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

isellhondas

When was the last time anyone saw one of these?
http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/cto/5190354497.html

berri

I grew up in the Chicago area, just down from Kenosha. The 63 and 65 Rambler's were fairly common, but I didn't see as many 64's back then. Don't know if it was the style or the economy though.

andre1969

Check out that speedometer...damn thing only goes up to 12 mph!

stickguy

not a bad looking car for the money. But those wheels and tires gotta go. A nice set of cragers and tires with some sidewall please!

bhill2

isellhondas said:

When was the last time anyone saw one of these?
http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/cto/5190354497.html

Oh Lord love a duck. My folks had one of those in four door form. Same engine and same transmission. Even the same body color (no contrasting roof). Bench seat, of course.

qbrozen

sharp looking car. I could think of far worse ways to spend $6k.

Mr_Shiftright

Price seems close to fair enough if it's not some tarted up rust bucket. I'd say $5K is all the money for a nice driver.

isellhondas

Back in the 70's when I managed a shop, Ramblers used to give us fits.

For whatever reason, they wouldn't use the same parts on all of their cars. You couldn't order, say a
brake drum. The parts house would want us to measure the drum, provide the car's VIN number etc.

I remember onc time we needed an alternator and after three tries we gave up and sent the old one out to be rebuilt. Stuff like this was common on Ramblers.

A co-worker who needed a cheap transportation car at that time ended up with a 1965 American. Because they weren't very popular he bought it for a cheap price and it turned out to be a great little car.

andre1969

I think in some years, Ramblers used brake and wheel parts that were sourced from Ford, so that might have added to the fun. Back in the 90's, one of my friends had a '76 AMC Hornet wagon, in Robin's Egg Blue. One time they got in trouble when it came time for the emissions test, because the car had no catalytic converter. Even though we tend to think of the catalytic converter becoming standard in 1975, some makes and models managed to slip through the cracks, and didn't get them until later. However, the state of Virginia wasn't buying it. My friend's parents actually had to write to the manufacturer and get documentation that the car left the factory with no catalytic converter! I wonder how hard that had to be, considering Chrysler had taken over AMC by that time? Somehow, they did manage to get the documentation.

ab348

I wonder what goes on sometimes with auto parts. I had a situation years ago that still baffles me. My '64 Skylark blew its heater core. I had a pal working at a parts store and called him up. Didn't have it in stock, but it was a common part, used in all GM A-bodies that year (and I believe for several years), he could get it the next day. Sure enough, it arrives, and I pick it up. It was a fairly involved job to replace, needing the inner fender removed, which in turn needed a few other things to be removed, in order to get at the nuts on the heater case buried on the firewall side. Then under the dash to remove a bunch of other stuff until finally revealing the leaky core. After all that, removing it was pretty easy, but - what's this? - the new one is not close to the same size and won't fit.

I go back to the parts store the next day and assume I was given the wrong part. My buddy takes out the printed catalog from the manufacturer and finds the spec, complete with picture and dimensions. No, I had been given what they said was the right part for a '64 Skylark. It just didn't fit. He asked me to bring in the original one to measure it, so I did. He then went through his catalog and looked for one that size and shape. He found that a core from a '61 full-size Olds was identical to what I had. He ordered one in (amazed he could still get it) and sure enough, that's what I had. It went in just fine. But I could never figure out what the heck happened. The Skylark was unodified in any way, hadn't been hacked, etc.

uplanderguy

I thought the '63 Rambler redesign was a good one, and the '64 not quite as nice--I liked the concave front end on the '63. Classics finally got a V8 in mid-'63 and a hardtop for '64.

Andre, LOL--that used to always bug me too, how their speedometers showed "1" through "12"--although to be fair, all three of my sixties Studebakers had round speedometers with only every 20mph written in numerals.

bhill2

uplanderguy said:

I thought the '63 Rambler redesign was a good one, and the '64 not quite as nice--I liked the concave front end on the '63. Classics finally got a V8 in mid-'63 and a hardtop for '64.

Andre, LOL--that used to always bug me too, how their speedometers showed "1" through "12"--although to be fair, all three of my sixties Studebakers had round speedometers with only every 20mph written in numerals.

You know, that speedometer never bothered me. It certainly didn't keep from trying to peg it. But I chickened out. Even at 16 yo or so, taking a car with drum brakes, a soft suspension and bias-ply tires to 120 didn't sound like a good idea (I got it over 100 [that is, 10] though).

texases

bhill2 said:

uplanderguy said:

I thought the '63 Rambler redesign was a good one, and the '64 not quite as nice--I liked the concave front end on the '63. Classics finally got a V8 in mid-'63 and a hardtop for '64.

Andre, LOL--that used to always bug me too, how their speedometers showed "1" through "12"--although to be fair, all three of my sixties Studebakers had round speedometers with only every 20mph written in numerals.

You know, that speedometer never bothered me. It certainly didn't keep from trying to peg it. But I chickened out. Even at 16 yo or so, taking a car with drum brakes, a soft suspension and bias-ply tires to 120 didn't sound like a good idea (I got it over 100 [that is, 10] though).

I did the same thing with my '72 Duster, once. Hit 100, on a downhill, then thought about those tires....POP!

As for the odd speedo markings, my '86 Cherokee had odd tach markings, in 100 rpm increments: 10 = 1000, etc. So both the tach and the speedo had the same numbers: 10, 20, 30, 40...

fintail

Rambler seems harmless at that price - won't explode in value, but is reasonably uncommon, nicely styled, and is easy on the eyes. Being a HT is also nice. It does need either period mags, or factory deluxe hubcaps.

Ad somewhat reminds me of a 63-64 Pontiac wagon that was for sale in the same town a while back.

Mr_Shiftright

Okay, all you Automotive Sherlock Holmes..es....Jump in on this one please!

Need Help Identifying Car From Aussie Brochure

sda

ab348 said:

I wonder what goes on sometimes with auto parts. I had a situation years ago that still baffles me. My '64 Skylark blew its heater core. I had a pal working at a parts store and called him up. Didn't have it in stock, but it was a common part, used in all GM A-bodies that year (and I believe for several years), he could get it the next day. Sure enough, it arrives, and I pick it up. It was a fairly involved job to replace, needing the inner fender removed, which in turn needed a few other things to be removed, in order to get at the nuts on the heater case buried on the firewall side. Then under the dash to remove a bunch of other stuff until finally revealing the leaky core. After all that, removing it was pretty easy, but - what's this? - the new one is not close to the same size and won't fit.

I go back to the parts store the next day and assume I was given the wrong part. My buddy takes out the printed catalog from the manufacturer and finds the spec, complete with picture and dimensions. No, I had been given what they said was the right part for a '64 Skylark. It just didn't fit. He asked me to bring in the original one to measure it, so I did. He then went through his catalog and looked for one that size and shape. He found that a core from a '61 full-size Olds was identical to what I had. He ordered one in (amazed he could still get it) and sure enough, that's what I had. It went in just fine. But I could never figure out what the heck happened. The Skylark was unodified in any way, hadn't been hacked, etc.

With you being in an area that I assume has cold winters, did the heater core of the 61 Olds have greater capacity than what was listed as the standard replacement?

sda

bhill2 said:

uplanderguy said:

I thought the '63 Rambler redesign was a good one, and the '64 not quite as nice--I liked the concave front end on the '63. Classics finally got a V8 in mid-'63 and a hardtop for '64.

Andre, LOL--that used to always bug me too, how their speedometers showed "1" through "12"--although to be fair, all three of my sixties Studebakers had round speedometers with only every 20mph written in numerals.

You know, that speedometer never bothered me. It certainly didn't keep from trying to peg it. But I chickened out. Even at 16 yo or so, taking a car with drum brakes, a soft suspension and bias-ply tires to 120 didn't sound like a good idea (I got it over 100 [that is, 10] though).

I always got tickled by what AMC called their heater/ac, (climate control), Weather Eye. How neat is that?

ab348

sda said:

With you being in an area that I assume has cold winters, did the heater core of the 61 Olds have greater capacity than what was listed as the standard replacement?

Actually, it was originally a Seattle car, so it wasn't that.

berri

I think the old Weather-Eye actually goes back to around 1950 when Nash was known for their effective heaters.

Mr_Shiftright

And their transmission was a Flash-o-Matic ! (push button type).

isellhondas

I had forgotten those Rambler valve covers used wing nuts to remove them.

ab348

They kept that terminology at AMC for a long time. Our '75 Hornet Sportabout had a "Weather Eye" heater/defroster, and had a "Torque Command" transmission along with "Luster-Guard" paint and "Cruise-Command" speed control.

bhill2

ab348 said:

They kept that terminology at AMC for a long time. Our '75 Hornet Sportabout had a "Weather Eye" heater/defroster, and had a "Torque Command" transmission along with "Luster-Guard" paint and "Cruise-Command" speed control.

My understanding is that they used "Flash-O-Matic" when the autobox was a Borg Warner unit and "Torque Command" when they switched to the Chrysler Torqueflite. I can't remember when that happened.

ab348

I always loved the "Flash-O-Matic" name. We had a cat that always liked to stick his paw in the water bowl and splash it around before drinking, and I called him the "Splash-O-Matic" kitty.

andre1969

ab348 said:

I always loved the "Flash-O-Matic" name. We had a cat that always liked to stick his paw in the water bowl and splash it around before drinking, and I called him the "Splash-O-Matic" kitty.

I have a cat that does that now. He sticks his paw in the water bowl and pulls it towards him, sloshing it all over the place. And if someone has a drink sitting within reach, such as on the coffee table, he'll try to take a swipe at it.

qbrozen

Driving back from getting coffee this morn and this grabbed my attention so I pulled in and took a closer look. I had to look up the price online. Oddly, it is priced lower than I thought it would be given some of his other stuff, but still high, no?

what say you?
http://platinummotorsnj.com/mobile/VehicleDetail.aspx?InventoryId=5965893&Guid=e8d8ba58-e3a4-4b24-ad59-1e88dae15833

ab348

First thing I would say is that I hate that style of website design. Way too minimalist and requires too much interaction to actually see anything. Must have been created by a Google devotee.

Second thing is that price seems awfully high for a car with a drivers seat that I wouldn't want to even touch. The '53/'54 Chevys have never interested me in the least. Last days for the old '40s stuff.

fintail

Looks like a quick paint 'n chrome exterior renovation flip. Way too much money for a car with that interior, and a virtual absence of data in the ad. The pics are also depressing for such a high price on a 2 door sedan, I always wonder about other corners being cut if good pics are too difficult.

Mr_Shiftright

I agree, overpriced by a fair margin. Based on what I see, I'd say the car is worth about $9000, presuming the engine bay and undercarriage is no better or worse than the interior, and that the paint job is mediocre (which I bet it is).

explorerx4

Then there is that trans fluid on the showroom floor.

isellhondas

I once had that exact 54 Chevy only mine was the lighter shade of green.

Those amber turn signal lenses have to go along with that ratty interior.

I suspect that car has been cheaply spruced up to sell and that under close examination wouldn't score very high and I also think Mr. S is being chartable with his estimate.

Mr_Shiftright

Just giving the seller the benefit of the doubt. If the engine and undercarriage are a greasy mess I'd put the value at about $5500 as it sits.

isellhondas

I saw a 1954 Chevy at a recent car show with ultra rare power steering. Only the second one I've ever seen. It had just about every other option that could have been ordered too.

I've seen two 55 Chevies with factory air conditioning. One was in a junkyard. Talk about RARE!

andre1969

I googled around and found that air conditioning cost $620 on a 1955 Cadillac, so I'd imagine it would be comparable on other cars. A Coupe DeVille had a base MSRP of $4305, while the convertible was $4,448. A '55 Bel Air hardtop coupe started at $2,067, while the convertible was $2,206.

No wonder convertibles were so popular back in the old days! Going from a hardtop to a convertible only cost you about $140-150. Getting a/c was $600+! To put that in perspective, adjusting for inflation, the $140-150 premium for a convertible would be around $1250-1340. The $620 a/c would be roughly equivalent to $5500!

isellhondas

I grew up by the ocean in So. California and since there were very few hot days, not many people bought A/C.

People were more conservative in those days. Power windows were considered a unnecessary luxury for most people.

Thinking of the differences between a 1954 Chevy and a 1955, the many changes were staggering.

First year for the V-8. Totally restyled. Torque tube replaced with open driveshaft, 12 volt system, ball joints replaced the old king pins, tubeless tires. Available overdrive and air conditioning.

I'm sure I'm missing something.

isellhondas

Can I hear some thoughts on this one?

http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/cto/5167923039.html

To me, unless I'm missing something this car has very little value.

I sure don't recall that color. To me, it just looks wrong.

Anyone believe what the odometer is showing?

A couple of years ago, I saw a NICE very original 240Z for sale for, I think 6000.00 dollars and
I thought that was a stretch at the time.

fintail

I'm skeptical. First, about the color. That blue is what I call "Friendly Auto Sales blue", as when I was a kid, there was a used car lot in town with that name that often got old police cars, and painted them a similar blue. The mileage claim is amusing, even the seller doesn't try to defend it - "this is what the odometer says". Yeah, no. I think a 280 is also a lot less desirable than a 240. It's still worth something, but not nice 240 money. Really mint 240s are well above 10K now anyway.

isellhondas said:

Can I hear some thoughts on this one?

http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/cto/5167923039.html

To me, unless I'm missing something this car has very little value.

.

andre1969

I tried looking for a '75 280Z paint chart, but couldn't find anything. However, I did find a list of colors, and they offered "light blue metallic" and "blue metallic". In googling pics of blue 1975 280Z's, it does look somewhat close to the "blue metallic", but not quite. It actually make me think of the blue I saw on a 2015 Ram I looked at the other week, when I had mine in for an oil chance, tire rotation, and replacement/reprogrammed key fob.

I have no idea what these things are worth, but I was under the impression that they did have their following. IIRC, the most desirable was the 240Z, and for some reason the 260Z didn't catch on, but the 280Z was pretty hot.

ab348

What's the deal on the seats on that 280Z? Really ill-fitting aftermarket covers?

The pictures showing the factory stickers don't show any overspray I can see (although I have some question about the emission control sticker being disfigured). If it's a repaint, they did a great masking job.

texases

While it has a/c, bet it doesn't work.

stickguy

I kind of like the Z. but that particular one, scares me. Just think it is hiding some nasty "secrets"

berri

Z car - look out for rust

isellhondas

The least desirable Z's were the one year only 1974 260's especially the 2+2's. The techs hated working on them. Very tricky carburators for one thing.

qbrozen

On that 54 Bel Air, I don't believe it to be a recent cheap repaint. The paint on it is actually quite old, it seems. So maybe done in the 80s or 90s, I think. Door handles are bad but bumpers looked ok. I was checking out typical rust areas I could see and didn't notice any issues. Of course, if I was a buyer, I'd look much much closer. I was thinking $13k was all the money, but maybe I'm wrong. What would a ...let's say B Grade version get? This isn't a B, I'm just curious.

isellhondas

I have found that cars usually look better in photos than in person.

As far as price, I think if it were a number 2 car it "could" bring 15,000. Maybe.

fintail

Took the old car out for a spin today - started right up and ran fine. It's so consistently reliable for something of its age - I must be driving it just enough to keep things going. Honked at a couple slowpokes - something about this weekend here has people really crawling. Fun moment was when I parked at a store and came out, a guy was taking pics of his kids in front of it, the boy seemed very impressed with the car. Crossroads area, Indian family who looked like recent arrivals (in a Camry I think, of course) - the father said "thank you" to me when I walked up to the car.

Mr_Shiftright

$13K with that shabby interior seems very optimistic.

qbrozen said:

On that 54 Bel Air, I don't believe it to be a recent cheap repaint. The paint on it is actually quite old, it seems. So maybe done in the 80s or 90s, I think. Door handles are bad but bumpers looked ok. I was checking out typical rust areas I could see and didn't notice any issues. Of course, if I was a buyer, I'd look much much closer. I was thinking $13k was all the money, but maybe I'm wrong. What would a ...let's say B Grade version get? This isn't a B, I'm just curious.

texases

Isn't there some rust on the driver's side floor?

texases

Here's the pic on that '54. Note the floor near the door. Make me wonder what else is under the carpet:

fintail

Another cheap late run fintail