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

1277278280282283853

Comments

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,649
    Maybe if your Intrepid craps out you can buy this dreamboat

    But probably not this oddball

    And on the brown car idea, I have seen period Porsches in brown too...a whale tail 911 and a 924 (well, it's badged Porsche anyway) come to mind.

    I remember an episode of CHiPS that featured a brown 70s Rolls, too. A brown Rolls Royce. That's just not right.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 20,958
    not only a dreamboat, but has the rare 1 disc cd changer too! :surprise:
    2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 20,958
    drove my '91 mustang to work today. i still enjoy the way the rear wheels feel directly connected to the gas pedal. there is no slop in that drivetrain. :)
    2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • steine13steine13 Member Posts: 2,825
    Hey, that 74 Passat is just like my 1st car! I inherited it from my mom at the ripe age of 23, except mine was the ever-stylish 2-door bustle-back-without-liftgate. 1.3 l engine, 55 firebreathing horses, short-throw 4sp shifter. Really.

    A much better driver than you'd guess from those numbers...

    -Mathias
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,109
    I may be about to lose a car. I was out in the yard today, and a guy stopped by and asked me about my Dart. I was brutally honest about it...not trying to scare him away, but also not trying to lead him on, either.

    He's definitely interested, and we exchanged contact info. This guy looks to be about in his 50's, was driving a mid-to-late 90's Dodge Ram, and is a Mopar guy. So he knows what he's getting himself into.

    So with any luck, it'll be gone in a week or two!
  • jlflemmonsjlflemmons Member Posts: 2,242
    I had a 1979 Olds Cutlass Calais (back when they were RWD) in a dark brown metallic with thin gold pinstripes and light brown interior. Very nice looking car, and a good runner, too. The '79 Calais was the high point for touring suspensions in the Cutlass line up. I actually drove it in an autocross and spanked several "sporty cars" in my class.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,649
    You could get a SL with 1/4 those miles for just a few grand more. Never a good idea to seek the cheapest Mercedes.
  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,439
    I love when sellers classify their massive miles as 'easy' or 'highway'. I would think that just about anything with 180k hard miles would be long gone but even if that Benz was completely pampered, you can't be sure that it has years and years left in it. I think any car that in the 200k range would be day to day.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    With a car like that, if you lose the engine, you can just junk it. Being complex, German and a high miler all spells disaster to me for anyone on a budget who was trying to "look rich for cheap".

    I'd buy it for $5,000 bucks, about the cost of a luxury car lease for a year. Then if it dies, I can just walk away if I got a good year's use out of it.

    Given that the predicted reliable lifespan of any modern car is about 225,000 miles at the very best (you rarely see cars with more than that, or if you do, they have a hefty stack of repair bills), this car is about 4/5th done for. So I'd pay 1/5th of top retail for it.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,649
    With the road congestion around here, I think highway miles might not be much better than city miles either. I don't know if stop and go at 40 is better than stop and go at 20.

    Shifty is right about how to buy a miled up old MB - cheaply. There's a mid 90s SL600 with about 100K on it in the parking garage of my building - it could be had for 10K. But I wouldn't risk it.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    To put it bluntly, if any of those dashboard warning lights go on, you may be screwed. These are extremely complex pieces of work.

    If I were buying that 600SL, I'd spend all day playing with every gadget, working those switches, windows, vents, lights, then spend $300 bucks to have the car gone over like it was getting an army physical. That would certainly improve your odds. People just don't test these cars properly prior to buying them.

    I even check for sneaky stuff, like warning light bulbs being removed (which is evil, BTW).

    Gas being what it is, I'd probably just sit in it and work the steering wheel like kids do with those suction cup ones.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,649
    I'd simply not bother. Those V12s have never won me over, and the chances of a complex repair outweigh even a bargain price. If I wanted a R129 I'd find the most pristine 2000-02 silver arrow car I could find. You get what you pay for.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,649
  • fortee9erfortee9er Member Posts: 134
    While I was in college my father got a 1963 Olds 88 wagon as payment on past due rent, from a tenant. He gave me the wagon to commute to school but I promptly gave it back to him because I coldn't afford the gas bill - it barely got 10mpg.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,109
    Heck, if Lemko doesn't want it I'd take it...that's a nice old beast. Looks like it still might be in good enough shape to get some use out of, but not so nice that I'd cry if something catastrophic happened. And heck, if it gets 10-11 mpg in my type of driving, I could hack it. I've been able to get smaller-engined cars to get similar, if not worse mpg.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Heck, for $1,000 I'd take a chance on it. I'd probably have to get the carb rebuilt to deal with the rough idle. I'd love to get something like a 1964-67 Buick Special for an everyday beater if I didn't have to pay too much for it.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,109
    Oops, one little detail I forgot about with those '63 Oldsmobiles. They were still using that troublesome "Slim Jim" Hydramatic. I guess that's one Achilles heel on these cars but heck, if it's lasted this long, maybe it'll hold out awhile longer.

    The Slim Jim was smaller than the old 4-speed Hydramatic, so that resulted in a different floorpan with a smaller transmission hump for Slim Jim cars. So I guess if you wanted to swap in one of those older ones, it would be quite a chore. I wonder how hard it would be to swap in a later THM400?
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 11,159
    Andre-you've mentioned the 4-speed Hydramatic a few times. That it had 4 speeds seems like it was ahead of it's time. Did it get dropped because of cost? Reliability? Both?
  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    I can't pull up eBay at work, but over the weekend I found on eBay a really rough looking Gen II RX-7 with an Isuzu diesel truck engine. If that is the engine from their little pickup truck, it must cut horsepower to about 1/3 of a stock RX-7. Not a match made in heaven. Rotary Mazda pickups are very popular, so maybe someone took out the RX-7 engine and put it in an old Isuzu pickup and this is the other half of the bastardization.
  • oregonboyoregonboy Member Posts: 1,650
    here it is:
    diesel RX-7

    the engine was from a chevette :)
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 11,159
    I'd bid on it, just on the chance that the 'previous owner' was so drugged out he left a sizable stash hidden somewhere :P
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,109
    That it had 4 speeds seems like it was ahead of it's time. Did it get dropped because of cost? Reliability? Both?

    Yeah, I always thought it was amazing that the world's first automatic transmission, way back in 1939, had 4 speeds! I'm not sure why, exactly it got dropped. While it had 4 speeds, it used a fluid coupling and not a torque converter. I'm not sure, but I think 3 speeds with a torque converter is considered better than 4 speeds without one. Maybe someone who's more mechanically inclined could explain it?

    I think the old 4-speed Hydramatic was a sturdy, reliable transmission, but it was also big. Once they started lowering floorpans, it took up a lot of space inside the car. For some reason, Pontiac Bonnevilles and Star Chiefs stuck with the old 4-speed Hydramatic from '61-64, while the Catalina, Grand Prix, and Oldsmobiles went with the 3-speed/torque converter Slim Jim. The difference in transmission hump size is really noticeable.

    I'd guess the Slim Jim was cheaper to build, and lighter as well, so it probably sapped less power from the engine. It wasn't as reliable as the old transmission though, and I've heard it's really expensive to rebuild. The later THM400 transmission, which I think started getting phased in in 1964, was a much sturdier transmission, and pretty cheap and easy to rebuild. I dunno how it compared to the old 4-speed tranny, though.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    The early 4-speed Hydramatics were rugged, reliable and efficient. I'm not in a position to comment on their cost-to-manufacture, or their size and weight, but their major functional drawback was that they shifted rougher than today's automatics, kind of like the old Mercedes 4-speed automatics. You felt every shift, especially the one from first to second, The second to third shift was less pronounced, although it was definitely crisp, and the third to fourth was least pronounced, and not objectionable. The tradeoff was that there was minimal slippage between shifts. Downshifts were also not smooth, by today's standards. GM introduced a very useful functional enhancement for '52, when they renamed the transmission Dual Range Hydramatic. I won't go into all the nuances at this time, but the main benefit was that the driver had more control over upshifts and downshifts at all throttle openings below full throttle. You could downshift and/or hold second and third gear through the lever, similar to many of today's automatics. Full throttle shifts weren't affected, but the driver gained control over partial throttle shifts and gear selection.

    To mitigate the roughness, the '50 Olds started in second gear, unless you manually moved the lever to low. Maybe the thinking was that the Rocket engine had so much torque that this delivered a good tradeoff between smoothness and acceleration, whereas the Pontiac, with its less powerful flathead straight sixes and eights, needed that low gear for off-the-line grunt. I'm only guessing here, though. Cadillacs didn't adopt the Olds second gear starts, but, for whatever reason, their first to second gear shifts felt smoother than the Pontiac's. It might have had to do with the the fact that Cadillacs were quieter and heavier, but I'm not certain about this, either.

    In 1956 Oldsmobiles and Cadillacs, and the more expensive Pontiacs (the Star Chiefs, I believe) were equipped with a new version of the 4-speed Hydramatic. The good news was that the shifts were much smoother, but the tradeoff was greater slippage. The dual range feature was retained. Lower line Pontiacs continued with the older Dual Range Hydramatic.

    As for the Slim Jim Hydramatic, the shift action was rather quirky, in terms of feel, but I think this transmission was reasonably durable. For example, my family had a '63 Olds Dynamic 88 4 door hard top, purchased new, that went ~94,000 without any transmission problem. Except for the color, our family's '63 was very similar to that green one that's been the focus of discussion. I would add that our car was not babied. It was eventually traded because of rust, but the transmission never gave a bit of trouble, and it performed just fine over the entire six years my family owned it. I'm not even sure whether the transmission fluid had ever been changed. Now a sample of one doesn't prove that the Slim Jim Hydramatic was durable, but it may help mitigate some concerns about it.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,649
    Those sound very much like the early MB automatics like in my car. Fluid coupling, second gear start, harsh shifts, very little slippage if any at all, and easily manipulated by the shift lever. I wonder if MB saw these units as inspiration.

    MB used a Borg-Warner unit before the first in house model, I have heard those are less durable than the later units such as in my car.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Those old cars needed four gears to motivate 2+ tons of vehicle with engines that had about as much horsepower as the typical subcompact today. Manual tranny cars used astoundingly short rear ends and auxiliary overdrives to compensate at cruising speeds. The horsepower wars of the late '50s and the advent of V8s in just about all classes of cars by 1965 took care of the power shortage, so the domestics were able to build smaller, lighter slushboxes with only 2 or 3 gears in them.

    GMC used the old Hydramatic in its trucks through 1962 before dumping them for Powerglides and TH400s. Supposedly, the old 4-speed had a reputation for leaking and breaking flexplates behind the GMC V6.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    "I wonder if MB saw these units as inspiration."

    It wouldn't be at all surprising if the Hydramatic served as the model for the MB automatic. In addition to the Olds, Pontiac, and Cadillac cars, many of the WWII GMC military trucks that saw service in Europe were equipped with Hydramatic transmissions. I'm sure that the German military captured some of these. The absence of a clutch pedal, and the other features of this transmission, at a time when automatic transmissions were non existent in Europe, must have been a real curiosity for the German military staff, to say the least. It would be hard to imagine that they didn't disassemble some Hydramatics. I'd guess that they would have been impressed with the technology and the performance of these transmissions.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,109
    Now a sample of one doesn't prove that the Slim Jim Hydramatic was durable, but it may help mitigate some concerns about it.

    Actually, that is a breath of fresh air to hear of a good experience with the Slim Jim. One of my favorite 60's Pontiacs is the '61...for some reason I just love the style of that grille. But I always figured if I was going to hunt one down one day, it would have to be a Bonneville rather than a Catalina, because of that transmission.

    But even if I got one with the Slim Jim, chances are the car's just going to be a limited-use toy. It's not like I'd have to depend on it to get me 15-20,000 miles per year. So if I were to find one in decent shape, it would probably have a good, long life with me.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    Andre, did you ever drive or ride in a Slim Jim equipped car? The reason I ask is that I'd be more concerned with the way it performs than with its durability. The first to second gear ratios are very wide apart, which makes for an unusual driving experience, in terms of feel and sound. In addition, I believe that there was a design element that I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable to describe to you, that caused an erratic behavior and unusual whining sound in second gear, at certain speeds and throttle openings. It's rather wierd, for those who are sensitive to that sort of thing, but I'm guessing that the great majority of drivers never noticed anything unusual about the driving dynamics of this transmission.

    In an odd sort of way, the quirky qualities of the Slim Jim could even be somewhat endearing... as unique and odd things can sometimes be. That's not to say I'd choose a Slim Jim over other Hydramatics, because I wouldn't, or that it's peculiarities would be acceptable in a modern car, because they definitely wouldn't be, but I wouldn't pass up a classic car I liked because of this transmission.

    Insofar as driving it 15,000-20,000 miles per year, at $4+/gallon, the fuel expense would make any V8 from this era a really bad choice.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,109
    Nah, I've never had a chance to drive or ride in a Slim Jim car. The peculiarities in the transmission don't sound like they'd be too scary to me, although I guess it's just something I'd learn to adjust to.

    Heck, if it made any noises that were too annoying, well that's what radios are for. Or, since something like this would only have AM, I guess a portable boom-box would suffice. :)

    And yeah, at $4.00 or so per gallon, driving something like this 15-20K miles per year would be back-breaking!
  • jlflemmonsjlflemmons Member Posts: 2,242
    When I was a wee lad, my parents owned an Olds Super88, 1954 model. Rocket V8 and the aforementioned 4spd automatic. That beast was bullet proof. We had it until 1964 when it was sold to another family with many kids. They passed it down from kid to kid, and the last we heard it was up to around 165K miles and still had not had the tranny overhauled or the valve covers off! That tank also had one of the first under-dash Frigidaire a/c units installed in Corpus Christi. Think window unit hanging under the dash and you get the picture. Sucker would blow ice cubes in high humidity, but it sure did a fine job.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    The peculiar whining sound in second gear, under certain circumstances, isn't loud or even annoying, just a little unusual. It doesn't need to be drowned out. But hey, anyone who's interested in classical or collector cars can put up with characteristics that "normal" people wouldn't tolerate, right? It not only goes with the territory, but in some ways, it's part of what attracts us to the hobby.

    Virtually every car we discuss on this forum has some nuances that need to be explained. If that weren't the case we'd have far fewer than 14040 messages, and many overlapping topics. And, worst of all, Shifty would be out of a job.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,109
    I have an old Consumer Reports from 1955 that had a comparison test of a 1955 DeSoto Fireflite, an Oldsmobile 98, and a Nash Ambassador. In acceleration, the Olds was the quickest, at 0-60 in something like 11.8 seconds. The DeSoto came in at 13.0, and I think the Nash was around 15.

    The DeSoto and Olds both weighed about the same, around 3900 lb base weight, and had similar hp. 200 for the DeSoto, 202 for the Olds. I guess this could show one advantage of the Hydramatic's 4 forward speeds, compared to only 2 for the Powerflite? Another difference though, could have been displacement. The DeSoto used a fairly small-displacement 291 Hemi, while the Olds used a bigger 324 Rocket V-8, so it probably had a torque advantage. Also, I don't remember what axle ratios the cars had. I'd guess the DeSoto had around a 3.54:1...at least that was common in the '57 Mopars with the 2-speed automatic. With the 3-speed, a 3.31:1 was standard, but I'm sure a whole slew of other ratios were available.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    If I remember correctly, Nash used GM sourced Hydramatics when it first introduced an automatic option, in the '50s. Was that Ambassador an I-6? If so, that would have explained its slower acceleration compared with the Olds and DeSoto.

    While it couldn't compete with the new V8s of the day on performance, the Ambassador 6 was an excellent engine. It had overhead valves and seven main bearings, for smoothness and durability. It also delivered good fuel economy for its time. The more popularly priced Statesman model had a smaller displacement, lower cost, five main bearing flathead design. Performance was modest, but fuel economy was best-in-class, or close to it, when equipped with overdrive manual. Another independent model, the Studebaker Champion, also was renowned for its fuel economy, especially with overdrive.

    America produced the world's best popular priced cars for many decades, through the '50s, and, arguably, even through the early '60s. While exports were never a significant percentage of domestic production, for much of this period the U.S. exported more cars and trucks than it imported. American cars enjoyed a reputation for quality, style, and comfort in many countries.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,109
    Yeah, that Ambassador had a big 6-cyl. I forget how much hp it had, but in searching around on the internet, it it looks like it had around 140? So all things considered, that 15 second acceleration time isn't too bad. And yeah, I'm pretty sure Nash used the GM hydramatic, too.

    Actually, when you consider that those hp ratings were gross, those acceleration times weren't too bad. 200 hp gross is probably the equivalent of around 150 net, and I wouldn't be surprised if 140 gross is only around 105-110 net.

    24 years later, Consumer Reports tested three big cars...an LTD with a 129 hp 302, a Caprice with a watered-down 135 or so hp 305, and a St. Regis with a 135 hp 318. This time, the 0-60 times were around 13.5 for the LTD, 15.4 for the Caprice, and a pathetic 15.9 for the St. Regis!

    Ahh, progress. :P
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    Yes, net horsepower numbers were low with those low revving motors, but as you know torque was much more respectable.
  • oregonboyoregonboy Member Posts: 1,650
    "draws crowds" hahahahaha, yeah sure. :P
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,109
    That looks close to the color of my old '69 Bonneville, although I think my car had a slight hint of green in that gold. My car had a black vinyl top, too. That Caddy looks a lot more tasteful than my Bonnie did, though.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,800
    "draws crowds" hahahahaha, yeah sure. :P

    Well, its just simple physics. Something that size has a pretty strong gravitational field.

    '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

  • texasestexases Member Posts: 11,159
    No the Sterling's not uncommon because it's a manual, it's uncommon because "Car runs and drives" :P
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 17,244
    Wonder what the guy plans on doing with the Mark V next to the Impala? Looks like a '78 Diamond Jubilee to me.

    2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Icon I6L Golf Cart

  • jlflemmonsjlflemmons Member Posts: 2,242
    What is it with these idiot wheels on these cars??? The handling has got to be bizarre at best, and with so little side wall I would expect the thing to beat you to death crossing anything more substantial than a squirrel fart.

    Not to mention the whole "Hot Wheels" look is downright cartoonish.

    Weird. :confuse:
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,820
    a few weeks ago I saw a pick up (GMC I think) with that type of wheel. Even worse, it was a dually, and the dual rears were the same. way. Truly bizarre.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • oregonboyoregonboy Member Posts: 1,650
    Can you imagine how much THAT must have cost !?!

    What kind of person spends thousands of dollars to make his vehicle ride, handle, accelerate, and brake worse, and simultaneously get poorer guel economy???

    Oh, I forgot. It looks kewl. :lemon:
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    "Selling is the art of convincing you to buy something you need; advertising is the art of convincing you to buy something you absolutely do not need by making you think you do; marketing is the art of selling you something you do not need and making you feel good afterwards that you did it".
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,649
    I bet it wouldn't be hard to roll that Impala or a similar jacked up silly wheels old boat
  • oregonboyoregonboy Member Posts: 1,650
    Oh, yeah... I forgot to mention making your vehicle more dangerous for yourself and everyone near you.

    When I become the Grand Imperial Dictator for Life, I will proclaim that all vehicles with raised ride height be restricted to off-road use only. Penalty for first offence: confiscation of vehicle. :P

    james
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I've even heard of windshields being cracked because of large wheels.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

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.