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

Mr_Shiftright

Oof, what an abortion. Well I guess it's worth whatever the cost of a very nice restoration is worth minus the cost to make this thing "correct" (RWMV (real world market value) - COR (cost of restoration) = Value.

Soooo, let's say just for argument that a freshly restored car built to drive (not the over-the-top, velvet rope restoration) would require:

rebuilt 3.8 or 4.2 engine and transmission
correct hood
restoration of body (probably had the floor pan cut, who knows what else)
correct hubs and wheels
new interior
new top
bare metal respray
all missing parts to take it back to factory

So if a shop did all this, you're looking at maybe...what? $150K? And if a very nice fresh restoration is worth say $175K, that leaves about $25K on the table.

Of course, you could just keep it like it is, although an automatic transmission in this car seems rather pointless.

Worth restoring? I think so. Would you come out even or ahead? Marginal......maybe.....

explorerx4

"car still runs like nothing happened."
http://hartford.craigslist.org/cto/5370124494.html

stickguy

well, at least he didn't say it drives!

could be interesting to see what you could jam that drivetrain into!

fintail

I say a K-car.

xwesx

Oh, that would be fantastic! LOL I was thinking that it would make for quite the sleeper to stuff that into my '74 Pinto. I'd have to give up my AWD dream, but dang. Hahha!

stickguy

well, I was thinking more like one of Andre's New Yorkers would make sense.

Me? I would get a nice clean Aspen R/T, a case of beer, a blow torch, and have at it!

fintail

Pinto could get a new Mustang GT engine or one of those 4cyl ecoboosts/Taurus SHO engine. Gotta keep it in the family

stickguy

I think the ecoboost might be an easier fit, but plenty of people have done V8 conversions in Pintos over the years. I believe though that the new engines are bulkier and a harder fit. So, a nice 289 Cobra motor sounds like the way to go!

andre1969

I think it's sad that what looks like such a light hit was enough to total that Challenger. My uncle hit a deer once with a 2003 Corolla, and it looked a lot worse than that, but only cost about $4800 to fix. And yeah, I've long fantasized about, how if I had money to burn, it might be fun to stuff a Hemi into one of my New Yorkers.

Mr_Shiftright

The car isn't worth that much anymore, so I can see a total. Let's say it's worth $17.5K private party retail...so if an insurance company totals a car at 60% damage, then the repair estimate would have been about $10K. I could see that amount of damage.

This seller is dreaming. Why would you pay $10K for a car that goes on a salvage title and will cost about that same amount to repair? AND he's already been paid for the car. He probably bought it back for a couple thou.

andre1969

I remember back in 1989, when my grandparents had a brand-new '89 Taurus LX. Granddad had foot surgery, so Grandmom was driving, when a woman in a '74 or so Catalina couldn't stay in her lane, and ended up pushing them off the road and into a telephone pole. The Catalina damaged every piece of sheetmetal on the driver's side, and I think the telephone pole got everything on the passenger side, plus the hood got smashed. The only undamaged body panels were the roof and the trunk lid!

The body shop had that car at least a month. I think it cost about $6,000 to repair, so figure in 2015 dollars, about double that. I guess they lucked out that nothing too serious got damaged, like the sub-frame, cowl structure, B-pillars, etc.

When my uncle hit the deer with his 2003 Corolla, I swear that car looked almost as bad as some of those NHTSA offset crash tests. It was enough to push the radiator back into the fan, so all the coolant leaked out. And the driver's door got jammed shut, so he had to climb out the passenger side. Now that I think back on it, the shop had that car easily a few weeks, as well.

Still, it's amazing that so little apparent damage could be so serious. But, I imagine simply setting off the airbags in that car probably added a few thousand bucks to the repair bill.

xwesx

fintail said:

Pinto could get a new Mustang GT engine or one of those 4cyl ecoboosts/Taurus SHO engine. Gotta keep it in the family

LOL good point, fin! One of these years. I just have to tick a few more items off the project lists..... Hahha.

uplanderguy

Just fumblin' through eBay as I often do, and came across this car. I post here only to comment at how the angle of the pic, and the obvious non-original color, make me think this car could be in a Pixar movie.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Buick-Riviera-/151919553682?forcerrptr=true&hash=item235f1c6c92:g:cOkAAOSwN81WDFVz&item=151919553682

ab348

What a terrible color for that car.

andre1969

Agreed...for the most part, the Riv was just too classy to pull off a color like that. With one exception...I could see the '71-73 models looking okay in it. They were already wild enough with the boat-tail styling.

I think the pics that bug me the most about that green Riv are the ones that show the engine. That green clashes horribly with the light blue of the engine.

isellhondas

Now, this doesn't seem like such a bad price for this Buick

http://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/650855828/overview/?aff=criteo&BAC=criteolf91814

I have to question the miles since the interior isn't original.

ab348

First thing I noticed too. Modern cloth really stands out in an older car.

Seems like a lot of money for an admittedly nice 4-door sedan.

Probably 20 years ago I almost made the mistake of buying a '54 Buick Super. It was presentable, though not nearly as nice as this. I think the owner wanted $5K for it, probably would have taken less. It was driven pretty regularly in the summer so I had seen it around a lot. In looking it over I realized I would eventually need to change/restore almost everything, so I passed. I recently saw what I believe to be the same car posted for sale locally, now not much more than a parts car. Sad.

Mr_Shiftright

It does seem to be priced high for what it is. Obviously not professionally restored but from photos fairly nice "driver". One would have to crawl underneath, and also drive it to see what it's really worth. Could just be a tarted up clunker.

isellhondas said:

Now, this doesn't seem like such a bad price for this Buick

http://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/650855828/overview/?aff=criteo&BAC=criteolf91814

I have to question the miles since the interior isn't original.

uplanderguy

That Buick is at a dealer ten miles from where I live.

At first glance to me, it looks pretty authentic from the outside, but I don't know much about those cars.

andre1969

Back when I was in high school, and started getting close to driving age, and lusting after antique cars, my neighbor mentioned a '54 Buick that he knew of for sale. I can't remember now if it was a Super or Roadmaster, but it was definitely the bigger C-body, and not a Special/Century. This was around 1985-86, and I think they only wanted $900 for it. I have no idea what kind of condition it was in, as I never saw it. And, there was no way my family would've let me have something like that.

qbrozen

Buick is pretty. Looks very straight and I'm not spotting any concerning rust in those pics. It is missing a window crank in the back? Kind of an odd oversight, no? Wonder what its really worth. My gut tells me something like $8500-$9500 if its truly clean and rust-free. No idea how accurate my gut is in this case.

Mr_Shiftright

Yeah, I'm thinkin' about $9,000 is all the money here. It's got a number of minuses---it's a Roadmaster, and it's a 4 door.

andre1969

Why would the car being a Roadmaster be a minus? I could see the Skylark convertible being at the top of the heap. And I could see the Century being a hot item, as it was the lighter body with the bigger engine. But, I'd think a Roadmaster would still be more desireable than a Special or Super.

Actually, narrowing it down to just 4-door cars, I'd think the Roadmaster would be the most desireable that year, even more than the Century, as it was the most luxurious. With coupes or convertibles people tend to go more for the sportiness, but if a car is stuck being a 4-door, don't buyers usually want the most luxurious, optioned-up examples?

fintail

I was thinking the same - wouldn't top of the line be a good thing for a sedan, second to a performance model?

Mr_Shiftright

The Roadmaster just doesn't boost the value of the 4D sedan. If it were a coupe or convertible, then yes, the Roadmaster should bring somewhat more money than a Special or Super. The 4D sedan stigma pretty much cancels the Roadmaster value, IMO. It's a supply and demand equation, it's not necessarily rational.

andre1969

Yeah, but it's just the fact that it's a 4-door that hurts the value, right? Being a Roadmaster doesn't have any stigma, does it? The way you worded it earlier, it sounded like being a Roadmaster was a minus, in addition to being a 4-door.

I can understand something like a Special hardtop coupe being worth more than a Roadmaster 4-door sedan, because hardtop coupes are much more desireable, even if its one from a cheaper series.

Mr_Shiftright

Oh, okay---I didn't mean it THAT way. What I was thinking was that being a Roadmaster might raise the seller's expectation to an unrealistic number. In a 4D sedan, the model Roadmaster is neutralized.

Then again, I'm not so sure the Roadmaster name actually matters anymore. For instance, an Olds 88 will pull more money than a 98.

isellhondas

I wouldn't mind having a Century 2 door hardtop. That was the smaller Special body with the larger Super/Roadmaster engine. Back in their time, there weren't many cars that could beat one in a race.

steine13

Great Ferrari ad..
http://tampa.craigslist.org/pnl/cto/5382435132.html
... I like the line about "daily driver."
Cheers & HNY -mathias

ab348

^^^ Holy '80s, Batman!!

The color is pretty unique for sure. Too bad about the styling...

explorerx4

1 of 3, I'm surprised it took that long to fire the guy.

explorerx4

Reading a 1982 review of Mustang GT and Camaro Z28.

the Mustang 5.0 overcomes the handicap of its ultra-wide gearing to log in some impressive (at least for the Eighties) acceleration times: 0-60 in 8.0 seconds, 0-100 mph in 25 seconds flat, and the standing quarter-mile in just 16.3. By contrast, the heavier, lower-power Z28 needed 9.7 sec to reach 60 mph, 30.0 to reach 100, and 17.5 to cover the quarter-mile despite its more tightly packed four speeds.

stickguy

pretty sad that a Versa today could probably dust that Z28.

hpmctorque

isellhondas said:

I wouldn't mind having a Century 2 door hardtop. That was the smaller Special body with the larger Super/Roadmaster engine. Back in their time, there weren't many cars that could beat one in a race.

I think the Super shared the Roadbastard's body, but featured the smaller engine that was also used in the Special. This would have made the Super the least super, in terms of performance. Of course, only those that counted the portholes knew or cared, since the Super played the role of the big, bad Buick well, especially if it was painted black. Besides, driving such a land barge slowly was more proper and dignified than squealing the tires.

Mr_Shiftright

Ferrari miles are like dog years.

hpmctorque

It's 9:00 EST New Years Eve and I'm still on Edmunds. Geez, I need to get a life. Happy New Year everyone!

stickguy

RoadBastard? Ouch.

I always thought an actually used Ferrari would be fun. Assuming it was owned by a fanatic and well maintained. Probably better for it to get exercised, and you save a fortune!

Of course, I would also like to have a lift in my garage and the tools and knowledge to drop the whole drivetrain and subframe out and actually be able to work on it. Which is not happening unless I hit powerball, and hire an old pro to tutor me for the next 5 years!

stickguy

Wife and I have not gone out for years. I usually wake her up around 11:45 from snoozing on the couch to watch the ball drop.

sadder is that my 20 YO daughter is still hanging around in her jammies, because she just doesn't feel like going out! Though she is packing up early tomorrow to hit the road by 9 for the drive back to college in NC. Hopefully NYD is going to be traffic free. gotta be a good chance that is the one day of the year!

hpmctorque

stickguy said:

RoadBastard? Ouch.

I always thought an actually used Ferrari would be fun. Assuming it was owned by a fanatic and well maintained. Probably better for it to get exercised, and you save a fortune!

Of course, I would also like to have a lift in my garage and the tools and knowledge to drop the whole drivetrain and subframe out and actually be able to work on it. Which is not happening unless I hit powerball, and hire an old pro to tutor me for the next 5 years!

If you hit powerball you could afford a new Ferrari, then hire Tony to live in your guest house when the warranty runs out.

hpmctorque

stickguy said:

Wife and I have not gone out for years. I usually wake her up around 11:45 from snoozing on the couch to watch the ball drops

Pretty similar at our house this year.

stickguy

I like old Ferraris a lot more than new ones. the new ones are like video games or caricature of a real car. Though that newer front engine one might work. But sadly, Ferrari had to cut back, and can't afford to put 3 pedals in the car any longer.

Michaell

At least I'm out.

delivering pizza. 

fintail

Not counting real classic Ferraris, I think something like a white Testarossa or a 512 or even a nice 400 series car is cooler than a new one. I'd easily take a 288GTO over any new Ferrari, A Koenig 512 would be pretty cool too.

stickguy

for the price of a 288GTO, you could buy a few nice houses, even in your area. they are in the low 2 million range now.

I nicely upgraded 348 would be fine for me!

fintail

Yes, they are a little dear now. Ferrari, like Porsche, is for speculators again - 1988 repeated.

I wouldn't complain about a nice 456 or 550, kind of the last of the old school GTs.

stickguy

I was always partial to the Daytona. Must be a front engine type of guy.

fintail

Those cost only as much as one house in my zipcode, I think.

stickguy

must be some sort of Hovel available for 1.2 million or so.

Mr_Shiftright

If you want an "affordable" kind of Ferrari around $75K, like a Testarossa or 550 Maranello, you're going to have to accept high mileage----and really, these cars are "done" at 60,000 miles.

andre1969

hpmctorque said:

I think the Super shared the Roadbastard's body, but featured the smaller engine that was also used in the Special. This would have made the Super the least super, in terms of performance. Of course, only those that counted the portholes knew or cared, since the Super played the role of the big, bad Buick well, especially if it was painted black. Besides, driving such a land barge slowly was more proper and dignified than squealing the tires.

You had me curious, so I looked it up. For 1954 (according to Consumer Guide at least, the engine choices were:
Special: 264 CID V8 with 143/150 hp (manual/automatic?)
Century: 322 CID V8 with 195/200 hp
Super: 322 CID V8 with 177/182 hp
Roadmaster/Skylark: 322 CID with 200 hp (guessing an automatic was standard in these cars?)

I wonder if the 177/182 hp 322 used a 2-bbl carb and the 195/200 used a 4-bbl?

For 1955 they went to a 264 with 188 hp for the Special, and a 322 with 236 hp for everything else.