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

Mr_Shiftright

Hmm....don't know what his tastes are.

The old SLs are real cows, kind of like German Buicks, so I dunno. We used to say (and we were cruel) that this is the kind of car a corrupt Senator bought for his Las Vegas showgirl mistress.

Shocking parts and repair costs as well, and very hungry for gas in the 450SL model.

Plus side?

Look rich for cheap, very comfy long distance car once the gas pump pain is over, excellent build quality, and you can always unload it if you get bored.

Figure 15 mpg maximum on a 350/380 model with a 24 gallon tank full of premium gas---do the math. In California, that's going to cost you about .28 cents a mile to drive anywhere and more for city driving.

Fiat X1/9 --- fun little car and that one you picked has fuel injection, a big plus. The car has very cheesy build quality and it's a tight fit beyond a man of about 5' 9" I would guess. Great handler, modest performance but not bad. Hardest repairs are window-winder and water pump, so avoid both problems.

Lexus -- boring, boring, boring.

Nissan 300ZX -- if it's a stick shift, could be fun. You don't really need the turbo, which is an expensive car to repair to say the least.

qbrozen

the first 300 .. the nonturbo ... is an automatic.

Anyway.... found a new personal favorite in the race

qbrozen

If only this were a 2-door. I'd convince him he needs to buy it and paint it up like Doc Hudson and be his grandson's hero.

qbrozen

Was it here or the other board we were just talking about these?

Looks pretty good for the price, I think.
Although I hate that front bumper ... and is the gap around the door supposed to be that big??

Mr_Shiftright

Sunbeam Alpine looks like a good buy. Parts are a bit iffy though.

lemmer

I didn't think you could get a decent Alpine for $4k. This is the cheapest Alpine I could find on Auto Trader - an excellent restoration candidate.

I like this 240Z for little more than an extra grand.

qbrozen

well, maybe I'm wrong, but I think alot of run-of-the-mill Alpine owners get their cars' values a bit confused with the Tigers.

Mr_Shiftright

Or turn them into bogus Tigers, which is common. We call them "Algers".

There is so much fraud going on now in the hobby, one has to be extremely vigilant. Even the documentation is being faked, and very well done, too.

Datsun 240Z seems a bit high priced, given that it has dents and has been in storage since 1992. You could sink a lot of money into a car like that. Obviously will need tires, brake work and rehab on the AC. Also rusty air cleaner does not support the meticulous maintenance claimed, seems to me.

But still, it's like the Space Shuttle compared to a Sunbeam Alpine, which I suspect an exhumed mechanic from 1925 would have no problem working on.

boomchek

I'd pick the newer 300Zx over the older ones anytime based on look alone. The Lexus is nice too but like shifty said it's booring. Just another leather complaint riding coupe.

stevedebi

Amazing, he got 30 MILLION miles on that 308...

Mr_Shiftright

A Ferrari with over 60,000 miles on it is a parts car as far as the Ferrari marketplace is concerned.

lemmer

As usual, I can't see the links at work. But, I can tell you there is no comparison between the two generations of the 300ZX. I liked the first, but it was really a continuation of the 280ZX, more of a boulavardier than a GT. The later 300 was better looking inside and out, better handling, faster (the NA was faster than the old Turbo) and more comfortable. It was just plain better in every way.

I'll assume the "complaint" coupe is an SC300/400. I like the way these look and I love the reliability, but the drive is pretty similar to a contemporary Lexus sedan (that means kind of boring and numb).

lilelvis

The pics aren't great, but it looks real clean. I don't know anything about that particular model, but it is a pretty sharp old car for under $2000. The interior looks immaculate.

http://washingtondc.craigslist.org/nva/cto/808499934.html

lilelvis

Teasing me with those Opels!

Everytime I see an Opel GT, it just looks like you could have a pretty cool car with some mods (i.e. engine swap, new suspension, and maybe 14" or 15" rims) Not the most prudent thing to do - putting thousands into an Opel GT. But when I hit the lottery that will be one of the little projects . . .

On the Ferrari - I seem to recall a car mag doing an article about cheap "supercars" (I'm using that term loosely). They were up on the 308 (or maybe it was a 328). I wonder if that thing could beat an 2008 Accord.

Mr_Shiftright

Pretty good cars, very solid ride, decent acceleration if you don't drive it like a baby.

Your proverbial "panzer". You could probably knock down a fair size building with it.

Downside? AC is pathetic (Iaughable), radio can be thrown over a fence, has ignition point distributor so sometimes hot starts are difficult. Not a warm weather car. Value appreciation is nil, so any money you put into it is lost. Hard car to unload, very hard.

Not bad, price is okay if it doesn't need anything. The test drive will tell you everything you need to know.

lilelvis

It just sounds funny to me to use the term "restore" on a 1988 vehicle (especially since I graduated high school in 1986!). It also sounds peculiar to use that term in reference to any mustang newer than about 1970. Maybe I should find one of those mid 70s Mustang Cobra IIs (aka Pintang) and "restore" it to all its Charlie's Angels grandeur.

Of course, I guess I'm "restoring" my '87 FJ60, so call me hypocritical.

boomchek

It is a Lexus. i meant to say compliant, not complaint. :surprise:

fintail

Timelessly elegant cars, but as Shifty says, there's pretty much no ability for appreciation, and they do have a few small issues. The ignition points are easily bypassed by an electronic setup for a couple hundred bucks, and the radios are no worse than anything else from the period. The thing to beware of is the engine...the later W108-109 cars tended to be V8s, and that ad does not specify what it has. The I6 engines are generally easier to live with, and are much less thirsty - the period MB V8s are real guzzlers and there's not much of a performance gain. I have a MB I6 from about 10 years before that car, and it averages 17/22 or so without having to try for economy. That's OK for a car that age. They also do like to rust, so you have to inspect them pretty carefully, especially low on the body and structure. The metal is thick like a Panzer indeed, but it is not immune to rot. Really genuinely nice ones with acceptable cosmetics and mechanicals sound enough to make a long trip only bring 5K or so.

I see that one has a MB-Tex interior...the most durable upholstery ever.

fintail

Landcruiser people don't have to be sane :P

Regarding Ferrari vs Accord, I have no doubt the modern Accord could beat the 30 year old Ferrari in many performance aspects.

Mr_Shiftright

It's probably a 6 cylinder as the ad doesn't say 280SE 3.5 (E35 model). They weren't bad on gas at all but if you didn't drive them with elan an spirit, they'll foul up and miss on you. This was a big problem as American drivers were not used to revving up an engine. You really need to slam these cars into the yellow zone on the tach to get anything out of them. That's what they were built to do, they like it.

fintail

And the auto transmissions are geared more for economy (4th gear by maybe 30-35mph), so in my fintail I often do a bit of shifting myself. No tach though, so I just do what feels right.

texases

Uh-oh: "Our Mechanic told us that it would not take much to have it on the road,"

So who knows what that MB really needs. Too bad.

hpmctorque

It was a gorgeous car in its day - the classiest sedan on the road, by far. But, after reading the recent comments in this discussion, I wouldn't want it. Oh, I might consider it for $1,000, if it checked out reasonably well, so I could junk it or donate it without remorse at the first hint of a needed repair.

lilelvis

I thought that looked like MB-tex in the pics, but I didn't realize it had been around that long. That explains why the interior looks so nice. Whenever I fawn over w124s, I'm always in awe how nice the MB-Tex seats look after nearly 20 years. it's kind of funny that many (most?) would prefer vinyl over leather when looking at a used MBZ.

I wish they sold it by the yard - the landcruiser would look nice and be very functional with an MB-Tex interior.

Mr_Shiftright

It was a nice car but not engineered for American tastes or roads. People complained about the necessity for high-revving to 'get any power', and the neck-snapping transmission shifts, and the fact that the seats were "too hard".

These early Benzes were not "compliant" and Americans were not yet used to the feel of European sedans. I think it would take BMW to teach them the benefits of taut handling and high revving motors.

To be fair though, some of the complaints were justified. The seats were like slabs of marble and the transmission really did shift very harshly.

Also reliability over time was not as good as your average Chevrolet. The cars were a bit "fussy" for American maintenance habits, which is a euphemism for "no maintenance". You didn't adjust valves in a Chevy, and fuel injection in America was an alien concept.

andre1969

I sat in one of those that was in the car corral at Hershey PA a couple years back. Here's a pic I took of it. I sat in it and didn't like it at all. The steering wheel was too big and the seat didn't go back far enough, so I had to practically bend into positions that mother nature never intended to get myself behind the wheel.

Even if they were well-built, quality automobiles, they were probably simply too small to be taken seriously by most domestic buyers of the time. Most people still equated luxury with Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial, or even a nicely decked out Caprice, LTD, or Fury VIP. That type of buyer would associate these Benzes with Darts, Novas, and Mavericks. It wasn't until the first oil embargo that people really woke up and took notice of these cars. And it wouldn't be long after that, until the domestics started responding with Valiant Broughams, Dart Special Editions, Granadas, Nova LNs and probably the most serious competitor, the Seville.

Interestingly, there was a first-gen Seville for sale at that Hershey meet, too. I sat behind the wheel, and was really disappointed. It was more comfy than the Benz IMO, but still pretty cramped. Probably the biggest difference was that it had thicker seats and a more normal-sized steering wheel. Still, there was no denying the fact that these things were compact cars, after all!

fintail

Does nobody manufacture MB-Tex for replacement? I guess there wouldn't be much demand for it, but I would imagine someone somewhere makes it.

I think MB-Tex goes back to the mid 50s maybe. Leather carries no price premium in most old MB as the tex fools most people, and is so durable, it can look decent 40 years down the road.

fintail

Funny you mention the donation angle...there's a seller of donated cars in my area, and they've had a few W108s now.

fintail

The first thing I thought when I sat behind the wheel of my fintail, with its huge wheel and upright windshield: "This is like a bus!". I am a few inches shorter than you I think, so I can fit fine...but the big wheel is unforgettable.

Shifty makes a good point too - the cars need more tinkering and maintenance than domestic brands. These are high revving little 6s, not big lazy V8s.

andre1969

The first thing I thought when I sat behind the wheel of my fintail, with its huge wheel and upright windshield: "This is like a bus!". I am a few inches shorter than you I think, so I can fit fine...but the big wheel is unforgettable.

So how would the seating position of your fintail compare to this '72 Benz? Would it be similar? For some reason I was thinking the fintail's seating position was a bit higher. For a car to fit me comfortably, the seat has to either go back really far, or be fairly high up if it doesn't. That's one reason why I'm not so fond of the higher seating position of many modern cars...it's just not high enough to offset the lack of horizontal room lost, and often ends up leaving me with no thigh support. That's the main killer for me in cars like the Corolla, Fit, Yaris, etc, but sometimes even bigger cars do it to me. Like the '02-06 Camry unless it had a power seat, or my buddy's '06 Xterra.

hpmctorque

" the domestics started responding with Valiant Broughams, Dart Special Editions, Granadas, Nova LNs and probably the most serious competitor, the Seville."

Lets not forget the Maverick LDO and its Comet counterpart, the predecessors to the Granada and Monarch. These models arguably launched the American compact mass market luxury decor movement.

andre1969

I forgot about the Maverick LDO and the Comet version (can't remember what it was called). I checked my old car book, and it was actually introduced in 1973, so Ford was actually pretty quick to the market in offering these spruced-up compacts. I wonder how well it sold? My book just says that it was fairly popular, but it was listed as an option package rather than a trim level, so they don't have production totals listed.

fintail

Here's what the drivers seat in my car looks like:

See more Car Pictures at CarSpace.com

I don't think it's too low. One thing to look out for on old MB is collapsed seats - they are stuffed with springs and laminated straw, and both of these seem to decompose over time. So the one you sat in might have not been to proper specs. For whatever reason, the seats in my car seem to have held up better than many later cars - the problem seems to be worst in 70s models.

I have the thigh support issue in some cars too, as on a long trip I like to stretch out a bit. I have found some BMW seats to be suitable for this, some of them have a front extendable thigh bolster for taller drivers.

hpmctorque

Those optional decor packages dressed those plain Jane cars up pretty nicely, and lifted them up from the bottom feeder category. The option was well worth the money, in my opinion, especially if you kept your car a few years. Now if they had only had fuel injection, better suspensions and steering, and available 5-speed manuals...the imports wouldn't have made such strong inroads. I guess that was too many "onlys".

fintail

"mole hair interior"...yuck

What a dreamer - hilarious speedo too

The predictions of this guy make him a bit of an optimist, or a lunatic

These PzKw IIs are coming out of the woodwork

boomchek

HA HA HA.... I'm crying from disbelief about the Caprice. Rewind to my post 14910, and my craigslist classic car calculation formula comes into effect for 2 out of the 4 listings here.

You have a Caprice, which, if left alone in stock form would make a decent commuter/beater car. SO you put a load of money into it and pretty much shrink it's appeal from mass market, to a minimal audience (3 people) who probably might admire, but most likely can't afford it now for $12000. It sounds like he just added all the receipts he spent on the car (I''m trying to do the math as the ad says), plus an undisclosed figure for the artisitc value, and came out with the magic number of $12000.

The MB SLC same thing. It'll be $50k in 15 years if all of a sudden there is a surge in demand for mass market old Mercedes coupes with no real historical significance or performance appeal that require a mechanic to be on your payroll.

andre1969

I think as the years went by, the Caprice dashboard actually got worse looking. IIRC, the earlier models had a horizontal strip speedo flanked by two circles. One housed the fuel gauge and one was a space for an optional clock. There was an optional dash, which I think was four square cutouts, that gave you fuel, a circular speedo, temp, and amps. But in the 80's, they went to that weird font that just didn't look right, and I think they replaced the amp gauge with a vacuum gauge.

In contrast, the '83-86 Parisienne dash (also used up through 1989 in the Safari wagon) was kinda cool. It was just a version of the Caprice dash, rather than use the "real" 1977-81 Catalina/Bonneville dash. But instead of the four squares, it had four round dials, which faintly recalled the 1964 Tempest/LeMans/GTO. I thought that was cool that they'd put a little heritage like that into an otherwise mundane (although I liked 'em) 80's car.

lilelvis

It's too bad that Caprice is listed for $12,000 firm. I would have jumped on it for $11,500.

One year from now he will either still have his "$12,000" Caprice or he will have sold it for $2500 to one of the other 3 idiots who would actually want that.

andre1969

I know it's hard to tell from a picture, but that actually looks fairly roomy to me. The steering wheel, while much larger than a modern one, still looks like it's mounted high enough that there's enough room underneath. And the seats looks look like they're raked back at just enough of an angle to be comfortable, and still give a bit of thigh support for tall drivers.

Now would the 1972 era 280SE have a similar-sized passenger cabin? It's hard to remember now, but the one I sat in didn't look like it had as much height inside, and its seats seemed lower. But like you said, they could have collapsed over the years.

fintail

I find my car to be plenty roomy and actually pretty comfortable. The seats are big, kind of squashy, and can be adjusted to suit almost anyone, I would think.

I've only driven a W108/109 once, and it was only for about 100 yards, so I can't recall how it was inside exactly. It was an air suspension car that had sagged down over time when parked, so I was paying attention to that when I moved it. I think they might be a little tighter inside than a fintail, or at least feel that way as the fintail feels airy with the wraparound windows. I'd chalk most of it up to a collapsed seat though. These cars were made to be pretty roomy inside...from the days when men still wore hats, and middle aged German businessmen often aren't very petite.

Regarding the font on the Caprice speedo, I call that the "Celebrity font" because I'm pretty sure it debuted in that car. It's so 80s, in a cheesier than usual way.

fintail

I see the SLC as the "disco" Mercedes - when I see one in period colors like that I think of the opening instrumental bit to "Disco Inferno" or the song "TSOP".

Caprice (and my estimates are generous I am sure) - purchase car = $2500, wheels = $2000, paint = $1500, stereo = $1000, other geegaws = $1000, doesn't make 12 grand.

lemko

Didn't Richard Gere drive one of those in the beginning of "American Gigolo?"

Mr_Shiftright

How fitting.

Why Mercedes bothered to make a hardtop version of a convertible car that already came with a hardtop made of armor plating, is somewhat puzzling to me. Typical Teutonic Overkill?

Or maybe it was clever. I mean, think of all the 450SL owners who never took their hardtops off because the Big Four Rent crane was busy that day. :P

andre1969

Well the hardtop was actually a 2+2 seater, while the convertible was just strictly a 2-seater. Maybe they perceived enough of a market for a 2+2? I think a car with a back seat, no matter how small and unusable, is cheaper to insure than a 2-seater, but I doubt if insurance costs really mattered to the typical luxury car buyer back in the 70's. I don't think it was as easy for the wanna-be poseurs to acquire a new luxury car back then as it is now.

Mr_Shiftright

Sure, a back seat for a cat and a cantaloupe, that's about it.

Ever try to get out of the back seat in one of those? It's like those re-birthing experiences you pay for at a weekend at Esalen in California. :P

hpmctorque

The new Mustang is larger than the original one, yet the back seat is more difficult to access and is tighter than the older model's. The '65-'68 Mustangs had usable back seats, while the newer ones are barely usable.

I've found this to be true with other cars too, and am puzzled as to why. Maybe it has to do with structural rigidity

andre1969

I can think of a few things that might hamper access to the back seat of a newer coupe, compared to an old one. First, the roof pillars on modern cars are very thick, whereas back in the old days, you had a slim B-pillar, or none at all with hardtop models. So there was less bulk there to get in your way. I think the way the sides of newer cars curve in more might hamper access as well.

Then, once you're in the car, it seems like there's less footroom under the seats, which is a real problem if you have big feet.

Back in the day, I think most coupes had a back seat that was lower than the sedan version. While that might not make for a very comfortable seat for many people, when you're tall I think it actually helps out. When your butt sits lower than your knees, you don't need as much room as when your legs are straight out. And with a lower seat, that often helps with headroom.

Just for nostalgia, I sat in the back seat of my '68 Dart a few weeks ago. I can actually fit back there without having my knees touch the seatback. I still don't think I'd want to ride back there for a very long time, though.

I've tried squeezing into the back seat of my '76 LeMans, and it's definitely worse. The seat itself is actually better...much better padded and very comfy. But with the way the sides curve in, and the forward thrust of the B-pillar, it's hard to get back there. And where I have the front seat positioned, my knees hit the not-very-well-padded seatback. Oh well, at least with this car, GM put the back seat ashtrays on the back part of the door armrest, rather than in the seatback. The downsized GM coupes I had ('80 Malibu, '82 Cutlass, '86 Monte Carlo) would put an ashtray right in the seatback, about level with your knee. Pure genius :confuse:

Oh, and I guess GM should also get bonus points for combining metal buckles with vinyl. A winning combination on a hot summer day.

boomchek

Most cars today are heavier than their predecessors mainly due to safety standards.

Pillars are thicker, and bigger, side impact standards are more stringent, more gadgets and gizmos (even though there's more use of lightweight materials and plastics).

When I worked at Honda from 03 to 07 many people asked why the Civic became the size of the old Accords, and why there was no small car like the old 88-91 Civics. I told them you'll never see a new light subcompact car here anymore due to the safety regs.

boomchek

Our family friend had a 70s SLC and we received a few rides from him when we came to Canada in the 80s. His SLC was a bit rusty though, but it moved even with 4 people inside.

Since he was somewhat of a car broker, he also had an Austin Marina he tried to sell us, but we eventually went for the 77 Volvo 240 wagon, and he had an older Jag sedan in his collection (i think a late 60s mk2).

Mr_Shiftright

A "friend" tried to sell you an Austin Marina?