Those 80s Camaros are pretty much worthless unless they are <1000 mile time capsule cars. That one is about as awesome as the Maserati the alarmist media was running with last week, no doubt. A lot of car enthusiasts wouldn't take it for free.
The last post on the page is interesting, with the old 5er being clunked. That one looks like a big waste, yeah. But I have to think, if people are so upset about this, why didn't they try to buy these cars for the C4C equivalents beforehand? As they say, cash talks, and something else walks...
I saw an 80's Camaro today, on my way down to Kings Dominion near Richmond, VA. The gold chains and fooball jersey the driver was wearing was probably worth more than the car!
I remember they were kind of a hot car to have back when I was a kid, although I preferred the Trans Am. I could see a nice one bringing a few bucks, but I doubt anybody would be C4C'ing a really nice one anyway.
Those Aero coupes are neat and rare but no one cares.
more insanity from 4, 5 and 6 especially the Lambo.
I love the Jeep Kaiser. That is freaking awesome. There is one of those parked in down town Torrington by the Tattoo shop near the Walgreens by the police station if you know where that is.
Oh yeah everyone out there has an opinion on value of old cars until you ask them to take out their checkbook and VOTE with it. Suddenly they are faced with explaining how on the one hand they insist Car X is worth $10000 "all day long", and on the other hand, they won't give $3000 for it. You'd think they wouldn't mind the "easy money" they'd make on the resale? :P
70 Monte Carlo -- it's nice, but really, this is 2009 and it's not a Chevelle. Try half the price.
67 Satellite -- no documentation, can't spell the car's name right, and he wants a world-setting price for it? This is, after all, 2009, and it is...ahem...a Satellite.
85 Rolls Corniche convertible --- he might get $35,000 for it. Not out of the question.
79 T-Bird -- yeah, the miles are ridiculously low, but who cares? I guess somebody might pay $8K for one, but nobody I know.
79 T-Bird -- yeah, the miles are ridiculously low, but who cares? I guess somebody might pay $8K for one, but nobody I know.
The only way I could see someone paying that kind of money would be if it was someone who was as passionate about those T-birds as I am about the '76-77 LeMans or the Mopar R-body...and even I have my limits! I imagine that someone who wanted one of those T-birds though, would only be willing to pay top dollar for the nicest example out there, and one that's fully optioned up. In 1979 they had some kind of special edition called Heritage, or something like that, which had a landau top that blanked out the big quarter windows in back, leaving only the little slits in the "basket handle" B-pillar. One of my cousins had one, and that thing had nicer carpeting in the trunk than what most cars have in the passenger cabin! I have a feeling this '79 is just some low-level model with a 302, and that gold "leather" is probably just vinyl.
I like that '78 Grand Marquis a lot. I've always had a bit of a soft spot for these, although I rank them below an equivalent GM or Mopar in terms of desirability (for me, at least). But I do have an unhealthy obsession for cars in the right shade of green, and that one does it for me! Kinda cool that it has the big 460. I imagine that was kind of rare by that time, as most of these were probably just 351's or 400's. I wonder if you could get a 302 in something that big back then?
Is there any sort of price premium for the Aerocoupe version of the Monte Carlo SS, compared to the conventional notchback? Personally, I never cared for them. I'd just rather have the notchback. Or better yet, and Olds Cutlass 442 or Regal T-type or Grand National, mainly because they had nicer interiors and weren't as common.
In 1979 they had some kind of special edition called Heritage, or something like that,
Yeah, also in '78 they also had a Diamond Jubile Edition like the Mark V did. As for those years of the Thunderbird, I guess for basically the same money you could get into a clean Mark V and have the benefit of the 460, more options, and a much nicer looking car IMO.
That 78 Grand Marquis is an odd one... 460, power equipment and no A/C. You could definately spec out some wierd stuff back then. Could you imagine ordering a car like that today?
We had an '85 Caprice wagon - a cheaper version of that Roadmaster. A real boat, but my wife wanted the classic mom-mobile instead of one of them newfangled minivans that had just come out. SUV's weren't on the scene back in those days, so if you wanted to seat 6 people, that was what you went for if you didn't want a full size van.
That 78 Grand Marquis is an odd one... 460, power equipment and no A/C. You could definately spec out some wierd stuff back then. Could you imagine ordering a car like that today?
Yeah, I thought that was a bit odd, too. At first I thought maybe the seller meant the car had a/c but it didn't work. But, I guess if the car originally came from up north, maybe it was a bit less likely for it to have a/c? Still, Connecticut isn't THAT far north; I'm sure it still gets stifling up there in the summer!
I could also see some scenario such as someone going from a late 60's car to a late 70's car, and thinking they could get by without a/c. I've noticed that 1960's cars seem to handle no a/c better. They had better fresh-air ventilation, especially if they had vent windows, and often the glass didn't curve as much, so the roof kept the sun's rays out better, I guess. Then, all that extra padding and insulation they used in the later 1970's seemed to hold the heat more, and the cars seemed more airtight, which no doubt contributed to baking the passengers.
I imagine a lot of people still bought cars with no a/c in the late 1970's, but then when it was time to trade again, they made sure to never make the same mistake again!
I guess if you had a collection of all T-Birds ever made and you needed THAT one to fill it out---then maybe. But spending $8K on a car that is generally ignored by 99.9% of the world's population---well, that takes a certain kind of selfless unconditional love that I can't muster for that American wood stove.
You know, your money, your choice. But when I think of what nice cars you can buy in today's market for $8K......
With some of those, I have to wonder if someone is trying to get out of a big mortgage or something. Asking top-notch 2006 Barrett-Jackson prices in 2009...
I suppose if you detailed and presented your car in a glittery showroom setting, as BJ does, with TV cameras rolling, the bidders all lubed up, and with mirrors under your car, a fat binder with all documentation, etc and a busker pointing at your buyers encouraging them to big higher---then YEAH, maybe you could ask BJ prices.
But when you put an ad on craigslist, with a few blurry photos and you can't spell the name of your car----gimme a break, or take a course in marketing, would be m advice.
A mirror under my car...I think the fintail would break it :P
So...I paid $1500 for that car...let's say I sink 25-30K into it and do a good quality restoration...I might have to ship it back to Europe to sell it, but I think I could get half my money back. Sounds right.
I noticed all that too on the Caprice wagon. The carpet looks destoryed in the driver's side footwell.
I wouldn't be surprised if this was some sort of an airport transport vehicle, some kind of a special fleet order or something. Maybe that's the explanation for the car phone too.
The rusty spots on the carpet, are they from water collecting in the footwells? Lots of weird things about this car, and for $1500, who cares. But this definetely does not look like a granny driven car for some reason.
On a side note when I worked in the security biz in my past life, the coroners would use these wagons to transport dead bodies to the morgue. They later switched to Savanna type vans when the wagons went out of production.
First the price has one too many zeroes and even then it's double of what it should be. Then there is a ton of spelling mistakes. No other details.... probably no sale for a while for him.
I like it how the poster there just knows exactly which clunker car has ben "babied" and that they're all in "mint condtion, especially the brown Camaro just by looking at the back of it from 25 feet away.
I agree with Shifty. People will say it's worth this or that until it's time to vote with their own money.
Yup I am not going to cry over someone clunking a C4 unless some idiot clunks a ZR-1.
These are the some of the same people who showed pictures of a bunch of cars that claimed were clunkers at a few dealerships but when I pointed out most of them got too good of gas mileage or were too old to clunk they got all defensive.
No, no they said I asked the dealership they said all of them were clunkers.
R-I-G-H-T.....
So what is more believable that a dealership just blew $50,000 plus dollars on clunker deals that will get rejected or that you made a mistake or are stretching the truth a little?
None of these cars had Clunker or C4C written on the windows either and most most still had their plates on.
There were some pictures of a Cyclone that had supposedly gotten clunked too but it also didn't have clunkers written on it. There were pictures of a Typhoon and it did have CARS and Clunkers written on it along with a number that was probably the application number for the Clunker submission.
That is kind of sad but the Typhoon looked a little rough. I would imagine the most valuable parts of those cars are the exterior body kit and trim pieces as they were only offered on the few thousand they made. The body kit on this car was all roughed up.
I was also about to say he was dreaming with that HP number for an engine pulled from an F150 ... then realized he must have pulled it from a Lightning. Strange that you wouldn't mention that, though.
'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
My roommate just went to Advance Auto, and asked me if I needed anything. I asked him to get a pcv valve for my '85 Silverado. Now, he knows absolutely nothing about cars, so I wrote down the following on a piece of paper...
PCV Valve 1985 Chevy C10 truck 305-4bbl.
He just called, from the store. Said they wanted to know whether it was 2wd or 4wd. Maybe I'm being a bit too much of a gearhead here, but if it was 4wd, I would've written down K10!
Then, he said they wanted to know how many liters the engine was? Guess the cashier couldn't find their handy-dandy english-to-metric conversion table.
Honestly, I don't expect the layman to know stuff like that. But I'd hope someone who works in an auto parts store would? Or am I just being too nitpicky?
Still, this just smacks of the time I went off on the manager at Firestone who said "LOOK, we don't have time to memorize the oil requirements of every single car out there, so we just put 10W30 in everything!" :surprise: I think that particular store went under new management not too long after that.
looks like you are having a lot of fun trying to reason with the 'army of darkness'. :confuse: so when are you changing your moniker to 'swedish...?' how about if we have everyone help out? meatball?, no. fish? no. i did go to an IKEA over the weekend.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
02 Continental should be a good parts car. Interior looks like new. But I don't think anyone will pay that much for it when you can find a running no accident condition one for the same money, although with higher mileage.
2002 Continental -- you can buy a clean running one for LESS than he's asking for the wreck!!! Dream on, pal. Give it to someone, would ya?
73 Gold Duster---what a nightmare in progress. Part it out, bud
76 Trans AM -- just go buy a nice one for $12,500 and be done with it, then rent a tow bar, then strip a few pieces off this disaster for sale, and take the rest to the wrecking yard. What is he smoking?
79 Cutlass -- fair enough price! Make it a '79 Hurst / Olds clone
86 Chrysler "Woody" -- shouldn't it really be called a Plasticky? Just askin'
Well, if it is just a standard 5.4, he's got his head in the clouds thinking he could get all that extra power with bolt-ons. But, then again, what would you expect of someone looking to get $80k for a '97 mustang.
'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
"what would you expect of someone looking to get $80k for a '97 mustang"
Yeah, I'd have REAL trouble choosing between Ricky Racer's '97 Mustang and, oh, the Porche 911s, BMW M6s, Ferarri 360s, and every kind of Mercedes you might want on Cars.com for $70-$90k in the DFW area. You want domestic? A few Ford GTs are in that price range...tough choice :confuse: :sick:
No how, no way is it possible to bump a naturally aspirated engine up an additional 53% horsepower with an intake, exhaust, and reflash. (Standard 5.4 in an '01 F150 had a whopping 260hp and this guy is claiming 400.) I don't know all the details, but I am damned confident in saying the difference between an F150 5.4 and Cobra 5.4 goes WAAYYY beyond intake and exhaust.
'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
Why does a V6 mustang with an auto need traction control???
The Olds Cutlass guy screwed up. The Hurst option on that car is a 350 OLDS engine. The Chevy 350 just makes it a mis-fit. It would take the engine and another 5K minimum to make it a H/O clone. The H/O started out with the Cutlass Calais, not the Supreme. Different interior, suspension, grill, etc.
I had the '79 Calais with the Chevy 305. The engine was the weakest part of the car. The suspension was awsome. Excellent handling with a good, albeit firm, ride. The Supreme rode like a marshmellow. :P
I had the '79 Calais with the Chevy 305. The engine was the weakest part of the car. The suspension was awsome. Excellent handling with a good, albeit firm, ride. The Supreme rode like a marshmellow.
Did the Calais use the 2bbl or 4bbl 305? And did they at least use an axle ratio better than the 2.41:1 that GM seemed to use in just about everything back then?
I guess if you wanted to just do a quickie swap, it's cheaper to throw in a Chevy 350 where a 305 once was. But what bothers me, is if the 305 had the THM200 transmission and it wasn't swapped out too, the 350 would probably tear that up pretty quickly.
IIRC, the ratio was a 2.73:1. Both the chevy 305 and the olds 350 were 4bbl quadrajets, but the 350 got better gas mileage! The THM200 issue seemed to be specific to a production lot. There were thousands of those installed that gave 100K plus of trouble free service. Mine had a slight whine when under maximum load, but after 78K miles (when I sold it) it had not given the slightest bit of trouble.
On the other hand, the '78-'79 305 had an intake/head problem in the #8 cylinder that caused fuel fouling on the plug every 8K miles or so. City driving really aggrevated the problem. I used to buy 10 plugs for a tune up, because I knew I would be changing/cleaning the #8 regularly. A friend had a '78 Camaro with the same problem. That's when I started checking around and found out it was a known design issue that Chevrolet didn't talk about. In today's emission environment they would never get away with it.
I've always wondered what the story was behind the late 70's Malibu and the 350 engine. I've heard conflicting stories as to whether it was available or not. For instance, my old car encyclopedia says it was only offered on the 1979 Malibu wagon, but I've known people with '79 Malibu coupes that had a 350 and said it came that way. Seems like it was only 1979 though, not '78 or '80. I've also heard that GM really didn't want anything in these cars bigger than a ~5L engine, for CAFE purposes.
With Olds, I read that they found some EPA loophole that allowed them to build the 1979 Hurst. If they used an engine that was already certified from another car, they could put it in the Cutlass without getting it re-tested, provided they built fewer than 2500. So, they got the 350 out of the Delta/Toro/Ninety-Eight, and built 2,499 Hursts.
Maybe Chevy did something similar with the 1979 Malibu coupe? One that I specifically remember was a light brown coupe with dark brown SS-style racing stripes, bucket seats, and a floor shifter. The owner had been a substitute teacher at my high school, but I ran into him about a year after I graduated, and we talked about his car...he was one of the ones that said it came that way.
Chevy also put 350's in the Malibu police cars, so maybe because of that, it was easier for them to put some in some civilian models?
Comments
'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
Some of these people are the same ones who want Texas to secede from the Union so they aren't exactly stable anyway.
So one of them posts some pictures of clunked cars and there is a late 80s early 90s Z28 camaro in there.
That starts of a fire storm of OMG that's a collectible, rare, classic car and worth a ton more then 4,500 dollars.
I try to point out that an 80s camaro is none of those things and just an old car with a grand or so wholesale and not anywhere near 4,500 bucks
Hilarity ensues.
Read at your own risk.
link title
Guess its the 6-cyl that makes it so valuable?
'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
Those 80s Camaros are pretty much worthless unless they are <1000 mile time capsule cars. That one is about as awesome as the Maserati the alarmist media was running with last week, no doubt. A lot of car enthusiasts wouldn't take it for free.
The last post on the page is interesting, with the old 5er being clunked. That one looks like a big waste, yeah. But I have to think, if people are so upset about this, why didn't they try to buy these cars for the C4C equivalents beforehand? As they say, cash talks, and something else walks...
I like this: "...to make sure dat da car is good"...that alone is a red flag, of course along with the price being a mere 4x what the car is worth.
I remember they were kind of a hot car to have back when I was a kid, although I preferred the Trans Am. I could see a nice one bringing a few bucks, but I doubt anybody would be C4C'ing a really nice one anyway.
#2
#3
ok not so crazy
#4
#5
#6
bargain for someone
#7
#8
semi andre
Those Aero coupes are neat and rare but no one cares.
more insanity from 4, 5 and 6 especially the Lambo.
I love the Jeep Kaiser. That is freaking awesome. There is one of those parked in down town Torrington by the Tattoo shop near the Walgreens by the police station if you know where that is.
70 Monte Carlo -- it's nice, but really, this is 2009 and it's not a Chevelle. Try half the price.
67 Satellite -- no documentation, can't spell the car's name right, and he wants a world-setting price for it? This is, after all, 2009, and it is...ahem...a Satellite.
85 Rolls Corniche convertible --- he might get $35,000 for it. Not out of the question.
79 T-Bird -- yeah, the miles are ridiculously low, but who cares? I guess somebody might pay $8K for one, but nobody I know.
The only way I could see someone paying that kind of money would be if it was someone who was as passionate about those T-birds as I am about the '76-77 LeMans or the Mopar R-body...and even I have my limits! I imagine that someone who wanted one of those T-birds though, would only be willing to pay top dollar for the nicest example out there, and one that's fully optioned up. In 1979 they had some kind of special edition called Heritage, or something like that, which had a landau top that blanked out the big quarter windows in back, leaving only the little slits in the "basket handle" B-pillar. One of my cousins had one, and that thing had nicer carpeting in the trunk than what most cars have in the passenger cabin! I have a feeling this '79 is just some low-level model with a 302, and that gold "leather" is probably just vinyl.
I like that '78 Grand Marquis a lot. I've always had a bit of a soft spot for these, although I rank them below an equivalent GM or Mopar in terms of desirability (for me, at least). But I do have an unhealthy obsession for cars in the right shade of green, and that one does it for me! Kinda cool that it has the big 460. I imagine that was kind of rare by that time, as most of these were probably just 351's or 400's. I wonder if you could get a 302 in something that big back then?
Is there any sort of price premium for the Aerocoupe version of the Monte Carlo SS, compared to the conventional notchback? Personally, I never cared for them. I'd just rather have the notchback. Or better yet, and Olds Cutlass 442 or Regal T-type or Grand National, mainly because they had nicer interiors and weren't as common.
Yeah, also in '78 they also had a Diamond Jubile Edition like the Mark V did. As for those years of the Thunderbird, I guess for basically the same money you could get into a clean Mark V and have the benefit of the 460, more options, and a much nicer looking car IMO.
That 78 Grand Marquis is an odd one... 460, power equipment and no A/C. You could definately spec out some wierd stuff back then. Could you imagine ordering a car like that today?
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
Yeah, I thought that was a bit odd, too. At first I thought maybe the seller meant the car had a/c but it didn't work. But, I guess if the car originally came from up north, maybe it was a bit less likely for it to have a/c? Still, Connecticut isn't THAT far north; I'm sure it still gets stifling up there in the summer!
I could also see some scenario such as someone going from a late 60's car to a late 70's car, and thinking they could get by without a/c. I've noticed that 1960's cars seem to handle no a/c better. They had better fresh-air ventilation, especially if they had vent windows, and often the glass didn't curve as much, so the roof kept the sun's rays out better, I guess. Then, all that extra padding and insulation they used in the later 1970's seemed to hold the heat more, and the cars seemed more airtight, which no doubt contributed to baking the passengers.
I imagine a lot of people still bought cars with no a/c in the late 1970's, but then when it was time to trade again, they made sure to never make the same mistake again!
You know, your money, your choice. But when I think of what nice cars you can buy in today's market for $8K......
But when you put an ad on craigslist, with a few blurry photos and you can't spell the name of your car----gimme a break, or take a course in marketing, would be m advice.
That, and they fall into the trap "I've put $50,000 in this thing, I'd better get that out of it!" :sick:
cost of car + cost of restoration / 2
note: if car does not appear in any "classic car price guide" divide / 4
So...I paid $1500 for that car...let's say I sink 25-30K into it and do a good quality restoration...I might have to ship it back to Europe to sell it, but I think I could get half my money back. Sounds right.
I wouldn't be surprised if this was some sort of an airport transport vehicle, some kind of a special fleet order or something. Maybe that's the explanation for the car phone too.
The rusty spots on the carpet, are they from water collecting in the footwells? Lots of weird things about this car, and for $1500, who cares. But this definetely does not look like a granny driven car for some reason.
On a side note when I worked in the security biz in my past life, the coroners would use these wagons to transport dead bodies to the morgue. They later switched to Savanna type vans when the wagons went out of production.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
First the price has one too many zeroes and even then it's double of what it should be.
Then there is a ton of spelling mistakes. No other details.... probably no sale for a while for him.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
I like it how the poster there just knows exactly which clunker car has ben "babied" and that they're all in "mint condtion, especially the brown Camaro just by looking at the back of it from 25 feet away.
I agree with Shifty. People will say it's worth this or that until it's time to vote with their own money.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
Some old Corvettes are worth $80,000, some are worth $30,000, and quite a few are worth $4000.
But what you hear is "Oh, did you see that CORVETTE that went to Cash for Clunkers?"
Now WE here see a clapped out '84 C4, but the person hearing this in a bar sees a restored '65 Sting Ray big block.
These are the some of the same people who showed pictures of a bunch of cars that claimed were clunkers at a few dealerships but when I pointed out most of them got too good of gas mileage or were too old to clunk they got all defensive.
No, no they said I asked the dealership they said all of them were clunkers.
R-I-G-H-T.....
So what is more believable that a dealership just blew $50,000 plus dollars on clunker deals that will get rejected or that you made a mistake or are stretching the truth a little?
None of these cars had Clunker or C4C written on the windows either and most most still had their plates on.
There were some pictures of a Cyclone that had supposedly gotten clunked too but it also didn't have clunkers written on it. There were pictures of a Typhoon and it did have CARS and Clunkers written on it along with a number that was probably the application number for the Clunker submission.
That is kind of sad but the Typhoon looked a little rough. I would imagine the most valuable parts of those cars are the exterior body kit and trim pieces as they were only offered on the few thousand they made. The body kit on this car was all roughed up.
'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
Maybe it is just a modded 5.4.
PCV Valve
1985 Chevy C10 truck
305-4bbl.
He just called, from the store. Said they wanted to know whether it was 2wd or 4wd. Maybe I'm being a bit too much of a gearhead here, but if it was 4wd, I would've written down K10!
Then, he said they wanted to know how many liters the engine was? Guess the cashier couldn't find their handy-dandy english-to-metric conversion table.
Honestly, I don't expect the layman to know stuff like that. But I'd hope someone who works in an auto parts store would? Or am I just being too nitpicky?
Still, this just smacks of the time I went off on the manager at Firestone who said "LOOK, we don't have time to memorize the oil requirements of every single car out there, so we just put 10W30 in everything!" :surprise: I think that particular store went under new management not too long after that.
"You pay peanuts, you'll get monkeys"
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
so when are you changing your moniker to 'swedish...?'
how about if we have everyone help out?
meatball?, no. fish? no.
i did go to an IKEA over the weekend.
if you have to mention the car cover...
i thought there was going to be an elf involved
i never liked fords with chevy motors in them
bill says this is not a kit car :P
overweight midget
the rare headturner model
roh roh
leave this time capsule buried
That "Ford" isn't even a Ford, just a mishmash of parts pretending to be something.
If your speedometer says "reproduction" right on it, you know you are driving something uncool.
2001 Range Rover...nice resale value.
Olds
the car is not a driver
ENGINE IS FRESHE
Priced Right
John Voight's Car?
Good Beater
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
73 Gold Duster---what a nightmare in progress. Part it out, bud
76 Trans AM -- just go buy a nice one for $12,500 and be done with it, then rent a tow bar, then strip a few pieces off this disaster for sale, and take the rest to the wrecking yard. What is he smoking?
79 Cutlass -- fair enough price! Make it a '79 Hurst / Olds clone
86 Chrysler "Woody" -- shouldn't it really be called a Plasticky? Just askin'
'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
2k svt cobra r
Yeah, I'd have REAL trouble choosing between Ricky Racer's '97 Mustang and, oh, the Porche 911s, BMW M6s, Ferarri 360s, and every kind of Mercedes you might want on Cars.com for $70-$90k in the DFW area. You want domestic? A few Ford GTs are in that price range...tough choice :confuse: :sick:
'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
The Olds Cutlass guy screwed up. The Hurst option on that car is a 350 OLDS engine. The Chevy 350 just makes it a mis-fit. It would take the engine and another 5K minimum to make it a H/O clone. The H/O started out with the Cutlass Calais, not the Supreme. Different interior, suspension, grill, etc.
I had the '79 Calais with the Chevy 305. The engine was the weakest part of the car. The suspension was awsome. Excellent handling with a good, albeit firm, ride. The Supreme rode like a marshmellow. :P
'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
Did the Calais use the 2bbl or 4bbl 305? And did they at least use an axle ratio better than the 2.41:1 that GM seemed to use in just about everything back then?
I guess if you wanted to just do a quickie swap, it's cheaper to throw in a Chevy 350 where a 305 once was. But what bothers me, is if the 305 had the THM200 transmission and it wasn't swapped out too, the 350 would probably tear that up pretty quickly.
On the other hand, the '78-'79 305 had an intake/head problem in the #8 cylinder that caused fuel fouling on the plug every 8K miles or so. City driving really aggrevated the problem. I used to buy 10 plugs for a tune up, because I knew I would be changing/cleaning the #8 regularly. A friend had a '78 Camaro with the same problem. That's when I started checking around and found out it was a known design issue that Chevrolet didn't talk about. In today's emission environment they would never get away with it.
With Olds, I read that they found some EPA loophole that allowed them to build the 1979 Hurst. If they used an engine that was already certified from another car, they could put it in the Cutlass without getting it re-tested, provided they built fewer than 2500. So, they got the 350 out of the Delta/Toro/Ninety-Eight, and built 2,499 Hursts.
Maybe Chevy did something similar with the 1979 Malibu coupe? One that I specifically remember was a light brown coupe with dark brown SS-style racing stripes, bucket seats, and a floor shifter. The owner had been a substitute teacher at my high school, but I ran into him about a year after I graduated, and we talked about his car...he was one of the ones that said it came that way.
Chevy also put 350's in the Malibu police cars, so maybe because of that, it was easier for them to put some in some civilian models?
Excellent working vacuum?
Remember Cannon?
Pricey clone
What happened with the hood?
Good looking Monte
Yawn Been out there with all different prices for a long time. Maybe get some rallys to snaz it up a bit?
Less pricey clone
Not a great year but I like this What's the horsepower rating in 73 for the 454?
Another nice looking Benz that I have no idea how to price
I never knew what to make of these oddball little Porsches
Tiny
The ORIGINAL high-performance sedan