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

bumpy

I like the galvanized steel pipe between the hoses for the radiator and thermostat housing.

bumpy

Mark III: rode hard and put up wet

just call a junkyard

Benz for parts

when an H1 just isn't enough

photos taken at night to hide...what?

"super cheap", eh? Hmmm.

comes with instructions for performing burnouts, FREE!!!

Andremobiles, from best...

to worst...

to who knows what?

gsemike

Who know's what the picture are hiding on that Camaro but 5 grand is a good price since the car looks together. I guess it depends on if that rust is on the floor or the frame.

That Chevelle looks OK but it's not close to an SS and is overpriced. At least put on a cowl hood and SS badge if you're going to call it an SS.

The LeMans is ready for the junkyard and probably not worth $80.

The Caprice ad is laugh out loud funny.

qbrozen

thrown rod? yup. that's what happens when a [non-permissible content removed] puts a boost controller on their car and says "i bet it can handle 30 lbs." ... nope, it can't.

Mr_Shiftright

73 Camaro "Z28" -- wrong engine? (where's the finned valve covers?) Rock crusher? Yeah but M22 not available that year. Looks like wrong wheels. Does it have sport suspension, black out grille, dual exhausts? This car may be a fake.

fintail

The ultimate money pit

The ultimate 80s car

Depreciation

gsemike

It could be a fake but for a together car with a 4 speed, it can still be worth 5 grand. 5 grand doesn't exactly buy much these days. It depends on how much work it needs in person. I've seen people want 5 grand for some pretty messed up cars.

Mr_Shiftright

True but you can buy the correct, clean "daily driver" version of this car for $20,000 and a show car for $30,000. So are you going to take this $5K rat and make it look like a 5 to 7 year old used car for an additional $15,000? I don't think so. The words "rust" and "mold", and an engine that looks like it used to live on the bottom of a river bed really discourage me from being optimistic. Remember this is the whimpy 245 HP Z28, not the 1971 330HP/350.

au1994

The Lagonda has to be one of the ugliest cars ever produced. And a technical nightmare to boot.

andre1969

Call me sick and twisted, but I feel that '75 LeMans crying out to me to rescue it. And local.live seems to think that it's less than 2 1/2 hours away! Seriously though, in that condition, the only way I'd take it would be if the guy was willing to give it away. And if that's "minimal rust", I'd hate to see what "moderate" or "serious" is!

Judging from the pics, it looks like the mutants from the movie "Wrong Turn" are looking to unload some of their inventory.

lemko

Per the Lagonda, it would probably be cheaper to have your identity stolen rather than to get that car back in working order. It is the Grand Canyon of money pits.

The Testarossa? Wow, I can pretend to either be Magnum or Crockett!

Dang! I could've had a S600 for less than what I paid for my DTS! Of course that car lost more of its value over the course of 3 years than the entire cost of my new ride + taxes and title!!!

hpmctorque

And the S600 will most likely depreciate more than your DTS in the next three years, in percentage terms, and maybe in dollar terms too, if you extrapolate the rate of depreciation of the past three years into the future. Didn't those big 12 cylinder Benzes sell for well over 100 large in '04? I'm basing my prediction of continued rapid depreciation on the assumption that by '10 the rich won't want it because it'll be fairly old, and middle class folks won't be able to afford the fuel bills. The DTS, on the other hand, doesn't cost and arm and a leg to maintain and repair, gets respectable fuel economy and, if I'm not mistaken, takes regular gas.

The devil's advocate argument for buying a well maintained old S600 for little money could be that as an extra car, driven 1,000-2,000 miles per year, you could have a relatively affordable weekend show-off car. When a repair costing more than, say, $2,500 was required to keep it on the road, you'd unload it. That means you'd do the regular maintenance (either yourself or through an independent garage), but you wouldn't repair things that weren't essential for safety, or to just keep it running. Controlling the miles driven would mean fewer repairs and reasonable fuel expenses. With luck, someone might be able to enjoy it for a few years, or even several years, this way. It wouldn't be my style, but as long as it's driveable someone will buy it.

Mr_Shiftright

The problem with cars like the S600 is that they are so incredibly complex, and the systems so integrated, that any little electrical glitch could totally disable the car and force you to take it to a technician for repair. It is not inconceivable that a short circuit in the wrong place on that car could total it by the time you find it and dig it out. My friend's 750iL is a perfect example. He went over a grass berm, scrapped the dislodged the crank sensor mounted on the lower bell housing, which tugged on the wiring harness and stretched it. One bank of cylinders stopped firing, branch harness was damaged, repair bill was $3,800.

fintail

It's even worse than that - that S600 had a base MSRP of about 125K, and true to Mercedes form, many items were still optional. It's already lost 2 DTS in value, and will keep spiraling downward until it is worth no more than its lesser engined counterparts (it barely is now). The rich won't want it because it is the old style, enthusiasts won't want it because it is such a high maintenance vehicle with no real upside over an AMG car...it has a hard life ahead of it.

The W220 S-class are looking old very fast.

fintail

Marshmallow on wheels

Mr_Shiftright

I wouldn't give you $100 for that car.

andre1969

I sort of like the thing, but if I get some big, overblown mastodon like that I want a hardtop, so I'd go for something like a '78 New Yorker or a '76 DeVille/Electra/98.

I can't imagine a 159 hp 400 with 2.50:1 gearing would be much fun in a nearly 2.5 ton beast. I like the fact that it has a sunroof, though.

fortee9er

Re: S600 and AM Lagonda. I've a thing for these high end sedans and I was seriously thinking of getting an early 90s MB S600 (600SEL) until I found out that the ignition module has a relatively short live span and it cost $3800. from the MB dealer - there is no other source for this part.
I have never been a fan of the AM Lagonda until I saw one in the flesh recently. I found it more appealing in person than in pictures. There is something about how low the car sits which makes the wheels look larger than they are giving it a rather athletic look. Of course that pesky electronic instrument cluster/dash will make repairs on the S600 look down right cheap. I guess if you had problems with the dash you could rip it out and replace it with a Dakota Digital dash for a fraction of the cost of repairing the original.

lemko

Aaaagh! The ignition control module in that S600 alone is 2.93 times the price I paid for my 1988 Buick Park Avenue three years ago!

fintail

Not many left like this

andre1969

I never really cared for those Granadas, but I guess to the Granada afficionado, that one would be like the holy grail or something!

bumpy

Those S-classes are staggeringly glitchy. The perfect car for a masochist who is guilty about his vast fortune.

I think Jeremy Clarkson should do a "Who Killed the British Luxury Car Industry?" around the Lagonda.

Mr_Shiftright

I've tried dealing with cars like that---you can barely get out alive. The range and frequency of problems is more like a blind raging assault upon the owner. You can't go two weeks without something cropping up. I'm sworn off any S-class Benz out of warranty.

fintail

The W220 was indeed a very glitchy car, and it along with the earlier ML are key players in the real and perceived loss of MB quality. Early W220s should be avoided at all costs, and already I see them with asking prices down in the teens. I actually once test drove a S430, as it seemed very cheap for what was offered...but I could see it was so big and complex, I ran away. Every now and then I'll see a S55 and run it through my mind, but I lack the courage. Many of the same problems also exist on the C215, which is a shame as it's a pretty car.

Luckily, from all accounts I know, the W221 S-class is a different world, and has proven reliable.

gsemike

Back on that Camaro, not every car is destined for a frame off resto and not everyone is destined to have a 20 or 30 grand pristine car. If the car looks and runs OK in person, someone could get alot of enjoyment out of driving it around and fiddling with it and making it better and better this year. I don't disagree with you at all, but these days I see 74 to 77 cars which are much less desirable going for 7 or 8 grand in just cruiser condition.

british_rover

It's already lost 2 DTS in value, and will keep spiraling downward until it is worth no more than its less...

I love that. We should start expressing depreciation in base MSRP of some common car. Not sure if a DTS is the best one to use but maybe like a Cobalt or Focus.

Mr_Shiftright

Yeah you'd have to look at it. Just a quick judgment from photos, it looks like a cobbled up rat, however. And probably a fake as well. It's very difficult to correct other people's mistakes. I don't see any upside on a car like this unless you want some garage therapy and just tear the thing apart right down to the last nut and bolt. But patching up a car like this you'll just have a nuisance and no pride of ownership.

Seems to me one's energy and $$$ could be put toward a better "starter" car. Obviously the owner has given up on it and doesn't care.

I'd buy a clean automatic 6 cylinder version and build that up.

fintail

I wonder how many Foci or Aveos this has depreciated

Mr_Shiftright

Since 2004, that CL 600 has depreciated $86,000.

qbrozen

or ~7 Aveos

british_rover

And it doesn't even look that exciting. I couldn't ever get excited about the CL.

andre1969

I liked the CL when it first came out, mainly because it was still a true hardtop. But I think soon after, Benz started offering a cheaper coupe that was a true hardtop. Forget the series, as I always get their coupe naming conventions mixed up, but I think it was the cheaper style that started off at "only" about $50K or so.

I still kinda like that CL, but at those prices, I'm sure they'll always be too blue for my blood!

gsemike

One problem with Mercedes styling is it's sometimes hard to tell the money ones from the common ones. I mean look at the wheels on that one. Could it get any plainer?

fintail

The CLK is the one you describe

toomanyfumes

That's a lot of white in that interior.

texases

CLKs cheaper than CLs, yes, but amazingly more expensive than the Cs they're based on.

gsemike

69 Gran Prix Not the most desirable cofiguration or color, an acceptable cruiser for not a great deal of money

Audi = Depreciation

I always liked these and this one looks pretty good

Price is too high given the work needed

What exactly does it mean when 'engine knocks a bit?'

This could be good Depends on how it looks in person

Mr_Shiftright

There's no such thing as a 1964 &1/2 Mustang. I wish people would stop that.

Wrong wheels, wrong exhaust, looks like a color change. Raised in New York. Not promising so far. It's still cheaper to buy these cars when they are right than correct them.

andre1969

There's no such thing as a 1964 &1/2 Mustang. I wish people would stop that.


Well, how did the phrase "1964 1/2" get started, anyway? I know they were never titled or registered as 1964 (or 1964.5), but it had to come from somewhere!

Personally, I don't see a problem with it. I mean, I've heard mention of a 1977.5 Pontiac Can Am and a 2001.5 Volkswagen Passat. Heck, I think VW even used that in their marketing!

And at least with the Mustang, it did signify a real difference. For example, the 1964.5 used a 170 CID 6-cyl, while the proper 1965 used a 200 CID. Similarly, on 9/24/64, the standard V-8 switched from a 260 to the 289. I think that's also when they switched over from generators to alternators.

If I was in the market for a Mustang, if someone said "1964.5", at least then I instantly know it's an early one with the smaller engines. And if that's what I'm looking for (or not looking for), it helps simplify my search.

Mr_Shiftright

Oh, collectors made that up because they thought a 64 &1/2 is worth more. (It's not).

Ford never used it.

It's just as easy to say "early version" or "260 V8"

Sometimes the decimal .5 DOES mean something, when the factory changes a model mid-year. But just running changes to internals doesn't warrant a .5, otherwise every car would be like software.....the 1966.2.1. Mustang or some such.

Just silliness.

urnews

Sometimes the decimal .5 DOES mean something, when the factory changes a model mid-year. But just running changes to internals doesn't warrant a .5, otherwise every car would be like software.....the 1966.2.1. Mustang or some such.

Just silliness.

As you say, Mr. Shiftright, "just silliness," which is all the more reason why it may come to pass. Ford uses "Job 1," "Job 2" etc. to designate model year changes within the one-year span. Our "Job 2" 2007 SEL AWD Ford Fusion has an MP3 plug in the center console and a front passenger seat with a back that folds forward, allowing the hauling of an 8-foot, 2-by-4 if one had a mind to do that. The 2007s that were "Job 1," built before Labor Day 2006 were not so equipped, so, technically we have a 2007.2 Fusion. There was also a Job 3 change too, but I don't remember what changes were involved.

Minor differences, to be sure, but differences nevertheless.

Ford is doing the same thing with the new Sync system from Microsoft. It's a "late availability" item, one not available on the early '08s. That's kinda goofy, in my humble opinion.

One way to instantly distinguish a 2006 Fusion from a 2007 is by the radio mast on the roof near the rear window. It's missing on the 2006 because the radio antenna was incorporated into the rear glass. That design was either problematic or more costly because they went with a mast on the 2007s and '08s.

british_rover

Yup I would much rather have a CLK then a CL. I didn't like the CLK in the past but a customer of mine has a CLK500 with the AMG package but NO stupid AMG badges and it is a damn pretty car. I think a CLK500 like his in either Black, Dark Blue would be a good car to have.

fintail

C-class size, E-class money - but they do seem to have a demographic who loves them.

Speaking of expensive, it still amuses me how MB can get away with its ala carte options scheme (or how some things aren't included)...buy a 90K CLK 63 and you'll still have to fork over another 2 grand for nav.

fintail

I think the current CLK looks better than the original, which seemed a bit too rounded. They still don't really get me going though (apart from maybe a Black Series), as I can imagine my mother driving one - her favorite current model car is the CLK cabrio.

british_rover

Yup BMW manages to do that as well. I capture a lot of sales from frustrated MB and BMW owners who are tired of paying extra for EVERYTHING Most of the Rovers come loaded with everything and have four to five options at the most.

fintail

And Porsche is the worst, IIRC.

Heck, on a base E-class you don't get leather either. And until the early 90s, the base Euro S-class still had a cloth interior. It's a German thing. I understand back in the day, MB would even charge you extra for the fluids in the car.

fintail

This dumb thing is back - I can't decide what I like most - the hood scoop or the fake badges. The exhaust tips are nice too.

gsemike

What does he mean no dealers? He won't sell it to a dealer?

That car is not worth a dime more than any other Solara.

british_rover

Oh yeah they are. To get a Cayenne up to the same equipment level as a Base Range Sport you have to spend over 70,000 dollars. A sport with that equipment is only 62,000,

toomanyfumes

The J.C. Whitney hood scoop and fake wood is nice. I think I'd want the Toyota badges so at a quick glance noone thinks I'm driving a Sebring