By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
It is not just a money pit.
It is not just a neutron star money pit.
Or even a blackhole
It is one of those supermassive blackholes that swallows whole galaxies for breakfast and then asks when lunch and dinner will be served.
The 8 series is the automotive equivalent of a Venus Fly Trap.
Well, it did have a worn gear in the convertible top motor, which somehow turned into an $850 repair.
An 8-series couldn't be any worse than a 928, right?
All of it.
Add up the repair bills.
All of them.
Then get down on your knees, thank your personal icons, and buy an Acura.
Pricey fins, but I do know of them going for this much - in Europe of course
I do recall that last time I had my 3-series at the dealer, there was some old guy dressed up like Judge Smails in Caddyshack throwing a fit because his new 7-series had some problem for which they didn't yet have a fix.
Maybe I'll just spend my $12K on a C4 'Vette or a twin turbo Z. Or maybe a mid '90s Miata and an early '80s 928.
And it wouldn't cost the GDP of Luxembourg to do it.
You can't say that about old Italian, German or British cars.
Yeah, it's funny how the very thing that the cars get slammed for, when they're new, ends up becoming an asset as they age! That crudeness and simplicity pays off, eventually.
Of course, there are some domestic cars that are NOT easy to restore or fix, like the big Cadillacs or Lincolns.
Still, it made the 4-5 mile round trip with no fuss, whatsoever! :P A contractor dude in a fairly new-ish Chevy Astro commented on it, and thought it was cool, although he didn't know what it was...asked me if it was a Lincoln!
As for old Cadillacs and Lincolns, I can understand some of the more complex Lincolns, like those complex 4-door convertibles with the top that totally stowed away under the boot, and maybe some of the fuel-injected Cadillacs of the 70's. And maybe those FWD Eldorados were a bit more complex than your typical RWD car. But otherwise, what is it, exactly, that would make, say, a 1968 Fleetwood Sixty Special more complicated to work on than a 1968 Impala? I could see the relative scarcity of parts for the Cadillac being a problem, and all the standard power stuff just waiting to fail.
Or, to use a newer example, is there really anything about my buddy's 1978 Mark V that would make it more complicated to work on than a fully decked out LTD-II?
But, even though it can get cranky, I admire the simplicity of my New Yorker. I'm sure I'll have it long after my Intrepid had been junked and cubed. My Intrepid, which just had its check engine light come on today, for the first time. :sick: I have a baaaad feeling about this!
Old Cadillacs -- yes, the lack of aftermarket parts is one factor, also the expensive and extensive electrical gadgetry (auto headlight dimmers, wonder bar radios, power antennas. Repairing these is costly. And cosmetic restoration is equally expensive, with all that chrome and leather. They simply aren't reproducing much of the interior or trimwork, so you're stuck there as well as on mechanicals.
Price is about what average ones bring anymore. Mint ones bring a little more, beaters can be had for a grand. But as Shifty says, there's no upside...too common, big, and 4-door to be collectible, repairs approach prices on a new car but with no resale value, and they aren't really a status symbol anymore. Like all old MB sedans, a handful will be cherished by enthusiasts, the rest will slowly die.
Even within the popular GM cars, Fords and Mopars you have to pick your poison carefully. A Cougar will be a lot more hassle than a Mustang, a 4-4-2 more than a GTO.
Then again, I was always sweet on the 442.
Heck, for all the bad-mouthing '80s GM cars get, I have two that are darn near bulletproof. Couldn't say that about a late '80s BMW 750i! In fact, I'm taking my Park Avenue to southern Delaware tomorrow.
Unfortunately, both cars met sad demises. The power steering pump went out on the Caddy. Instead of getting it fixed, the son thought it would be cool to drive it without the power assist, like it was some macho thing. As a result, that put more strain on other components of the steering, and within a few months the car was shot. As for the Continental, the air suspension went bad, and I think the guy got quoted something like $800 per corner...or roughly $3200 total to repair! Needless to say, both of them got junked. I forget what the guy bought after that, as he transferred to another job shortly after he decided to junk the Continental.
Yeah, Lemko, I know you. If I ever want to bankrupt you, I'll give you one of my '79 New Yorkers for Christmas! :P
80's GM cars:---I think they run okay. The comments were directed mostly at the build quality. But then, they were relatively inexpensive cars for the money, for the most part, so you can't compare them to expensive imports. They're just a bit, if you excuse the expression, cheesy in how they are made, and this has caused a general lack of interest in all but a few types.
So it seems like most of the issue with a lot of these cars is limited aftermarket for specific trim and body parts and such. But if you just have some old heap of a Cutlass Sedan, would it be any harder to keep running, than, say, an old heap of a Chevelle sedan? I'm not talking about trying to restore it to perfection, but just to keep it running. So like if you have suspension problems, or need a tranny rebuild, or rebuilding a carb?
As for 80's cars, I think one problem with them, that stems from the 70's, is simply that they started using more plastic in them...both hard and soft. Plus thicker padding, plusher fabrics, etc. And all that stuff just doesn't hold up in the long run as well as good old fashioned metal. For example, the door panel on my '68 Dart is mostly just painted metal. It has a vinyl insert, which is just a thin piece of vinyl with a little bit of fuzz behind it for padding, adhered to a backing that's sort of halfway between cardboard and waferboard. That insert is held in place by a chrome strip at the top that it slides into, and pop-in clips around the side. Then the armrest, a little rubbery padded foam thing, is bolted to a piece of plastic, which is then bolted to the door itself. The top 4 inches or so, and the bottom 3 inches, or so, are good old fashioned exposed metal.
Now, contrast this to my '76 Grand LeMans. The top half of the door panel is thickly padded vinyl, which entirely covers the top of the door, curving all the way to the window. It's all nice and pretty, when it's new. But over time, the sun will fade the top part, and it'll get brittle with age. It also appears to be held on by clipping at the top, and then two screws at the bottom. The lower part of the door panel is a giant plastic slab, with carpeting glued on at the bottom. This big plastic slab just clips onto the door itself. The armrest itself is more integrated than on the Dart, being a padded section that bolts down onto a molded part of the plastic. However, it's not bolted directly to the metal of the door frame, so when you pull the door closed, it's just those little clips that are holding the whole thing to the door itself.
It also seems to me that the plastics they used on cars in the 70's just didn't hold up as well as it did in the 60's. It would fade, get chalky and brittle, and start to fall apart. I wonder though, if this is because of cheaper plastics, or the fact that cars started getting more airtight in the 70's, which would allow the interior to heat up more? Also, windows became much larger, and more curved, in the 70's, which would let in more of the sun's rays.
My Dart's windows are fairly upright, with the exception of the large, concave rear window. But even here, that rear window mainly exposes the passenger shelf, and not the back seat area so much. In contrast, my LeMans has windows that curve in severely on the sides, and the rear window is fastback-rakish, extending up over the back seat area.
With the Dart's windows rolled all the way up, a gentle push will still close the door all the way. With my LeMans, windows up, you have to put some muscle into it and slam it to close it all the way. Hey, maybe that's another reason 70's cars didn't hold up...all that slamming you had to do to close the doors! Eventually, I'd think that would take its toll.
In strolling through the junkyard, one thing I've noticed is that the steering wheels on the '67-'72 GM trucks are all disintegrated by now, while the wheels on the '60-66 trucks are still intact and ready for service.
But various linkages, vacuum servos, shift lever parts, or things like window seals, door seals, etc.---all that can be hell to find on 60s or 70s cars that are not completely mainstream or are not that popular.
I think if you just want to keep an old Cutlass running, for instance, you can adapt a lot of parts off other GM cars, but small mechanical and trim bits are going to be tough. You can make up an exhaust system but not an exhaust manifold---so you'll need either an expensive header aftermarket, or you'll have to weld what you got.
I guess that you can drive this as is
If you always wanted one when new, this doesn't look horrible
Blue stripes does not make it a shelby clone This price seems wildly optimistic
Pretty funny ad
I guess the worst of the lot back then was that Grand Prix 2+2 they offered in 1986-87. It had that clunky aerodynamic rear window that looked similar to the SS Monte Aerocoupe, but was still a unique part. The front-end on those looked really odd, too, jutting out in a fashion similar to the Monte SS...but I don't think the Grand Prix really needed that, as its front-end was more rakish in stock form than a Monte, anyway. But I guess to compete in NASCAR, it needed that thing. Worst insult of all though with the GP 2+2 was that it just had a stock 150 hp Chevy 305! They didn't even have the decency to give it the 180 hp version that the Monte SS had...this was just the mundane version that would have gone into a regular Monte, Grand Prix, or Bonneville G.
That's a shame that the car's age caught up with it. What made it age so fast? Does he have to keep it stored outside?
Some of the interior plastics make me cringe, and the fit and finish is amusing.
I didn't think my Mom's '86 Monte was too bad inside. However, I think Chevy changed the interior fabrics on these cars a bit for 1986. My Mom's Monte had a cloth interior, with just the seatbacks and side bolsters being vinyl. Now, it wasn't exactly a high-quality cloth. I believe this is the stuff they used to call "Mouse Fur". I've seen older 80's Montes though, with interiors that were a combination of cloth and vinyl. Usually just the seating surfaces were cloth, with everything else, including the door panels, being vinyl. Some of them could look pretty tacky.
My 1982 Cutlass Supreme had a much nicer interior, though. It had sort of a corduruoy pattern that was smoother than the Monte's mousefur, and even a bit shiny, but comfortable and pretty durable. The Cutlass also used a different material for the dashboard...this stuff that had sort of a leathery texture to it, and was surprisingly resistant to cracking. I've never seen a car with that type of material have a cracked dash. My grandma's '85 LeSabre also used it, as did my '79 Newport, and my two '79 New Yorkers. My '89 Gran Fury used a similar version of it. But then the other stuff, which is lower-quality looking, and not as soft-touch, seems to crack much more easily. My '80 Malibu, Mom's '86 Monte, and my '85 Silverado used this type of padding...and it cracked in every single case! And while the Gran Fury/Diplomat/5th Ave used the higher quality stuff, I noticed that the Aspen/Volare didn't...and therefore tend to crack.
I think the earlier versions of the downsized Cutlass and LeSabre used a different material as well, and were more prone to cracking.
As for that door rattling, I don't remember the three similar cars I've had...a 1980 Malibu, 1982 Cutlass, and Mom's '86 Monte, being too bad with the windows rolled all the way up. All the way down, you had to make sure you didn't slam the door too hard. And if the window was at half-mast, forget it! Still, as bad as these cars were, they didn't rattle near as bad as the '73-77 models they replaced. I'm always VERY careful whenever I have a passenger in my '76 LeMans... in fact, I'll usually offer to hold the door for them!
He also has an 83 Monte CL, which has a more decent mouse-fur interior. On the SS, the problem isn't the upholstery rather the plastics and the eastern-bloc grade vinyl. I have driven the SS, and the t-tops do not help with headroom either - and I am not terribly tall at 6'1". It was an awkward drive for me. I've also driven the CL, which was much better, save for the brakes - not like the MB I am used to! It goes about 10mph at idle, and you have to plan your stops.
The rattly doors are with the windows down...it's pretty embarrassing, I'd think. Those cars seem to have big heavy doors, too.
Since I bought that $500 midnight blue '79 New Yorker back in May, I've learned about how hard those dark colors can be to keep clean. I swear I can wash the thing, and not even drive it, and within a day or two of just sitting in the yard, it looks filthy again. I guess I got spoiled by all those years of owning cars in more neutral colors...white, silver, gray, creme, etc. And it's not that I'd actively seek out those colors...they just seemed to find me somehow!
As for that window rattling, one trick I learned with my LeMans, is that when I close the door with the window down, I take my hand and cup the top of the door, at the windowsill, clenching the door skin and interior trim together. I close it that way, rather than just flinging it shut from the outside, or pulling it shut by the armrest on the inside. Cuts down on the rattling and gives the impression of a much higher quality automobile. :P
Does the $500 NYer have clearcoat paint? It seems the clearcoat on cars also makes it look dirtier when the car gets a little dirty, and of course it is a magnet for swirls and imperfections. My modern car is dark grey, and it is a huge PITA to keep clean to my desired standard, I feel like I have to wax it weekly, and I do wipe it down with a damp cloth a couple times per week. On that note, Meguiars NXT wax is a very good product for dark colors, it puts a nice gloss on modern paint, but I suspect it would not do the same to an old car like the fintail, and its old fashioned paint.
I suspect those windows rattled even when new...and that it isn't hard to break one if you really slam the door.
Metallic paints have come a long way, but back in those days they tended to fade pretty quickly if left outside. I'll have to try that Meguiars NXT stuff and see how it does.
I don't know how that wax will work on a non-clearcoat car. I need to find something to use on the fintail, that will apply in an even coat. Last year I stripped off the old wax with soap, used Meguiars polish, and then put on two coats of normal wax - it was a real workout. It didn't make a big difference. I guess the car needs something heavier.