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

qbrozen

shifty knows these far better, but I don't believe the market has ever come around on these (although I like them, of course), so getting a nice one up front is probably a far better idea.

qbrozen

For example, getting from that $1600 basket case to this one for $8k is highly unlikely

stickguy

I agree with Q. Let some other guy take the restoration bath if you just want a nice driver. That one body wise may be ok if you want a DIY project, though if the interior is that trashed I am afraid to see the under carriage.

stickguy

Wonder how that black one made it from Cali to NYC?

isellhondas

@qbrozen said:
For example, getting from that $1600 basket case to this one for $8k is highly unlikely

My feelings exactly. I'll bet the 1600.00 one is a total rust bucket too.

Cars that haven't run in years are scary no matter how attractive the price.

I did like the duct take on the steering wheel! Added a nice touch.

isellhondas

@stickguy said:
Wonder how that black one made it from Cali to NYC?

I was wondering the same thing and then they never registered it in NY.

xwesx

@isellhondas said:
OK, I have to ask...WHY would you sell a 4 month and a 6 month old Subaru?

Speaking of fair questions!

So, the first one, the 2007, was a car that we bought with the intention to keep it. Our 1996 Outback was destroyed in a crash and it was our only car at the time. So, I picked up the '07 a week later (Jan 7th). On Jan 14, my wife found out she was pregnant with our daughter. She planned to stop working around May and wanted us to continue being able to save money for our house construction, so we dumped the car to divert that cost into the house. In its place, we picked up the '98 DGC, which was an out of pocket purchase. My goal was two years of life out of the DGC without major investment, and that's about exactly what we got out of it. Overall, it was a 60% cost savings compared to if we owned the Outback over that time.

The second one, the 2008, was purchased as a means to an end (i.e., we never intended to keep it). We needed to take a vehicle down to Salem, Oregon, and leave it there. At the same time, we wanted to make the most of the trip (free for that distance because we didn't have to pay for food, fuel, or lodging) and not just head straight home. So, I bought the car in Seattle for a good deal (as opposed to Alaska), we transferred from the truck to the car in Salem, put 5,500 miles on it driving it around the US and back to Alaska, then sold it for nearly no depreciation when we arrived home.

It cost us less than rental car(s) and airline tickets would have, and we certainly enjoyed ourselves more!

Caravan headed south @ Boya Lake, BC:

Loaded up in Salem, OR:

Headed home near Toad River, BC:

stever

See, I told you those Outbacks look better loaded down on top.

We knew several guys who would buy a car in Oregon or Washington, fly down and drive them back and flip them. Usually they were 4x4s. They'd make money even after trip expenses (most probably used Alaska Air miles to get a free flight).

xwesx

@Stever@Edmunds said:
See, I told you those Outbacks look better loaded down on top.

We knew several guys who would buy a car in Oregon or Washington, fly down and drive them back and flip them. Usually they were 4x4s. They'd make money even after trip expenses (most probably used Alaska Air miles to get a free flight).

Yeah, they look great! They just don't get the best mileage that way! The '08 gave us 28-29 MPG sans carrier, and about 22 with it (loaded; about 25mpg with the carrier empty).

I still have the carrier and use it on our dipnetting trips...

But, I preferentially use the tray now that I have it. I initially purchased it with the intent of using both carrier and tray (triple cargo space FTW!), but the bonus discovery of the no fuel economy penalty using the tray really swayed my opinion...

Mr_Shiftright

Yeah but the '69 is all wrong, so we should in all fairness factor that into value. Wrong upholstery, has Weber carb (awful addition), and who knows what else needs to be corrected. So we'll need the SUs and manifold to get the car running right, and an upholstery re-do.

The big question with the $1600 car is RUST--if it's rusted I agree with gbrozen--walk away---BUT----if it's rust free, I'd say it is well worth the asking price. You can buy ANY part you want for an MGB---anything, shipped to your door UPS second day---you can even order an entirely new body for it!

And they are very simple cars to work on (exception! The overdrive unit).

The GT is nice because it has the taller windshield and is way more weather-proof. On the downside, a bit slower than the roadster. It has a nice full hatchback, too, so you can stuff a lot in there.

@qbrozen said:
For example, getting from that $1600 basket case to this one for $8k is highly unlikely

xwesx

For $1,600, it sure looks like a good place to start (for a person with some time on his hands!). I had not seen a wagon version of these before (GT), but it's a cute looking little thing.

Mr_Shiftright

They even made a V8 version of the GT in England.

stever

House cleaning - time to toss this stuff I suppose.

ab348

I guarantee someone with an older collector car that has whitewalls would love to have it.

stever

Probably have to ship it ground with a hazmat carrier.

It's going in the box with the old paint for delivery to the collection station up the road.

fintail

How old is that? Graphics look kind of vintage. I wonder if the chemical still works, or if anyone maintains whitewalls in the UP.

stever

My guess it dates back to the guy's big honking green LTD that was in the garage here when we looked at the house, and he died in the early 90s. It was a bit odd; usually he dated everything he purchased, including a jug of Clorox we found down in the basement. The date was probably was on the price sticker that fell off.

qbrozen

Get a clue!

That thing went up to $9600 last time and reserve still wasn't met! WTH?

stickguy

@xwesx, how much can that tray hold, and how stable is it? I am realizing I will never fit everything to take my daughter to college in the fall into our RDX, and I don't have a roof rack. Instead of renting a minivan, I might get a hitch finally and rent a tray of basket. Same cost or less, and I end up with a hitch!

It doesn't tend to "wag the car" on the highway?

Mr_Shiftright

that's just stupid. I hit the truck at around $8500 and that's just about where the last two auctions have rested. This seller is getting a free, GLOBAL appraisal and he's not listening.

@qbrozen said:
Get a clue!

That thing went up to $9600 last time and reserve still wasn't met! WTH?

xwesx

@stickguy said:
xwesx, how much can that tray hold, and how stable is it? I am realizing I will never fit everything to take my daughter to college in the fall into our RDX, and I don't have a roof rack. Instead of renting a minivan, I might get a hitch finally and rent a tray of basket. Same cost or less, and I end up with a hitch!

It doesn't tend to "wag the car" on the highway?

It can safely hold 400#. I cap it out at 250-300# on that car, just because it is a class III hitch and it makes the car squat pretty solidly at that weight. But, stability-wise, it is fine with short loads. I mean, there's a bit of wobble in it, but you can firm that up with putting a "tightener" on the hitch receiver if you need that for larger loads. I hauled refrigerators on it, a elliptical trainer, you name it.

And, no, no wagging of the car. The only way you notice it is even on there is if you put a heavy load on it, and then it is similar in feel to having a heavy load in the cargo area (i.e., that "nose in the air" feeling).

I need to put new shocks on the car (I'm at 75K now) soon, so I'm going to put King springs on it, which should help it with it's tendency to squat so much at the slightest provocation!

stickguy

Thanks. I would put bulky but not heavy stuff on it. Trunk full of bedding and pillows, a circle chair. Stuff like that. Might be just enough to cover us.

The RDX sits pretty high and I think will not be bothered by it much. Probably no worse than putting the 4 bike hitch rake on it. That really sank our odyssey, but the RDX has less overhang and rides higher.

I doubt I would go over 200#s. And it will be a 2" receiver which should help.

xwesx

Yes, the 2" receiver makes all the difference on those lever-based devices. I have an adapter to a 1.25" on my Fiesta, and use the tray occasionally on it, but 100# is the most I'll put on it. I also have a polypropylene based tray, so it weighs about 40# total as opposed to the 70-80# of the all-steel ones.

Bulky works well on them. Just have a couple (or a few) ratcheting tie downs to lock the goods in and you're good to go. Put the heavy, compact stuff in the car and the light, bulky stuff on the tray.

I do have a little ATV trailer (8x8) that I use now and again for the unwieldy stuff, but it probably gets used a couple times each year as opposed to the monthly (at least) use of the tray. While I sorta miss driving vehicles that didn't require add ons to carry more cargo (my Econoline was wonderful for that reason), I definitely don't miss the fuel bill!

isellhondas

Can someone...ANYONE please explain to me exactly WHY these cars were ever produced?

http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/cto/4434412457.html

I just don't get it! ??????

xwesx

GM doing what GM did best.... diluting models across brands! But, there was a funny saying that came out of it, so it's not all bad:

"GM.... It's what makes a Subaru a Saabaru!"

Mr_Shiftright

It was a big mistake. They tried to charge a premium price for what was essentially your typical rougher-riding, noisier Subaru, with a budget Subaru interior as well. No wonder so few people bought one.

stickguy

Hey, SAAB had to have some product to try and sell.

I liked these. There were a few advantages though. That looks like a base car, but you could get it with power leather seats (I think), and a moonroof. So think of it as the premium package car Subaru didn't make.

fintail

WRX for those who don't want the WRX fist pumping backwards monster hat "brah" image?

But nah, just overpaid execs doing things to justify their positions.

@isellhondas said:
Can someone...ANYONE please explain to me exactly WHY these cars were ever produced?

andre1969

I think that Saaburu 9-2 looks a lot better than the Impreza it was based on. The Imprezas back then had sort of a lumpy, generic, Korean-car-inspired look to the front-end. The 9-2 at least looks a bit better balanced.

Now that I think about it, the 9-5 wagon looked better than the Saturn LS wagon, IMO at least. And the 9-3 looked better than the Malibu/Maxx/G6. I'll even throw it out there that the 9-whatever SUV version looked better than the Trailblazer/et al.

But, the problem is, a luxury vehicle has to do more than just "look better" than its more plebian brethren. It has to BE better!

qbrozen

I think the Saabaru should have been turbo only for starters. They could have tweaked the ECU ever so slightly for a modest bump in output and added more sound deadening (which would offset the power bump so it wouldn't really be any faster). Couple that with the cool 2-tone leather they had in them and you've at least differentiated yourself enough, IMHO.

ab348

@andre1969 said:
I think that Saaburu 9-2 looks a lot better than the Impreza it was based on. The Imprezas back then had sort of a lumpy, generic, Korean-car-inspired look to the front-end.

What do you mean, "had"?

andre1969

@ab348 said:
What do you mean, "had"?

LOL, true... Still, I don't mind the front-end of the current Impreza. It reminds me a bit of the front-end of my Mom and stepdad's old '99 Altima, just a bit better proportioned.

isellhondas

So, were those Saaburus sold by Saab Dealers or by Subaru Dealers?

If the Saab stores were selling them it would have been a nightmare for the parts and service departments. They would have to stock Subaru parts and the service depts. would have to have the equipment and knowledge to work on them.

I think I've seen ONE of these and I'll never understand what they were thinking when they decided to build them!

stickguy

Saab dealers. Probably just sent out to Subaru dealer for all the common parts.

stever

That's the trouble with twins, especially as they age. My Quest is mechanically the same as a Mercury Villager, but recently a Ford dealer told me that they send everyone to a Nissan dealer 45 miles away if the owner needs work done.

Doesn't help that Mercury is defunct.

isellhondas

I didn't know these were ever built.

The question begs.....WHY??

http://seattle.craigslist.org/skc/cto/4447761349.html

fintail

I think those existed to troll (see what I did there) Saab fans by putting the name on a middle American SUV. That being said, it's probably nicer than what it is based on.

andre1969

I think that Saab 9-7 is in sort of the same boat as a Lincoln Versailles, or even the more recent Lincoln Zephyr/Mark-Z. Not a bad looking rig in its own right, but the second you realize what it's based on, you lose all respect for it.

gsemike

I remember at the time they came out, that research showed that more than half of Saab owners owned an SUV as well, but that they've never buy a Chevy. I guess that they figured that any sales they got from it, would have been incremental and not stolen from GMC or Chevy

texases

GM exec: "Hmmm...they won't buy a Chevy...I got it, take off the "Chevy" name plates, put on "Saab", problem solved!!"

stickguy

pretty much Mike. Plus, SAAB desperately needed some product to sell, and had no budget to develop anything.

fintail

It's not the rare that's hard to find, it's the mundane

stickguy

Nice hood fitment. Darn I miss the 80's

fintail

I think the hood may be popped. Doesn't make me miss the 80s, but it brings back a few memories.

Something odd going on here Doesn't seem like the usual CL scam, but pics are obviously not taken in North America (likely Russia)

Michaell

@fintail said:
I think the hood may be popped. Doesn't make me miss the 80s, but it brings back a few memories.

Something odd going on here Doesn't seem like the usual CL scam, but pics are obviously not taken in North America (likely Russia)

There's a tag on one of the photos with a '.ru' suffix, so I'm inclined to agree with you.

andre1969

One thing I'll say for that Tempo...with the nice fabric on the seats, the padded vinyl door panels, and lower carpeting, it almost looks like a luxury car, compared to the typical bargain basement compact of today. That Louisiana Cathouse-Red interior might make it look a bit ritzier, too. Today's cars usually come with interiors in muted, bland colors, acres of hard plastic, and fabrics roughly the texture of outdoor patio furniture.

But, that being said, the '84 Tempo is not a flashback I want to experience! Maybe an '84 Caprice, Crown Vic, 5th Ave, Grand Prix, etc...

isellhondas

I hated Mustang II's when they came out and I still have no attraction to them...but...
I once sat in a Ghia edition and it had a MUCH nicer interior than I would have ever thought it would.

Just a glorified Pinto but people bought them.

andre1969

I'll see those Mustang II Ghias every once in awhile at car shows. Usually one pops up at the Macungie PA show I go to in August. Those things are downright luxurious, for that size/class of car. The Chevy Monza had an upper trim level that was pretty nice, as well. Can't remember what it was called. Not quite up to Mustang II Ghia standards, but still pretty nice.

stickguy

Well the original was just a glorified falcon and people bought them. I always thought the II was more true to the original than the bloated model it replaced. Plus I kind of liked them.

fintail

And that Tempo cloth is just the standard velour - there was a plusher patterned velour interior, as was in our 85 GLX. Manual windows and hubcaps also point to this as a midrange model. I remember the door panel carpeting too - as our car got miled up, the carpeting on the driver's door became worn, and became kind of long and shaggy - I called it "Chewbacca hair" (but it was a medium blue color).

Red interiors and blue interiors seem uncommon these days.

Speaking of Mustang II, I don't mind the fastback. And yeah, the 71-73 notchback especially wasn't really pretty.