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

texases

Disagree with the road test results? Why? I've driven 2bbl 289s with the AT. Lots of noise, not much action. ALL cars were slower then, so the Mustang was fine, in its day. Not now.

Edmunds is testing the 2016 Prius, got 10.2 seconds 0-60.

Mr_Shiftright

The 4bbl intake was better for breathing---good enough even for the K code engine. The K code also got special exhaust manifolds.

fintail

10.6 for a V8 Mustang is kind of disappointing - I think the fintail can pull it off somewhere in the 12s, and it has a 2195cc (134 cubes) I6. It does have a fuel injected engine sittin under its hood, but still.

berri

Those Mustangs were pretty light compared to today's cars. Shelby took advantage of that.

isellhondas

I don't remember ever feeling that my Mustangs were lacking in power. I do remember they would spin the rear wheels from a standing stop. I knew a guy who had an early Falcon with that engine that had a three speed manual. He surprised a lot of people!

sda

This is very similar to what I was mentioning in the Cars & Conversations forum. I remember when anything doing 0-60 in less than 10 sec was considered quick. Now anything that takes 10+ secs is considered slow. Having driven several cars that took 15-18 sec to get to 60, my Accord that will do it in under 8 is a rocket, and it routinely gets 30+ mpg. New cars are great!

hpmctorque

fortee9er said:

Since you are all discussing the Tempest I just saw this ad http://houston.craigslist.org/cto/5943860892.html

Those '60s Tempest were RWD, not FWD. The first generation were awful cars!

isellhondas

They were very strange cars with that half a V-8 under the hood and the transmission between the rear wheels.

They used a skinny little driveshaft that makes the BEST prybar you will ever find if you can get your hands on one!

The 4 cyl engines shook and vibrated in their mounts!

isellhondas

texases said:

Disagree with the road test results? Why? I've driven 2bbl 289s with the AT. Lots of noise, not much action. ALL cars were slower then, so the Mustang was fine, in its day. Not now.

Edmunds is testing the 2016 Prius, got 10.2 seconds 0-60.

Well I guess since I owned those Mustangs "in their day" I was satisfied at the time.

hpmctorque

I had a '65 Mustang 2 barrel V8 with 4 speed and positraction. Bought it new. I opted for the 2-barrel (200 hp) instead of the 4 (225) because the 2 was tuned to run on regular. I found power very adequate, but it certainly wasn't a muscle car. It struck a good balance of power and economy for me. It also had the heavy duty suspension, which was bone jarring too much of the time...definitely not sophisticated. On the other hand, the standard suspension was criticized as providing an unsatisfying ride-handling balance for a car with sporty pretensions.

I sold this car to my brother in 1969, and about six months later it was stolen. The police found it, dismantled with other Mustangs, in someone's back yard. Sad ending!

fintail

I wonder how a Mustang with a 260 would compare on the road to a Falcon with the same engine, as they share so much in common. I might actually prefer a Falcon Sprint, which is a neat little car.

Mr_Shiftright

It would be the same I bet---the early Mustang WAS a Falcon, pretty much. Same weight, chassis, etc. That's why the Mustang was priced so attractively. A brilliant product, really--a sporty car on a very pedestrian platform.

texases

Here's a test from the day, 260 with the AT was 11.6 seconds, 289 4sp 4 bbl  8.2 seconds. 

Its not not that a 289 2bbl AT was slow for its day. Now, though, it is.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/1964-1-2-ford-mustang-review-performance-to-rival-the-pontiac-gto-page-4

berri

Those Mustang's were classically styled and still look clean and sharp today. I doubt a lot of today's vehicle styling will still look that good in 20 or more years. It too often tends to get a bit extreme.

fintail

That's the key - what looks good in 20+ years? I doubt the predator Lexus and styling by the metric ton Toyondas will be considered classics.

There are many 90s cars that are kind of cult design icons already, I suspect the number will decrease as the model years increase - the stylist hivemind is all about volume now, no matter the brand.

tjc78

Many of the 90s cars were actually pretty clean designs. 92 Camry, early Accords, 92+ Taurus all still look decent today IMO. GM had too much tacked on cladding on most models in the 90s and Chrysler was probably the most daring with the initial LH cars (Intrepid and corporate cousins).

Mr_Shiftright

It's hard to predict but you can usually count on grossly disproportioned, chaotic, or visually grotesque cars not making the cut for the future. Sure, occasionally you'll get a "cult favorite" that has no right to be collectible, but more often than that these are more "pointed at" than revered.

Personally I have the most respect for "ground-breaking" cars in terms of design---leading the way to a new design paradigm (geez I hate that word) .

In terms of project cars, some people argue that you should put your money into "what you like" and if that is a $50,000 restoration of a '52 Plymouth sedan...well, so be it, it's your money. I'd rather see all that human effort, skill and treasure put into something that will have meaning for future generations, in terms of design history I mean.

berri

I liked the Olds Cutlass 4dr in the 90's that was kind of an updated version of a flat top. Different, but cleanly styled to me.

fintail

I agree. 92-96 Camry and 90-93 Accord are perhaps the zenith of styling for those nameplates. Not exciting, but as homogeneous and balanced as anything out of Europe. 92-95 Civic was also a high point. I think the 92-95 Taurus also has aged well, as it is 25 years old now - in 1992 a 25 year old Ford was vintage and looked it, a 25 year old Ford now, not so much.

The early cab forward cars are still kind of eye catching, but the small headlights look funny now.

For MBs, the big W140 S-class was much derided for its severe bulky looks, especially coming from the classic W126, but has now graduated to becoming a cult classic for MB people, and truly mint survivors are being saved. Its design looks so clean and pure compared to modern cars.

tjc78 said:

Many of the 90s cars were actually pretty clean designs. 92 Camry, early Accords, 92+ Taurus all still look decent today IMO. GM had too much tacked on cladding on most models in the 90s and Chrysler was probably the most daring with the initial LH cars (Intrepid and corporate cousins).

fintail

One of these?





GM jumped head first into the aero game after rejecting it for awhile, no doubt.

berri said:

I liked the Olds Cutlass 4dr in the 90's that was kind of an updated version of a flat top. Different, but cleanly styled to me.

stickguy

back from the days where cars actually had real outward visibility.

tjc78

I like that style Cutlass, even nicer in International Series trim. No need for backup cams then. My 2012 LaCrosse was like driving a bathtub (a nice bath tub, lol)

berri

Yep, simple lines and user friendly

isellhondas

texases said:

Here's a test from the day, 260 with the AT was 11.6 seconds, 289 4sp 4 bbl  8.2 seconds. 

Its not not that a 289 2bbl AT was slow for its day. Now, though, it is.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/1964-1-2-ford-mustang-review-performance-to-rival-the-pontiac-gto-page-4

It may have been "slow" for it's day but I don't drive any faster now than I did at the time so I don't care.

sda

tjc78 said:

I like that style Cutlass, even nicer in International Series trim. No need for backup cams then. My 2012 LaCrosse was like driving a bathtub (a nice bath tub, lol)

I tried to buy a maroon and silver International Series with sunroof but they wouldn't budge on price and gave a very low value for my trade in. I still think it was a sharp car.

hpmctorque

Mr_Shiftright said:

It's hard to predict but you can usually count on grossly disproportioned, chaotic, or visually grotesque cars not making the cut for the future. Sure, occasionally you'll get a "cult favorite" that has no right to be collectible, but more often than that these are more "pointed at" than revered.

Personally I have the most respect for "ground-breaking" cars in terms of design---leading the way to a new design paradigm (geez I hate that word) .

In terms of project cars, some people argue that you should put your money into "what you like" and if that is a $50,000 restoration of a '52 Plymouth sedan...well, so be it, it's your money. I'd rather see all that human effort, skill and treasure put into something that will have meaning for future generations, in terms of design history I mean.

Examples?

ab348

fintail said:

The early cab forward cars are still kind of eye catching, but the small headlights look funny now.

A couple of days ago I happened to be looking out the window when a very well-preserved second-gen Intrepid R/T, white in color, rolled up to the corner. It looked very nice and I was struck by a couple of things: first, how they have largely disappeared from the roads here, unusual for not being all that old; secondly, how big it was. It seemed rather long in particular. Overall, those and its cousin the 300M were nice designs.

fintail

I see the 2nd gen ones as often as the early ones anymore, which is infrequently. 300Ms seem to be the most common survivors. I suspect transmission issues claimed a lot of them. I think I see the "cloud cars" more often than the larger models. In my area, you can'y throw a cat without hitting a 90s Camcord or Civrolla

fortee9er

A few candidates for 1990s collectibles not in any order:
1997-1998 Lincoln Mk VIII LSC
1995 Porsche 928 GTS
199X BMW 850 CIS
199x Mercedes C140 V12
199x BMW E32 and E38 750i
Given more time I can come up with more but that is all for now.

stickguy

4 out of those 5 could break any wallet quickly.

I assume some of the "exotic" Japanese cars (RX7 TT? Or was that 2000+?), supra turbo could qualify.

qbrozen

3rd gen RX7 started in '91

tjc78

Supra Turbos bring stupid money, don't forget about the ZR1 vettes and early Vipers

fintail

Supra Turbo is definitely a collectible now, along with 928 GTS. I have to believe early Vipers will get there sometime too. NSX shot up awhile back and now aren't such bargains.

I think the V12 MBs of the era (sedan and coupe) will be like the 6.3 and 6.9 cars - really mint ones have value and many people love them, but there are lots of wacky messes out there, and restoration costs are insane. 124 cabrios will also always be worth something if they are nice.

uplanderguy

Re.: that era Cutlass sedan--the Saturn sedans looked like a 2/3 scale version of these.

Around where I lived, that two-tiered piece of trim at the bottom of the decklid used to delaminate from the inside. GM replaced them for free outside of warranty.

fintail

Speaking of Saturns, these are getting thin on the ground, and I can admit I always thought they were good looking:

Mr_Shiftright

fortee9er said:

A few candidates for 1990s collectibles not in any order:
1997-1998 Lincoln Mk VIII LSC
1995 Porsche 928 GTS
199X BMW 850 CIS
199x Mercedes C140 V12
199x BMW E32 and E38 750i
Given more time I can come up with more but that is all for now.

Not as keen as you on that list---I agree with the Porsche 928 as it is already moving right up there...if it's the later models, like the GT, Club, or GTS. The BMW 850 coupe has a good shot. The others I think will end up in junk yards because if they haven't made their move up by now, it's not going to happen. If anything, they are depreciating. Same with early 928s.

I agree that the Supra Turbo, if it remains stock (hard to find one that hasn't been messed with) is already a solid collectible.

Mazda RX-7 Twin Turbo --yes, now's the time to grab one.

Mazda RX-8 --it'll take a while but this is a much underappreciated car

No doubt the Hellcat--I mean, it's just too outrageous not to be.

Mustang Laguna Seca has a shot

I'm not sure what the "Hot SUV collectible" will be,but I'm sure there will be one to follow the old Broncos, Tahoes and Land Rover Defenders.

qbrozen

Land Cruisers are pretty hot, too, and G-class beasts. Let's not forget FJ Cruisers have gone up in value since they were discontinued. I could see maybe the X5M holding some value. Hummer H1 has held value. Even the H2 is up there as a used truck right now. As for more mundane vehicles, my money is on the Wrangler Unlimited.

Mr_Shiftright

My general rule of thumb is that you know a car is "hot" when its current value exceeds its original MSRP, adjusted for inflation. Right now H2s are running about 1/3rd of MSRP, which isn't bad, really, for a vehicle barely 10 years old.

FJ 40s are ridiculously high-priced right now. That's a sure winner.

fortee9er

Yes you are correct some of those will break the bank but since when is that a factor in collectability.
As far as the Japanese yes the RX7 TT, the Nissan 300Z TT, the Toyota Supra TT all have been collectible or just very desirable and it has been reflected in their sales price for quite a while now. I don't remember a time when a Supra TT sold for much less than when new.

tjc78

What about the 3000GT VR4? They are pretty slim picking to find one that isn't all riced out.

fortee9er

Yes you could put the 3000GT Vr4 and it's twin the Dodge Stealth R/T in that category. But in terms of availability the Supra and the RX7 seem to be in a category by themselves. You will rarely see a Supra for sale and when one comes up the price is very high even it has been riced. The RX7s that come up for sale are in pretty sad shape and the asking price is in the low teens. And they don't come up for sale often.

Mr_Shiftright

It's really not driven by how much it costs to repair or how rare a car is--it's driven primarily by supply and demand: How many people want one, vs. how many people already have one. My opinion is that everyone who ever wanted a 10-20 year V12 BMW or Mercedes sedan either has one already or is done with them.

You can find Mitsu 3000 VR4s for under $5,000. The car has had 20+ years to go somewhere and it hasn't, so I'd say give up on that one except as a hobby car.

The Rule of Thumb---"loved when new, loved when old" isn't bulletproof, but it's pretty reliable.

I know some people will point to cars that were ridiculed when new but now have some sort of collector value, like the Delorean, but if it wasn't for the free publicity of that movie, they'd be worth far less. Even then, the cars have had generally stagnant values, and the nicely restored or pristine ones have actually dropped in value. Certainly not an "investment grade" car.

fortee9er

My list of 90s cars was a list of cars I find interesting and possibly collectible. Not a list of "investment grade" cars from that era. You may sell a car for more than you paid for it but the "carrying costs" will usually negate any gain.

qbrozen

3000gt is not in the same category. Reputation for being bloated and overly complicated has held it back, IMHO.

I don't know why, but Deloreans jumped way up LONG after the movies came out. I remember seeing really nice ones back around 2000 for under $10k. Now we're talking $25k-$30k.

fintail

I think some cars can take longer to ferment and experience demand. 190SLs and W113s weren't terribly valuable until the past 10 years, then they tripled or more virtually overnight. Earlier 911s did the same.

With 90s cars being adored by Gen X and younger, the price peak may come later as affluence is coming later for those groups.

Mr_Shiftright

Not quite so. 190 and 280SLs always maintained a high value, and were never cheap to buy. It is true that their more rapid gain in value came about with auction hysteria. Also, Mercedes' high level of support for these cars helps a lot, don't you think? It certainly encourages restoration.

There will certainly be a handful of 90s cars that will become valuable collectibles, but not many, and certainly none of the mass-produced ones IMO. You need a whole bunch of people, with money, to be really excited about a car for it to "move up".

The Delorean is an odd duck. There is no reason for it to be collectible, really. It's an awful car. Probably the relative scarcity (only about 8500 made, and many of those already dead), the movie of course, and a rather good aftermarket supply system keep it going. And really, they have barely maintained MSRP, whereas a 280SL is 20X MSRP right now. Also----it's a very difficult car to sell to anyone.

sda

I realize it was never a good car, but it is somewhat unique, perhaps a novelty. Will the Bricklin become a desirable collector car? Slap me if it is a stupid question.

fintail

Seemingly overnight, 30K cars became 100K cars. Maybe they started from a higher point, but they exploded and nobody predicted it. Same for some Porsches. I am not saying it will happen with these 90s cars, but there is some appreciation potential as time goes on, and the younger fans who couldn't buy them when new are stable enough to buy one as a sentimental item or project car. I don't claim they will become 100K cars, but there could be a doubling or tripling of price in time. I can see a bone stock low mileage perfect Supra TT being a lot more expensive in 25 years.

Some of the MSRP vs price today issue is also because of the cost of living inflation and asset inflation that took place between 1970 and today, compared to 1996 and today. This inflation is also what allowed many boomer types the ability to lay down 100K on one of these cars.

I have some old NADA/KBB guides from 1976. The inflation was already at play then - some MY 1970 MBs had book prices almost equal to original MSRP.

Mr_Shiftright

Ah, well, who knows. The collector car market can be as irrational as the stock market.

As for Porsches, the 993s are already in a deflating bubble, maybe 20% off last year. Deloreans took a 25% whack. Even some of the sacred, revered "muscle cars" have been pummeled.

Not everything goes up and up.

In a way, any "old car" is interesting, but there are 1st, 2nd and 3rd tier collectibles. I don't see many 90s cars getting out of 3rd tier---you know----what's an 80s Celica worth? Not much, but somebody will buy it at the right price.

I never would have predicted $45,000 Toyota FJ40s though. Again, supply and demand I guess. I've been fooled before.

fintail

993s are insane, but 60s-early 70s ones are even more so. Another 200-300% price gain in a short period. 80s Celica, not much, but 1st gen Celicas are now definitely keepers.

Funny thing about Landcruisers - 90s era ones are now being marketed as lifestyle fashion accessories. Kind of like 80s era Grand Wagoneers.