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

texases

Yes, it can be a problem, but not because of the oil-the pump runs directly off the camshaft, so it's pumping as long as the engine's turning over. The problem is the gas that's dumped into the cylinders washing down the walls while the engine's off.

210delray

I like that '61 LeSabre as well. GM really cleaned up and toned down the garishness of its styling with all of its 61s (even the Cadillac was more dignified). I especially like that little reverse curve at the base of the A-pillars. Why can't carmakers do something neat like that now?

Today, we have all of the following, which I cannot stand:
1. Huge "gaping maw" grilles
2. Gigantic emblems and nameplates
3. Plastichrome (used for said grilles and emblems)
4. Fake "air vents" on the front fenders (Buick gets a pass for the "ventiports" though)
5. Raised beltlines with gunslit side windows

texases

How many of your list does this one qualify?

fintail

I too like the curve of the A-pillar...even when I was a kid noticing old cars, that detail stood out, it is kind of elegant in its own way. It also matches well with the 'bubbletop' styling of those models.

Car stylists are as lemminglike as ever. Not much independent thought anymore, everything has to be similar.

fintail

Gaping maw of a mouth and a huge emblem, anyway.

I also hate huge headlight assemblies, and lights angled "aggressive" to make it look like the car is glaring. Sorry, a glaring SUV reminds me of an annoyed refrigerator, not scary.

qbrozen

What would a #1 condition '65 Corvair convertible run?

I know ... not much to go on. But a buddy of mine called me last night to talk about one. He seems to think its a $14k car. I think that's WAAAYYY over reality. I'm thinking $8k-$10k, depending. $10k being the best in the world.

I really don't have a clue. Maybe he's right. But the way I usually look at these things is ... "for $14k, there are a ton of other better cars out there."

andre1969

Well I guess the first question would be if it's really a #1. I think a #1 car tends to be a mythical beast, rarely ever seen. Most cars that people claim are #1 are really a #2, sometimes lower.

I'd imagine that something like a fully-optioned Corvair Monza convertible might fetch a pretty price. And yeah, I agree, there are a ton of better cars out there. Unless your heart's set on a Corvair.

Actually, that reminds me of the time I bought my '67 Catalina convertible, back in 1994. I saw it for sale at a used car lot north of Baltimore. They wanted something like $3995 for it. They also had a Corvair convertible, red with a black top, of 1965 vintage. It had dents on the corners, and overall looked to be in worse shape than the Catalina. They wanted $4995 for it! They also had a 1975 Grand Ville convertible, in a medium metallic blue. It was in nice shape. Came from Canada they told me, and didn't have a/c. They wanted either $5495 or $5995 for it, can't remember which now. They also had a midnight blue '69-70 Caddy convertible, in nice shape, that they wanted around $7000 for.

I've always had a thing for the '67 Catalina, so this one really seemed to be calling me. And with the asking price being less than any of the other cars, it just seemed too good to be true. So later that week, I had it. I guess that comparatively low price could have been an indication of hidden problems. And the car hasn't been perfect. But who's to say any of those others would have been, either?

british_rover

Ughh those GLs are nasty.

They handle much better at high speed then any vehicle that size has any right too but their low speed handling is atrocious.

I don't know how Mercedes managed to do that but they feel very clumsy below about 35 mph.

qbrozen

Most cars that people claim are #1 are really a #2, sometimes lower.

That's very true. Without seeing it myself, there's no way I'll know for sure.

This guy seems to have weird car deals fall into his lap all the time. He's a paving/patio contractor and I guess as soon as people learn he's a car/bike guy, they try to offer their vehicles in exchange for work. About a month ago was a Harley offer, this time its the Corvair.

He also came across an '00 Land Cruiser with 60k miles at a customer's house 2 days ago. They said they would take $15k for it, so he called me to see if I'm interested. Sure, I'm interested, but I can't afford to do it right now.

texases

I don't know how Mercedes managed to do that but they feel very clumsy below about 35 mph.


I guess having the star in the grill no longer qualifies an MB as 'sporty'...

texases

re: '65 Corvair convertible-
Excluding the turbos, the most any Corvair convertible's been bid to on Ebay is $8000 (one), with most of the clean ones not much over $6,000. One turbo reached $15,000, that was the absolute max.

qbrozen

whoa! i didn't even know they made a turbo. Was that still an air-cooled car??

texases

Yep -- GM was very brave, really a good, sporty car, so I understand, 'bleeding edge' technology, it seems.

wevk

Many years ago I hang around with a fellow who owned an Austin Healey Sprite. This thing could diesel on for , maybe, 10 minuits causing it to loudly bang, flap and rock around. For fun we would park it downtown walk away and from a distance watch the puzzled expressions of those walking past it.

WVK

Mr_Shiftright

Yeah it was a turbo but in name only. It blew through a carburator that was, I believe in line AFTER the carb. At any rate, it didn't work except at some extremely high rpm. It was cludged together and not very well thought-out.

I would say $10,000 is all the money in the world for a well-restored '65 Corvair convertible. The Corvair you really want is a a '65 Fitch Corvair coupe.

wevk

I once had a 1964 Monza Spyder. I could out drag a TR4 but not by much. As I recall they used a relatively large turbo with a small carb The small carb would limit boost @ high RPM while the large turbo would limit boost in the low to midrange. This way they could get away without a wastegate (I think).

WVK

Mr_Shiftright

I think that's right. The boost was very low. It was a primitive system to say the least.

qbrozen

ok. so you and i are in agreement, then. I didn't think I was crazy, but he had me doubting myself. Then again, I guess I should have known when he said the $15k Land Cruiser is a $25k rig.

Mr_Shiftright

Yeah, it's a "second tier" collectible at best with not much hope of greater appreciation. For that kind of money, you can buy a very flashy full-size convertible with power, styling and all the gadgets....or the world's best MGB or TR6 or 450SL/560SL.

So $15K seems borderline foolish for such a car, given what else you can buy for the same money. You'd have to be a certified Corvair nut, and then at car shows you'd have to hang out with other Corvair nuts---not a pretty thought.

It's like joining a cult.

texases

Too bad it sounds like this guy's trading his services on the basis of these nutty values.

andre1969

According to Wikipedia, it looks like the Corvair's hp peaked at 180. So by net hp standards, figure maybe 130-135? Still, I guess that light weight, coupled with a 4-speed, would make for a pretty quick car?

texases

It was a primitive system to say the least.
Very true, but what '60s turbo wasn't? Porsche did theirs in '74, Saab waited until '78.

andre1969

were those little 215 turbo V-8's that were offered in the early Special/F-85 cars? I did find a 0-60 time for the Corvair Corsa with the 140 hp turbo engine. 11 seconds. 1/4 mile in 18 seconds @ 80 mph. Pretty respectable given the era, engine, etc.

Mr_Shiftright

You'd have to burn up a Corvair clutch to get those kinds of times I think. There was a lot of turbo lag and the gearshift was awful.

Maybe with the automatic and a gas/brake launch, you could get close to 11 seconds...maybe.

Yes, Saab was the first to have a really efficient turbo in a mass-production passenger sedan.

The Corvair is one of those cars that is prettier in the coupe I think...even the 4-door hardtop is very attractive.

But alas, driving a Corvair today is a big letdown. It feels like a VW 411 with beachballs for a suspension.

qbrozen

well, he hasn't made a trade yet. He's always tempted, and says if it wasn't for the impending wedding he has to pay for, he'd do it. Hopefully the new wife can keep him under control.

Mr_Shiftright

Has he driven it? That might change his mind.

jlflemmons

Yes, they were called Jetfire. Ran pretty good, and used water/alcohol injection to help with pre-detonation.

Here is a link to some information. I actually got to ride in one of these as a little kid. The turbo made a really cool sound.

1963 Jetfire

bumpy

This site claims 0-60 in 8.5 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 16.5 @ 80 mph, which sounds nice enough until you realize that a stock '90 CRX Si is just as quick.

Here's a nice cutaway view of the engine.

texases

No wonder it needed water/alcohol injection - over 10:1 compression ratio :surprise:

jlflemmons

Dad was an Olds service manager back then. I beleve the life expectancy of the turbo was ~20K miles, 40K if you really babied it with extended cool down and frequrent oil changes.

andre1969

This site claims 0-60 in 8.5 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 16.5 80 mph, which sounds nice enough until you realize that a stock '90 CRX Si is just as quick.


yeah, but you have to take these things in perspective, considering the time they were built, the limitations of the transmissions, tire technology, etc. And that whatever hp they quoted back then, when adjusted for todays's net standards, is roughly 75% at best. Plus, back then you still had plenty of cars that would easily take a half-minute to get to 60.

Did those little F-85's and their ilk really use 3-speed automatics? I was under the impression that they had a 3-on-the-tree, 2-speed automatic, and mayba 4-speed stick.

bumpy

Did those little F-85's and their ilk really use 3-speed automatics?

Were those the cars that the "slim jim" was designed for?

Never mind. It seems that Olds used a 3-speed Hydramatic of some sort in 1961-2.

http://www.442.com/oldsfaq/oftrn.htm

Mr_Shiftright

And I doubt it had an intercooler either (gulp).

texases

Hmmm - 1963 Olds turbo: 10.3:1
2007 Porshe turbo: 9.4:1
Can you spell g-r-e-n-a-d-e??

bumpy

Most cars with turbochargers weren't intercooled before the mid-80s or so, and a decent majority of the turbodiesels not sold here still don't have them.

jlflemmons

All I remember is riding down a country road with my dad on a cool fall evening, the turbo winding up and an exhaust note like I had never heard before. The little Jetfire was smaller than most of the cars I had ridden in, and never had I felt such a rush of acceleration and the excitment of riding in a special car.

A long time ago, but the memories are still good.

andre1969

I don't think the Buick started using them until around 1985 or 1986. IIRC, that was one thing that differentiated the Regal T-type from the Regal Grand National, and accounted for a 10 hp boost.

Mr_Shiftright

Diesels don't need them, the blocks are built double-strong to withstand the heat of combustion to begin with.

No intercooler? That's just asking for trouble. But what did they know? I think turbo combat planes of WWII had intercoolers, although I do recall the B-29 had horrible problems with exploding engines.

bumpy

The boost on those early turbo cars was pretty low and the compression ratios were dialed down far enough to get away with it. They started putting top-mount ICs on them to raise the boost and learned about heat soak, went to corner-mounts in the late '80s, then finally got their ish together with full front-mounts in the '90s.

Mr_Shiftright

That's true, and I think the diesels ran especially low boost, so not as much need for intercooling.

stevedebi

"No intercooler? That's just asking for trouble. But what did they know? I think turbo combat planes of WWII had intercoolers, although I do recall the B-29 had horrible problems with exploding engines."

Yup, nothing like a supercharged and turbocharged liquid cooled engine. The B-29 had the highest HP-to-weight ratio in history. The ironic thing is that the Russians impounded many of them at Vladivistok and promptly copied them. At which point they found out the engines didn't work.

Gen Lemay called the B-29 "the buggiest d--- airplane to ever come down the pike".

wevk

http://boards.ign.com/cars_lobby/b5126/150879150/p1/?6

WVK

texases

B-29:
Here's the engine (2-row radial, air cooled):

They found a B-29 on Greenland a few years ago, restored it, as they were taxying for takeoff the portable generator in back tipped over, caught fire, burned up the plane :surprise: :sick:

british_rover

Doh I remember when they found those planes. There were a couple of P38s buried in the ice too. Did the P38s make it out?

texases

At least one ('Glacier Girl') made it out in pieces and was restored, it was buried under the ice. You can read about the recovery and restoration here:
P38 recovery

oregonboy

increasingly rare, forget the "unique wheels", where are the originals?

Not as quirky as an Isetta or Messerchmitt

It's a 2-liter, but that color just looks wrong

now, THIS is the green (yellow?) that I remember

it looks cool, but aren't these trouble?

"Excelent sample of the most desireable year"

stevedebi

"Here's the engine (2-row radial, air cooled): "

Drat, I could have sworn it was water cooled.

stevedebi

"At least one ('Glacier Girl') made it out in pieces and was restored, it was buried under the ice. You can read about the recovery and restoration here:"

Interesting. My uncle flew B-17s escorting P-38s about a week later, but he made it across except for weather delays (on the ground, fortunately).

W.S. Arnett War Diary

fortee9er

Hi Mr Shiftright and fellow car nuts,
I recently came across an add for an unusual car - a 1969 MGC GT with an auto transmission no less. I corresponded with the seller and he sent me some pictures and more history: There is rust in the sills and some perforation in one door, the paint (not original) is very thick and there is some bubling in one spot. The body looks straight and the interior complete, the engine compartment looks clean also. The car has not been run in 5+ years and seller "thinks it will run" with a fresh battery and gas.
How much do you think it is worth? I have my own ideas but I am a cheapskate.
Thanks
Jorge

jlflemmons

Thick paint hides a lot of damage and bondo. Auto Tranny in a '69?

I'm not sure this one is a good deal for free.