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

Mr_Shiftright

GEEZ---$22,000??? I could have found him an entire Edsel 4 door hardtop for that price, WITH good chrome and pretty darn good everything else, too.

andre1969

Yep, $22K is what he said, although who knows? He might be off a bit. He said some other car they were restoring ran about $17K in chrome...a '38 Packard or something like that?

Just as an estimate, he said it would probably cost around $1500, if I wanted to have the front bumper/grille assembly on my '57 DeSoto redone. I don't think it looks that bad though, so I'm not going to bother with it.

He is going to call around though, and get an estimate on getting the rear bumper re-done. Hopefully that won't be *too* bad, as it's a fairly simple piece...although it does have the dent in it, and has the dual, built in chrome exhaust tips. And then, if I got the bumper re-done, might as well get the taillight bezels redone.

I wonder if there are any relatively decent, rust-free '57-58 bumpers still out there somewhere, and maybe it would be cheaper to find one, rather than get mine hammered out?

I looked on eBay and did find this, but I don't think it'll quite fit... :P

And, check out this . Holy Chrysler, $895 just for a freakin exhaust tip?! :surprise:

texases

Watch out, once you chrome that rear bumper you're on a slippery slope...'oh, now the front bumper needs it'...

And compared to some claims that get made when folks sell their cars, yours did have a 'frame off restoration', and you have the pictures to prove it!

explorerx4

Maybe one day the guy will come to work and the frame and wheels will have reattached themselves.
Could save you some money.

berri

If you look at those 58 Edsel's from the sides or the interior, they're not bad looking cars for their time. I'm with you on the 57/58 Imperial. In that pix, I like the more formal maybe 64 or 65 Imperial next to it much better than the 59 (but that 59 Orthodontia grill could fit some of those overdone recent Fomoco models). Personally, I'd take Andre's Desoto (or a 57 Chrysler 300) over all of those.

andre1969

If you look at those 58 Edsel's from the sides or the interior, they're not bad looking cars for their time.

I agree on the '58 Edsel...my only real beef with them is a few details up front. I actually don't mind the vaginal/horsecollar/toilet seat grille; I think a bigger problem is how the front is just too flat-faced and vertical around the headlights. The front fenderline thrusts forward, rising above the under-cut flanking grilles, but then when it just goes vertical around the headlights, I think it just looks awkward.

But otherwise, I don't think it's too bad looking. I always thought Edsels looked pretty nice from the back, with that gullwing thing going on.

And, the '58 Edsel my mechanic has is really plush and ritzy inside. Thick, ribbed fabric on the door panels (the mechanic said it was a real pain to get those "poofs" just right), integrated door panels, etc. Overall, definitely a plusher, more luxurious car than my DeSoto. One dumb thing I noticed though, is that they put that peel-off Mylar crap on the lower door panels, the area where you'd usually expect carpet. Not too smart, putting a flimsy material like that in an area that's probably going to get kicked. DeSoto did that too, but oddly, only on the more expensive Fireflite. On my cheaper Firedome, it's just vinyl down there, although they put the Mylar crap around door handle and arm rest, where it will still get worn (and did on my car, at least on the driver's side)

fintail

I can admit I kind of like 58 Edsels too, especially a senior model big engined loaded hardtop model. The front is kind of quirky, but the rest of it isn't that bad, and if you want to revel in the excess of 1958, it's as good a choice of any. The wagons also do kitsch as well or better than the competition.

berri

I remember thinking the 57 and 58 Mercury's were decent looking cars, although the Turnpike Cruiser was a bit over the top (but it was the Sputnik era!). I thought the 57 was a pretty clean looking design overall, although some didn't care for the rather triangular taillight style. The 58 got a little more bulked up. I think the 59 got somewhat exaggerated though, maybe even a touch art deco. Definitely a like it or hate it model year for Mercury. For me though, in 57/58 it's hard to beat a Desoto or Chrysler. Still look good today in my book.

lemko

I got a call that my Brougham will be ready on Friday! I was thinking andre would get his DeSoto back first! :P The man tells me the new trim looks fantastic. Dang, now I'll be afraid to drive it and nick it up with rocks! I've been told it's actually ultra-rare NOS. I'm saving the surviving Uniroyal Royal Seal tires.

lemko

Of the three, I like the 1959 model the best though it no longer has the cool pushbutton tranny.

berri

Edsel is an interesting story and I think there's a lot more to it than just it's looks. If you go back to 1958 I don't think the Edsel was any worse looking than a lot of vehicles that year. Think 58 Olds or Lincoln Continental for example. But after a year of many underwhelming car reveals the Edsel was behind schedule and came out late. I think that just added to reviewer frustration and Edsel caught it hard unfortunately. It also caused some early models to have sometimes shoddy assembly. Add to that the new techno gadgets that caused owner problems like the telematics pushbutton transmission control in the steering wheel and it was not a successful launch. 1958 was also a big recession year that hit mid priced car lines particularly hard. Edsel also has the same problem that Desoto faced; low priced lines were adding higher end models and higher priced lines like Chrysler and Olds were adding lower priced lead in models, both squeezing middle status car lines. Unbeknown to many consumers, GM was getting concerned about Pontiac back then as well. It had a very loyal buyer base because of a great quality and reliability reputation. Unfortunately, it's buyer base tended on the older side and that help create a stodgy image with younger buyers. GM cleaned up the Pontiacs starting in 55, but it still wasn't creating a strong growing segment. In 58 that did some extensive sheet metal differences with Chevy, but it wasn't until 59 when they decided to come out with the widetrack (maybe a bit of a gimmick) that added a sporty element when sales started turning. Bill Mitchell added some of the nicest body styling on the 61 and Pontiac took off. Regarding Edsel, I'd say Ford Motor Company was on the right strategic path with Edsel, but blew the tactical execution. Ford knew they needed another model line to better compete with GM and Chrysler, and that it needed to be sufficiently differentiated to avoid the Desoto syndrome. But they went a little too far in styling, got behind schedule and introduced some new innovations before they were ready. The new Edsel dealerships were forced to open with very little product on the lot. By the time production finally got rolling, the media was crucifying it's looks, owners were having glitches and the buying public was still antsy about ending up with an orphan after all the independents took a beating in the mid fifties. I actually believe that the 59 Edsel was cleaner looking than that year's Ford or Mercury. But it was tough overcoming all of the 1958 problems and Edsel also decided to short change the 60 model and focus on the upcoming Comet which was going to be under their brand originally. Funny, the original Comet was a bit of a an oddball style also like the 58 Edsel model. Ironically, I always thought the Desoto pulled the new Exner large car design off better than the 1960 Chrysler, but again I think the buying public was getting gun shy.

andre1969

Same here, when it comes to Mercurys. I don't think the '57 is too bad looking with the single headlight setup, although it does have a heavy-handed look up front. But the quad headlight models look horrible, IMO, as the cluster hangs kind of low and seems very poor-fitting, too wide for the fenders.

For '58, I think it's a slight improvement with the headlights, although the bumper/grille combo still seems heavy-handed. And both '57 and '58 seem kind of boxy to me, and a bit overly sculpted.

I think the '59 was a big improvement, as I like the more aggressive forward thrusting front-end. The grille seems cleaner and less fussy as well, and the overall styling, while still a bit heavily sculpted, seems less boxy, and a bit sleeker overall.

The '59 was longer than the '58, as well. I think Mercury sort of got caught with their pants down with the '57 model, which was on a 122" wheelbase, and a bit smaller overall than much of the competition. In this price class of car, it was normal for the entry level models to be on a wheelbase of around 122"...cars like the Buick Special, Olds 88, and DeSoto Fireweep. But the more senior models were on larger wheelbases of around 126" (Olds 98, the bigger DeSotos, Chrysler) and even 127.5 (Buick Super/Roadmaster). But with Mercury, even the Turnpike Cruiser was on the short 122" wb, same as a Dodge, or the smaller Pontiacs.

Overall, the '57 Mercury wasn't such a hot seller. Most likely, management reacted to this by ordering an increase in length to get it in line with the competition. But by the time that happened, 1959, there was a backlash coming against bigger cars, and the '59 Mercury debuted with something like a 126" wb for the cheap models, 128" for the pricier models. As a result, even though the economy was improving over 1958, Mercury sales barely improved. Something like 150K in '59 versus 133K for '58. And that was down from 286K in 1957. And, '57 was off from '56, when about 327K Mercurys were sold.

Kinda sad that the one time Mercury was truly unique and had its own dedicated body style ('57-58 and '59-60) they just didn't sell very well. For 1961, Mercury returned to essentially being a guzzied up Ford, and that formula worked well for them until probably the 2000's, when sales really started to fall off and the brand was eventually dropped for what? 2011?

lemko

Don't feel sad! They still make Mercuries, but with Lincoln nameplates on them! :P

andre1969

True...as you once said, "Lincoln: What a Mercury SHOULD be!"

fintail

Reminds me of this thing I spotted several years ago:



Was actually in pretty decent shape - and judging by those tires, it was stored somewhere for a very long time. I saw the car again a year or two ago, but haven't seen it since. These have to be pretty rare.

fintail

The forward look cars were very nice designs in general, too bad about the quality control/rust.

And how quickly it changed - by 60-61, those fins were becoming passe already.

Mr_Shiftright

That Merc would make a nice Pro Street rod. Put a big block in there, Hotchkis suspension, some 18" wheels, disc brakes, custom dash with full instrumentation, vintage AC---and there you go.

andre1969

I would love to see an old vintage road test of one of those '57-60 era Mercurys with a big engine option. About the closest I recall seeing was a Consumer Reports test of a '58 Edsel. Memory's a bit fuzzy, but I think it was one of the smaller, Ford-based models like a Ranger or Pacer, but if so it would've had a 361 CID V-8. If it was a bigger Corsair or Citation, it would've had a 410. They said that, at that point, from 0-60 it was the fastest car they had ever tested.

That may not be saying much, as CR would usually test run-of-the-mill, fairly inexpensive, mass market cars. They had tested Corvettes and T-birds prior to that, but in those days, those cars could be had with mild engines. And they'd test sports cars every once in awhile, but in those days, most sports cars, semi-affordable ones, at least, weren't fast in a straight line. The "sports" was in the handling.

I think they got 0-60 in around 8.5 seconds with that Edsel. While that doesn't sound all that impressive, CR was usually a bit conservative in their testing. C&D or MT would've gotten a quicker time.

lemko

I think there was a review by "Uncle Tom" McCahill that says he was pretty impressed with the Edsel 410.

Mr_Shiftright

I'm sure it was a real torque monster with all those cubes, but probably as foul-handling and badly braked as most domestics of that era.

GM just had it all over Ford in those days styling-wise.

fintail

You'll need to get a pic with the new tires, so we can judge it

bhill2

I would love to see an old vintage road test of one of those '57-60 era Mercurys with a big engine option.

Well, in 1973 SIA did a test on a '57 Turnpike Cruiser 4-door hardtop with the 290 hp 368 and measured 0-60 in 9.8 and the 1/4 mile in 17.2 sec at 80 mph even.

lemko

Finally got my 1989 Cadillac Brougham back this afternoon! The tires look awesome! Will post pics when I get back to Philly. I still need to take care of a few more details under the hood. Hopefully my friend who is also a Brougham aficionado can locate this component. I also need to locate a left mud flap with the Cadillac script. Will try to locate a tasteful aftermarket set.

fintail

Cool. Is the problem part under the hood the (presumably plastic) inner fender? I bet those can be hard to come by. I bet you'll find a mudflap, I have to imagine they made those for a number of years.

lemko

Actually, it's a little red plastic box where the positive ground bolt is housed. It was on the plastic inner wheel housing that got wiped-out. They found the housing itself easily enough. They can't locate this little red plastic box which is about 2 inches by 1 inch and mounts at the peak of the housing. I was lucky the wiring harness itself didn't get wiped-out, else I'd be in a world of crap. The insulation on the hood cable was also damaged. I'm hoping my friend who is even more of a Brougham geek than I am can locate these for me. Trouble with my car is it's too old to have much dealer support and too new to have much aftermarket support. The best thing is, other than the tires, I didn't spend too much out of my own pocket for the repair. They did find some great NOS stainless rocker panel and wheel arch trim which is pretty much unobtainium.

fintail

Some of that stuff should be able to be junkyard sourced, too - surely there are specialized Caddy dismantlers like there are for German cars, right?

That car is in the position you mention - too new to be old, too old to be new.

fintail

Cold day here, good day to go for a drive:



Signals are working, but dim. The fun quirk today was the howling speedometer (cable, I assume - I bought a NOS one 10+ years ago, and it's still in the trunk). When I first started out this morning, the thing made so much noise, especially above 35mph, that the radio was useless. Once the cabin warmed up, the noise went away. Car started on the second turn, first try was sputter and stall. But ran fine after that. Not bad.

lemko

I finally got my 1989 Cadillac Brougham back from the body shop on Friday afternoon. It's wearing new whitewall tires I ordered from Coker Tire. There are still a few details left to do before it's back to what it was before the accident.

I still have the three remaining Uniroyal Royal Seal tire. The last picture compares the original-style Royal Seal tire to the ones I had put on the car.

fintail

Nice! Not too far off the original, and if there's any brand that can do whitewalls, it's Cadillac. I've seen slightly-wider-than-narrow band tires like that on 70s-80s Caddys before. I suspect those yellow stripe tires with that width of whitewall are long out of production.

berri

...so that's why it was snowing like a b.... in Philly today :-)

lemko

They're at least 20 years out of production. I believe the last new Cadillac to wear them was the 1992 model. The 1993 Fleetwood was a completely new design.

toomanyfumes

Nice looking Caddy, Lemko.

tjc78

What a beautiful car, glad they fixed it up nice.

tjc78

South Jersey Craig's.

southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/4231215970.html

southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/4253559630.html

southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/4253342538.html

southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/4230084552.html

southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/4210204225.html

Mr_Shiftright

62 Impala -- well, no power steering, no AC, cheesy air horns, lotsa non-stock parts---I guess $15K is a good starting point for negotiation but this car may not be as good as the photos suggest.

84 Deville Sedan--- normally this is a $1500 car all day long but if he can back up the mileage claim, it might be worth something close to $3K

27 Chevy -- asking too much $$ with no chance of pay-back. Try $2500. Might make a good shell for a street rod, that's about it. Too bad it is so far gone---20s Chevys are not that common anymore. The slathered bondo patches aren't a good sign though.

79 Pontiac Grand Prix--it'd have to be pretty near perfect to warrant a $7K price.

91 GMC Syclone -- might be worth it if it were a solid #3 "clean driver" with no great needs.

andre1969

I think that '79 Grand Prix is going to be a bit of a hard sell. Even though it's in nice shape, it's a base model instead of an LJ or SJ...231 V-6, crank windows, manual seat adjust, no rally wheels, etc.

Does engine choice make much of a difference in value by this point in time? I had an '82 Cutlass Supreme coupe with the 231 V-6, and I'm sure this Grand Prix would be every bit of the dog that my car was. I don't think I would ever want to re-live that experience. But, maybe I'm looking at it from the wrong point of view, as a regular-use car that I'd have to depend on. By this point, I imagine that whoever bought it would want it to preserve, take to shows, etc, and isn't that concerned about performance.

The V-8 option on these cars was the Pontiac 301, which had 140 hp with a 2-bbl, 150 with the 4-bbl. Hardly a powerhouse by today's standards, but I imagine not too bad for the era. I think that CA/high altitude models used a Chevy 305.

For the most part, I like GM's downsized RWD intermediates from that era, but if I was going to seek one out, I think I'd definitely want a V-8 model. And NOT one of those shrunken 260, 265, or 267 V-8's!

Mr_Shiftright

yeah the V-8 would make a difference in value but only proportional to the value of the car, which isn't that much to begin with. Let's say 10%. Might make it sell faster, though, since maybe you could get more power out of it with some mods.

fintail

Yowza

Mr_Shiftright

Luxury ride for the price of a Hyundai ! Not sure if this is money well spent or not, since you can buy a pretty nice used Benz for $18K. Seems like an emotional, rather than a rational, buy. Cross your fingers that the seals haven't all dried up. Looks like a REAL Benz, though.

fintail

That's definitely what a real MB is all about.
It's at a hard spot though - drive it much, and you kill the condition and value. Or, pay a lot for sunny Sunday local show car. I think it's pretty amazing looking, but maybe not a value for anyone but a rabid W126 fan who wants to potentially win awards.

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
Luxury ride for the price of a Hyundai ! Not sure if this is money well spent or not, since you can buy a pretty nice used Benz for $18K. Seems like an emotional, rather than a rational, buy. Cross your fingers that the seals haven't all dried up. Looks like a REAL Benz, though.

Mr_Shiftright

That's a lot of money to spend to win a $5 plastic trophy. I'll rather drive the snot out of it and enjoy every last drop of it.

fintail

But that car won't be too fun to drive, really, a smooth cruiser, and not a fast one (it's a 300, not a 560) nor particularly economical. If I had it, I would preserve it and maybe drive it as much as I drive my fintail.

Auction just hit 20K, not bad for a 126.

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
That's a lot of money to spend to win a $5 plastic trophy. I'll rather drive the snot out of it and enjoy every last drop of it.

Mr_Shiftright

I didn't mean drive it fast. I meant, use it up. No one is even going to notice an 80s era 4-door sedan.

fintail

Even using it up, the average punter would get more enjoyment out of a base 20K loss leader Camcord. This thing would only be enjoyed by an old school diehard - who wouldn't want to use it up. I think it appeals most to a monied eccentric who wants attention at a show - at my local MBCA show, people would be all over this.
I don't get the bidding, which is approaching Euro money for the car - no meat left on the bone for export.

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
I didn't mean drive it fast. I meant, use it up. No one is even going to notice an 80s era 4-door sedan.

Mr_Shiftright

Really? Are MBCA shows that starved for excitement? I'm kind of surprised. This is really a very ordinary car that happens to be in extraordinary condition. Well, I guess to a select audience it means something, okay.

fintail

126s are highly thought of, and preservation is big right now. I have no doubt that car finish in the top 3 (for "older" - pre-1990 cars) in my regional show.
And a local or regional MB show might not be the most exciting place, it won't be full of 300SLs and 540Ks, it's mostly rich geezers in no miles 10-20 year old SLs, with some old car weirdos thrown in. Cars like 190SL or 280SE cabrios etc are the unusual highlights, not the norm. Heck, my car made the MB magazine for a representative shot of "the field" at my local show, an unrestored fintail - as it is odd enough to get attention

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
Really? Are MBCA shows that starved for excitement? I'm kind of surprised. This is really a very ordinary car that happens to be in extraordinary condition. Well, I guess to a select audience it means something, okay.

Mr_Shiftright

I always thought the W126 very non-descript. You can buy real beauties around here in the Bay Area for around $7K, and easy to find, and low miles, too. Buyer's market.

fintail

When you see any, post links of those real low mileage beauties. The W126 is considered to be the pinnacle of the traditional MB sedan, hugely over-engineered and advanced over everything else on the road when new. New ones, while amazing and posh, just aren't the same.

Speaking of links...

I want want want

This isn't shabby either

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
I always thought the W126 very non-descript. You can buy real beauties around here in the Bay Area for around $7K, and easy to find, and low miles, too. Buyer's market.

Mr_Shiftright

you can just look them up on craigslist. I see them all the time, some with well under 75K miles. They range $6,000 to $8,000 and you can bargain hard down here---these are not easy cars to sell because they are high maintenance and gas hungry and SF has some of the highest gas prices in the country. In a way they are too new to be classic, but too old to compete in any way with a new car.

fintail

I've looked, but found very little that looked tempting. I suspect the really nice cars are stalked by dealers and shipped out.

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
you can just look them up on craigslist. I see them all the time, some with well under 75K miles. They range $6,000 to $8,000 and you can bargain hard down here---these are not easy cars to sell because they are high maintenance and gas hungry and SF has some of the highest gas prices in the country. In a way they are too new to be classic, but too old to compete in any way with a new car.