I had a lifted '86 Toyota 4x4 with 32" tires with a carbureted 22R. It was so gutless and I was glad to get rid of it.
The next 4x4 I had, a '92 Cherokee, was a rocket by comparison because it had the famed 4.0-liter high-output six. Do you remember the 3.0-liter V-6 that Toyota made for their trucks from 1988-95? They were also gutless but their weak point was that they liked to blow head gaskets.
Eh, it wouldn't get you there in a hurry, but it would get you there. I used to use an '87 4x4 for landscaping. We had put a flat bed on it and 1-ton air shocks coupled to full half-ton leaf springs on the rear. That poor truck.... we once carried a full pallet of landscaping bark (that's 4x4x8 and ~1500#) with a full pallet of fertilizer (broken down and restacked where space permitted). Ugh. I shudder to remember it. But, the truck performed admirably, albeit a little slow. Then again, I would not have wanted to go any speed but slow with a load like that. Heck, that would have made my C20 work pretty good. Any 4-cylinder rig that can pull a load like that is worthy of use. Surprisingly, its axle bearings were still performing fine after two summers of that sort of use.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
Not something I'd need for a daily driver (RWD, large enough to be a parking nuisance, thirsty, I don't have six kids), but for a family on a budget, a contractor or whoever would need something like this, looks quite nice for the price (anyone heard from alhubcaps lately?):
I like how he splurged for the Eagle GT IIs instead of the Pep Boy tires. The man obviously takes pride in his ride, and wanted to inject a little handling excitement.
I wonder how fast it will go. The current trucks aren't too fast I don't think, but they look fast doing 50 mph down a residential street (with a huge amount of engine and exhaust noise).
I'd almost be tempted by that Custom Cruiser. Same basic thing as the old '85 LeSabre my Grandma had given me. I wonder if the station wagon got a different rear end ratio, though. IIRC, the station wagon variant added around 500 pounds, if not more, over the sedan and coupes. Grandma's LeSabre, with its 140 hp/255 ft-lb 307-4bbl and 2.73:1 rear end was, at best, adequate. But then again, you could load that car up to its GVWR and it didn't seem to perform any worse, so maybe that combination could handle the extra weight of the station wagon?
I'm thinking that UPS truck is only suitable for under 40mph driving. However, I bet it would be easy to put a big engine in it. I've never seen another old rig like that, different from the usual old milkman vans.
Bad year for a 2002 IMO, and that one looks ratty.
Now, if I had found the Firebird buy me for $4,900, I would have bought that. Looks nice, and reminds me of my 1st car ('67 Camaro), other than it isn't a 6 cyl PG with massive rust.
Should be a fairly easy clean up resto to driver status, just don't go overboard, although I imagine it would be fairly easy to clone a T/A (they have them in '67?) or some other higher end package.
So, the Bird looks like a fun project that isn't likely to kill you too bad (if it is as sound as claimed). Nothing like starting your new hobby and immediately finding out that the frame rails are rotted out to ruin the party.
That W123 coupe is more desireable in that it's a later turbo car, but it's not really "rare" per se. And I think just about all of them survived. Looks like a decent enough car though. I do spot a W116 nosing its way into a few of the pics, I wonder if the guy is a MB enthusiast.
I remember when I was little a local Ford lot had one of those fake Bugattis in its used section...I wanted it.
No, the turbo coupe isn't rare. In fact, it's probably worth a bit less than a sedan, as it is less useful....or if not worth less, harder to sell at any rate. People driving old Benz diesels aren't into "sport" after all.
"BUGATTI" -- awful, it should be crushed, it's blasphemous and in horribly bad taste. A paint by numbers Mona Lisa?
2002 -- yet another beater 2002. Just go buy a nice one and be happy and leave these dogs alone. You'll never come out alive on a car like this. If it was an earlier round taillight car and with a nicer interior, I'd say go for it at that price. But a rusty '76, no way. It can barely get out of its own way.
Wow, I was away for a few days and it got burried. I am early 30-something. Yeah, I an definitely more up on cars than 4x4s, but the FJ-40 and the 4 doors through the 80s (before they turned into Japanese Escalades) would be on my list for Japanese 4x4s. A big issue is it took Japan a little while to learn how to make steel and how to design things to resist corrosion. Even 4-runners have a lot of rot over the rear wheel arch if not kept after, and apparently the patch panel runs $700 from Toyota (of course, they do actually have them unlike some German makes I won't go into). The Mitsu/Dodge Raider is kinda neat too, but I don't know if it will ever be worth anything. I have a friend with a 1st gen Pathfinder, its got some rediculous number of miles on it and he loves it, had it since HS. Dunno if that will be worth something or not, but its been durable.
Yeah, when you add big wheels, you change the final drive ratio, not to mention they way a million pounds each. Good for bling, bad for actually going anywhere. Also, that mass is hard to change direction, in addition to accelerating or decelerating. The 22r equipped Toyota 2wd 1ton had just over 300k on it when my friend's sister wrecked it. It got 2 people and 5 mountain bikes over the pass with no problem, it shelped wood, soil, scrap, whatever, and never had an issue. It wasn't the fastest thing I'd driven, but was fine with that 4spd and 14 or 15" tires (cant remember which).
You may not realize how utterly worthless a '96 Oldsmobile actually is, in terms of market value. You could have totalled that car with a can opener, literally. I doubt it's worth more than $2,000 clean and undamaged.
So why put any money into it? It makes no sense. Just go buy a 1996 Olds already together if you want a cheap car. And it won't have a salvage title.
We are rapidly entering the age of the Disposable Automobile. Better get used to it. Cars will be hit and junked more and more often now.
the insurance company gave me something like $2200 for a totaled 1986 Monte Carlo with 192,000 miles on it! But this was back in 1998...while the car was 12 years old at the time, domestics tended to hold their value a bit better back then.
FWIW, KBB on a good one with 15K miles is around $4500. Of course, what it would actually fetch is another story, and any salesperson posting on Edmunds will often tell you that KBB is way off (yet why do so many dealership websites bring it up then, or put it on the window sticker? :P )
Anyway, the biggest problem with that Olds is that nobody would want it. They didn't make very many of them by then. It would make an excellent parts car, or if you could find a good parts car for it, it would be a good fixer upper. The problem, though, is that nobody cares if these things get smashed, and when people wreck them they usually just junk them, so there's little demand for parts cars.
A lot of the mechanical stuff like the engine, tranny, rear suspension, steering column, etc, would probably be salvageable, and could be useful on any 1992-1999 GM H-body (Bonneville, LeSabre, 88). Windshield too, and most likely the front window glass, although the rear windows and rear window would most likely be different. Unfortunately, most of the sheetmetal wouldn't swap, because GM was trying to make these cars more unique by this time.
At least there's one advantage to badge-engineering cars. If you smash the door on your '98 Crown Vic, the door on a wide range of Crown Vics and Grand Marquises should fit. Actually, from 1998 onward, I think the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis shared all the same sheetmetal. It was just easy-swap stuff like taillights, grille inserts, and possibly the front header panel that they changed.
Way back around 1977 or so my Granddad bought a '53 DeSoto Firedome from his brother-in-law, for something like $200. It had belonged to his mother, who had a stroke while driving and hit a parked car. It was then put into storage, and years later when she passed away, my great-uncle sold it to Granddad when it came time to settle the estate. Appearance-wise, it was in much worse shape than that Olds. I remember the fender on the driver's side was smashed way back, and the hood was pushed back at a seemingly obscene angle. Front bumper was also smashed and most of the grille "teeth" were either smashed or missing. It was also just enough of a hit that it buckled the passenger side fender just a tad. I remember Granddad went and got all the parts he needed (minus the passenger-side fender...I think he planned to just pound it out) from a junkyard for around $80-100, and fixed the car himself.
Now granted, nearly 30 years later it would cost a lot more to fix that DeSoto. Parts would be much more scarce and more expensive (although the '53 he pulled the parts off of is still sitting in the junkyard!). Still, it's sad to think that something smashed as minor as that Olds is a total. Considering the airbag took out the dash, I'd guess that the airbags alone would run around $1500?
As for salvage titles, that '96 Olds might not have one. I've had two totaled cars (the Monte and a '69 Dart) that I just held onto and paid a deductible from what the insurance company would have given to me. They didn't do anything with the title.
I just noticed the windshield on that Olds is smashed, too. What would that add nowadays? Another $400-500 or more? Last time I broke a windshield it was in my Dart, and it only ran around $150 to replace. Now that I think about it though, the windshield on my '88 LeBaron coupe got broken, and it was around $500 to replace. Insurance picked that one up, thankfully.
A dude I work with drives a '96 Century (poor fellow), and a recent replacement of the rear window with rear defroster was only $195. I don't know if rear windows are generally more or less.
I don't know, either. One thing I remember about the LeBaron, is that to replace the windshield they also had to replace the blackout (I think it was just painted aluminum) trim around the windshield. That might have made it more expensive.
I wonder if those old GM windshields that had the antenna in the windshield were much more expensive to replace than the regular ones? Luckilly I never broke one out! My Mom's Malibu had one, and the windshield got broken, but she had it replaced before she gave it to me. My LeMans and Silverado have those antennas, and the Silverado's windshield has a few stone chips here and there, but thankfully nothing that's spreading.
Cars of that size are looking increasingly ridiculous in today's world aren't they? Everything is so much more crowded---imagine trying to squeeze that into most modern mall parking lots?
How big is a '73 era New Yorker, anyway? For some reason I'm thinking they were just over 230", but they never seemed that big to me.
FWIW though, just about any full-sized pickup made in the past 30 years or so is just as wide and these days most of 'em are longer, so a car like that should be no worse to maneuver than the #1 and #2 selling vehicles in this country right now.
Holy smoke! My neighbor back in the old 'hood had a big Chrysler like that. It was always parked in front of my Dad's car. Dad had a 1972 Ford LTD at that time.
isn't around 233" about as long as mass-produced cars got? I'm thinking that the big 70's Continental sedans and Town Coo-pays were around 233". I just checked, and the big pre-downsized Fleetwoods of the 70's were 234", while the DeVilles were "only" 231". I think the Mark V is like 230.4". The '71-78 Eldorados are actually tiny little things, only around 225" :P Funny how they seem so big, though. Maybe it's because of the ultra-long hood?
One thing I don't like about those early-70s barges is how little interior room there is compared to the overall size of the car. I bet a Hyundai Sonata is roomier than that thing.
So, this is probably the nicest of its kind on earth. And technically it is 'rare'. I personally think it's cool, but who else would want it? It's a 4-door sedan (why are these always owned by old men, saved and fussed over and polished while the coupes and convertibles end up in junk yards?). Mercurys of this era, more than being 'unloved', are just ignored:
Some of those old 70's barges were lacking in some respects in interior room. However, they also didn't have to deal with huge driveshaft/tranny humps, wheel well intrusions, etc. And because they were low-slung, the seating position was more stretched out, as opposed to upright like today's cars. The EPA wasn't rating cars for interior volume yet, but something like that '73 NYer would probably have around 108 cubic feet of interior volume and around 22 cubic feet of trunk space. Basically, close to what a Crown Vic would have today.
However, if you needed 6 passenger seating, no sedan built today would fit the bill as well as that NYer. The main reason that cars today have seemingly generous interior volumes is because they're taller. A taller car isn't going to let you fit more people in it though. And because today's cars have curved roofs, where you position the front seat can have a big effect on headroom. For instance, headroom's fine for me in my '00 Intrepid, but my great-aunt, who's short but has a beehive hairdo, hated hers because where she had the seat adjusted, she'd hit the ceiling! Back in the old days, the roof was usually flat enough over the driver's seat that it didn't matter where you put the seat...headroom wouldn't change.
Another area where cars got much more efficient was rear seat legroom on 2-door models. But since most 2-doors are gone now, that's a moot point!
One reason that NYer might look small inside is because of the relatively high beltline and low roof, which gives it somewhat of a tank-like appearance with a claustrophobic interior. Also keep in mind those seats were much bigger and thicker than most cars of today, so that might make the car look more cramped inside.
Well that's kind of a left-handed compliment isn't it, to say that a '73 Chrysler weighs about the same as, and is long as as full size long bed pickup truck?
But I agree, either vehicle is ridiculous for one person commuting with no luggage.
When I look at the traffic and parking in my area, it does make such big old barges look silly. The same way the posers and trophy wives in their Escalades and H2s and Lexus SUVs of all types look so bad.
If you live in a smaller town though, what the hell.
That 68 Mercury does have to be one of the best left. but that Buy It Now is well over twice the actual value I am sure.
About 4 years ago I ran into a guy with an immaculate 66 Mercury, ParkLane I believe, whatever the top of the line model was with the breezeway window. It was creme yellow with a black vinyl top, and it was excellent looking. He wanted $2500 for it.
not a left-handed compliment aimed at the Chrysler, so much as pointing out that the more things supposedly change, the more they stay the same! Heck, these days most mid-sized pickups probably weigh more than that NYer! :P
Yeah but the pickup truck can do a lot more work. Nobody today would buy a passsenger car that size or that uneconomical, or very few people, even if they were cheap.
But sure, everything seems to be getting bigger and heavier and more powerful, even Porsches.
Yes, similar to McGarrett's, except his was a four-door hardtop, which I think did NOT have the Breezeway window. Oh yeah, if you read this guy's eBay ad, it claims production of something like 708, which, according to a book I have was 7008. Oops. There goes the 'rare' part, at least from a production standpoint.
Have you picked up a copy of Collectible Automobile magazine yet? They have a great article on the 1982-89 Plymouth Gran Fury, as well as a summary of other M-bodies.
yeah, I noticed that. It turns out that now I've had TWO models that were featured in the "Cheap Wheels" section of Collectible Automobile! A couple months back they did a spread on the '79-81 New Yorker.
As for my Gran Fury, it went through a bad phase back in 2002 where it was eating starters regularly. Fortunately I had a warranty, but it got irritating having to get the thing towed back to the shop (occasionally I'd get one last start out of it, and was able to drive it myself). Finally they got a starter on it that worked, but then a few months later the water pump went out. It had around 118,000 miles on it by that time. I let it sit for awhile, and then got something ominous in the mail. An emissions test notice. Somehow, that car had slipped under their radar and for four years I never got called in. I had thought that because it was an ex-cop car, it was exempt.
Well, I figured there was no way in hell it would pass, and I was amassing enough of a fleet by that time that I just parked it at my grandmother's place and cancelled the insurance and turned in the tags.
Then I discovered that a lot of the parts on it would swap with my '79 NYer. The copcar wheels went on the NYer. So did two power window motors, and I put the full-sized copcar spare in it. I think I pulled the hood ornament off of it too, to keep as a memento. I tried to start it every once in awhile, but eventually the battery died on it and I let it sit for awhile.
In late 2003 I moved in across the street from my grandmother, and in the spring I tried to start that Fury so I could drive it over, but no luck. It would turn over, but just wouldn't catch, even with dumping a bit of gas down the carb. So I hitched it to my truck with a chain and towed it over, so at least Grandma didn't have to look at it anymore. Finally ended up selling it for parts. I dunno what ultimately happened to it. The body was still good, with no rust at all, and the interior was near perfect. The paint was pretty shot, too (typical bad late 80's paint that was repainted in 1998, but by 2004 looked bad again)
Sometimes I kinda miss that car. It was a great handling car, and had plenty of legroom for me, although the steering wheel was kind of close. And it was a heavy, sturdy sucker too. Also had decent performance. It was a horrible guzzler, though. The EPA rated it at 13/15! In contrast, the civilian model was 16/22, and the police pursuit (basically a copcar with a civilian engine) was 14/18. The 4-bbl and 2.94 rear end (civilian was a 2-bbl and 2.26 rear) really took their toll.
I could actually break 20 mpg on the highway, but around town it was more like 11-13. And it had an appetite for premium fuel.
Here's an old picture of it, taken at the Mopar Nationals back in 1999. Don't ask me what I was thinking when I did that to my hair, though! That old pic shows how much the Mopar Nationals has grown over the years. Back in 1999, they stuck the 1975-1989 RWD stock cars up on the hill, kind of in no-man's land, and they used most of the field in the background for paid parking. Nowadays though, that whole area is part of the show field, as the number of cars showing up has really shot up.
Comments
The next 4x4 I had, a '92 Cherokee, was a rocket by comparison because it had the famed 4.0-liter high-output six. Do you remember the 3.0-liter V-6 that Toyota made for their trucks from 1988-95? They were also gutless but their weak point was that they liked to blow head gaskets.
http://chicago.craigslist.org/car/116071436.html
Granddaddy of all UPS trucks
2002. It apparently took about 11 seconds for the rust to break through the new paint.
Bugatti. On the cheap.
Firebird. Original looking. Don't you love it when people outsmart themselves and end up bidding more than the original buy-it-now price?
Now, if I had found the Firebird buy me for $4,900, I would have bought that. Looks nice, and reminds me of my 1st car ('67 Camaro), other than it isn't a 6 cyl PG with massive rust.
Should be a fairly easy clean up resto to driver status, just don't go overboard, although I imagine it would be fairly easy to clone a T/A (they have them in '67?) or some other higher end package.
So, the Bird looks like a fun project that isn't likely to kill you too bad (if it is as sound as claimed). Nothing like starting your new hobby and immediately finding out that the frame rails are rotted out to ruin the party.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I remember when I was little a local Ford lot had one of those fake Bugattis in its used section...I wanted it.
"BUGATTI" -- awful, it should be crushed, it's blasphemous and in horribly bad taste. A paint by numbers Mona Lisa?
2002 -- yet another beater 2002. Just go buy a nice one and be happy and leave these dogs alone. You'll never come out alive on a car like this. If it was an earlier round taillight car and with a nicer interior, I'd say go for it at that price. But a rusty '76, no way. It can barely get out of its own way.
The Mitsu/Dodge Raider is kinda neat too, but I don't know if it will ever be worth anything.
I have a friend with a 1st gen Pathfinder, its got some rediculous number of miles on it and he loves it, had it since HS. Dunno if that will be worth something or not, but its been durable.
The 22r equipped Toyota 2wd 1ton had just over 300k on it when my friend's sister wrecked it. It got 2 people and 5 mountain bikes over the pass with no problem, it shelped wood, soil, scrap, whatever, and never had an issue.
It wasn't the fastest thing I'd driven, but was fine with that 4spd and 14 or 15" tires (cant remember which).
Insurance company totalled it for a reason after all. Think of all the '96 Olds owners it will make happy.
So why put any money into it? It makes no sense. Just go buy a 1996 Olds already together if you want a cheap car. And it won't have a salvage title.
We are rapidly entering the age of the Disposable Automobile. Better get used to it. Cars will be hit and junked more and more often now.
Especially when all these cars have 4-6 airbags that have to be replaced after any frontal accident.
I could get $3500 for that Oldsmobile with 14k if it was in good condition (i.e., before the accident).
FWIW, KBB on a good one with 15K miles is around $4500. Of course, what it would actually fetch is another story, and any salesperson posting on Edmunds will often tell you that KBB is way off (yet why do so many dealership websites bring it up then, or put it on the window sticker? :P )
Anyway, the biggest problem with that Olds is that nobody would want it. They didn't make very many of them by then. It would make an excellent parts car, or if you could find a good parts car for it, it would be a good fixer upper. The problem, though, is that nobody cares if these things get smashed, and when people wreck them they usually just junk them, so there's little demand for parts cars.
A lot of the mechanical stuff like the engine, tranny, rear suspension, steering column, etc, would probably be salvageable, and could be useful on any 1992-1999 GM H-body (Bonneville, LeSabre, 88). Windshield too, and most likely the front window glass, although the rear windows and rear window would most likely be different. Unfortunately, most of the sheetmetal wouldn't swap, because GM was trying to make these cars more unique by this time.
At least there's one advantage to badge-engineering cars. If you smash the door on your '98 Crown Vic, the door on a wide range of Crown Vics and Grand Marquises should fit. Actually, from 1998 onward, I think the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis shared all the same sheetmetal. It was just easy-swap stuff like taillights, grille inserts, and possibly the front header panel that they changed.
Way back around 1977 or so my Granddad bought a '53 DeSoto Firedome from his brother-in-law, for something like $200. It had belonged to his mother, who had a stroke while driving and hit a parked car. It was then put into storage, and years later when she passed away, my great-uncle sold it to Granddad when it came time to settle the estate. Appearance-wise, it was in much worse shape than that Olds. I remember the fender on the driver's side was smashed way back, and the hood was pushed back at a seemingly obscene angle. Front bumper was also smashed and most of the grille "teeth" were either smashed or missing. It was also just enough of a hit that it buckled the passenger side fender just a tad. I remember Granddad went and got all the parts he needed (minus the passenger-side fender...I think he planned to just pound it out) from a junkyard for around $80-100, and fixed the car himself.
Now granted, nearly 30 years later it would cost a lot more to fix that DeSoto. Parts would be much more scarce and more expensive (although the '53 he pulled the parts off of is still sitting in the junkyard!). Still, it's sad to think that something smashed as minor as that Olds is a total. Considering the airbag took out the dash, I'd guess that the airbags alone would run around $1500?
As for salvage titles, that '96 Olds might not have one. I've had two totaled cars (the Monte and a '69 Dart) that I just held onto and paid a deductible from what the insurance company would have given to me. They didn't do anything with the title.
I wonder if those old GM windshields that had the antenna in the windshield were much more expensive to replace than the regular ones? Luckilly I never broke one out! My Mom's Malibu had one, and the windshield got broken, but she had it replaced before she gave it to me. My LeMans and Silverado have those antennas, and the Silverado's windshield has a few stone chips here and there, but thankfully nothing that's spreading.
1998 Rover
Interesting car, worth maybe half of asking price at best.
FWIW though, just about any full-sized pickup made in the past 30 years or so is just as wide and these days most of 'em are longer, so a car like that should be no worse to maneuver than the #1 and #2 selling vehicles in this country right now.
http://cgi.ebay.ca/1968-68-Mercury-Park-Lane-Parklane-MINT-RARE_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategory- - Z6882QQitemZ4594672924QQrdZ1
Nice as it is, the Buy It Now is probably twice what it's worth.
However, if you needed 6 passenger seating, no sedan built today would fit the bill as well as that NYer. The main reason that cars today have seemingly generous interior volumes is because they're taller. A taller car isn't going to let you fit more people in it though. And because today's cars have curved roofs, where you position the front seat can have a big effect on headroom. For instance, headroom's fine for me in my '00 Intrepid, but my great-aunt, who's short but has a beehive hairdo, hated hers because where she had the seat adjusted, she'd hit the ceiling! Back in the old days, the roof was usually flat enough over the driver's seat that it didn't matter where you put the seat...headroom wouldn't change.
Another area where cars got much more efficient was rear seat legroom on 2-door models. But since most 2-doors are gone now, that's a moot point!
One reason that NYer might look small inside is because of the relatively high beltline and low roof, which gives it somewhat of a tank-like appearance with a claustrophobic interior. Also keep in mind those seats were much bigger and thicker than most cars of today, so that might make the car look more cramped inside.
But I agree, either vehicle is ridiculous for one person commuting with no luggage.
If you live in a smaller town though, what the hell.
That 68 Mercury does have to be one of the best left. but that Buy It Now is well over twice the actual value I am sure.
About 4 years ago I ran into a guy with an immaculate 66 Mercury, ParkLane I believe, whatever the top of the line model was with the breezeway window. It was creme yellow with a black vinyl top, and it was excellent looking. He wanted $2500 for it.
But sure, everything seems to be getting bigger and heavier and more powerful, even Porsches.
Oh yeah, if you read this guy's eBay ad, it claims production of something like 708, which, according to a book I have was 7008. Oops. There goes the 'rare' part, at least from a production standpoint.
By the way what did happen to your '89 Fury?
As for my Gran Fury, it went through a bad phase back in 2002 where it was eating starters regularly. Fortunately I had a warranty, but it got irritating having to get the thing towed back to the shop (occasionally I'd get one last start out of it, and was able to drive it myself). Finally they got a starter on it that worked, but then a few months later the water pump went out. It had around 118,000 miles on it by that time. I let it sit for awhile, and then got something ominous in the mail. An emissions test notice. Somehow, that car had slipped under their radar and for four years I never got called in. I had thought that because it was an ex-cop car, it was exempt.
Well, I figured there was no way in hell it would pass, and I was amassing enough of a fleet by that time that I just parked it at my grandmother's place and cancelled the insurance and turned in the tags.
Then I discovered that a lot of the parts on it would swap with my '79 NYer. The copcar wheels went on the NYer. So did two power window motors, and I put the full-sized copcar spare in it. I think I pulled the hood ornament off of it too, to keep as a memento. I tried to start it every once in awhile, but eventually the battery died on it and I let it sit for awhile.
In late 2003 I moved in across the street from my grandmother, and in the spring I tried to start that Fury so I could drive it over, but no luck. It would turn over, but just wouldn't catch, even with dumping a bit of gas down the carb. So I hitched it to my truck with a chain and towed it over, so at least Grandma didn't have to look at it anymore. Finally ended up selling it for parts. I dunno what ultimately happened to it. The body was still good, with no rust at all, and the interior was near perfect. The paint was pretty shot, too (typical bad late 80's paint that was repainted in 1998, but by 2004 looked bad again)
Sometimes I kinda miss that car. It was a great handling car, and had plenty of legroom for me, although the steering wheel was kind of close. And it was a heavy, sturdy sucker too. Also had decent performance. It was a horrible guzzler, though. The EPA rated it at 13/15! In contrast, the civilian model was 16/22, and the police pursuit (basically a copcar with a civilian engine) was 14/18. The 4-bbl and 2.94 rear end (civilian was a 2-bbl and 2.26 rear) really took their toll.
I could actually break 20 mpg on the highway, but around town it was more like 11-13. And it had an appetite for premium fuel.
Here's an old picture of it, taken at the Mopar Nationals back in 1999. Don't ask me what I was thinking when I did that to my hair, though!