An NA Miata will be a "classic" in the sense that people will be looking for well-kept examples (assuming it's a manual) as long as gas is even remotely affordable, but it won't ever bring in rare car money. The value of a Miata is in the drivetrain and not the paint job, so the Sunburst yellow doesn't do much for it. Treat it well, drive it on sunny weekends, and someone will give it a good home 20 years from now.
just out of curiosity, is there ever an instance where people will be willing to pay a premium for the "right" color? I'm guessing that a color that was rarely ordered isn't going to be the "right" color in most instances. Because if it was the "right" color, it wouldn't have been so rarely ordered when it was new!
I guess with newer cars, one consolation is that over the years they've pretty much weeded out most of the nasty colors. Since they usually only give you like 4-8 colors to choose from, they're going to stick with the more tasteful ones. And with that few to choose from, even the least common ones will never be all that rare. Back in 1976, for in contrast, the Pontiac LeMans was offered in 18 different colors. Needless to say, not all of them were tasteful. And once you factor in two-toning options, I think I read somewhere that the 1957 DeSoto was available in something like 133 different color permutations!
I don't think so. I know they'll pay less for the wrong color however, definitely. Probably the best thing you could say for a "good" color is that you might sell it a bit faster, but it doesn't give you the power to go over retail, no.
also the "bad" color on one car might be perfect on another.
So it's tricky. You can't sell an olive green Ferrari but you can sell an olive green Land Rover.
Oh yeah isn't that truth. Even for non-classic cars color is very important.
For example Black Escelades carry a couple of thousand dollar premium over all other colors because they get shipped over seas, normaly to the middle east, and everyone out there wants to drive a big, black Slade like they are in the mafia.
Red on the other hand is the kiss of death on a Escalade.
Red is also a bad color for all Rovers except the Range Sport and then it is really only ok on the non-supercharged ones.
Most BMWs and Mercs do better in conservative colors black, Silver, Gray white. Back when my GM worked for a mercedes dealer his boss only ordered Black, White, Gray and Silver Mercedes because those were easy safe colors to sell.
Ref. message 98, "Yep.... a left-handed compliment at best, since they gave the same award to the Mustang II in 1974 and the Renault Alliance in 1983"...and to the Vega in '71.
While I'm tempted to criticize MT's judgment, I should acknowledge that I was pleased to see the Mustang return to a more sensible size in '74. However, I was not enamored with the execution of that Pinto-based predecessor generation to the Fox platform Mustang. The thing that disappointed me the most were the engines. The 2.3 I-4 was totally anemic; the German sourced (2.8?) V6 would have been a reasonable choice from a spec standpoint, but it had serious reliability and durability issues; and the smog chocked 302 c.i. small block V8 made that short wheelbase car too front end heavy, thereby compromising handling. The redesigned '79s were much better looking, both inside and outside, in my opinion, but the engine choice issues weren't improved much, with the addition of the Turbo-4, since that engine also had reliability and durability shortcomings. But at least that generation returned the Mustang to its roots. Goldilocks would probably have approved of its not-too-big/not-too-small dimensions, and, unlike the T-Birds of the '70s, it wasn't overweight. I really wanted to like the early Fox platform Mustangs, but when you added the poor assembly and lack of structural rigidity to the uninspiring engine choices, it was hard to get too excited with the overall package. The '83 and '84 V8s addressed the engine issues, but by then the chassis was long-in-the- tooth.
I guess I'm inclined to cut MT some slack on the Vega and the Alliance because when they awarded these cars the Car of The Year awards, they didn't know how trouble prone they would be. But then, being the automotive experts that they professed to be, should they have predicted how problem plagued these appealingly designed models would be? Your thoughts on this?
I think part of the problem is that the COTY award is given out to the all-new (or mostly all-new) car design of a given year that MT thinks is the most innovative. Well, innovative usually entails pushing the envelope in vehicle design, into relatively uncharted territory. And that opens up a whole new can of worms when it comes to reliability/durability issues.
Probably the only reliable COTY winners of the 70's were the 1977 Caprice/Impala and the 1979 Riviera. The Caprice/Impala was innovative, in being the first standard-sized car in a long, long time to be significantly smaller than its predecessor, yet still being able to provide big-car interior room. But as far as the technology goes, there was nothing cutting-edge about it. I'm convinced to this day that the '77 B-bodies used the same frame as the 1973-77 midsized A-bodies. With the exception of the unreliable Pontiac 301, none of the engines were new...just different-displacement versions of existing engines. But they were good, reliable cars for the most part, and made the old pre-downsized mastodons obsolete almost instantly.
Similarly, the 1979 Riviera really wasn't all that cutting-edge. It was FWD, but it was the same basic layout as what the Toronado had been since 1966, and the Eldorado since 1967. You could get a turbo in it, which was kinda cool, but unreliable at the time.
But most of the other 70's COTY winners, like the Vega and Omni/Horizon, were a bit complex compared to what their manufacturers were used to putting out. And the 1976 Aspen/Volare, while not a complex car, was saddled with the problems of a company rapidly running out of development resources.
I hate to say it, but in a twisted way I kinda like the 1974 Mustang II! I mean, it's a sham compared to the 1964.5-1970 models, but I never really cared for the bloated '71-73's. If you consider the time frame, and its competition, cars like the Monza and Sunbird, I think it holds its own. I always thought that, with the right trim level, they had pretty nice interiors.
I think we need to distinguish between design and execution. What I mean is that the reason such cars as the Vega, VW Rabbit,Aspen/Volare, and Alliance disappointed, just to name a few, related more to their execution than their design. Well, okay, the Vega's aluminum engine probably had some inherent design flaws, and the lack of inner fenders in the early years of the Aspen/Volare invited premature rust, but the assembly and components deficiencies were even more glaring.
The Vega was a nice looking car, but a botch in every other way. Typical 1970s GM slap-dash, "whatever" approach to "fighting off the import invasion".
Speaking of weird color combinations, do you remember that 1955 Buick that looked like it was maroon and light green or yellow? Somebody actually ordered the car in those colors and the factory delivered! Let's just hope that nasty shade in which that 1974 Cadillac DeVille was finished has been retired forever.
Kinda of a salmon color with pastel yellow two-toning, and a green interior? Y'know as sickening as that sounds, somehow, I think the car still manages to carry it with some dignity. Just don't try that with a modern car!
Let's just hope that nasty shade in which that 1974 Cadillac DeVille was finished has been retired forever.
Y'know, as many years as that Caddy was at that show, I never bothered to take a picture of it for whatever reason. However, you can see part of it in the corner of this picture:
I think what little you can see of it in this picture actually flatters the car. I remember it being far more vulgar looking in person.
I have always thought along the same lines as you guys about the Miata. The car belongs to an in-law, and he claims that the yellow makes it a very rare color....and is quick to spout off just how few were made. Whenever he goes into this thing about how it is going to be a collector's item, I have always thought to myself, "It is just a Miata".
Yes, that is it. The exterior colors don't match each other, and interior is also a mismatch with the salmon pink.
I have a photo of the 1974 Cadillac, but the photo is not on my digital camera. The color isn't quite so bad, but like many 1970s colors, it was clearly meant to be broken up with a vinyl top.
That Cadillac was one of the few from the 1970s that I've ever seen with a painted metal top. It also had an undivided bench seat. Apparently somone decided to scrimp on the options when purchasing a Cadillac.
This question may have already been asked, but what are the chances that the Plymouth Prowler will become a pricey classic one day?
I doubt it. Unfortunately the Prowler is kinda like the 2002 T-bird or the 1976 Eldorado convertible, where they were built and sold with a "future classic" mindset about them. As a result, it seems like every blessed one of them survived.
Also, the Prowler isn't a very practical vehicle. It looks cool and everything, but it's only a 2-seater and I don't think it even has a trunk! Plus, it only has a V-6 engine and a 4-speed automatic. Lack of a stick shift and especially lack of a V-8 will probably kill its potential down the road.
Worse, I've heard that Prowlers are actually pretty fragile. They're meant for a nice, gentle cruise on a sunny day, going to car shows (you see tons of them at the Mopar Carlisle show), etc. Whereas you can get in a 1976 Eldorado and press it into service as a daily driver (provided you have the funds for its healthy appetite for fuel), and you could do the same with an '02 T-bird, provided it doesn't overheat or drop its tranny , I've heard that the Prowler just isn't designed to be the type of car you could reliably put a lot of miles on. I believe it has something to do with the suspension components and other bits and pieces...the engine itself should actually be fine, although Chrysler 4-speed automatics from that era can be iffy, too.
Thanks, Andre. What prompted me to ask was that I happened to see a sharp looking yellow one on I-95 between Washington and Baltimore today. The temperature was an unusually warm 60 degrees F, and the driver had the top down. The scene met your description of how the car is used.
Shifty, your emphatic response answers my question. Thanks.
The temperature was an unusually warm 60 degrees F, and the driver had the top down.
Yeah, I heard rumors that it was nice outside yesterday. Unfortunately, I didn't get out of my windowless office until 7 last nite, so I didn't get to experience it. I need to dig my '67 Catalina out and put the top down and run it around the block a few times before the weather turns bad again.
My own impression was it looks like more fun than it actually is. But anything without a top is automatically a certain amount of fun. However, with a puny exhaust note, automatic transmission, etc....the fun doesn't last very long. I think most owners get tired of them.
You bought a LeSabre T-Type back in '89? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the only turbos were on the midsize RWD platform, so yours has the naturally aspirated 3.8. While FWD T-Types were produced in moderate numbers, by now there aren't too many left, so I would put them in the special interest category. I happen to like the coupe, and, in fact, would enjoy owning one. Soon, they'll be rare.
No, I'm talking about my car. It has a 100 MPH speedometer and I've had it past the peg on deserted highways in Eastern Washington. The 3800 engines are remarkable.
All these are are 2 door Le Sabres. They are lowered a bit, have heaver suspension and a lower axle ratio. Leather buckets and they came fairly loaded.
Nothing really special, just different. I don't drive it much but people always ask me what it is.
Nothing on Edmunds but if you "google" Buick Le Sabre T Type, it should bring up the name of that club.
ever offer an equivalent of the LeSabre T-type on the '86-91 88 platform? I don't remember a specific trim level, but years ago, there was a lady at work who had an '86 88 coupe. It was black with alloy wheels, and was a pretty tough looking car.
I liked the style of those LeSabre and 88 coupes. Those sloping rooflines were a sharp contrast to the formal roofs with the vertical rear window that GM had been doing for so long. I guess by that time though, the market for coupes was really starting to shrivel, ensuring that the 1992 restyle would only be offered as a sedan.
Yes and no. Yes, you could option an 88 coupe with the F-3 suspension and leather to be the equivalent of the LeSabre T-Type, but, no, it didn't have a specific model identification. I saw a well preserved black one recently, and it looked really nice.
I didn't know the T-Type was "lowered a bit." The Olds counterpart probably wasn't, since that wasn't one of the features of the F-3 suspension.
isellhondas, do you know whether the 4-door Electra T-Types were lowered? They appeared to be the same height as the Park Avenue, but, then, I hadn't noticed the reduction in height between the LeSabre coupe and the T-Type.
Andre, after I responded to your post I realized that I didn't add anything that you didn't already know about the 88 coupes.
While on the subject, though, these GM coupes were roomy and practical, with spacious trunks. Equipped with the better suspensions, they were nice highway cruisers, that delivered a good blend of ride, handling and performance, at a lower price than the Riviera and Toronado. I'm a fan, and while I know it won't happen I'd like to see a LaCrosse T-Type coupe added to the '08 Buick lineup. A Lucerne T-Type, featuring some of the touches seen on the SEMA Lucernes, would also be cool. Are you listening, Buick?
I know, I know, it's a junky car, but I think this particular model (Andre, was it the Mark Cross Edition that could be optioned as a woody?) might, just might, be an appealing special interest car. One reason is that the topless K-car, humble as it was, sparked the revival of Detroit converts. It also differed from its more pedestrian K siblings by appearing in affluent areas. I'm not under any illusion that it's Pebble Beach material, but a well preserved one is worthy of being displayed at lesser shows, in my opinion.
Wow---tough thing to accomplish. Sad to say, this car is mostly ridiculed by car magazines, not respected. I can't imagine a large enough enthusiasts base to elevate this car to any kind of collectible status. It just has the stain of "1980s bad taste" about it.
But you know, maybe in time it will be a sort of curiosity...period charming, like a lava lamp?
As for local car shows, no harm in that...they are open to just about anything...
Andre, was it the Mark Cross Edition that could be optioned as a woody?
I'm not sure, but I think the Mark Cross edition denoted the ritzy leather interior (I think it was even "Corinthian"!), while the style that had the woody trim on it was called the "Town & Country"?
I had a friend who had an '85 LeBaron convertible with the 2.2 and then later an '86 with the 2.5, and they really weren't bad little cars for what they were. And as long as you stayed away from the turbo 4-cyl and, to a lesser degree the Mitsubishi 2.6 4-cyl, they were fairly reliable. I know both of my buddy's cars lasted well over 100,000 miles. He ended up swapping the '86 for a 1995 Corolla, when he made a move that ensured him a ~150 mile round trip commute each day.
Here's a link from AllPar about the LeBaron/400, which includes a lot of info on the convertible versions. Judging from the sales stats, the Mark Cross was actually fairly popular, some years accounting for about half of all LeBaron convertible sales.
Now that I think about it, I had another friend who bought a 1984 LeBaron convertible with the 2.6. He bought it soon after I got my '67 Catalina. In fact, he said it was MY fault he bought that LeBaron because my Pontiac gave him convertible fever! He regretted it in a major way though, and soon dumped it for one of those little Australian Capri convertibles of late 80's/early 90's vintage. I don't know what problems, exactly, he had with it. But to be fair it was over 10 years old when he got it.
I dunno if the Capri was any better, but he held onto it longer. I haven't seen him in years though, so I dunno if he still has it.
Personally, I kinda liked those Dodge 400/600 convertibles with the slatted grilles. Or even the '86 600, which had one of the earlier Dodge crosshair grilles. They were usually less common than the LeBarons, so you didn't see them every day. That might be one reason I prefer 'em.
that looks pretty classy, I'd probably go for one of those '82-85 Rivieras. They only made a few hundred to a few thousand per year, and it was contracted out to ASC or somebody else, but it made for a pretty attractive package. I think most of them had Oldsmobile 307's, but I believe there was an S-type version that had the 231 turbo. The 4.1/252 V-6 may have been available too, but if so was seldom ordered. And I'm sure an occasional 350 Diesel worked its way in there.
I think the Eldorado convertible was only offered from 1984-85 on that generation, but I never cared for the Caddy version of this platform. I always thought the Riv and Toro had more tasteful interiors and often seemed put together a bit better. Plus, the Eldorado was stuck with those awful 4.1 aluminum V-8's.
As for the Toronado, I don't think GM officially offered a convertible version, but I think the supplier who did the conversion for the Eldo/Riv ended up running off about 300 Toros.
Not that you indicated otherwise in your message, but I think we both agreed, some time ago, that the Mitsubishi sourced 2.6 wasn't a good engine. While the Chrysler 2.5 wasn't devoid of issues, it was generally more reliable and durable than the Mitsu 2.6.
Yeah, from what I've read, the Australian Capri convert is best avoided.
For whatever reason, those GM/ASC coverts don't do much for me. Any idea of the values on these?
I dunno, but I doubt if they're worth much more than the closed coupe versions. Now one conversion I always thought was beautiful was the 1980-83 Dodge Mirada. Back in October, someone stole one of the wheels off my Intrepid, and I went to the local junkyard (B&B down on Central Ave near the PG/AA county line), and found one off a junked '02 Intrepid. Well lo and behold, a couple cars away was a midnight blue Mirada with what I thought was just carriage roof. That option was really common on the '80-83 Cordoba/Mirada. I always liked these cars to begin with, so I went over to take a look. That's when I noticed it was a REAL convertible!
I had only seen a car like this once before. About 13 years ago, a local Pontiac/Dodge dealer had one on their used car lot. Midnight blue, white top, blue leather interior. It was pristine and looked brand-new, except for a rip in the top. The sucker looked gorgous with the top down. At that time I think they wanted like $10-12K for it.
I thought about trying to salvage this junkyard Mirada, as it still had the engine/tranny in it, and according to the junkyard people, the powertrain was solid. But then the more I thought about it, the less intriguing the idea seemed. After all, there's a REASON it went in the junkyard, right? :P
Hmmm, didn't know there was a Mirada convert, other than the occasional backyard unreinforced amateur conversion jobs...you know, the kind you'd want to run away from. So, are you saying there was a REAL Chrysler authorized Mirada convert sold through Dodge dealers, or was it an independent professional conversion, not officially authorized by Chrysler?
Well Jon Voight is an actor. I think he usually plays bad guys or just generally unsavory characters. He was in "Anaconda" and "Midnight Cowboy" and more famous stuff that that I'm sure...it's just that those were the first two movies that pop into my mind.
As for John Voight, he's nobody. Just a generic similar name they used. Although if you do a Google search, a John Voight at the U of Minnesota comes up. Probably not the one that Costanza idolized, though ;-)
As for the Mirada convertible, the two I've seen were independent professional conversions, like by ASC or something. I dunno if they were authorized by Chrysler or not, though. The one I had the opportunity to drive back in 1993 was a horrible shaker, but probably no worse than something like a 1976 Eldorado convertible. Actually, now that I think about it, I did mention this junkyard Mirada in the online Mopar club I belong to, to see if anyone was interested in salvaging it. One member responded that he helped a buddy sell one on eBay a couple years back.
All things considered, it wasn't a bad conversion. The only thing I don't like about it is that the top does away with the little rear quarter windows, so it makes one hell of a blind spot. But I guess that was for the best. Even though the Mirada/Cordoba were styled to look like hardtops, those quarter windows were way too big to roll down into the space between the door and the rear wheel opening.
Thanks. Yup, I know the actor, but not the JoHn guy.
Midnight Cowboy was a great movie, with outstanding acting by both Voight and Dustin Hoffman, especially, since the Rizzo role required more talent than the cowboy role. The sound track was also superb.
I also like the styling of the last generation Cordoba/Mirada, as well as the first gen Cordoba, but not the first gen Dodge counterpart (Magnum?). The trim on the Dodge wasn't as tasteful as that of the Cordoba, in my view.
Comments
I guess with newer cars, one consolation is that over the years they've pretty much weeded out most of the nasty colors. Since they usually only give you like 4-8 colors to choose from, they're going to stick with the more tasteful ones. And with that few to choose from, even the least common ones will never be all that rare. Back in 1976, for in contrast, the Pontiac LeMans was offered in 18 different colors. Needless to say, not all of them were tasteful. And once you factor in two-toning options, I think I read somewhere that the 1957 DeSoto was available in something like 133 different color permutations!
also the "bad" color on one car might be perfect on another.
So it's tricky. You can't sell an olive green Ferrari but you can sell an olive green Land Rover.
For example Black Escelades carry a couple of thousand dollar premium over all other colors because they get shipped over seas, normaly to the middle east, and everyone out there wants to drive a big, black Slade like they are in the mafia.
Red on the other hand is the kiss of death on a Escalade.
Red is also a bad color for all Rovers except the Range Sport and then it is really only ok on the non-supercharged ones.
Most BMWs and Mercs do better in conservative colors black, Silver, Gray white. Back when my GM worked for a mercedes dealer his boss only ordered Black, White, Gray and Silver Mercedes because those were easy safe colors to sell.
While I'm tempted to criticize MT's judgment, I should acknowledge that I was pleased to see the Mustang return to a more sensible size in '74. However, I was not enamored with the execution of that Pinto-based predecessor generation to the Fox platform Mustang. The thing that disappointed me the most were the engines. The 2.3 I-4 was totally anemic; the German sourced (2.8?) V6 would have been a reasonable choice from a spec standpoint, but it had serious reliability and durability issues; and the smog chocked 302 c.i. small block V8 made that short wheelbase car too front end heavy, thereby compromising handling. The redesigned '79s were much better looking, both inside and outside, in my opinion, but the engine choice issues weren't improved much, with the addition of the Turbo-4, since that engine also had reliability and durability shortcomings. But at least that generation returned the Mustang to its roots. Goldilocks would probably have approved of its not-too-big/not-too-small dimensions, and, unlike the T-Birds of the '70s, it wasn't overweight. I really wanted to like the early Fox platform Mustangs, but when you added the poor assembly and lack of structural rigidity to the uninspiring engine choices, it was hard to get too excited with the overall package. The '83 and '84 V8s addressed the engine issues, but by then the chassis was long-in-the- tooth.
I guess I'm inclined to cut MT some slack on the Vega and the Alliance because when they awarded these cars the Car of The Year awards, they didn't know how trouble prone they would be. But then, being the automotive experts that they professed to be, should they have predicted how problem plagued these appealingly designed models would be? Your thoughts on this?
Probably the only reliable COTY winners of the 70's were the 1977 Caprice/Impala and the 1979 Riviera. The Caprice/Impala was innovative, in being the first standard-sized car in a long, long time to be significantly smaller than its predecessor, yet still being able to provide big-car interior room. But as far as the technology goes, there was nothing cutting-edge about it. I'm convinced to this day that the '77 B-bodies used the same frame as the 1973-77 midsized A-bodies. With the exception of the unreliable Pontiac 301, none of the engines were new...just different-displacement versions of existing engines. But they were good, reliable cars for the most part, and made the old pre-downsized mastodons obsolete almost instantly.
Similarly, the 1979 Riviera really wasn't all that cutting-edge. It was FWD, but it was the same basic layout as what the Toronado had been since 1966, and the Eldorado since 1967. You could get a turbo in it, which was kinda cool, but unreliable at the time.
But most of the other 70's COTY winners, like the Vega and Omni/Horizon, were a bit complex compared to what their manufacturers were used to putting out. And the 1976 Aspen/Volare, while not a complex car, was saddled with the problems of a company rapidly running out of development resources.
I hate to say it, but in a twisted way I kinda like the 1974 Mustang II! I mean, it's a sham compared to the 1964.5-1970 models, but I never really cared for the bloated '71-73's. If you consider the time frame, and its competition, cars like the Monza and Sunbird, I think it holds its own. I always thought that, with the right trim level, they had pretty nice interiors.
Yeah, right. Pathetic.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
If I recall correctly, the interior was also a mismatch with the dominant exterior color. The owner insisted it came that way from the factory.
Kinda of a salmon color with pastel yellow two-toning, and a green interior? Y'know as sickening as that sounds, somehow, I think the car still manages to carry it with some dignity. Just don't try that with a modern car!
Y'know, as many years as that Caddy was at that show, I never bothered to take a picture of it for whatever reason. However, you can see part of it in the corner of this picture:
I think what little you can see of it in this picture actually flatters the car. I remember it being far more vulgar looking in person.
I have a photo of the 1974 Cadillac, but the photo is not on my digital camera. The color isn't quite so bad, but like many 1970s colors, it was clearly meant to be broken up with a vinyl top.
That Cadillac was one of the few from the 1970s that I've ever seen with a painted metal top. It also had an undivided bench seat. Apparently somone decided to scrimp on the options when purchasing a Cadillac.
I doubt it. Unfortunately the Prowler is kinda like the 2002 T-bird or the 1976 Eldorado convertible, where they were built and sold with a "future classic" mindset about them. As a result, it seems like every blessed one of them survived.
Also, the Prowler isn't a very practical vehicle. It looks cool and everything, but it's only a 2-seater and I don't think it even has a trunk! Plus, it only has a V-6 engine and a 4-speed automatic. Lack of a stick shift and especially lack of a V-8 will probably kill its potential down the road.
Worse, I've heard that Prowlers are actually pretty fragile. They're meant for a nice, gentle cruise on a sunny day, going to car shows (you see tons of them at the Mopar Carlisle show), etc. Whereas you can get in a 1976 Eldorado and press it into service as a daily driver (provided you have the funds for its healthy appetite for fuel), and you could do the same with an '02 T-bird, provided it doesn't overheat or drop its tranny
Shifty, your emphatic response answers my question. Thanks.
So odds are against it on that basis alone. They'll be "collectible" like 54 Studebakers are collectible, which is -- "collected in my back yard".
High supply, low demand---a deadly combination.
Yeah, I heard rumors that it was nice outside yesterday. Unfortunately, I didn't get out of my windowless office until 7 last nite, so I didn't get to experience it.
Circling back to the Prowler, notwithstanding the automatic tranny, V6 and other deficits, it strikes me as a fun ride.
Sitting in our side yard behind a fence is a 1989 Buick Le Sabre T-type that I bought new. It's in amazing shape but I don't know what to do with it?
That Buick cruises as smooth as glass at 100 MPH.
There is a whole forum dedicated to that model. Amazing how groups form for almost any kind of car!
Does this statement refer to the RWD turbo model, as I think it does, or are you, by chance, referring to your LeSabre T-Type?
"There is a whole forum dedicated to that model."
I couldn't find it on Edmunds. Please point me to it.
Does the LeSabre T-Type share the same 85 mph speedometer as the regular Buicks of that period, or does it go higher?
All these are are 2 door Le Sabres. They are lowered a bit, have heaver suspension and a lower axle ratio. Leather buckets and they came fairly loaded.
Nothing really special, just different. I don't drive it much but people always ask me what it is.
Nothing on Edmunds but if you "google" Buick Le Sabre T Type, it should bring up the name of that club.
I liked the style of those LeSabre and 88 coupes. Those sloping rooflines were a sharp contrast to the formal roofs with the vertical rear window that GM had been doing for so long. I guess by that time though, the market for coupes was really starting to shrivel, ensuring that the 1992 restyle would only be offered as a sedan.
I didn't know the T-Type was "lowered a bit." The Olds counterpart probably wasn't, since that wasn't one of the features of the F-3 suspension.
isellhondas, do you know whether the 4-door Electra T-Types were lowered? They appeared to be the same height as the Park Avenue, but, then, I hadn't noticed the reduction in height between the LeSabre coupe and the T-Type.
While on the subject, though, these GM coupes were roomy and practical, with spacious trunks. Equipped with the better suspensions, they were nice highway cruisers, that delivered a good blend of ride, handling and performance, at a lower price than the Riviera and Toronado. I'm a fan, and while I know it won't happen I'd like to see a LaCrosse T-Type coupe added to the '08 Buick lineup. A Lucerne T-Type, featuring some of the touches seen on the SEMA Lucernes, would also be cool. Are you listening, Buick?
But you know, maybe in time it will be a sort of curiosity...period charming, like a lava lamp?
As for local car shows, no harm in that...they are open to just about anything...
I'm not sure, but I think the Mark Cross edition denoted the ritzy leather interior (I think it was even "Corinthian"!), while the style that had the woody trim on it was called the "Town & Country"?
I had a friend who had an '85 LeBaron convertible with the 2.2 and then later an '86 with the 2.5, and they really weren't bad little cars for what they were. And as long as you stayed away from the turbo 4-cyl and, to a lesser degree the Mitsubishi 2.6 4-cyl, they were fairly reliable. I know both of my buddy's cars lasted well over 100,000 miles. He ended up swapping the '86 for a 1995 Corolla, when he made a move that ensured him a ~150 mile round trip commute each day.
Here's a link from AllPar about the LeBaron/400, which includes a lot of info on the convertible versions. Judging from the sales stats, the Mark Cross was actually fairly popular, some years accounting for about half of all LeBaron convertible sales.
Now that I think about it, I had another friend who bought a 1984 LeBaron convertible with the 2.6. He bought it soon after I got my '67 Catalina. In fact, he said it was MY fault he bought that LeBaron because my Pontiac gave him convertible fever! He regretted it in a major way though, and soon dumped it for one of those little Australian Capri convertibles of late 80's/early 90's vintage. I don't know what problems, exactly, he had with it. But to be fair it was over 10 years old when he got it.
I dunno if the Capri was any better, but he held onto it longer. I haven't seen him in years though, so I dunno if he still has it.
Personally, I kinda liked those Dodge 400/600 convertibles with the slatted grilles. Or even the '86 600, which had one of the earlier Dodge crosshair grilles. They were usually less common than the LeBarons, so you didn't see them every day. That might be one reason I prefer 'em.
I think the Eldorado convertible was only offered from 1984-85 on that generation, but I never cared for the Caddy version of this platform. I always thought the Riv and Toro had more tasteful interiors and often seemed put together a bit better. Plus, the Eldorado was stuck with those awful 4.1 aluminum V-8's.
As for the Toronado, I don't think GM officially offered a convertible version, but I think the supplier who did the conversion for the Eldo/Riv ended up running off about 300 Toros.
Yeah, from what I've read, the Australian Capri convert is best avoided.
For whatever reason, those GM/ASC coverts don't do much for me. Any idea of the values on these?
Yeah, but unfortunately it was JoHn Voight, and not Jon Voight!
I dunno, but I doubt if they're worth much more than the closed coupe versions. Now one conversion I always thought was beautiful was the 1980-83 Dodge Mirada. Back in October, someone stole one of the wheels off my Intrepid, and I went to the local junkyard (B&B down on Central Ave near the PG/AA county line), and found one off a junked '02 Intrepid. Well lo and behold, a couple cars away was a midnight blue Mirada with what I thought was just carriage roof. That option was really common on the '80-83 Cordoba/Mirada. I always liked these cars to begin with, so I went over to take a look. That's when I noticed it was a REAL convertible!
I had only seen a car like this once before. About 13 years ago, a local Pontiac/Dodge dealer had one on their used car lot. Midnight blue, white top, blue leather interior. It was pristine and looked brand-new, except for a rip in the top. The sucker looked gorgous with the top down. At that time I think they wanted like $10-12K for it.
I thought about trying to salvage this junkyard Mirada, as it still had the engine/tranny in it, and according to the junkyard people, the powertrain was solid. But then the more I thought about it, the less intriguing the idea seemed. After all, there's a REASON it went in the junkyard, right? :P
Hmmm, didn't know there was a Mirada convert, other than the occasional backyard unreinforced amateur conversion jobs...you know, the kind you'd want to run away from. So, are you saying there was a REAL Chrysler authorized Mirada convert sold through Dodge dealers, or was it an independent professional conversion, not officially authorized by Chrysler?
Well Jon Voight is an actor. I think he usually plays bad guys or just generally unsavory characters. He was in "Anaconda" and "Midnight Cowboy" and more famous stuff that that I'm sure...it's just that those were the first two movies that pop into my mind.
As for John Voight, he's nobody. Just a generic similar name they used. Although if you do a Google search, a John Voight at the U of Minnesota comes up. Probably not the one that Costanza idolized, though ;-)
As for the Mirada convertible, the two I've seen were independent professional conversions, like by ASC or something. I dunno if they were authorized by Chrysler or not, though. The one I had the opportunity to drive back in 1993 was a horrible shaker, but probably no worse than something like a 1976 Eldorado convertible. Actually, now that I think about it, I did mention this junkyard Mirada in the online Mopar club I belong to, to see if anyone was interested in salvaging it. One member responded that he helped a buddy sell one on eBay a couple years back.
All things considered, it wasn't a bad conversion. The only thing I don't like about it is that the top does away with the little rear quarter windows, so it makes one hell of a blind spot. But I guess that was for the best. Even though the Mirada/Cordoba were styled to look like hardtops, those quarter windows were way too big to roll down into the space between the door and the rear wheel opening.
Midnight Cowboy was a great movie, with outstanding acting by both Voight and Dustin Hoffman, especially, since the Rizzo role required more talent than the cowboy role. The sound track was also superb.
I also like the styling of the last generation Cordoba/Mirada, as well as the first gen Cordoba, but not the first gen Dodge counterpart (Magnum?). The trim on the Dodge wasn't as tasteful as that of the Cordoba, in my view.