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

ab348

tjc78 said:

I think it depends a lot on the tires. Our Enclave with Michelins is dead silent at speeds well above the limit. Heck, even my aging 04 Grand Marquis is quiet with Michelins that are nearing 45K miles.

That's true. The OEM Goodyear Eagles on my Intrigue became very noisy as they wore. I eventually replaced them with Michelins which were much quieter.

andre1969

My grandparents had two Tauruses...first was an '89 LX with the 3.8, and then an '89 GL with the 3.0. I think both of them had 140 hp. That '89 was a nice car, although I think it started stalling every once in awhile toward the end. Grandmom was getting sick and needed to go back and forth to the doctors, hospital, etc, so he wanted something reliable, and traded on the GL in late 1993.

The '94 was okay, but just seemed watered down and rental car-ish compared to the '89. I don't think the '94 ever gave any troubles, but I remember towards the end, I could smell antifreeze.

Granddad gave up driving in 2004, just before turning 90. Offered to give me the car, but I turned it down, because I really didn't need it. I think it only had about 40,000 miles on it. One of my cousins got it, instead, and I think he had it until around 2011 or 2012. I remember taking Granddad down to see them for Easter, back in 2009, when my cousins still had the Taurus. It was looking pretty ratty by that time, parked off the driveway over by the property line. Granddad got out of my car, went over to look at the Taurus, and just shook his head, sadly, at how beat up the car had become.

And yeah, I think I'd take a Taurus over any same year Corsica as well. Still, I think I could tolerate a Corsica, if it was in nice shape, the price was right, and I needed a car.

uplanderguy

I never thought a Corsica competed with a Taurus, but rather with the Tempo and Topaz. I'm biased, but I prefer the Corsica/Beretta eons over the Tempo/Topaz!

I'm perplexed why my two Cobalts, regardless of make of tires (original versus replacement), have virtually zero road/tire noise, and the Malibu does. The Cobalt, of course, is the older design...one does have to wonder if in getting the Malibu to get in the 30's EPA mileage, every weight trick in the book was used. The Malibu is a nice car, but that does frustrate me about it.

My Cobalt (the other is my daughter's; hers is similar) is absolutely whisper-quiet and smooth at idle. I'm always amazed at that. The other day I turned the key thinking it wasn't running. And someone on the old "I Hate GM So Everybody Else Should Too" forum here (or whatever it was called, LOL) posted how the engines in those cars are noisy and thrashy--then later conceded he'd never even sat in one yet ridden in one...LOL.

andre1969

My stepdad had an '84 Tempo, so I'm biased against it, as well!

I think it's a bit hard to place the Corsica, as it doesn't have a direct correlation at Ford, at least not in the early years. I always thought of the Cavalier as the Tempo's competition, while the Celebrity went up against the Taurus. Once Ford released the Contour and Mystique, I'd say those went up more directly against the Corsica.

As for the Cobalt, most of the complaints I've heard about it are that it felt like a bigger car than it was. So it didn't have that lightweight, nimble, tossable feel that you might have gotten out of a Honda Civic, Ford Focus, or whatever. But, then you got the advantages of a quieter, smoother ride. I've never driven a Cobalt, but I've sat in them at car shows. I remember them having a pretty good driving position...the seat went back further and gave me better legroom than competing compacts of the time.

berri

I found Corsica's as one of the chintziest models out there during their sales life. I never much cared for the Ford Tempo, but would readily take it over a Corsica at the rental counter.

fintail

Corsica definitely was half a degree above a Tempo, in size and price. Tempo was smaller and 4cyl only for most of its lifespan. Tempo faced the Cavalier, where it compared well.

berri

Looks aside, maybe Corsica was also a market niche that didn't need to exist?

uplanderguy

In my mind, the Cavalier went up against the Escort. Both the lowest-priced model their makers sold that were built in the U.S., and both had wagon bodystyles.

The Corsica/Beretta was America's best-selling line at one time, so there was a market for them.

I was steering my wife towards a Cavalier wagon, but she liked my folks' Corsica better so wanted one of those. If I remember correctly, the Corsica and the Cavalier wagon cost about the same.

As usual, it's what you were used to, but I always thought the Tempo/Topaz coupes looked 'chubby' and had a lot of sheetmetal above the wheel openings, which I never liked. Say what you will about the styling of Corsica/Beretta, but you can't say they looked 'chubby'.

They had an open compartment to the left of the steering wheel, low in the dash, that would about swallow your arm halfways to the elbow. That was a small thing I liked.

One thing I didn't like about the V6's, although IMHO they had plenty of power for the time, is that they had that raspy sound. My wife and I would hear that sound and say, "There goes a Beretta". The exhausts on the sixes didn't seem to last very long either.

fintail

I think Tempos, especially the round earlier style, can have the undersized wheel look. IIRC the largest wheel was a 14". I think the Corsica/Beretta was definitely upmarket from a Tempo. Maybe GM and Ford didn't have exact competitors in this segment. I like how the Beretta had tall windows with a low beltline - that ideal is long gone.

I remember that exhaust note vividly, I called it the "popcorn popper". Back around 1989 someone in my area had a new Grand Prix, and I would see/hear it every day on the way to school.

uplanderguy

I remember that exhaust note vividly, I called it the "popcorn popper".

Good analogy! Yeah, that got annoying after awhile.

ab348

My brother owned a Mercury Topaz, a 1990 that he bought new, and I had Corsicas and Berettas as rental cars back then. To me there was no comparison. The Ford product was underpowered, not pleasant to drive, and to my eye looked bad. The Chevys were cheapish inside, but had lots of glass and drive well.

andre1969

My only beef with the Corsica and Beretta was the interior styling, and all that plastic, and random odd shapes. The outside was nicely styled, I thought. Although one detail I didn't like was how the back door edge is actually part of the surround of the rear wheel opening. It make the car look incomplete to me. My Park Ave is the same way, and I just don't like that little detail.

I only drove my stepdad's '84 Tempo once. I forget why, but he took my '80 Malibu, and made me drive the Tempo for a day. I think he just wanted to drive it around and make sure it was safe. Anyway, I only drove that Tempo to work and back, as it was summer vacation. Work was only 2 miles away. But in that short amount of time, I really hated that car! My Malibu was no great shakes, but it felt like a musclecar compared to that Tempo!

My '85 Consumer Guide has a test of an '85 Topaz. I think 0-60 was listed at 15.9 seconds.

uplanderguy

I did like the cloth on the interior door panels, the door map pockets, and the corduroy-like seats of my Beretta and Corsica. Our Corsica was charcoal gray with gray interior (my Dad's had the red interior, which I liked much better), and my Beretta GT was the ubiquitous bright red, but mine had the beige corduroy interior when most had the gray interior. The Beretta was definitely the smallest car I had owned 'til that time. We never again had two smaller cars at the same time as the Beretta GT and the Corsica LT.

Being that my Beretta was a GT, it had all the nameplates in red. I hadn't noticed, but an old buddy commented that the one across the center of the rear looked almost 'pink' (sun-faded). I painted it with Testor's red model car paint.

My Beretta had the big tires and aluminum wheels that were sort of a fine, cross-hatched or spoked look, not the GT steel wheels (although I thought those looked OK). Thankfully mine didn't have a spoiler. The decklid of the Beretta had a bit of a Kamm-thing going on anyway; IMHO putting a spoiler on it was 'double dipping'.

fintail

That door edge = wheel opening thing irks me too, looks cheap. I suspect it is cheaper, as it is a piece of body that doesn't exist.

We still had the 85 Tempo (GLX, loaded, pretty rare) in my family when I got the fintail. The fintail is definitely faster 0-60 than a Tempo - the Tempo lost steam pretty quickly, I remember doing what I could to get performance out of the car - holding it in gear late, and revving before takeoff. I don't think it made much of a difference.

Speaking of wheels, I was thinking Beretta had a cool optional wheel, but that was the 80s style Cavalier Z24 wheel. I think Beretta eventually had a somewhat cool 90s looking "throwing star" wheel at one point.

andre1969 said:

My only beef with the Corsica and Beretta was the interior styling, and all that plastic, and random odd shapes. The outside was nicely styled, I thought. Although one detail I didn't like was how the back door edge is actually part of the surround of the rear wheel opening. It make the car look incomplete to me. My Park Ave is the same way, and I just don't like that little detail.

I only drove my stepdad's '84 Tempo once. I forget why, but he took my '80 Malibu, and made me drive the Tempo for a day. I think he just wanted to drive it around and make sure it was safe. Anyway, I only drove that Tempo to work and back, as it was summer vacation. Work was only 2 miles away. But in that short amount of time, I really hated that car! My Malibu was no great shakes, but it felt like a musclecar compared to that Tempo!

My '85 Consumer Guide has a test of an '85 Topaz. I think 0-60 was listed at 15.9 seconds.

andre1969

One of my friends in college had an '89 Cavalier Z-24 coupe, in red/silver, that was almost a dead ringer for this, except that it had a pop up sunroof...


I thought it was a sharp looking car, and 1988-90 was probably the Cavalier's high point. The interior was nice and well-appointed, and the car just had a nice, well-proportioned look about it. It had a strong Chevy identity, I thought, with its horizontal grille and taillights that reminded me a bit of my old 1980 Malibu.

The roofline makes me think of something like a '59-61 Impala hardtop coupe, in the rear window/C-pillar area. I thought the wheels were pretty cool, too.

fintail

Those are the wheels. I think I called them graph paper wheels or something due to the center caps, very much a piece of the late 80s. They work well on the car, which doesn't look too bad a quarter century later, for what it was. I remember they looked good in that medium blue of the period, too.

Speaking of wheels, a guilty pleasure of mine is the mid 80s Monte Carlo checkerboard wheel, like this - so 80s:

andre1969 said:

The roofline makes me think of something like a '59-61 Impala hardtop coupe, in the rear window/C-pillar area. I thought the wheels were pretty cool, too.

andre1969

I remember seeing those checkerboard wheels every once in awhile back in the 80's. I didn't care for them at the time, but nowadays I can see their charm.

uplanderguy

I love those checkerboard wheels and they weren't often seen on '81-88 Monte Carlos in my neck of the woods. It seems like the center caps came off easily--they'd almost always be missing when I did see one. I could enjoy a late '86-88 LS Monte with those wheels, the V8 engine, and WITHOUT the optional body side molding which was probably only two inches above the bright metal molding those cars all came with down the side! From '86 on, it seemed like the Monte SS was the one I'd see the most, but in hindsight I don't like the 'boy racer' graphics on the car.

andre1969

I liked the '86 Monte Carlo that my Mom had, the one I had for a few months before getting t-boned while delivering pizzas. It had the 150 hp 305/4-speed automatic, and had a good blend of power and economy, I thought. Not too big, not too small. It was two tone, dark gray over silver, with a burgundy cloth interior...sort of a rat-fur type of texture. Not the highest quality in the world, but I've seen worse. And...this was a base car, not an LS or SS.

Mine just had the basic silver metal hubcaps, with the slots around the sides, divided into three sections. Like this...


I remember my Granddad making Mom mad when he said it was a "cheap car" because it didn't have power windows! He was just teasing though, as he and Grandmom didn't even get their first power-window vehicle until they bought an '85 LeSabre in late '84. And then the Silverado he bought in the summer of '85.

I didn't mind the crank windows though, because the car was narrow enough that I could reach over to the passenger side. And they still went down fairly quickly...maybe 3-4 cranks to get it all the way down. Crank windows are pretty much non-existent these days, but I noticed that in more recent cars, you'd have to crank a lot more to get the window down or up.

xwesx

andre1969 said:

I noticed that in more recent cars, you'd have to crank a lot more to get the window down or up.

Yeah, definitely! My grandmother had a Justy (three of them, actually, but this was her last one, a silver one from maybe 1993? The last year they were made.) for a long while, and I remember that it took many cranks to get the window down (or up).

The good part was that it was really easy (aside from the many spins) versus our 1979 F150 or other manual-crank windows that required far fewer turns, but more effort per turn. To a child, this is significant. LOL My son still has issues getting the window to move in my '69 C20.

andre1969

One of my friends had a 1998 Tracker, and I remember that thing seemed to take forever to crank up and down. Part of it might have been the fact that it had some pretty big windows, though. I do remember the crank being in an awkward location, and the handle was pretty small, and not easy to grasp.

And yeah, some older cars can get, well, cranky when it comes to putting the windows up and down. My '67 Catalina's passenger side door window isn't too bad going down, but to get it back up, I'll crank with one hand and grab the glass with the other to help pull it up!

fintail

The window cranking thing reminds me of the Wagon Queen Family Truckster - it seems Clark cranked that thing about a dozen times to roll it up. The fintail is awesome for that - I want to say it is under 3 revolutions from end to end.

Back when I was in school in the late 90s, I remember someone in the building where I lived had an immaculate Monte Carlo, with the composite lights, and it had checkerboard wheels and t-tops. That has to be pretty uncommon. It wasn't an SS.

berri

Not a big tempo fan, but just didn't like the Corsica. I remember renting them and they had some kind of cheapo seat adjuster, kind of like a rocker, that didn't work well for tall guys. The car just reeked low budget to me.

andre1969

I just noticed...there really wasn't much of a difference in price between the regular Monte SportMy Coupe, like what my Mom had, and the Luxury Sport (LS) model that was a step up. The V-8 base priced at $10,633 in the Sport coupe, and $10,841 for the LS. Now, I don't know what all the LS had standard, but most of the ones I've seen would have a much plusher interior, and some kind of sport rims...either the checkerboard or something else.

I think a split bench seat may have been standard in the LS as well. My Mom's base model had a split bench, but I don't know if it was standard or an upgrade.

But regardless, ~$190 seemed like a bargain, for the nicer car. I actually didn't like the composite-headlight front-end of the LS at the time, but it's grown on me in later years.

FWIW, they dropped the base Sport Coupe after '86, leaving just the LS and SS for '87-88.

uplanderguy

I remember that the LS wasn't available at the beginning of the '86 model year--this was even mentioned in the brochure. I believe the Sport Coupe was phased out when the LS came in.

I am about 98% certain that a bench seat with fold-down center armrest was standard, and the 55/45 front seat was optional. My parents had an '84 Monte Carlo with it and it was an extra-cost option at that point.

I've seen LS Montes with the wheelcovers your Mom's Sport Coupe had. I believe the LS merely replaced the Sport Coupe, and did not have any better interior; in fact, would have had the same interior standard. The "CL" was the upgraded interior.

It's a small thing, but I never liked how starting in '86, even on the Sport Coupe, how they moved the optional body side molding up from the natural crease in the lower side of the car's body. For '85 and earlier, it was on that crease.

berri

I don't remember for sure, but I think I had to order "optional" buckets and console when I bought my '79 Monte Carlo, so I wonder if a bench was standard back then?

uplanderguy

In '79, buckets and console were optional equipment on a Monte. A bench was standard, and there was also a "Special Custom Interior" option with velour or vinyl 55/45 front seat and more padded door panels with carpeting on the bottom.

I liked how the Montes did the center console then--it rose up in the center to meet the center of the instrument panel, and had 'piano black' trim.

gsemike

Craigs Long Island Winter Buys
Searching for anything older than 1990

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5303006463.html 69 GTO. I love the blue but think that he should have wiped down the engine and thrown some sort of radio into it. Hate that he talks about the great price but doesn't say what the ask is

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5303014440.html Can't quite tell what this guy's story is, or what of the car is there, but it looks like clean quarters

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5302937826.html Real Z73. What's a Z73? Something about this one. I don't like the body side moldings or wheels and wonder if the paint can show better than it does in the pics

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5302894657.html Battle ship that Runs and drives but the engine needs to be rebuilt. I wish he could be more specific. The engine is a dime a dozen, so could be good for the right person

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5302883013.html Do these have a following? So much is wrong about that interior

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5290848869.html It does look like a time capsule and the price is pretty reasonable. Time has caught up to those bumper fillers and they're not cheap

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5279930194.html Has barn find and Thing love gotten to this? What is a Thing in no 3 condition worth?

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5302868629.html What a weird time capsule. Crumple zone = your front legs

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5302459676.html I agree with the seller that this Ferrari is cool in grey. Probably has too many needs for this price

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5302379214.html Old Bel Air. He's calling it a parts car but it appears complete. A good pressure washing might do it wonders

Mr_Shiftright

Yeah, VW Things are getting to be worth some money---that's not a #3 though, that's a low #4. Nonetheless, he might get close to his price. He should clean it up though if he wants top dollar.

Cadillac Allante---yes, they have a following but it's not a Northstar car and it's pretty rough; they don't bring big money even in the nicest condition. Might be an ok project for someone but there's no upside whatsoever.

Ferrari 308 GTsi -- well, at least it's the fuel injected model which means it could pass California emissions (the carb models don't have a prayer of doing that); on the downside if he had the timing belt replaced way back in 2004, the car needs to have it done again, and that's not cheap. Less than pristine old Ferraris are always a huge risk, because cost of repair can literally bludgeon you into senselessness. I'm thinkin' he's too high here by at least 25%.

66 Olds---looks like a Scheib-y paint job. Engine is no problem, they are as simple as a woodstove to rebuild. But 4-door reduces value considerably, so you have to buy this one right, which means "cheap".

texases

That GTO is sure bare-bones. No AC, PB, or PS (I think). So drums all around. Plus an AT. Not my idea of a fun project muscle car.

gsemike

texases said:

That GTO is sure bare-bones. No AC, PB, or PS (I think). So drums all around. Plus an AT. Not my idea of a fun project muscle car.

Yeah. I didn't look close enough but I agree. Some guys love that, but I think that wrestling with it everytime I drive it would take a lot of the joy away. And, what is that sauce can thing by the fender?

texases

I think that big black can is a vacuum reservoir. I think...

isellhondas

The techs at Cadillac stores just HATED Allantes for a number of reasons. They caused a lot of problems and were nasty to work on. The Northstar engines were more desirable but they had problems too such as the "Northstar Oil Leak" that always happened and it's a 5000.00 fix.

gsemike

Granted, I know nothing about Porsches, but I have a friend that knows less than me but still wants one. At a quick glance, this looks good:

http://longisland.craigslist.org/cto/5226555575.html

Agree?

qbrozen

need to know if the IMS issue has been addressed yet

Mr_Shiftright

Right! Without knowing if the IMS bearing has been given an upgrade, such a purchase would be...er...really stupid. There is about a 10% chance of complete engine destruction, to the tune of an $18,000 rebuild, or...in the case of this car....you just junk it.

Two ways to go here---one, have a complete pre-purchase inspection done by a qualified Porsche repair facility--they will remove the oil filter and cut it in half. If metallic debris is present, just button the car up and tell the owner that a) there is no fix at this point, and b) start shopping for a new car.

If there is no metallic debris, all that means is that nothing has happened YET. The IMS could destruct itself at any time, although lower mileage cars are more vulnerable than higher mileage cars. Most IMS bearing failures have been recorded in the 70,000 mile or before arena, but it can still happen anytime.

The only real fix is a retrofit, which requires engine out, and that's one of those "while we're in there" scenarios. You'd be foolish not to replace the water pump and the oil/air separator. Figure around $4000 for all this, if you want to sleep at night.

If the seller has evidence of the IMS retrofit (don't take his word for it), he should have both a receipt and a metal plate affixed to the door jamb.

qbrozen said:

need to know if the IMS issue has been addressed yet

xwesx

Mr_Shiftright said:

Right! Without knowing if the IMS bearing has been given an upgrade, such a purchase would be...er...really stupid. There is about a 10% chance of complete engine destruction, to the tune of an $18,000 rebuild, or...in the case of this car....you just junk it.

If the seller has evidence of the IMS retrofit (don't take his word for it), he should have both a receipt and a metal plate affixed to the door jamb.

And, if the answer is 'yes' to all that, then how does this all compare to the asking price ($19.5)?

Mr_Shiftright

It's retail market, maybe a bit high. $18.5K sounds right if it passes its inspection. If not, deduct accordingly. For this price it sounds be really really nice inside and out. If no IMS was done, I'd offer about $14K for it and have the upgrade done immediately. if it has the hardtop and hardtop carrier, then $19.5K is fair enough I guess. Also keep in mind that this car will continue to depreciate...it's a 996, not a 993, and it has a bad reputation.

Nice car, though, and good color combo. A 997 would be a better choice however.

isellhondas

Help me here....what is an IMS bearing?

Mr_Shiftright

Intermediate Shaft Bearing. The intermediate shaft is located just below the crankshaft. Porsche used a sealed bearing to support this shaft, and over time the lubricant inside this bearing breaks down from engine heat. Then, as the bearing seal disintegrates, engine oil (normally separated from the bearing) washes into it, taking the broken pieces of bearing throughout the entire engine, causing catastrophic damage.

This defect was correct in 2009, about 9 years too late. Some say the 996 engine block was cheaped out to save $$$. This may be true, since Porsche wouldn't use it for racing.

texases

InterMediate Shaft I think. First water cooled 911s and Boxsters had them fail at a scary rate, toll the engine out when they did. 

Mr_Shiftright

I have a few used cars my "scary buy" list and the 99-2008 Porsche Boxsters and 996s are on it. You can buy 'em but you have to be extremely careful.

sda

andre1969 said:

My grandparents had two Tauruses...first was an '89 LX with the 3.8, and then an '89 GL with the 3.0. I think both of them had 140 hp. That '89 was a nice car, although I think it started stalling every once in awhile toward the end. Grandmom was getting sick and needed to go back and forth to the doctors, hospital, etc, so he wanted something reliable, and traded on the GL in late 1993.

The '94 was okay, but just seemed watered down and rental car-ish compared to the '89. I don't think the '94 ever gave any troubles, but I remember towards the end, I could smell antifreeze.

Granddad gave up driving in 2004, just before turning 90. Offered to give me the car, but I turned it down, because I really didn't need it. I think it only had about 40,000 miles on it. One of my cousins got it, instead, and I think he had it until around 2011 or 2012. I remember taking Granddad down to see them for Easter, back in 2009, when my cousins still had the Taurus. It was looking pretty ratty by that time, parked off the driveway over by the property line. Granddad got out of my car, went over to look at the Taurus, and just shook make his head, sadly, at how beat up the car had become.

And yeah, I think I'd take a Taurus over any same year Corsica as well. Still, I think I could tolerate a Corsica, if it was in nice shape, the price was right, and I needed a car.

I think I've shared this story before, so if I have, my apologies. Mom had a 78 Olds 98 Regency coupe with an astro-roof that she had from 1982. After driving it almost 10 years, dad said it was time to say good bye. It was needing paint and the interior was getting shabby. Mom was kind of ok with that, but she dictated that her next car had to have a sunroof, which she truly enjoyed and used all the time. In 1991, I think, I found a very clean 87 Taurus LX, fully loaded with sunroof and 13K miles. Dad and I drove the 98 to the Ford dealership, test drove the Taurus, brought it home for mom to drive. She said she liked it. Back to the dealer, traded the 98, and brought home the Taurus. When we got home mom wanted to know where "black beauty' was, her 98. When she found out that the Taurus was now hers, she sadly replied, "I didn't get to say good bye" to black beauty, and was upset with both dad and I for weeks. The 87 Taurus was the top of the line model, and was very nicely equipped. It provided fairly trouble free service until it was traded in 2000 for mom's 98 Olds Aurora--yes with sunroof, and yes she was with us when we traded the Taurus. Thankfully we didn't have the heater core issue that plagued so many Taurus/Sables at the time. It was needing a repaint, the solid cranberry color had oxidized and a waxing would only make it look better for about a month. The Aurora is now being driven by my cousins as their college car.

sda

sda said:

andre1969 said:

My grandparents had two Tauruses...first was an '89 LX with the 3.8, and then an '89 GL with the 3.0. I think both of them had 140 hp. That '89 was a nice car, although I think it started stalling every once in awhile toward the end. Grandmom was getting sick and needed to go back and forth to the doctors, hospital, etc, so he wanted something reliable, and traded on the GL in late 1993.

The '94 was okay, but just seemed watered down and rental car-ish compared to the '89. I don't think the '94 ever gave any troubles, but I remember towards the end, I could smell antifreeze.

Granddad gave up driving in 2004, just before turning 90. Offered to give me the car, but I turned it down, because I really didn't need it. I think it only had about 40,000 miles on it. One of my cousins got it, instead, and I think he had it until around 2011 or 2012. I remember taking Granddad down to see them for Easter, back in 2009, when my cousins still had the Taurus. It was looking pretty ratty by that time, parked off the driveway over by the property line. Granddad got out of my car, went over to look at the Taurus, and just shook make his head, sadly, at how beat up the car had become.

And yeah, I think I'd take a Taurus over any same year Corsica as well. Still, I think I could tolerate a Corsica, if it was in nice shape, the price was right, and I needed a car.

I think I've shared this story before, so if I have, my apologies. Mom had a 78 Olds 98 Regency coupe with an astro-roof that she had from 1982. After driving it almost 10 years, dad said it was time to say good bye. It was needing paint and the interior was getting shabby. Mom was kind of ok with that, but she dictated that her next car had to have a sunroof, which she truly enjoyed and used all the time. In 1991, I think, I found a very clean 87 Taurus LX, fully loaded with sunroof and 13K miles. Dad and I drove the 98 to the Ford dealership, test drove the Taurus, brought it home for mom to drive. She said she liked it. Back to the dealer, traded the 98, and brought home the Taurus. When we got home mom wanted to know where "black beauty' was, her 98. When she found out that the Taurus was now hers, she sadly replied, "I didn't get to say good bye" to black beauty, and was upset with both dad and I for weeks. The 87 Taurus was the top of the line model, and was very nicely equipped. It provided fairly trouble free service until it was traded in 2000 for mom's 98 Olds Aurora--yes with sunroof, and yes she was with us when we traded the Taurus. Thankfully we didn't have the heater core issue that plagued so many Taurus/Sables at the time. It was needing a repaint, the solid cranberry color had oxidized and a waxing would only make it look better for about a month. The Aurora is now being driven by my cousins as their college car.

I meant, nephews, not cousins. As of 3 years ago in July, mom now has a 2010 CRV EX, with sunroof. She likes it, has been trouble free and is the perfect size--yet she says it is no "Olds" in an affectionate way.

explorerx4

This person is really trying to 'sell' it, with the flag and a kid's scooter in the picture.
http://hartford.craigslist.org/cto/5289672983.html

explorerx4

@mrshiftright,
What do you think of this?
http://hartford.craigslist.org/cto/5308609548.html

stickguy

I like the part in the Boss 302 ad about "vins are gone". probably the first (and most valuable) things to sell, now happily living in a scam clone.

Mr_Shiftright

It's hard to sell old, regular cab trucks these days, for any kind of good money. If it were an extended cab, he'd get that price.

explorerx4 said:

This person is really trying to 'sell' it, with the flag and a kid's scooter in the picture.
http://hartford.craigslist.org/cto/5289672983.html

Mr_Shiftright

Junk. Value? Close to nothing. Maybe 25% of what a back glass would cost you new. Nothing else on the car worth anything. You don't have the VIN plate, you don't have any sheet metal, you have no interior, and most of the remaining pieces are just regular old bottom of the line Mustang bits you could buy cheaply brand new. This ad is almost a parody.

explorerx4 said:

@mrshiftright,
What do you think of this?
http://hartford.craigslist.org/cto/5308609548.html

texases

I'd cut out the 'Boss 302' sheet metal, mount them, and sell them on Ebay, the rest to the crusher.