I wonder if that '76 Electra really only has 8849 miles on it? Or if it's rolled over? The interior seems awfully nice, with no wear, so I suspect it really could be that low-mileage, but then under the hood doesn't look so hot. There are two prices listed. For $5895, if it was local I'd be all over it. But for $8895, not quite as tempting.
@fintail said:
I also remember the cruise control, being a rocker switch on a steering wheel spoke.
Oh wow, that sets off my imperfect memory. My wife had a '78 Tbird when I met her and it had that feature. IIRC (see description above) the switch controlled the disengage-resume function. In any case, I found it to be very convenient, as I could use it to slow down if necessary and then just flick it to get back up to speed. That Bird was a great car in its own way; very comfortable cruiser. We gave it to my stepson. His girlfriend flicked a still lit match toward the ashtray, missed, apparently didn't know it was still lit so she didn't check it, and the resulting fire gutted the car. To this day I can't figure out how she managed to do that, but she was a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic anyway.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
I kind of like those squared off downsized Birds, in a disco chic kind of way. One loaded up with turbine wheels and t-tops would be a cool retro car.
I had dinner with my grandma and uncle today, and we talked cars a little. My grandma mentioned an incident in the T-Bird ("that big white car") - apparently one day all of the electrics just randomly died, and her and my mother were stranded. She also mentioned the fuselage Chrysler my grandpa had, according to my uncle, the 383-2bbl had persistent carb problems, it would stall a lot and sometimes be hard to start.
@bhill2 said:
Oh wow, that sets off my imperfect memory. My wife had a '78 Tbird
Nice looking car, hard to believe it's 28 years old. Give it a really fine detail (my gripe about early 124 is the non painted bumpers, but I know there are chemicals to recondition them), and someone will rush to buy it.
While cleaning it, I just kept remarking to myself how amazing the interior is. I mean, other than the dead LCD thingy in the gauge cluster, its really like brand new. I can't find fault with it. Even the carpets are spotless. Exterior ain't too bad, either. All clearcoat is still there. Looks good other than that scuff on the bumper courtesy of the wife and whatever the hell is going on with those little painted pieces under the headlights. It also has the all-too-common paint checking this generation seems to suffer from, although far less severe than I've seen on others.
'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
I've notice that champagne gold color does check like you mention. For the headlight brackets, I suspect they've been repainted - those seem to be a magnet for rock chips, and a previous owner probably touched them up.
I know a guy with a 240D that has the same color interior. He scrubbed it out, and it looks as good as yours - amazing to see in person, looks new. MB really knew about material quality in the 80s. The paint on his car is pretty sharp too, a boring non-metallic beige, he buffed it out and it shines like new. One can see why the cars were expensive then.
LCD temperature gauge can be replaced, but at a cost.
As a teen I about lived at my hometown Chevy dealer, but I was much-more smitten with Chevelles and Monte Carlos and the occasional Nova throughout the early '70's. Too bad it's such a bland color IMHO. Still, I have to admit that is a nicely-styled car. I remember thinking it looked like a space ship when they came out in Feb. '70. I believe the miles--I used to own a '71 Chevrolet Showroom Album and almost all of their cars that year had the double-white-stripe tires. Been decades since I've seen a car with them.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I'd value it at just about 1/2 the asking price. The story sounds rather implausible and there's no actual documentation, so I'd buy the car on condition, not on miles.
I doubt you could get a more unappealing '71 Camaro. Having said that, though, it is still a '71 Camaro with all the cool things that implies. Price is nuts, but who knows. Neat to see the double-stripe whitewalls, shame you could never drive it on them.
Maybe the removed weight will make it go faster? These cars are real slugs. It does have an actual working tailgate, which is unusual for this type of conversion.
Bid is now $8300---I can't see it being worth much more than that, given that it hasn't been mechanically restored.
@uplanderguy said:
As a teen I about lived at my hometown Chevy dealer, but I was much-more smitten with Chevelles and Monte Carlos and the occasional Nova throughout the early '70's.
>
If that Camaro really is a stock, low-option survivor then maybe it can at least serve to remind everyone "the way it (really) was." If you bought a low option car back then it really showed! Example: A Rally Nova with a 350 V8 was often backed up with the base 3-speed manual instead of the optional 4-speed. This Camaro will probably live forever with it's pathetic 200-hp 307 and powerglide when it would have been better to use that up and then go with a crate upgrade years ago!
Maybe uplander can recall something about that survivor Camaro steering wheel because it looks like the same steering wheel from a '71 Chevelle. Odd, clunky looking thing to put into the Camaro interior with a 150-mph speedo in the dash but lacking the optional 4-spoke wheel. Nice tires, ugly wheel covers. Typical.
That was always my problem with "ordinary" low option cars populating dealer lots back then. So many cars from that era were missing the look or substance to be the "whole package." Maybe that's why there are probably more Mach 1 Mustangs and Z/28s today than Detroit ever actually built back then.
One more odd thing about this Camaro. In the back of the trunk behind the spare tire, there seems to be a lot of brown paint under the factory spatter paint finish. Is that the original factory primer or what? It looks like copper brown but that doesn't match the interior or exterior colors.
A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing.
@omarman said:
One more odd thing about this Camaro. In the back of the trunk behind the spare tire, there seems to be a lot of brown paint under the factory spatter paint finish. Is that the original factory primer or what? It looks like copper brown but that doesn't match the interior or exterior colors.
I'm certain that is the factory primer. I believe the bodies were dipped in primer and then sprayed with finish paint or trunk paint. Hence, difficult to reach areas would show primer.
I sort of remember the '53 DeSoto my Granddad had having some areas where the paint was a bit thin, and you could see a reddish-brown showing through. I always think of primer as just a dull gray or charcoal, but I guess it comes in all sorts of colors.
yeah I think people forget that in the 1960s, cars were pretty much slammed together. We see them NOW with all too perfect restorations, but back then it was far more slap-dash on the assembly line. Orange peel, skewed panel gaps, sloppy sealer and primer---all that.
Which is why some people argue today that if you pried a brand new 1965 car out of a box and put it in a show, it would lose on points.
That's something I have thought about. I think power windows didn't become a normal/expected thing until well into the late 80s. I remember many normal cars from the 80s that didn't have them. Today, kids look at a window crank with astonishment, what's that?
Back in the day, a menial job could pay most of the way through school, a decent suburban tract house was no more than a few years of income, medical debt was unknown, etc. Might have made cars easier to buy outright, or finance quickly.
I'll be 56 in a couple months, and was from a mostly working-class town, but I remember plainly, in the late sixties and even into the seventies--if I saw a car with power windows, I was like, "La-de-freaking-da, that is a loaded car!". ...LOL
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Power windows and AC weren't even factory fitted options on normal production MBs until around 1970. I remember a few cars in the family like a Taurus and Ciera that lacked power windows - cars where one might expect them. But we had a Tempo that did have them.
Maybe more sensible people, also people not accustomed to modern niceties (I am sure radios and heaters still seemed ritzy to some), and the cost of niceties was relatively higher vs base MSRP than today. To be fair, an 84 month old car today might hold up better than a 36 month old car in the olden days. But that's not what people consider. Long term financing might be part of a changing socio-economic structure rather than leather seats and sunroofs.
@isellhondas said:
That's right. People were more sensible.
They didn't "have" to have a sunroof, leather, heated seats etc.
In those days, individual options also tended to be a lot more expensive, where these days I'm sure they're getting an economy of scale from having fewer choices and more bundling.
Take air conditioning, for example. In 1956, it cost about $500. A low-end Chevy, Ford, or Plymouth was under $2,000, and even something like a Cadillac, Lincoln, or Imperial started under $5,000. So that's 25% of the cost of a low-end Chevy, but still around 10% the cost of a luxury car.
As the years went by, it became cheaper. By the late 60's, I think it was down to around a $300-350 option. It did start going up again in the 70's, thanks to inflation, and by 1985, I remember it was around a $750 option on your typical GM B-body, and $150 more if you wanted the 4-season a/c. But, by that time, an Impala was starting at just under $10,000. So by this time, a/c was only about 7.5% of the base price of a basic big car, compared to 25% in 1956.
Today, it's standard in just about everything, so that probably saves on manufacturing costs. I've read that a/c adds about $1,000 to the cost of a typical car, and I've been hearing that for years now.
So, I think one reason these features are such "must haves" is partly because they're so common these days. I think it's called "Hedonistic Creep" or something like that?
Hate to say it, but I got pretty spoiled by my 2000 Park Avenue. It has leather, a sunroof, and heated seats. Once you get used to all that stuff, it's hard to go back. Although admittedly, my 2012 Ram has none of that stuff, so while it's hard to go back, it's not impossible!
I'd recommend the models with Bosch fuel injection, so that would be the Spider 2000, 1982 on up. They are pretty reliable cars! Aside from obvious cosmetic issues (you don't want rust or torn up interiors), you can look for head gasket leaks (external usually) at the very back of the head, worn synchros 1-2 and 2-3 (very common and often left as is, if not too bad). Noisy lifters are a very bad thing (these are adjusted by shim and it's $$$).
Best thing I could advise is to locate a good Alfa mechanic BEFORE you buy the car. If you buy a good one and perform routine maintenance with a knowledgeable technician, these cars can run a long long time. They are NOT Fiats--they are built to a higher standard.
Buy the best Alfa you can---dont buy a fixer-upper.
@fintail said:
To be fair, an 84 month old car today might hold up better than a 36 month old car in the olden days. But that's not what people consider. Long term financing might be part of a changing socio-economic structure rather than leather seats and sunroofs.
Y'know, that's a good point, about the changing economy. On one hand, when you adjust for inflation and all the standard features, cars are probably cheaper than they've ever been. For example, my 2012 Ram, $20,751 out the door, would have been about a $9000 truck in 1985. Yet I remember Granddad paying $13,500 out the door for his '85 Silverado, and that would equate to about $29,000 today!
But incomes are not going up like they used to, either, and in real dollars, have been declining over the years as well. So while that 2012 truck might be cheaper, in inflation-adjusted dollars, than the 1985 truck, there might not be as many people around who could afford the monthly payment on it.
People have definitely shifted their priorities, as well. My Mom never financed a car until 1986, when she bought her Monte Carlo. It was something like $282 per month for 48 months, at 2.9% interest, or something like that. Every car before that, she always saved up and paid cash for. The one exception was her '66 Catalina convertible that she bought new her senior year in high school. She saved up half the money waiting tables, borrowed the rest from an aunt, and then paid the aunt back.
Every car since that Monte Carlo though, has been financed. Either that, or they borrowed against home equity. One reason for that might simply be that it's so cheap to borrow money these days, if you have good credit.
I don't think any of my grandparents EVER financed a car. Although one of them, a '60-61 Chevy wagon (nobody in the family who was around then can remember what year it was) was funded by an inheritance, I've heard.
Personally, I'd suggest a Series 4 spider. I've typically seen them in nicer condition, they are a bit rarer, and, to me, far far nicer looking with the painted bumpers and spoiler delete. They are only slightly heavier, so performance shouldn't be any different (which is to say slow).
'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
@andre1969 said:
In those days, individual options also tended to be a lot more expensive, where these days I'm sure they're getting an economy of scale from having fewer choices and more bundling.
A few years ago a friend found some dealer price sheets from the late 60s/early 70s - these were mimeographed one-page typed sheets for each model they sold (they were a Chevy/Olds dealer) showing base price for each model in a given line, along with prices for popular options. I remember I had a collection of these sheets also as a kid. They kept them with the brochures in a literature rack on the showroom floor.
There were strange differences in pricing of options back then. Things like a step-up engine were fairly reasonable, maybe $75-$100 to move up to a larger V-8, though going to a 396 Chevy or a 455 Olds got pretty pricey. An auto trans was about $350-400. A/C about the same. On the flip side, whitewalls were maybe $10 extra, and heavy duty suspension maybe $25 or so. The thing that jumped out at us was the cost of optional radios. They were surprisingly expensive. While a regular AM radio might have been $80 or so, going to AM/FM was double that and if you wanted a tape player you were looking at $300 or more.
Still, all were a huge bargain compared to today's prices!
I am pretty sure my grandparents never financed either - even the last car any of them bought, in 2004, was for cash. I've only paid cash for one car - the fintail. I think in the 70s my parents bought a couple cars for cash, but financed since, unless buying an old car.
No doubt, adjusted for inflation, wages for the majority are going nowhere - while costs of education, housing, healthcare, fuel, and now food do the opposite. Add more durable cars to that mix, and you get long financing.
@andre1969 said:
I don't think any of my grandparents EVER financed a car. Although one of them, a '60-61 Chevy wagon (nobody in the family who was around then can remember what year it was) was funded by an inheritance, I've heard.
Well if it were super super nice, you could offer $12.5K and see what happens. These are very hard to find in any kind of decent shape. They, like British sports cars and German luxury sedans, often fell (in the past) into the hands of people who could not afford to take care of them; hence 90% of them for sale should really be used for parts.
I also prefer the later models that don't have the rubber duck tail.
Keep in mind also that these Veloces are not very veloce. With the AC on and going up a hill--well, bring along a magazine to read.
@isellhondas said:
OK, Mr S. That was what I was looking for. Many thanks!
I spotted this one and it looks near perfect. But, 15,000 ???
@andre1969 said:
Take air conditioning, for example. In 1956, it cost about $500. A low-end Chevy, Ford, or Plymouth was under $2,000, and even something like a Cadillac, Lincoln, or Imperial started under $5,000. So that's 25% of the cost of a low-end Chevy, but still around 10% the cost of a luxury car.
I have always been somewhat surprised by how quickly A/C went from being fairly rare to being universal. Even in the late '60s most cars weren't fitted with it, and it was standard equipment in only top level cars (Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial). In 1972 or so, when American Motors made it standard on the Ambassador (their premium line and roughly equivalent to an Olds or a Chrysler), it was considered revolutionary. Then within 20 years or so a car without this quite expensive feature was the exception. Personally I can see the attraction, since being in a non-A/C car on a hot day reminds me of 'the box' in Cool Hand Luke and I wouldn't own a car without it. But it surprises me how many others must agree with me.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
new clutch with only 74k doesn't seem right, either. Granted, its old, but mine was still on its original with 50% more miles than that. Possibly 2nd gear synchro maladies made him incorrectly change it.
'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
@andre1969 said:
I don't think any of my grandparents EVER financed a car. Although one of them, a '60-61 Chevy wagon (nobody in the family who was around then can remember what year it was) was funded by an inheritance, I've heard.
Heck, the payments on my new 1987 Chevrolet Caprice Classic were $227 a month for 36 months and I paid the car off in 15 months. That's almost unheard of these days unless one has an awesome trade and/or a massive down payment.
My Grandpop and my wife's father always paid cash for their cars. They never financed.
I remember hearing about an old slogan called "56 a month for a '56 Ford". I've always wondered what the terms of such a loan would be, such as the APR, number of months, and amount financed?
That sounds cheap, but I just plugged that into an inflation calculator, and today that would be about $486 per month!
FWIW, $1900 financed at 4.9% for 36 months comes out to $56.86 per month. And in 1956, I'd imagine the cheapest Fords started at around $1800, although if you optioned them up nicely, the price would jack up fast. My grandparents had a '57 Ford Fairlane 500 4-door hardtop that Granddad said cost around $3500. IIRC, the base price according to my old car book on something like that was around $2400. But I guess by the time you add an automatic transmission, 2-tone paint, radio, bigger engine, power steering/brakes, heater, whitewalls, and a few other odds and ends, it wouldn't be hard to push it to $3500.
@andre1969 said:
I remember hearing about an old slogan called "56 a month for a '56 Ford". I've always wondered what the terms of such a loan would be, such as the APR, number of months, and amount financed?
That sounds cheap, but I just plugged that into an inflation calculator, and today that would be about $486 per month!
FWIW, $1900 financed at 4.9% for 36 months comes out to $56.86 per month. And in 1956, I'd imagine the cheapest Fords started at around $1800, although if you optioned them up nicely, the price would jack up fast. My grandparents had a '57 Ford Fairlane 500 4-door hardtop that Granddad said cost around $3500. IIRC, the base price according to my old car book on something like that was around $2400. But I guess by the time you add an automatic transmission, 2-tone paint, radio, bigger engine, power steering/brakes, heater, whitewalls, and a few other odds and ends, it wouldn't be hard to push it to $3500.
Wow, that seems pretty pricey for 50's iron.
IIRC, my dad's '70 Chevy pickup was something like $3500 new, and the '73 Toyota Corona they bought was $2900.
Even if an Alfa was bought new in Seattle, I wonder how long it would take for it to rust.
I don't remember olden day prices, but I seem to remember the 85 S-10 Blazer costing about 15K, an 85 Tempo (loaded) costing about 10K as an end of year special, and Ciera about 12-13K maybe. I also remember a 92 Accord LX, normally equipped, being about 15K,
new clutch with only 74k doesn't seem right, either. Granted, its old, but mine was still on its original with 50% more miles than that. Possibly 2nd gear synchro maladies made him incorrectly change it.
If you've ever driven in San Francisco where this car is from, you'll know exactly why a clutch doesn't last long.
Still, I'll be sure to check those items carefully. Appreciate the advice.
RE: 86 Alfa---price seems fair for what it is. For one thing, it is the older version with the rubber ducky whaletail, not nearly as desirable and the last versions of this car, made up to 1993 in the USA. (or was it 1994?).
Also, it is a "Graduate", which is Italian for "base model", with no AC, no electric windows, and downgraded interior.
So add to that the cosmetic issues we see in the photos, (shark bite on the front spoiler, and I think some shallow denting on the car's nose) and the asking price seems just about right to me, if the car runs out right.
The mileage is good---the bottom ends on these engines are indestructible, but the cylinder heads can show problems--mainly valve seat recession. This would be indicated by loud tapping noises from the engine, and a substantial loss of power.
On the positive side, the "Graduate" doesn't have the weight and added complexity of AC and electronic goo-gahs.
Worth a look, definitely. And no, it's not one of my old cars---I never owned a "Graduate".
@fintail said:
Even if an Alfa was bought new in Seattle, I wonder how long it would take for it to rust.
I don't remember olden day prices, but I seem to remember the 85 S-10 Blazer costing about 15K, an 85 Tempo (loaded) costing about 10K as an end of year special, and Ciera about 12-13K maybe. I also remember a 92 Accord LX, normally equipped, being about 15K,
I can comment on the '92 Accord LX, as the (ex) wife and I bought one. MSRP was something like $17K and we got ours on sale - one only at this price! - for $14,500. We added a CD player for an extra grand (ouch!).
Here's a few old car prices I can remember, from my family's past:
1957 Fairlane 500 4-door hardtop: ~$3500
1961 Galaxie 500 4-door hardtop: ~$3500
1963 Mercury Monterrey 4-door hardtop/Breezeway: ~$3500 ('57-63 must have been a period of deflation!)
1966 Catalina convertible: ~$3200
1972 Impala 4-door hardtop: ~$5000
1975 Dart Swinger: ~$5000
1975 LeMans coupe: ~$5000
1976 GMC 3/4 ton crew cab: ~$8000
1980 Malibu coupe: ~$7000
1982 Malibu Classic Estate Wagon: ~$11000
1985 LeSabre Limited 4-door: ~$16200
1985 Silverado: ~$13500
1986 Monte Carlo (base V-8 coupe): ~$14500
I always thought that '82 Malibu wagon seemed awfully expensive. IIRC, the base price on something like that was around $8500? It wasn't all that lavishly equipped, although it looked ritzy with its midnight blue paint, fake woodgrain trim, and stand-up hood ornament. But it just had a V6, crank windows, manual locks/seat, etc. It did have air conditioning, and I think it had an AM/FM stereo, but no tape player. I think the automatic transmission was finally made standard for 1982, so that probably accounted for a big bump in the base MSRP from 1981, but wouldn't account for the big bump in the options price. Guess it's always possible that I'm wrong on it being $11,000...memory does fade, after all! Or, somehow, Grandmom and Granddad might have gotten taken for a ride on that one.
So you were a Ford family many years ago! I always kind of liked the 57 Fairlane 4dr Ht and sedan look better than the 6 windows on the lower lines. The Breezway rear window was kind of interesting. I believe it first showed up on the 57 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser. That car was a high priced, low volume model that was maybe a bit over the top. But when it was introduced on the popular priced Monterey in '63, it became quite the hit for a couple of years before it lost buyer interest again.
I think Detroit started adding a lot of standard equipment in the 80's because Japan Inc was gaining and most of their stuff didn't require purchasing many options. Often it was just a choice of 5 speed or automatic and whether you wanted AC.
My grandparents on my Dad's side of the family were Ford fans. Their first car was a used 1949 Ford. Then they bought the '57, 61, and '63. Granddad said he really liked the '61 alot, but he traded it early on because he got a pretty good trade-in. I think he got into the '63 Monterrey for $1200 plus the '61 Ford. So effectively, he got about $2300 trade-in for it. He liked that Breezeway rear window, for hauling lumber, ladders, etc...
After that, two of the three kids were out of the house, and my Dad, the youngest, was driving, so they didn't need a big car anymore. They bought a Tempest hardtop coupe, a 1967 I think. Then a 1971. One of my grandmother's coworkers bought a '74 Dart Swinger that Grandmom really liked, so they bought a '75. Total lemon, stalled out on a regular basis and the dealer never could fix it. So they dumped it for a '77 Granada, and stayed with Ford until their final car, a 1994 Taurus.
Now my Dad hated Fords, probably a sign of rebellion against his parents! And my Granddad on my Mom's side of the family hated them too. Although when I was a little kid, he scored a '64 Galaxie for us to use as a second car. As a kid, I learned to hate Fords at an early age...I think because of Dad, plus my maternal Granddad, who was a bigger automotive influence on me than Dad's Dad was. Also, my stepdad had a few Fords...1981 Escort that he had when he met my Mom, and then an '84 Tempo coupe. GL I think. Now that I think about it, I believe it was around $10-11K. I only drove it once. Hated it. Slow and ugly. But it proved to be a fairly good car. Made it to 160,000 miles, and they traded it for a 1991 Stanza.
As I got older though, I outgrew my hatred for Fords. I might still Ford-bash a bit jokingly, but look at is more of a friendly competition these days.
Bottom-of-the-sticker prices I remember plainly, on our family cars:
'67 Chevelle 300 Deluxe $2,470 built in Baltimore
'73 Nova coupe $2,625 built in Ypsilanti, MI
Both cars above were six with stick and no PS or PB.
'74 Impala Sport Coupe $4,408 built in Wilmington, DE
'77 Impala Coupe $5,503 built in Janesville, WI
'80 Monte Carlo V6 $7,070 built in Baltimore
'84 Monte Carlo V8 $11,409 built in Arlington, TX
My first new car, '81 Monte Carlo V8, $8,192, built in Baltimore
First car of any of the above to have factory A/C was my parents' new '84 Monte Carlo.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Comments
I wonder if that '76 Electra really only has 8849 miles on it? Or if it's rolled over? The interior seems awfully nice, with no wear, so I suspect it really could be that low-mileage, but then under the hood doesn't look so hot. There are two prices listed. For $5895, if it was local I'd be all over it. But for $8895, not quite as tempting.
Oh wow, that sets off my imperfect memory. My wife had a '78 Tbird when I met her and it had that feature. IIRC (see description above) the switch controlled the disengage-resume function. In any case, I found it to be very convenient, as I could use it to slow down if necessary and then just flick it to get back up to speed. That Bird was a great car in its own way; very comfortable cruiser. We gave it to my stepson. His girlfriend flicked a still lit match toward the ashtray, missed, apparently didn't know it was still lit so she didn't check it, and the resulting fire gutted the car. To this day I can't figure out how she managed to do that, but she was a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic anyway.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
I did a google search on that '76 Buick VIN and found a cached link to USAtoAUS dated March 30, 2014. Same car but the mileage quoted in the ad was:
Miles: ODO Reads 8,849 (Its possible but more likely 108K)
I think that Electra was grandma's baby (the license plate gives me a similar vibe), and is a 108K mile car that was just very well cared for.
I kind of like those squared off downsized Birds, in a disco chic kind of way. One loaded up with turbine wheels and t-tops would be a cool retro car.
I had dinner with my grandma and uncle today, and we talked cars a little. My grandma mentioned an incident in the T-Bird ("that big white car") - apparently one day all of the electrics just randomly died, and her and my mother were stranded. She also mentioned the fuselage Chrysler my grandpa had, according to my uncle, the 383-2bbl had persistent carb problems, it would stall a lot and sometimes be hard to start.
after cleaning it up again, might prove tough to let her go.
'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
Nice looking car, hard to believe it's 28 years old. Give it a really fine detail (my gripe about early 124 is the non painted bumpers, but I know there are chemicals to recondition them), and someone will rush to buy it.
Low miles too right? If you have it running strong should sell easily.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
While cleaning it, I just kept remarking to myself how amazing the interior is. I mean, other than the dead LCD thingy in the gauge cluster, its really like brand new. I can't find fault with it. Even the carpets are spotless. Exterior ain't too bad, either. All clearcoat is still there. Looks good other than that scuff on the bumper courtesy of the wife and whatever the hell is going on with those little painted pieces under the headlights. It also has the all-too-common paint checking this generation seems to suffer from, although far less severe than I've seen on others.
'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
I've notice that champagne gold color does check like you mention. For the headlight brackets, I suspect they've been repainted - those seem to be a magnet for rock chips, and a previous owner probably touched them up.
I know a guy with a 240D that has the same color interior. He scrubbed it out, and it looks as good as yours - amazing to see in person, looks new. MB really knew about material quality in the 80s. The paint on his car is pretty sharp too, a boring non-metallic beige, he buffed it out and it shines like new. One can see why the cars were expensive then.
LCD temperature gauge can be replaced, but at a cost.
http://newyork.craigslist.org/lgi/cto/4430107820.html
What a weird car to time capsule. Seller is nutso. Maybe if it was an SS or a Z, but no way for a plane jane 307
As a teen I about lived at my hometown Chevy dealer, but I was much-more smitten with Chevelles and Monte Carlos and the occasional Nova throughout the early '70's. Too bad it's such a bland color IMHO. Still, I have to admit that is a nicely-styled car. I remember thinking it looked like a space ship when they came out in Feb. '70. I believe the miles--I used to own a '71 Chevrolet Showroom Album and almost all of their cars that year had the double-white-stripe tires. Been decades since I've seen a car with them.
I'd value it at just about 1/2 the asking price. The story sounds rather implausible and there's no actual documentation, so I'd buy the car on condition, not on miles.
I doubt you could get a more unappealing '71 Camaro. Having said that, though, it is still a '71 Camaro with all the cool things that implies. Price is nuts, but who knows. Neat to see the double-stripe whitewalls, shame you could never drive it on them.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Looks pretty well done, I don't mind this at all
Maybe the removed weight will make it go faster? These cars are real slugs. It does have an actual working tailgate, which is unusual for this type of conversion.
Bid is now $8300---I can't see it being worth much more than that, given that it hasn't been mechanically restored.
>
If that Camaro really is a stock, low-option survivor then maybe it can at least serve to remind everyone "the way it (really) was." If you bought a low option car back then it really showed! Example: A Rally Nova with a 350 V8 was often backed up with the base 3-speed manual instead of the optional 4-speed. This Camaro will probably live forever with it's pathetic 200-hp 307 and powerglide when it would have been better to use that up and then go with a crate upgrade years ago!
Maybe uplander can recall something about that survivor Camaro steering wheel because it looks like the same steering wheel from a '71 Chevelle. Odd, clunky looking thing to put into the Camaro interior with a 150-mph speedo in the dash but lacking the optional 4-spoke wheel. Nice tires, ugly wheel covers. Typical.
That was always my problem with "ordinary" low option cars populating dealer lots back then. So many cars from that era were missing the look or substance to be the "whole package." Maybe that's why there are probably more Mach 1 Mustangs and Z/28s today than Detroit ever actually built back then.
One more odd thing about this Camaro. In the back of the trunk behind the spare tire, there seems to be a lot of brown paint under the factory spatter paint finish. Is that the original factory primer or what? It looks like copper brown but that doesn't match the interior or exterior colors.
I'm certain that is the factory primer. I believe the bodies were dipped in primer and then sprayed with finish paint or trunk paint. Hence, difficult to reach areas would show primer.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I sort of remember the '53 DeSoto my Granddad had having some areas where the paint was a bit thin, and you could see a reddish-brown showing through. I always think of primer as just a dull gray or charcoal, but I guess it comes in all sorts of colors.
yeah I think people forget that in the 1960s, cars were pretty much slammed together. We see them NOW with all too perfect restorations, but back then it was far more slap-dash on the assembly line. Orange peel, skewed panel gaps, sloppy sealer and primer---all that.
Which is why some people argue today that if you pried a brand new 1965 car out of a box and put it in a show, it would lose on points.
That Camaro had what was considered the "normal" options at the time.
Buyers were more practical in those days. They didn't have to have everything and they
considered things like power windows "one more thing to break"
People usually paid cash or if the financed, they limited their payments to 24 or maybe
36 months.
Not the case anymore.
That's something I have thought about. I think power windows didn't become a normal/expected thing until well into the late 80s. I remember many normal cars from the 80s that didn't have them. Today, kids look at a window crank with astonishment, what's that?
Back in the day, a menial job could pay most of the way through school, a decent suburban tract house was no more than a few years of income, medical debt was unknown, etc. Might have made cars easier to buy outright, or finance quickly.
That's right. People were more sensible.
They didn't "have" to have a sunroof, leather, heated seats etc.
Now, people sign up for 84 month payments. Real smart huh?
Calling Mr. Shiftright!
I have a cousin who lives nearby who has decided to take a walk on the wild side for the first time in his life.
He has a hankering for an Alfa Romeo Spider!
He knows the pitfalls but this is what he wants.
I told him that I have a friend (YOU!) who knows everything about them.
Any years to avoid. Things to look for besides the usual things?
I'll be 56 in a couple months, and was from a mostly working-class town, but I remember plainly, in the late sixties and even into the seventies--if I saw a car with power windows, I was like, "La-de-freaking-da, that is a loaded car!". ...LOL
Power windows and AC weren't even factory fitted options on normal production MBs until around 1970. I remember a few cars in the family like a Taurus and Ciera that lacked power windows - cars where one might expect them. But we had a Tempo that did have them.
Maybe more sensible people, also people not accustomed to modern niceties (I am sure radios and heaters still seemed ritzy to some), and the cost of niceties was relatively higher vs base MSRP than today. To be fair, an 84 month old car today might hold up better than a 36 month old car in the olden days. But that's not what people consider. Long term financing might be part of a changing socio-economic structure rather than leather seats and sunroofs.
In those days, individual options also tended to be a lot more expensive, where these days I'm sure they're getting an economy of scale from having fewer choices and more bundling.
Take air conditioning, for example. In 1956, it cost about $500. A low-end Chevy, Ford, or Plymouth was under $2,000, and even something like a Cadillac, Lincoln, or Imperial started under $5,000. So that's 25% of the cost of a low-end Chevy, but still around 10% the cost of a luxury car.
As the years went by, it became cheaper. By the late 60's, I think it was down to around a $300-350 option. It did start going up again in the 70's, thanks to inflation, and by 1985, I remember it was around a $750 option on your typical GM B-body, and $150 more if you wanted the 4-season a/c. But, by that time, an Impala was starting at just under $10,000. So by this time, a/c was only about 7.5% of the base price of a basic big car, compared to 25% in 1956.
Today, it's standard in just about everything, so that probably saves on manufacturing costs. I've read that a/c adds about $1,000 to the cost of a typical car, and I've been hearing that for years now.
So, I think one reason these features are such "must haves" is partly because they're so common these days. I think it's called "Hedonistic Creep" or something like that?
Hate to say it, but I got pretty spoiled by my 2000 Park Avenue. It has leather, a sunroof, and heated seats. Once you get used to all that stuff, it's hard to go back. Although admittedly, my 2012 Ram has none of that stuff, so while it's hard to go back, it's not impossible!
I'd recommend the models with Bosch fuel injection, so that would be the Spider 2000, 1982 on up. They are pretty reliable cars! Aside from obvious cosmetic issues (you don't want rust or torn up interiors), you can look for head gasket leaks (external usually) at the very back of the head, worn synchros 1-2 and 2-3 (very common and often left as is, if not too bad). Noisy lifters are a very bad thing (these are adjusted by shim and it's $$$).
Best thing I could advise is to locate a good Alfa mechanic BEFORE you buy the car. If you buy a good one and perform routine maintenance with a knowledgeable technician, these cars can run a long long time. They are NOT Fiats--they are built to a higher standard.
Buy the best Alfa you can---dont buy a fixer-upper.
Y'know, that's a good point, about the changing economy. On one hand, when you adjust for inflation and all the standard features, cars are probably cheaper than they've ever been. For example, my 2012 Ram, $20,751 out the door, would have been about a $9000 truck in 1985. Yet I remember Granddad paying $13,500 out the door for his '85 Silverado, and that would equate to about $29,000 today!
But incomes are not going up like they used to, either, and in real dollars, have been declining over the years as well. So while that 2012 truck might be cheaper, in inflation-adjusted dollars, than the 1985 truck, there might not be as many people around who could afford the monthly payment on it.
People have definitely shifted their priorities, as well. My Mom never financed a car until 1986, when she bought her Monte Carlo. It was something like $282 per month for 48 months, at 2.9% interest, or something like that. Every car before that, she always saved up and paid cash for. The one exception was her '66 Catalina convertible that she bought new her senior year in high school. She saved up half the money waiting tables, borrowed the rest from an aunt, and then paid the aunt back.
Every car since that Monte Carlo though, has been financed. Either that, or they borrowed against home equity. One reason for that might simply be that it's so cheap to borrow money these days, if you have good credit.
I don't think any of my grandparents EVER financed a car. Although one of them, a '60-61 Chevy wagon (nobody in the family who was around then can remember what year it was) was funded by an inheritance, I've heard.
That's correct. Actual wages for the vast majority of middle class workers, adjusted for inflation, has not increased in almost 3 decades.
Personally, I'd suggest a Series 4 spider. I've typically seen them in nicer condition, they are a bit rarer, and, to me, far far nicer looking with the painted bumpers and spoiler delete. They are only slightly heavier, so performance shouldn't be any different (which is to say slow).
'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
A few years ago a friend found some dealer price sheets from the late 60s/early 70s - these were mimeographed one-page typed sheets for each model they sold (they were a Chevy/Olds dealer) showing base price for each model in a given line, along with prices for popular options. I remember I had a collection of these sheets also as a kid. They kept them with the brochures in a literature rack on the showroom floor.
There were strange differences in pricing of options back then. Things like a step-up engine were fairly reasonable, maybe $75-$100 to move up to a larger V-8, though going to a 396 Chevy or a 455 Olds got pretty pricey. An auto trans was about $350-400. A/C about the same. On the flip side, whitewalls were maybe $10 extra, and heavy duty suspension maybe $25 or so. The thing that jumped out at us was the cost of optional radios. They were surprisingly expensive. While a regular AM radio might have been $80 or so, going to AM/FM was double that and if you wanted a tape player you were looking at $300 or more.
Still, all were a huge bargain compared to today's prices!
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
OK, Mr S. That was what I was looking for. Many thanks!
I spotted this one and it looks near perfect. But, 15,000 ???
http://seattle.craigslist.org/see/cto/4422452290.html
I am pretty sure my grandparents never financed either - even the last car any of them bought, in 2004, was for cash. I've only paid cash for one car - the fintail. I think in the 70s my parents bought a couple cars for cash, but financed since, unless buying an old car.
No doubt, adjusted for inflation, wages for the majority are going nowhere - while costs of education, housing, healthcare, fuel, and now food do the opposite. Add more durable cars to that mix, and you get long financing.
Well if it were super super nice, you could offer $12.5K and see what happens. These are very hard to find in any kind of decent shape. They, like British sports cars and German luxury sedans, often fell (in the past) into the hands of people who could not afford to take care of them; hence 90% of them for sale should really be used for parts.
I also prefer the later models that don't have the rubber duck tail.
Keep in mind also that these Veloces are not very veloce. With the AC on and going up a hill--well, bring along a magazine to read.
I have always been somewhat surprised by how quickly A/C went from being fairly rare to being universal. Even in the late '60s most cars weren't fitted with it, and it was standard equipment in only top level cars (Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial). In 1972 or so, when American Motors made it standard on the Ambassador (their premium line and roughly equivalent to an Olds or a Chrysler), it was considered revolutionary. Then within 20 years or so a car without this quite expensive feature was the exception. Personally I can see the attraction, since being in a non-A/C car on a hot day reminds me of 'the box' in Cool Hand Luke and I wouldn't own a car without it. But it surprises me how many others must agree with me.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
Factory AC is worth about 10% increase in overall value on most "classic" cars from the 50s -- 70s.
Another Alfa Romeo that I just may buy for myself.
http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/cto/4427346165.html
I called the seller and it sounds like a nice car. He just spent 1700.00 on various items.
It's from Marin County of all places and he knows the previous owners and has all of it's history and service records.
Does it look familiar Joe?
Any opinions here? Meeting him tomorrow for a looksee.
seems too cheap
make sure you check inner and outer rockers.
new clutch with only 74k doesn't seem right, either. Granted, its old, but mine was still on its original with 50% more miles than that. Possibly 2nd gear synchro maladies made him incorrectly change it.
'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
Heck, the payments on my new 1987 Chevrolet Caprice Classic were $227 a month for 36 months and I paid the car off in 15 months. That's almost unheard of these days unless one has an awesome trade and/or a massive down payment.
My Grandpop and my wife's father always paid cash for their cars. They never financed.
I remember hearing about an old slogan called "56 a month for a '56 Ford". I've always wondered what the terms of such a loan would be, such as the APR, number of months, and amount financed?
That sounds cheap, but I just plugged that into an inflation calculator, and today that would be about $486 per month!
FWIW, $1900 financed at 4.9% for 36 months comes out to $56.86 per month. And in 1956, I'd imagine the cheapest Fords started at around $1800, although if you optioned them up nicely, the price would jack up fast. My grandparents had a '57 Ford Fairlane 500 4-door hardtop that Granddad said cost around $3500. IIRC, the base price according to my old car book on something like that was around $2400. But I guess by the time you add an automatic transmission, 2-tone paint, radio, bigger engine, power steering/brakes, heater, whitewalls, and a few other odds and ends, it wouldn't be hard to push it to $3500.
Wow, that seems pretty pricey for 50's iron.
IIRC, my dad's '70 Chevy pickup was something like $3500 new, and the '73 Toyota Corona they bought was $2900.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and let us know! Post a pic of your new purchase or lease!
MODERATOR
2015 Subaru Outback 3.6R / 2024 Kia Sportage Hybrid SX Prestige
Even if an Alfa was bought new in Seattle, I wonder how long it would take for it to rust.
I don't remember olden day prices, but I seem to remember the 85 S-10 Blazer costing about 15K, an 85 Tempo (loaded) costing about 10K as an end of year special, and Ciera about 12-13K maybe. I also remember a 92 Accord LX, normally equipped, being about 15K,
If you've ever driven in San Francisco where this car is from, you'll know exactly why a clutch doesn't last long.
Still, I'll be sure to check those items carefully. Appreciate the advice.
RE: 86 Alfa---price seems fair for what it is. For one thing, it is the older version with the rubber ducky whaletail, not nearly as desirable and the last versions of this car, made up to 1993 in the USA. (or was it 1994?).
Also, it is a "Graduate", which is Italian for "base model", with no AC, no electric windows, and downgraded interior.
So add to that the cosmetic issues we see in the photos, (shark bite on the front spoiler, and I think some shallow denting on the car's nose) and the asking price seems just about right to me, if the car runs out right.
The mileage is good---the bottom ends on these engines are indestructible, but the cylinder heads can show problems--mainly valve seat recession. This would be indicated by loud tapping noises from the engine, and a substantial loss of power.
On the positive side, the "Graduate" doesn't have the weight and added complexity of AC and electronic goo-gahs.
Worth a look, definitely. And no, it's not one of my old cars---I never owned a "Graduate".
I can comment on the '92 Accord LX, as the (ex) wife and I bought one. MSRP was something like $17K and we got ours on sale - one only at this price! - for $14,500. We added a CD player for an extra grand (ouch!).
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and let us know! Post a pic of your new purchase or lease!
MODERATOR
2015 Subaru Outback 3.6R / 2024 Kia Sportage Hybrid SX Prestige
Here's a few old car prices I can remember, from my family's past:
1957 Fairlane 500 4-door hardtop: ~$3500
1961 Galaxie 500 4-door hardtop: ~$3500
1963 Mercury Monterrey 4-door hardtop/Breezeway: ~$3500 ('57-63 must have been a period of deflation!)
1966 Catalina convertible: ~$3200
1972 Impala 4-door hardtop: ~$5000
1975 Dart Swinger: ~$5000
1975 LeMans coupe: ~$5000
1976 GMC 3/4 ton crew cab: ~$8000
1980 Malibu coupe: ~$7000
1982 Malibu Classic Estate Wagon: ~$11000
1985 LeSabre Limited 4-door: ~$16200
1985 Silverado: ~$13500
1986 Monte Carlo (base V-8 coupe): ~$14500
I always thought that '82 Malibu wagon seemed awfully expensive. IIRC, the base price on something like that was around $8500? It wasn't all that lavishly equipped, although it looked ritzy with its midnight blue paint, fake woodgrain trim, and stand-up hood ornament. But it just had a V6, crank windows, manual locks/seat, etc. It did have air conditioning, and I think it had an AM/FM stereo, but no tape player. I think the automatic transmission was finally made standard for 1982, so that probably accounted for a big bump in the base MSRP from 1981, but wouldn't account for the big bump in the options price. Guess it's always possible that I'm wrong on it being $11,000...memory does fade, after all! Or, somehow, Grandmom and Granddad might have gotten taken for a ride on that one.
So you were a Ford family many years ago! I always kind of liked the 57 Fairlane 4dr Ht and sedan look better than the 6 windows on the lower lines. The Breezway rear window was kind of interesting. I believe it first showed up on the 57 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser. That car was a high priced, low volume model that was maybe a bit over the top. But when it was introduced on the popular priced Monterey in '63, it became quite the hit for a couple of years before it lost buyer interest again.
I think Detroit started adding a lot of standard equipment in the 80's because Japan Inc was gaining and most of their stuff didn't require purchasing many options. Often it was just a choice of 5 speed or automatic and whether you wanted AC.
My grandparents on my Dad's side of the family were Ford fans. Their first car was a used 1949 Ford. Then they bought the '57, 61, and '63. Granddad said he really liked the '61 alot, but he traded it early on because he got a pretty good trade-in. I think he got into the '63 Monterrey for $1200 plus the '61 Ford. So effectively, he got about $2300 trade-in for it. He liked that Breezeway rear window, for hauling lumber, ladders, etc...
After that, two of the three kids were out of the house, and my Dad, the youngest, was driving, so they didn't need a big car anymore. They bought a Tempest hardtop coupe, a 1967 I think. Then a 1971. One of my grandmother's coworkers bought a '74 Dart Swinger that Grandmom really liked, so they bought a '75. Total lemon, stalled out on a regular basis and the dealer never could fix it. So they dumped it for a '77 Granada, and stayed with Ford until their final car, a 1994 Taurus.
Now my Dad hated Fords, probably a sign of rebellion against his parents! And my Granddad on my Mom's side of the family hated them too. Although when I was a little kid, he scored a '64 Galaxie for us to use as a second car. As a kid, I learned to hate Fords at an early age...I think because of Dad, plus my maternal Granddad, who was a bigger automotive influence on me than Dad's Dad was. Also, my stepdad had a few Fords...1981 Escort that he had when he met my Mom, and then an '84 Tempo coupe. GL I think. Now that I think about it, I believe it was around $10-11K. I only drove it once. Hated it. Slow and ugly. But it proved to be a fairly good car. Made it to 160,000 miles, and they traded it for a 1991 Stanza.
As I got older though, I outgrew my hatred for Fords. I might still Ford-bash a bit jokingly, but look at is more of a friendly competition these days.
Bottom-of-the-sticker prices I remember plainly, on our family cars:
'67 Chevelle 300 Deluxe $2,470 built in Baltimore
'73 Nova coupe $2,625 built in Ypsilanti, MI
Both cars above were six with stick and no PS or PB.
'74 Impala Sport Coupe $4,408 built in Wilmington, DE
'77 Impala Coupe $5,503 built in Janesville, WI
'80 Monte Carlo V6 $7,070 built in Baltimore
'84 Monte Carlo V8 $11,409 built in Arlington, TX
My first new car, '81 Monte Carlo V8, $8,192, built in Baltimore
First car of any of the above to have factory A/C was my parents' new '84 Monte Carlo.