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

volvomax

The car on ebay is an auto.

6 sec 0-60 is nothing special for a GT Car.
An Auto Z TT would get KILLED by a contemporary RX-7, Vette, or Supra Turbo.
Tha manual Z turbos were nice competent cars.Comfortable and fast.

Mr_Shiftright

Personally I think the fixation on 0-60 speeds is kind of silly, given the real world we drive in. A second here or there becomes rather irrelevant once you drop down to 7 seconds or less.

A GT car should have lots of torque, a nice loafing highway speed, and should feel comfortable and stable in high speed cornering. It's not a sports car (too much work to hustle around the twisties) but it can do it if you have to. A 300ZX seems to fit this GT profile quite nicely, whereas a C4 Corvette or RX-7 definitely don't. The Supra probably does GT very well, too.

lemmer

I would guess all of those cars are half a second slower in automatic guise. Street starts are probably the same auto or manual. I doubt there is any killing going on within the confines of public roads, maybe at the drag races.

In this strange age of kids drag racing Japanese cars, I don't really fixate too much on straight line performance. For the more sports cars oriented models(like the RX-7) I would be more concerned with lap times and fun to drive quotient. With cruisers like the Z and the Supra, comfort enters the equation. Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan of power. However, if I cared about 0-60 all that much I would just modify a Mustang or some such.

volvomax

0-60 has some importance simply because we all like pulling away from a traffic light as quickly as possible.
Lets face it, none of us can drive a car over 100mph anywhere, but we can all hammer the car away from a light.

I had 2 C4 vette's, they were actually good road cars. Good gas mileage @ highway speeds.
I have a C5 now that is much better, esp w/ the adjustable suspension and the sport seats.

andre1969

it's funny sometimes, how cars can feel faster or slower than their actual acceleration times suggest. For example, I always considered my '85 Silverado with its 305-4bbl to be dog-slow. It felt alot slower than, say, my '79 New Yorker with its 360-2bbl or my '76 LeMans with its 350-2bbl.

However, on my way to work, there's a short merge lane where I have to get onto a 4-lane divided road. At the end of that merge lane, I could usually have the NYer up to 50 mph, and the LeMans up to around 45 (a little embarrassing, because the LeMans looks sportier and "tougher" than the NYer). Well, the other day I noticed that if I really punch it, the truck will also be doing about 45 at the end of that merge ramp. So it's not as dog-slow as I thought. But still nothing to get excited about!

BTW, where did the phrase "dog-slow" come from, anyway? Most dogs I've had could run pretty fast.

Mr_Shiftright

them's summer dogs...hot 'n lazy....

Corvette C4-- rather too harsh a ride for a GT and not built very well. C5 is a lot more civilized and seems better screwed together. Still, a C4 is a bargain-basement used cars these days if you can find one that hasn't fallen apart or been abused. $5K-$6K is all you need to spend and if you shop hard, you can get decent ones under $5K. They are rather unloved but someday somebody is goingt to notice how cheap they are.

lemmer

I didn't realize a C4 was that cheap. Maybe I need to put in on my list to own eventually. How bad are repairs and maintenance on those?

volvomax

I didn't realize a C4 was that cheap. Maybe I need to put in on my list to own eventually. How bad are repairs and maintenance on those?

They aren't that cheap if you go for a early to mid 90's car.
I wouldn't buy an 80's C4 if I were you.
My 86 was a nightmare, my 93 was flawless.
The 93 was better built, faster, and better on gas.
Stay away from the Z51 suspension as it is rock hard.
FX3 adjustable suspension is the way to go.
Maintenance isn't bad. Replacing the battery is a pain, and the cars tend to eat U-joints. Heat is the enemy of the C4, the airflow under those big clamshell hoods isn't very good. Especially in traffic.
You could proably pick up a mid 90's C4 for the low teens in nice shape.

Mr_Shiftright

I've seen early 90s go pretty cheap at auction...not $5K but sometimes under $10K for a coupe #3 or #2. Of course, a really nice, well-kept, babied low miles 90s C4 is going to cost more but I can't imagine anything over $12,500 to $15,000 for the very best.

Corvette's the kind of car where the later the model evolution, the better for you. Kinda like a Porsche in that regard and NOT like a Nissan Z car.

Maintenance should be a breeze compared to most sportscars, unless of course you have to buy special trim parts or have to repair the body. You smack up an old C4, you best junk it.

One reason they are so cheap is that they made a lot of them.

xwesx

Andre, is your Silverado an auto? Just curious, because my '69 with stock 307 sure has umph-a-plenty when it comes to accelerating. A good thing too, considering that I just made three back-to-back daily trips this week wherein I loaded nearly 4000# of lumber on it (each time)! It still had good guts on the roadway, but I noticed that the front end liked to shimmy with the reduced weight. It was quite bad on occasion, so I think either the alignment is foobar'd or something is going out on me. Everything feels solid underneath, but I smell a problem developing.

fintail

No upside, needs everything, likely horrible to drive...but somehow I like it. Cool moderne striping on that window, too

fintail

The dullest powertrain combo, but looks like a good driver/cruiser for the money, these are decent looking cars

My dad would like it

bumpy

not a Mercedes, but that's a good thing

currently dissolving

should I spend my $650 on this or this?

lemko special

GenX chick car

a bargain... if you're a masochist :sick:

it was the worst of times, it was the worst of times

price of gas got you down?

Fitzgerald? :confuse:
(and how does someone manage to take pictures that badly?)

martian

I saw a show last night about the restoration of a 1967 Camaro. It was actually a total rebuild-new HP engine, tital body rebuild, new interior, etc. They dumped 45,000$ into the car-and it failed to meet reserve at auction! Another Camaro (lightly restored) fetched just $27,000. So this was one bad investment.

fintail

That sad old wagon is interesting...it's not a 86 (it's a 123, which ended production in 85), and it has Euro bumpers. I wonder what it really is. Looks like the rear self-levelling suspension has failed, too.

fintail

Like new low mileage 124...bad color though

Mr_Shiftright

It's not a "bust"...ordinary run of the mill '67 Camaros aren't worth that much, no matter what you do to them. He's trying to get RS/SS money for a plain 'ol Camaro---that doesn't work. This is a common mistake, forgetting that those "Barrett-Jackson" prices you see are for exceptionally and accurately restored, & often for rare editions of a certain car, not the one they made a gazillion of. $20K range should be all you need to pay for a clean driver '67 Camaro with base V-8 engine/trim level, etc. Even $27K seems too high a bid.

bumpy

What, the silver lowers? I kinda like it; helps to break up the Teutonic monotony, and matches the interior.

Mr_Shiftright

I agree---I like the "two-tone" aspect. Benzes of that era have too much monochromatic "freeboard".

fintail

I'm not a fan of white. That car would be lovely in 'Diamond Blue' or maybe one of the darker reds used at the time.

The grey/silver was the common lower color on white MB back in the day IIRC, I have seen late 126 in that same color combo. My 126 was light blue on top, darker blue on bottom. Lo and behold, early Lexus LS used the same idea.

andre1969

Yeah, it's an automatic. THM350C tranny. The engine is a 305-4bbl with 165 hp at something like 4400 or 4800 rpm, and I think peak torque is 245 ft-lb @2400 rpm?

I actually had no idea the truck was as heavy as it was until one day that I pulled onto a junkyard scale. After subtracting out my weight and the weight of a friend that went with me, I'd say it was around 4200-4300 lb. For some reason I always thought it was around 3800. Don't ask me where I got that figure, though!

One thing that holds my truck back is its rear end, which I'm pretty sure is a 2.56:1 When my Granddad got this truck, he never intended to use it for anything heavy-duty, as he had a 3/4 ton '76 GMC crew cab at the time that could do just about anything he needed it to. But it got about 10 mpg no matter how hard you worked it or how easy you went on it, and was about 21 feet long, so this '85 was kind of his run-about/errand car!

Now the few times I hauled topsoil in it, I knew I was chancing it, so I drove as gently as I could. Andthe place is less than a half-mile up the street, so I didn't have to drive too far, or on any high-speed roads. Interestingly though, on other occasions where I've loaded the truck down, such as running a load of firewood down to my Mom's, the extra weight didn't seem to slow the truck down any. I have no idea how much a bed full of firewood would weight (8-foot bed, stacked about to the top of it, and a little higher in the center) but my stepdad said probably about a ton.

When I'd drive loaded like that, I'd try to leave myself plenty of extra room, and really try to time it right when accelerating up a highway merge ramp, but it turns out I'd usually end up being overly cautious, as the truck seemed to take it all in stride. Still, better safe than sorry!

fintail

This is an uncommon 2-door

british_rover

Might be very interesting.

fintail

This looks like a better example than most, just needs a good detail. I don't see the typical rust these are known for

british_rover

I can't remember was that year RWD?

british_rover

So what do you think of this one.

Disassembled 240Z

Just reassemble and go.

Mr_Shiftright

Wrecking yard for sure.

Did the seller bother to look at the market value of these cars? You can buy one of these running and complete for $3,000 or less. And a sharp driver for under $5,000:

http://www.craigslist.org/eby/car/160323003.html

And a clean original with low miles for $6,500:

http://www.craigslist.org/sby/car/160206573.html

So who would even bother with this car?

fintail

I believe it was RWD yes, IIRC Celica went to FWD with the 86 redesign.

That $6500 Z looks pretty nice.

fintail

Worst color combo, probably gets 10mpg, gets mistaken for the Nimitz, but it's cheap

qbrozen

man, i love that description.

When looking at a car in a thousand pieces, these nifty catch phrases just SHOULDN'T come to mind:

"no expense was spared on this car" - because actually assembling the car isn't an expense?

"most of the work has been done" - could have fooled me!

fintail

It doesn't run? No way!

0-60 should be measured on a calendar, but it looks pretty excellent

Mr_Shiftright

My favorite description of a Mercedes 200D was that "it couldn't pull the skin off rice pudding".

fintail

Almost like 'Repo Man' (priced about 3x what it should be)

lemmer

I like that Camaro in Repo Man, the Malibu not so much.

I can't believe someone bid on this Chevelle. Unless you want the engine, I can't imagine what you would do with it.

I am inclined to like any car that includes "like Huggy Bear's" in the title.

I wouldn't hold my breath for someone to bid $38,000 on a disaster of a Gullwing replica.

lemmer

Tomorrow I plan to go with a friend to look at this '59 Corvette. The car is actually in Tuscaloosa, Alabama at the widow's house.

Any tips? Also, how do you verify low mileage and matching numbers? Don't people fake that stuff now?

Mr_Shiftright

Matching numbers would be very difficult to fake on a '59 Corvette, since you'd have to fake both the chassis's VIN and the engine number, (the two match on this car) and given the car's value in top restored condition (which this is not) of maybe $60,000--$65,000 for a totally correct stunner, I don't much see the point in risking fraud....since incorrect cars are selling at about $35K-40K. Given the description, I think the car is already overbid, but not too badly (yet). Reserve is too high that's for sure.

Verifying low miles? Very hard to do, almost impossible. Unless there is some fantastic documentation (sequential repair orders dating from 1959, showing progressive mileage up the current time), then it's all smoke and mirrors. The seller's "word" is all well and good but you can't give that word to anybody else...it's already second-hand info, and with you it'll be third hand.

So anyway, check the engine number for the correct number sequence by matching it against the VIN number on the steering post in the engine compartment. Also check the engine's "suffix", usually two letters. Also the casting number, which is found right where the engine meets the bell housing, driver's side.

You should really look up all these numbers and color codes and options list before you go. Don't be babes in the woods.

Might be a decent buy if the price doesn't go up too much more. Be sure to check for stress cracks in the fiberglass and for a rusty frame. If this car is original paint, you should see a chalk mark with the color code in the trunk, on the right side hinge.

Some resto items are going to be very very dear to correct---like the windshield surround.

Have you driven a '59 before? Remember, no power steering, drum brakes...take it easy.

PS: I think all these numbers are available online somewhere. don't leave home without them!

fintail

LOL at the "gullwing"...I think he put a couple extra zeroes in the price. If I had that, I would sell off the useful bits like the engine and seats, and put the body in my backyard or beside an old barn etc...and see people go nuts and look it over, offer to buy it etc, thinking it is real.

Mr_Shiftright

Whenever I see abortions like that, I am soooo tempted to.....well, never mind.

That car is SO badly done, so overpriced, so....stupid....ARGHHHH!

I'd say it's worth the engine + the body for target practice.

fintail

You have a friend with something like this right Andre?

lilengineerboy

A 914 1.7/1.8 is pretty much totally worthless. I think the best thing you can do with one of those is put a Subaru WRX motor in it (Yes you have to plumb water lines). I think my skateboard is faster than a 1.8 with smog stuff on it.
The 2.0 has k-jetronic (I'm pretty sure) fuel injection and is reasonably entertaining. Its on my list; more so than the 70s 924 that replaced it. A 914-6 is actually legitimately cool by almost any account but they are getting pricey.

ghulet

...and I don't know how much fun, but probably one of the best around (at least in Chicago), and I think kinda cool for the price:

http://chicago.craigslist.org/car/161566142.html

Alas, it's been on craigslist at this same price for the past two or three weeks at least, I guess that should tell everyone something--it is still a fifteen year-old 318i with 198k for almost $4k. For some reason, though, I'd rather have one of these than its '92-93 successor.

ghulet

I remember these, can't say I remember the last time I saw one. Also can't say there's much to recommend on a 15 year-old ragged out sport-truck thing, especially one that (I assume) isn't running, especially at $4k ('there is one thing wrong (HA!!) no electricity going to the injecters (sic)'?:

http://chicago.craigslist.org/car/161501362.html

I don't imagine model-specific parts or service are easy to come by, either.

british_rover

Ugh they were pretty cool for their day and fast but you just know that car will be a nightmare to get working.

fintail

That's a nice looking old 3er. That reminds me, I saw a 325iX the other day, those can't be common.

british_rover

I saw one of those for sale localy not long ago. It was red and in decent shape.

How bad was the AWD system?

fintail

The one I saw was red too, and it looked decent enough for a 15+ year old car.

I suspect it was like the early 4MATIC - in other words, not so reliable.

lilengineerboy

Those later 318s were pretty robust, but if you are the go big or go home variety, I reccomend:
http://detroit.craigslist.org/car/161078405.html
Which may actually be worth something some day. Very powerful, very stressed out 4 banger, and quicker handling than the rest of the E30s.

ghulet

...but then, you're talking about a car that, at 15 years old, costs three times as much to buy (and likely the same ratio to maintain) versus that 318is; it ought to be nice, no? It is fast (192hp, IIRC), but if fast is the main goal, I'd probably just buy something newer (perhaps a recent 189hp 325i?). Still, those first-gen M3s are kinda hot, and pretty uncommon. I just don't know that it would make an ideal car to tool around in Chicago, though.

lemmer

I think the name is supposed to Typhoon. He keeps calling it Thypoon - and that just sounds dirty.

lemmer

Back in the day, the more levelheaded among us pointed out that a 325i with some very mild mods could run with the M3 with a lot more tractibility, reliability, and lower cost to boot. I think the same still holds true - but then again, it will never be the same as having an M3.