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

stickguy

it has to weigh more than the flat six in any case, plus it looks like it hangs further rearward. maybe bigger tires would help.

I'm a little confused about all the wiring comments. I thought it was all in or present, or maybe he has it but it needs to be installed?

Seems crazy to pull it all back out, expecting to get more money for it. Plus, I have never seen an auction where you didn't know if the car you were bidding on would end up having an engine!

This guy deserves to be hopelessly buried in this beast.

stickguy

If yo ureally want a V8 Porsche, just buy the euro 928 from a few posts up!

Hmm, wonder if you could do a Chevy 350 conversion into a 928, if you found a nice one with a bad engine?

I can feel Shifty getting ready to erupt all the way over here on the east coast!

andre1969

I've seen that too. I think the problem is that people get "light weight" and "low reciprocating mass" mixed up. All the internal, rotating stuff of the Chevy smallblock, like the crankshaft, camshaft, pistons, rods and such IS lightweight, but the block itself is quite heavy for its external dimensions.

I think the Ford 302 block weighs about 100 pounds less than the Chevy smallblock. I think the Ford engine likes to rev more than the Chevy engine, as well, with having the short stroke. I wonder if a Ford V-8 might be a better candidate for swapping in to some of these sports cars whose owners have the urge to "domesticate" them?

lemmer

FYI on the "stuff" in the passenger footwall on the 928.

The long black rod coming from the center console is an adjustable reading light. The mount above it is for a cell phone. The gauge is a battery amp readout. It was put there because, the alternator is larger than stock to handle the amount of extra stuff added. Stereo amps, ect. If you look on the floorboard passenger side you will also see the hand set cable for the cb radio. Thanks for the interest.

Mr_Shiftright

No, no, I have no problem putting a nasty V8 in a 928 because it already has a nasty V8 in there. It's when people put them in Jaguars and Porsches, where they most definitely do not belong (and they aren't built for that level of torque so frame-bending is common), that I get into a snit.

There's a real nice kit to put a Chevy in a 928 (I think the company is Renegade or something like that) and also a blower kit for the stock 928 engine which looks really nice but you have to pony up $5K-6K for that.

All that Porsche really needs is "Death Wish" painted on the doors and it's ready to roll!

200 mph indeed......

bumpy

Think "dumbbell". The troublemaking part of my brain wonders what an SR20DET would do in that 911.

lemmer

PORSCHE 924S '87 Mint, 15,000 miles, black, classic, $10,500.

He was running it a while back at an even higher price. Even if it is the best example available in the world, I don't know if it is worth this.

lemmer

GT6 - least wordy description ever

Fintail's project for the day

'66 Olds convertible 88 project. The guy has a 98 Convertible project and a Bonneville bubble top (whatever that means), too.

stickguy

of course it is clean. There is a picture of him washing it, so truth in advertising. But, what can you really say about a car with 720 million miles on it?

actaully, other than that, it looks pretty darn nice, but I was under the impression that these weren't good cars to start with.

stickguy

looks salvagable if you really want to take it on as a project, but I doubt you could do a nice job once you really dug into it without being way under water. But, get it cheap and DIY in the garage, and you might have a decent cruiser out of it.

andre1969

just refers to that fastback hardtop coupe roof with the big rear window. In 1959-1961, I think all of GM's hardtop coupes had that same bubbletop roofline, although it was creased up a bit for Cadillac. Then in '62, all of the hardtop coupes, except for the Bel Air, went to a more formal roofline that somewhat mimicked a convertible with the top up, with thicker C-pillars, a more vertical rear window, and even creases in the roof to simulate the bows of a convertible top.

There was another style that I think was called the "flattop", which had a big, over-exaggerated, wraparound rear window. IIRC, it was only offered on the 1959-60 hardtop sedans, although some 2-door sedans might have used it too.

andre1969

I think this 1981 LeBaron is really pretty. You really don't see the '80-81 M-bodies too often, especially in coupe form. Kinda neat too, seeing one with bucket seats and a console! Too bad it only has the slant six. With 90 hp, about all this thing would probably do is sit and look pretty!

And this 1982 LTD looks like a lot of car for the money. Doesn't say which engine it has, though. While the Panther-based LTD/Crown Vic has always had a V-8 standard, around this timeframe a weak 255 CID unit was the base engine. Probably would've made it as slow as the slant six LeBaron!

This 1983 Benz 380 SEC looks very seductive, especially at the price. Aren't these things nightmares to maintain and repair, though?

I want to know what the owner of this 1973 Maverick is smoking!! And where I can get some! :P I mean, it's in nice shape, but $3200?! BTW, it was listed earlier at $4200. Maybe they need to knock another $2000 off?

qbrozen

I don't know... i guess i'm liking that Maverick more than you. If it is truly as nice as it looks in pics and as described ... I'm thinking $2500 would be fair to get into a (relatively) nice classic driver.

I know, i know, it could start falling apart any day now ... but what does that have in it anyway? Can I assume that's the straight 6 cyl 200 engine? I've had good experiences with those. The 3-speed auto is weak, but a cheap rebuild. New engine control module is like $50, i believe. Tear off all the garbage emissions stuff and it should be fairly reliable.

stickguy

how much did yo uend up paying for the Lebaron??

1racefan

Is that a 6cylinder Maverick? My grandfather had a powder blue '72 or '74 coupe back when I was a kid. It was a stickshift, on the column. The car was ugly, and it always had problems with the a/c and the heat, but it ran like stink. He drove it well over 150K miles, and then sold it to someone he worked with. That guy rear ended someone with the car, fixed it, and I think it is still in service today.

stickguy

too much for a plain 4 door. Maybe if it was a Grabber with a 302 and 4 speed stick it might be worth 3K (to me, anyway). Even though this one is in nice shape, no one wants a survivor 4 door '73 compact like this. it's just an old car to buy real cheap and use up, not a "classic"

andre1969

but I'm sure it's just a 6-cyl. I think most of them had 200 inline 6'es, although I think the 250 was available. You could also get a 302 V-8 in them. They were actually pretty lightweight, especially the coupes, so I'd imagine that one with a 302 might be a pleasant surprise, and even a 6-cyl might still be adequate.

qbrozen

welll..... to me, classic just means its old. Doesn't mean its "collectible."

I look at it like this ... I don't believe I can buy any better low-mile, easy-to-work-on, solid, large-by-today's-standards sedan for that kind of money.

And the ability to work on it and repair it cheap is definitely something it has over more recent cars. For $2500, I'd be looking at an 80K+ mile, 10-year-old Saturn or some other such thing. And when that breaks, you throw it out. Like I said before, tranny goes out on this, I can rebuild for a couple hundred bucks. "computer" goes out, its $50. Carb rebuild? What's that? $80? So it just makes more sense to me to spend $2500 on this than the aforementioned Saturn/hyundai/mundane domestic, etc.

stickguy

as long as you keep in mind you will be driving early 60's technology (since I think the Maverick is riding on a glorified Falcon chassis). Not everyone used to a modern, fwd car (even a Saturn) is going to be able to deal with that. Plus, 30 years old is getting up there for a daily driver.

even if it is worth 2.5K for you, why pay that if the rest of the market considers it a 1K (or whatever) car?

Still, I agree that it is simple to work on and can be cheap to own, but even by '73 the emissions stuff was getting kind of hinky, unless it has all been stripped off.

au94

Too bad the benz collection is in such bad shape, those were classy looking cars. Don't know much about them though. Maybe you could take 3 and make 1. Ever wonder how they got to Tanner, AL?

Olds looks nice, it could be a sweet cruiser, but I doubt you'd get your money out of it.

Mr_Shiftright

Hey good score in a perverted sort of way:

GT6 -- once described as "possibly the worst car in the world", but I suspect that is a bit harsh, even if uttered by a British writer. This was Triumph's answer to the Datsun 240Z (careful, don't spit coffee all over your keyboard).

Benz 219 -- in a similar vane, this is probably Benz's worst postwar car ever. Quite unsuccessful, it was quickly discontinued, which makes it one of those "rare for very wrong reasons" type of cars. Definitely ready to be banged into Turkish teapots for tourists.

Benz 380SEC -- yes, very seductive for the price, and possibly an okay buy if you get lucky. Problem with the 380/250/450 SLs and SLCs is that they are kind of like benign cows---lazy, heavy handlers (ever see a cow corner?), a devil to fix, and $$$ to keep running. They also have a huge appetite for fuel (or hay, if you want to keep the bovine analogy going). Think two-door German Buick. On the positive side, they are attractive and nice highway cars as long as you don't forget that you are NOT in a sports car in fact.

If you like this type of V8 Benz of the "sporty" nature, buy a 560SL or 500SEC and you'll have a much better car in every single way----except the $$$ to fix part.

Right now, where I live, a total rebuild of one of those V8 engines is going to cost you $12,000--$16,000. So you KNOW what happens when you develop clanking camshaft noises or start to burn lots of oil.

But if that 380SEC ran well, I'd buy it for $1,500 and just drive it until it did something real bad....hey, kinda like a Porsche 928!

andre1969

just to put the price of that Maverick in perspective, I only paid $3000 for my '76 LeMans. And my LeMans is a coupe has a 350 V-8, air conditioning, tilt, AM/FM stereo (or what passed for stereo back then), power windows, power seat, rally wheels, dual exhaust, and an interior that actually gives vinyl a new respect. So when I think $3000 for this car, to me, the Maverick just doesn't seem to be worth nearly as much. But then, I could see someone else valuing the simplicity and relative economy of the Maverick, or possibly just liking the Maverick style and hating the LeMans style, so it's all relative I guess. Plus, my LeMans has been repainted, so it's not original. And it has a tear in the driver's seat.

Also, don't let the overblown sizes in general of the 70's distort your impression of the Maverick. They're actually pretty cramped inside...a modern Toyota Corolla or Honda Civic probably gives you more interior room! And they had huge transmission/driveshaft humps. While they were considered a compact car, they were considerably smaller, both inside and out, than a Dart, Valiant, or any of the Nova derivatives, all cars that could probably pass for midsize these days. Truthfully, even my LeMans isn't that big inside. The way I have the seat adjusted, it actually feels huge up front, but you couldn't fit an adult in the back seat. And the trunk, I'd guess, is about 15 cubic feet....about that of a Honda Accord. Coupes back then tended to have really small back seats.

andre1969

if I really needed another car, and it ended up being as nice in person, I'd actually consider that LeBaron! I'm not crazy about a slant six in something that heavy...90 hp, maybe 160 ft-lb of torque, and a 3300 lb or so body just doesn't sound like a good combination. Plus, they probably stuck it with a 2.94:1 rear just so the engine could move all that mass, so it probably gets worse real-world economy than the 318!

qbrozen

yup. just stuff carried over from the 60s. pretty much everything on my '66 Stang and '79 Zephyr was interchangeable.

Now, market price is interesting and something Shifty and I have disagreed on in the past. Fact is, try to find another in the exact condition and miles as this one. Odds are STRONGLY against being able to find a comparable car. So there really is no way to establish a market price for it based on other sales. Can you find other Mavericks? Sure. Can you find another one in this condition (again, assuming its as nice as advertised)? Not likely.

Will the seller still be hanging on to it at that price? Possibly. I have to think, however, if I'm willing to pull the trigger at $2500, others will, too. And, most likely, someone somewhere will pay even more. Therefore, isn't that then the definition of market price?

qbrozen

Hmmm... something to think about. I'm really not familiar with Mavericks. Were they smaller than, say, my '79 Zephyr? I was assuming it was pretty comparable, and, to me, that car was big. Sure, it was dwarfed by my friend's LTD of similar vintage (these were both our high school cars at some point), but the back seat of my Zephyr was almost certainly larger than my current Volvo S70. Oh, and the Zephyr was a coupe.

andre1969

the Zephyr was around 196 inches long and rode a 105.6 inch wheelbase. The Maverick's wheelbase was 109.9" for the sedan, 103.3" for the coupe. I'm not sure about overall length, but I want to say around 185 or so for the sedan?

The Zephyr and Fairmont were very space-efficient designs, though. They were taller, boxier, had a taller rear deck, and thinner doors, all leading to a pretty roomy interior. The only thing I remember about them that was bad was, like the Maverick, they had a huge transmission and driveshaft tunnel. While they were considered compacts at the time, the Fairmont and Zephyr rivaled some midsized cars. In fact, I think the EPA classified them as intermediates. And in later years, they served as the basis for the 1981-82 Granada/Cougar and 83-86 LTD/Marquis, and the '80-82 and '83-88 T-bird/Cougar XR-7, cars that were all marketed as midsize.

I think the Zephyr might have been lighter than the Maverick, too. They used some pretty small engines, like the 2.3 Pinto OHC 4-cyl and 200 inline 6 (I don't think the 250 was available in these). The 255 V-8 was also offered, and the 302, which could really kick in a car this light.

andre1969

your logic with that Maverick and pricing is pretty much the logic I used when I bought my LeMans! I've always wanted a '76-77 LeMans, ever since I was a little kid...while all the normal kids back then wanted a black Trans Am with a gold chicken on the hood like what Burt Reynolds drove in Smokey and the Bandit, I wanted a car like Sherriff Justice!

So right there, it was a type of car that I actually wanted specifically, as opposed to some old battlecruiser that just happened to catch my eye. Plus, it was in pretty nice shape, and very well-equipped for the time, and a nice color combination. Now, if I didn't buy this one, I'm sure another LeMans might have come along. But it might not have been as well-equipped, in as nice of a color (the 70's had some beautiful colors, but most people had bad taste so they chose all the nasty colors!), or it might've been in worse condition, or had a smaller engine, and so on and so on.

Now, in retrospect, I'd rather have a LeMans with a 400 or 455, instead of the 350 that I have. But by this time, I wonder if a 180 hp 400 or 200 hp 455 would really give me that much more excitement than the 160 hp 350 I have? Probably not. And as for color, call me twisted, but there were two greens they offered back then that I would really love. One of them was a light, misty, silvery-green that is displayed on on the car on the right in this picture. The other was a darker, kind of a forest green that looked like this '73 GTO

But, hey, I'm happy with it. So if someone could buy that Maverick for $2500 and be happy with it, that's what counts!

Mr_Shiftright

Ah grasshopper may I humbly suggest an error in your understanding of fair market.

The fair market is not based on a comparable car exactly. It is based on the ceiling price people are willing to pay for something. A brand new Maverick locked in a vault and now for sale has no comparable...it may be the only one in the world...but that doesn't mean it's worth any more than a normal clean one. Why? Because nobody cares if a Maverick is pristine or not. Of if they care, they care maybe 10% more.

Appraisers and price guides don't set the market, buyers do.

Actually I had no problem with the asking price for the Maverick. I don't know why you got a different impression. Maybe due to my comments on other cars I found "overpriced". Basically I think any really clean good running, defect-free car is worth at least $2,500 in the year 2005, regardless of make, model or age.

qbrozen

oh, i wasn't really commenting on your take of this particular car. I just remember discussions we've had in the past regarding market value. I think it had to do with an RX7 and ebay, IIRC.

Anyway, as far as this post, I agree with everything you just said .... and its basically what I said regarding the price being what I (the buyer) am willing to pay. Unless, of course, we're talking about a dime a dozen car that I lose my mind over and pay twice what 20 other guys just paid for theirs.

martian

..just why are the partes so damned expensive? i mean, with a reasonable production run, one would expect that prices for pistons, valves, etc., would be pretty close to detroit pricing-face it, there is nothing 'high tech" about pistons and connecting rods.
but you are certainly correwct in your comments-it costs a bloody fotune to rebuild an old M-B engine! That is why i wonder why there is a collectors market for these cars at any price.

andre1969

but I kinda like this pimp-adelic beauty

Hard to tell from just the one pic, but this beast looks like it might have some potential.

And here's a nice low-mileage, original 1972 Dart Swinger which I think is a bit pricey, but I kinda like it. To me, 1972 was the last year the Dart had any semblance of a sporty flair to it, and the front-end had a nice, aggressive stance to it. For '73 they went for more of a beaky look that tried to look upscale in that typical 70's fashion. Something about this car looks re-painted, though!

qbrozen

I gotta think $6300 on that Chrysler is insane. Why? Well, aside from obvious reasons, my father-in-law, as a matter of fact, has in his possession a '74 Caddy coupe de'ville (i believe that's the name) in all original nice shape with low miles (don't know exactly, but its below 100k). He bought it last year, for some strange reason, thinking he could take care of a few minor cosmetic details, then flip it at this year's auto show for a profit.

well, he had 5 offers on it. ALL were $4k. Talk about market value, huh?

andre1969

look what I just found not too far away from me! Price seems kinda high to me, even if it is as nice as they say. One thing I don't understand though, is why a car would need a rebuilt after only 37,000 miles? Also, a rebuild from "the cam up" makes me wonder. Plus, it's just a 305! Wouldn't it make sense, if it needed a lot of work, to just yank the 305 and put a 350 under there?! :confuse:

I think this car is a good example, of buying what you really want when the opportunity arises. For example, if I hadn't bought my '76 LeMans when I did, and then saw this thing with an asking price almost twice as high, I'd really be kicking myself! Okay, so this one is around 70 miles away from me, while I had to go 500 for the other one, but still!

andre1969

this one goes against my normal taste in cars, but for some reason I find it kinda appealing.

jlawrence01

Was wondering WHY after 24 years, the individual was selling the vehicle ... then I saw that the transmission was ready to go ...

andre1969

I think these are ugly, but I like the light blue color on this one. I especially like the blurb about "400 horses under the hood!" Umm, no. Now it might have 400 cubic inches under the hood, but I'm guessing hp is more like 175-180. I think the 400's were almost always 2-bbls.

And this loveboat is kinda purty, although by 1979 the 460 was gone, and the 400 only put out like 166 hp. The price actually doesn't seem bad on this one, provided it looks as good in person.

Mr_Shiftright

Price is silly on that Lemans. All the money in the world, plus 10% would be $5,000, for Pebble Beach quality.

From "the cam up" means a valve job near as I can tell. I suppose if a car was sitting a long time the valves could stick in the guides.

lemko

That car isn't a 1972, it's a 1973 model. My dad had a 1972 LTD with the same 400 V-8 with 2bbl.

Mr_Shiftright

I think you may have forgotten how HUGE that car is, the LTD. I trust you live in the wide open spaces somewhere?

andre1969

good catch; I didn't even notice! Heck, now that I think about it, the '73 was a completely different body from the '72! Most of the '73-78 generation of big Fords had the more pretentious "formal" grille, and many of them had covered headlights. Those earlier versions of that '73-78 platform seem much more rare.

And yeah, while they'd be considered huge today, those big Fords were just your typical "standard" car of the time. IIRC the '73-78 was on a 121" wheelbase, and right around 220" long overall. By the mid-70's, some midsized cars were almost that long. In fact, I believe the '77-79 LTD-II (facelifted Torino) wagons were actually a touch longer than the full-sized '73-78 Galaxie/LTD wagons!

But then, I am out in the wide open spaces, so that might be one reason something like that doesn't seem so big to me! :shades:

Mr_Shiftright

If you can't park nose first where you live, don't buy an LTD.

fintail

$1500 SEC = ultimate beater. You're SOL if it dies, but that has to be the classiest ride available for the $$

MB 219 was indeed a mess, only useful as parts cars for other higher line pontons

lemko

Back in 1977, when GM downsized its cars, Ford had ads for the LTD comparing it to the Cadillac DeVille. They both have the same 121" wheelbase as does my 1989 Cadillac Brougham.

andre1969

Ford also ran ads proclaiming that they were the only company giving buyers a choice in full-sized cars, offering a "traditional-size" LTD and a new, "trim-size" LTD-II. Nevermind the fact that the LTD-II was just a re-trimmed Torino, just a pre-downsized intermediate wearing crisp new sheetmetal. IIRC, Dodge and Plymouth started trying to market their midsized Monaco/Fury as full-sizers too around that time. And I'm sure that once the truly big Royal Monaco and Gran Fury were dropped for '78, they were pushing those old intermediates as full-sizers. But then just a rew years earlier in 1975, ads proclaimed "The New, Small Fury, the car a lot of people have been waiting for!" "A lot" of people missed the memo, though, because it didn't sell well except into police and taxi fleets.

As for parking a battlecruiser, one thing I learned real quick when I went to college, and the under-sized parking spaces that went with the freshman lot, is that in tight quarters it's easier to BACK your car into a parking spot rather than pull in. This holds true whether you're in a mastodon-sized car trying to jockey around in a normal-sized parking lot, or in a small car that just happens to be in extremely tight quarters. I remember there was this cute Asian girl that drove a beautiful emerald green R-body New Yorker that on certain days got to the campus around the same time I did. If I saw her, I'd help guide her into the spot.

lemmer

I agree about the ultimate beater only if you are a person who can let things go. You can't say "I am just going to fix the air conditioning" or "I'll just put in a new power window motor" because before you know it, you will be in for another $1500. On a $1500 Mercedes, I wouldn't do anything more than an oil change.

andre1969

without air conditioning, as long as the windows still work. One advantage to having crank windows, I guess...often power windows coordinate with the air conditioning to fail around the same time! :mad:

fintail

Or if one can do the work themselves. A window regulator or motor is not especially difficult to fix (I did one on my fintail, easy job) or expensive to buy used - AC on the other hand...

Not many of these survived in acceptable condition

These keep going downhill, even the nicer ones

stickguy

I always liked this generation of Corollas, expecially the 2 door and hatch SR-5 models. The pinnacle of Toyotaness, as long as you kept them away from the salt.

steine13

..as long as you kept them away from the salt.

Around here, you can stand next to a pre-90s Japanese car... and if you listen carefully, you can actually hear them rust.

-Mathias

qbrozen

Corolla - should somebody explain to that seller that sedan does not mean 2-door?

Benz - $10K?? Hmmm... lesse... carpeted dash is never a good sign and "air needs recharge" means it needs to be converted or replaced completely.