, with this gear ratio, we will hit a speed of X).
But you can't argue with a radar gun, if that's what clocked 120 mph. Bet it took a long time, though.
1970 Roadrunner with 383, ram air, 4spd, and I don't remember the gearing, would run just under 140. And was scary as hell doing it. The front end would tend to lift at anything over 130 or so. :surprise:
Comments
And if that timing belt goes, you can add another $35,000 to the bill...
I'd take a roll on it for $10K, because I know Ferrari mechanics.
PS: Our dirty little secret. A MINI Cooper S would humiliate this car.
Wow Isell, for some reason I thought you hated that style Riv/Toro!
I always liked them, myself. The Toro has often been criticized for that front-end, but I've always liked it, probably because, back in that era of pretentious, upright grilles, it was different.
Now I never cared for the Eldorado, because it just seemed TOO flashy and its interior was too pimpy and gaudy, but in contrast, I thought the Toro had a clean, sleek look to it, while the Riv was a nice blend of 1979 modern and neoclassic.
It's been awhile since I've been in one, but I remember them being roomy suckers inside, too. Not so much in shoulder room, but they were a more capable 4-seater than most cars of today.
And, this is a silly thing to remember, but I recall one other thing I liked about the Toro in particular. It had a temperature gauge. Standard. Something that wasn't all that common on a car back then!
The 1986 redesign, which made them look too much like a Calais for twice the price, ensured the line would die off, and since people knew it was coming, they up enough 1985's to make that one of their best, if not THE best, sales years the Toro ever had.
Who knows? Maybe if Olds kept building them this way, they would've had a much brighter future?
Oldsmobile did have some really nice cars before Roger and his goons started to monkey with Dr. Oldsmobile's winning formula. "This is not your father's Oldsmobile!" My Dad's Oldsmobile was a beautiful 1955 Ninety-Eight Starfire convertible! Cars like the Quad 442 and the Calais looked more like my mentally-disabled cousin's rides.
I can't remember for sure, but I think by 1985, the 307 was made standard on the Toro and Riv, although if you were masochistic enough, the Diesel was still available! The 4.1 V-6 was dropped after 1984, and it was rarely ordered in the Toro/Riv anyway, so they probably just made the V-8 standard for that last year.
Now, I don't think a car like the Toronado would have lasted forever, as the times and tastes did change, and personal luxury coupes ultimately became extinct. However, they could have come up with something more substantial as a replacement, something more along the lines of the Mark VII, I'm thinking, but I guess it would've had to have remained FWD in the Toronado tradition.
Hell, in a straight line, most new family sedans would embarass it. And even an SUV or 2.
'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
Heck, if it was closer, and I was in need of a car, I'd snatch it up myself!
They did have a tendency to lose a transmission around 100,000 miles.
Oh yeah, that's right, I forgot that GM was still experimenting with their 200R-4 4-speed automatic at that time. Experimenting on the public, that is! To their credit, I think they got the bugs worked out of it quicker than Ford did with their 4-speed AOD tranny. I forget what year they finally got it more or less right, but by 1985 I think it was pretty durable. And possibly a year or two earlier.
If something like this had the overdrive tranny and it fried, would it be hard to swap in an older THM350?
Mechanically, that car has held up fairly well otherwise, but the paint and trim are really bad now. Of course, at 24 years old, it should be, even here. A local car from new, it has no rust anyway.
Displacement/Type 455ci 4bbl V8 455ci 4bbl V8
Horsepower @ RPM 375 @ 4600 400 @ 4800
Torque @ RPM 510 @ 3000 500 @ 3200
These were some of the most powerful engines ever produced by Olds, and were grossly underrated to keep the management (no olds shall have more than 1HP per 10lbs of weight) off engineering's backs. I have read reports where these engines would dyno out to 430-460 HP. Yowza!
I've had three cars with 200 transmissions, and I guess I've been lucky, because I've never had any problem with them. The first was a 1980 Malibu coupe with the 3-speed 200 tranny. Mom bought it new, and I sold it with around 100,000 miles, and saw it a year later, with 115,000. But then, it only had the 229 V-6, which probably wasn't strong enough to strain the tranny, and that was a fairly lightweight car. Plus, back then we usually changed the transmission fluid every 12,000 miles, so that probably helped out some.
My Grandma's '85 LeSabre had the 200R4, and it was fine when we got rid of it in 2002, with 157,000 miles on it. But again, Granddad was pretty anal about servicing it. Every 12,000 miles. Once he died though, I don't know how well Grandma took care of it. And I never had it serviced during the 3 years I had it, but by then, it was a spare car, sat around a lot, and I think only got about 12-13K miles put on it in those 3 years.
My Mom's 86 Monte had that tranny too, and was still fine when I got T-boned, with roughly 192,000 miles on it. I have no idea how she and my stepdad maintained it, although I know my stepdad could be pretty anal about it.
But then on the flip side, I had an '82 Cutlass Supreme, 231 V-6, with a THM350! Odd that they'd put the beefier tranny up behind the weaker engine. :confuse: And I ended up having to have that tranny rebuilt around 62,000 miles. To be fair though, that car was 11 years old when I bought it, and it could have been neglected.
GM has made some of the best automatics and some of the very worst. From 1957-1961, Chevy offered the Turboglide as a "upgrade" to the Powerglide. These were junk.
Buick Specials from 1961-1963 used the Dual Paths that were crap and the Roto Hydramatics that Olds and Pontiac used in the early sixties were garbage too.
In 1965, they made up for it with the Turbo 400.
IIRC, once GM started downsizing, the heaviest GVWR cars were usually the B-body station wagons, at around 5600-5700 pounds. However, 250-260 ft-lb would limit you to something around 5 liters, like a Pontiac 301, Chevy 305, or Olds 307. I think the 350's usually put out around 270-290 ft-lb, while the 400's, 403's, and 425's were over 300.
Also, I think with the Caprice/Impala, if you got the straight-six, it still came with a 350 tranny, while the 267/305 V-8 (and later 229 V-6) had the 200 tranny. Downsized Malibus used a V-6 from the get-go, so there you were stuck with a THM200 no matter what engine you got, although I'd imagine the rare '78-79 Malibu ordered with a 350 got the 350 tranny. At least, I'd hope so!
And IIRC, Novas were spared the 200. I think Novas got the 350, no matter what engine you ordered.
I have a sales brochure for a 1979 Malibu, and one of the bragging points about this "Fresh New Slice of Apple Pie" was that the service interval on the transmission was 100,000 miles! No WONDER the things failed so frequently!
He told me he had attended a class on the new,at the time 200's. The guy conducting the class started out by saying..." Guys, you are going to make a lot of money fixing these"
It was just a light duty transmission. If a 350 and a 200 were sitting on a bench together, the diffeence was dramatic.
Of course, they didn't all break. Some actually held up?
Alas, he took the car away and I ended up with a 2.0l 4 cyl. Can't blame a kid for trying. At least I got a stick that way.
wow.
My uncle's '97 Silverado is on its 3rd 4L60E. The first one crapped out sometime around 2000 I guess. It was rebuilt (or replaced, can't remember which) at the dealer, for free, covered by an extended warranty he had purchased. I forget how many miles he had on it at the time, but I'd guess around 60-70,000.
Well, that transmission started to crap out early last year, with around 108,000 miles on it. I remember it lost reverse and two forward gears. IIRC, it would start off in first, and upshift to third, but lost 2nd and overdrive. We took it to a local transmission shop, a place that I use to service my car trannies. Years ago, they rebuilt the crappy transmission in my '79 Newport. Piece of junk died prematurely at around 230,000 miles! :P
Anyway, cost of the rebuild was about $1800. I wonder how long this one will last? He doesn't drive the truck so much these days. I think it has about 120,000 miles on it, if that, and uses an '03 Corolla as his daily commuter.
I had thought about buying his truck if he ever decided to get a new one, but that whole transmission fiasco just makes me leery. I think I'll stick it out with my old '85, with its simple, durable THM350, which in the rare event that it does die, is only around $800 or so to rebuild.
I think it ultimately got phased out in favor of the 4L60E, which was used until the B/D body got phased out after 1996.
I recall hearing some overdrive transmission being referred to as essentially a THM400 with an overdrive gear. Maybe that was the 700R4?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo-Hydramatic
L-R: 4L80E, 700R4, TH400
andre - a lot of aqua
andre - i dare you!
lemko - this is an olds!
shifty - all that and a beautiful color too
you don't see these every day
wow! 2 at the same address
i like this one
'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
There is a certain clunkiness in the style, though. It's obvious the car was designed with the coupe in mind, while the sedans were kind of an afterthought. It seems like it's harder with smaller cars to do a good looking 4-door hardtop, although not impossible, as GM showed with the beautiful 2nd gen Corvair.
That '72 isn't the type of car that I'd buy and restore to showroom condition, but I wouldn't mind buying it, driving it around, and just having fun with it.
Intersting paint job on that Valiant. I'd like to see the other side to see how bad the body damage is. Also, the guy mentions "Super Six". There was a performance package back in the early years for the slant six, called a Hyper-Pak, which added a 4-bbl carb. You could get it on the tiny 170 slant six, where it boosted gross hp from 101 to 148, or on the larger 225, where it bumped it from 145 to 197. But a Super Six is just a '77-79 slant six with a 2-bbl carb and a slightly different cam to broaden the torque curve, bumping the net hp from 100 to 110.
3 grand for that bucket of crud :confuse:
the depreciation on this must be horrifying
3500 rpm redline. LOL
you need a bit more detail at that price, even for a MkIV
box of carburetor parts, with free car!
there is just SO much wrong with that interior
ugly color, ugly wheels, wrong transmission
back when trucks were trucks
I like that International, though. Although if I had something like that, I think I'd build up the sides of that wooden bed so it's more level.
I like the Caddy STS. always thought thy're very nice looking.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
Not so much hard, just more obscure. A good auto parts store with an old guy who's been around a while should be able to handle it. Tricky thing about IH is they didn't always do things the same way that Chevy or Ford did.
FWIW, gas was 25 cents per gallon. :surprise:
I don't see why, especially with the right gearing. My '89 Gran Fury would do 125 or so, and that was just with a 175 hp 318-4bbl. Don't take my word for it, because I never got mine up that fast. The Michigan State police did, though. :P
Yeah, but technically, a 1989 Gran Fury isn't a 1989 car. It's essentially a 1976 body with a 1964 V-8 and a 1960 transmission, and a GM carburetor that's about three days older than God!
Oh yeah, it turns out I was a bit off with the 1989 Gran Fury's top speed. I just pulled out my police car book, and it looks like the '89 Gran Fury topped out at 120.2 mph in the MSP test, while the identical Diplomat hit 119.1.
I looked in my old car book, and it looks like the last year for the 383 was 1971. That year it had either 275 hp or 300. I'm guessing that was 2-bbl/4-bbl? For some reason I was thinking there was still a fairly high-output 383 around that timeframe, but I guess by 1971 you really needed to get the 440.
Oh, my police car book does list a 1978 Dodge Monaco, with a 255 hp 440-4bbl, topping out at 133 mph. But when you figure that's net hp and the 1971 numbers were gross, that 1978 440 was more powerful than any 1971 383!
But you can't argue with a radar gun, if that's what clocked 120 mph. Bet it took a long time, though.