Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
I want a 1930s driver - is that impractical?
Having just wrecked my beautiful 1990 Cutlass sierra yesterday, I am now in the market for a new' car. I could go with another generic rental company cast-off (the Oldsmobile served me well), or I could go for something fun.
I live in Houston, so there aren't many hills to contend with. I seldom drive downtown, so I don't need to hit the interstate very often. On average, I would say I drive 10K miles a year ax. I can live without an air-conditioned, and as long as I keep out of floods, rust shouldn't be a problem.
THE QUESTION:
Am I crazy in considering a Model A or similar vehicle to meet my transportation needs? It would sit in my driveway, since the garage is full. Would I face frequent servicing and maintenance issues? Are parts readily and cheaply available? Is there a risk to parking the car in the Walmart parking lot? (Model As didn't make the top 10 list for auto thefts.)
I've never owned a classic before, so any advice would be appreciated!
I live in Houston, so there aren't many hills to contend with. I seldom drive downtown, so I don't need to hit the interstate very often. On average, I would say I drive 10K miles a year ax. I can live without an air-conditioned, and as long as I keep out of floods, rust shouldn't be a problem.
THE QUESTION:
Am I crazy in considering a Model A or similar vehicle to meet my transportation needs? It would sit in my driveway, since the garage is full. Would I face frequent servicing and maintenance issues? Are parts readily and cheaply available? Is there a risk to parking the car in the Walmart parking lot? (Model As didn't make the top 10 list for auto thefts.)
I've never owned a classic before, so any advice would be appreciated!
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Iguess it would have to be something like a Model A simply for the availability of parts.
Understand that these cars have a heck of a time keeping up with modern traffic. ModelAs are very slow by modern standards. We're talking 0-60 in, what, 35 seconds if that?
Mechanical, cable-activated non-hydraulic brakes..etc...
Safety features? Ha!
There some cars from the 30s that are quite capable of keeping up with modern traffic. However, the onesthat I can think of are all quite rare and valuable (Supercharged Cord, Duesenberg SJ, BMW 328, Alfa Romeo 8C 2900, Certain Cadillacs...etc..)
I'd look a lot more carefully at a 50s or 60s 4-door sedan...
Bill
I also heard that if you got 30,000 miles out of an engine before a rebuild, consider yourself lucky. My grandfather had a Model A when he was a teenager, a 2-door sedan, I think he said it was. I know he flipped it over once, and it held up quite well. In fact, I think he was actually able to upright it himself!
im sure there are some cool looking kit cars with modern parts, like power brakes power steering and reliable engines to propel you along life's highway.
For the modern world, you need a minimum of:
Decent brakes
Decent suspension & steering
Reasonable horsepower
Good parts supply
Reasonable reliability
As you can see, the Model A can only provide one or two of these, and you need all 5. To get all 5, you'd almost have to consider a 50s/60s GM, or a 60s Ford or Mopar product.
Having driven many Model As, and even being a very intrepid and tolerant driver when it comes to classics, I would never consider an A for my daily car--but it makes an excellent Sunday putter. My favorite is the 4-door town sedan.
It was used strictly as a pleasure sunday driver. Believe me, that is all they are good for! 40 MPH is about it. They are crude and they can't stop either.
If you ever get hit, you are probably dead.
Still...lots of fun but NOT as sole transportation!
Some people improve the old GM trucks, too, with the better 235 or even 230 Chevy Six, or a V8 transplant, power steering, different differential, updated brakes, etc.
I like these old trucks...my favorite is early 50s with a 235 engine and conversion to 12 volt electrics....no one would ever notice!
http://www.chevrolet.com.au/articles/engine_swap.htm
Gotta love the web.
Seems to me they also sell a higher geared ring and pinion, air conditioning, and a Saginaw four-speed kit. I like the idea of making older trucks easier to live with, without succumbing to the full blown hotrodder universe.
Somehow, it was possible to machine the rods and install insert bearings. Sadly, the shops and old timers who knew how to do this as well as file and shim the old style bearnings are probably all gone by now.
But...yeah, the 235's were MUCH better engines that could take a lot of abuse.
Under the heading "some folks have more money than sense"...a few months ago I ran across one of these with a built small block and AT, lowered and painted red. Even I could tell it was pretty crude. Some local people had bought it sight unseen in Montana (Californians have to go to Montana to find good iron?) and had it shipped down as a surprise--and how--for their son when he turned 16.
Yes he would have been surprised. In this area your average teenager lusts after a Bimmer, not Li'l Abner's dream machine and to top it off they had no idea it was a hot rod.
They brought this piece of work to their mechanic who suggested it would probably end up upside down at the gentle hands of a 16-year-old male driver.
So they sold the truck and bought him a Bimmer, adding years to his life and dodging the process of natural selection.
Oh, I think modern machine shops are more than capable of doing whatever you want to a Chevy 216, including substituting inserts for babbit bearings. The "old timers" did some pretty crude stuff because they were working on pretty crude pieces of iron. But for precision and finesse, a modern shop could do wonders (if you are willing to pay!). This is one reason why there are some 1 million Model A Fords still on the road. Modern machining, metallurgy, fuels and lubricants.
My great-uncle gave him a rusted hulk of a '74 Impala that still had a good 400 sb, and he yanked that out and threw it in something else!
Appreciate the input!
Take as an example: Guy I know from the weekly cruises here in Orlando bought a beautiful 57 Chevy Bel-Air 4-door sedan. 283 4bbl, Powerglide, power steering, brakes..etc.. Nice car. Larkspur Blue/India Ivory (Lt Turquoise/White) with matchinginterior.
Paid like $9,500 or so for it. Another $1,200 or so for AC.. ANother $900 or so for a decent radio and CD CHanger and speakers...
I could live with a car like that...
Bill
Granted, these updates may make for a more drivable car but they sure detract from the originality of it.
I'm more on Isell's side--after all, why have an old car unless the driving experience is at least somewhat "of the period"?--but even originality can be a moving target.
There were significant differences in ride and handling between tri-year Chevies at least when they were new. The '57 was more biased toward ride quality than the '55-56 but after almost 50 years of wear and owner modifications I doubt that most "stock" tri-year Chevies ride and handle like the day they left the factory.
There were 8 different front spring rates for '55-57 Chevies. While that doesn't mean a Chevy buyer could choose from 8 different suspensions, I know that Chevy offered a taxi or police package to the public that had stiffer suspension and better brakes. Recreating this package or something close to it might offer a good compromise between originality and better performance.
There's also the possibility of period modifications. In '57 Chevy put out a pamphlet on how to turn your Chevy into a stock car, complete with factory part numbers. In 1971 I went down to my local Chevy dealer and with the help of a friendly parts man and "Bill Carroll's Chevrolet V8 Performance Guide" bought four HD springs and what I think is called a Panhard rod for my '61 Chevy.
Back in the early '60s there was a mint black '57 Nomad usually parked in a driveway in my neighborhood. Actually it was nothing more than a very clean used car in those days, but I'd go out of my way to ride my bike past it. I think if there's one American sedan I'd commit larceny to own it's probably that one.
On the other hand, if you want a car that has the refinement and reliability of a Camry, why not buy a Camry? Why turn a '57 Chevy into a Camry? Why not make minor improvements that still let you appreciate the original driving experience (warts and all). That's as much a part of the car as the styling and nostalgia factor.
I guess it depends at least partly on the owner's situation. If a '57 was my daily driver then I'd want to bring it into this century. If it was my week-end car I'd leave it mostly original so I could appreciate the contrast with the very nice appliance I'm driving now.
It also depends on the car. I think early Falcon coupes are pretty sharp but I had a full dose of original Falcon-ness and it's not something I'd want to repeat. On the other hand, I had a '57 Buick that was a competent driver (at least by my standards) although it sure wasn't a 3-series BMW let alone a Camry.
And it depends on the needs and expectations of the owner. That's why there's no right or wrong answer.
But, that's me...
while bone stock != Mickey Mouse?
I'd think on a '55 Chevy you'd at least want an oil filter.
Hmm....Maybe because Camry's have all the excitement of cold oatmeal? A 57 Bel Aire is rock 'n' roll personified in a car. A Camry is a nap personified in a car. If you can have all the drop-dead gorgeous looks of a 57 Chevy, brakes that stop the car in a more reasonable distance, suspension that doesn't require slowing down to the numbers posted on the curve-in-the-road signs, then why not? You can get a TPI 350 and overdrive transmission, and bolt it in, and do wonders for the gas mileage. So long as someone is actually improving the car, and not doing oxy-acetelene and duck tape modifications, why not improve a good thing?
I think what fuels this debate is that so many "improvements" aren't improvements, they're just modifications so Mickey Mouse they should be wearing mouse ears. But if the idea and execution are good then I can admire the modification.
Better handling and brakes aren't mouse and they won't turn a '57 Chevy into a Camry. Now that I think about it no one could ever Camry-ize a Chevy, so we can all relax. You couldn't approach that level of refinement unless you completely redesigned the car from the ground up, like someone just did with the Tucker.
I don't mean to get heavy here but I think what we're really talking about are different personality types.
Purists don't have a good rep and I used to get flack from them when I owned GTOs, but I have to admire them, at least up to the point where some of them cross into the Twilight Zone. Their goal is to recreate an idealized snapshot of the car at some point in its history, usually the point when the car rolled off the assembly line. The purist accepts the challenge of finding out exactly where the lines are and then coloring inside them. This means their playing field is a lot smaller than it is for most of us.
On the other hand, most of us can't wait to color outside the lines. I can think of at least four cars that have non-matching number engines because of me if they're still on the road.
I see some validity in both sides of the debate as long as both sides use some sense. I kind of admire the guys who charge head-first after authenticity but I know that old cars pretty much beg for modifications because by modern standards they're deficient in so many areas except "character".
Carmakers used to leave plenty of room for modifications because even their high-performance cars were usually designed for a broad and not-so-discerning market. That left plenty of opportunities for gearheads to either work their magic or wreak their havoc, depending on how much sense they had.
I think it's fair to say that not every modification is an improvement. Modifications that keep you from getting killed are improvements. Just hanging hardware on a car because it's the flavor of the month isn't always an improvement but hey it's their car and their money. I've done that myself like most gearheads.
I think what made me a little sceptical of modifications is what I saw when I was buying and selling in the '70s and '80s. Like a lot of people I was chasing high-performance cars and these were the ones that suffered especially when they were $500 used cars and just about anyone could afford one.
That reminds me of a '62 Impala SS I had that some wannabe street racer had put 4.11s into. The car didn't need 4.11s and didn't like 4.11s but the magazines said it was a good street/strip gear so I bought a car that couldn't get out of the freeway slow lane.
Some of the most enjoyable cars I owned were relatively ordinary cars, like a '66 Charger 318 and a '67 GTO automatic, that their owners had done nothing to except maintain religiously.
On the other hand the last old car I owned started out as a very stock and boring Cougar and ended up as something the guys at San Jose's Mustang Ranch called "the beast" (although I'm not sure it was meant as a compliment).
So, yes, to me, anyway, a 350 engine with a TH 350 is Micky Mouse. The car came with, and should have a 283 under the hood.
Better shocks and modern brake linings, by all means.
Again, we all have our different ideas and there isn't a "wrong" way.
I can accept that. I feel, however, if someone puts their hard earned cash down on a car, they have earned the right to do whatever they want with the car. (Unless it's something rare/irreplacable. Then they technically cans till do what they want, but common decency should prevail and the car left untouched)
Putting a modern engine in a 57 Chevy? As long as you do a good job, and don't get out the cutting torch or duck tape (two tools 95% of "home mechanics" would be crippled without), then I don't see anything wrong with it. Some people do (why, I'm not sure), but for them, they can keep the 283. As for me, praise the Lord and pass the 350!
Having a Chevrolet trailered to events with "tire muffs" wrapped around the wheels, and then seeing 8 Chevrolet scholars debating the authenticity of a bolt head is, IMO, approaching near madness.
Now, of course, were this '57 Chevy a rare fuelie I might reconsider my opinion, just so we would have an original FI car to look at, but other than those rare exceptions I don't believe the cars need be original and they don't all have to be overestored either. Overestoring a car like a Chevrolet robs it of its dignity I think, as if to say "oh, no, you can't wear workclothes IN HERE, you need to pretend you were a prince in order for us to love you".
Isell I hear you about keeping the 283--a '57 Chevy is one of the few old cars that doesn't really need help in the engine compartment--but I bet both of us wouldn't mind having one with a 327/4-speed. Of course that involves cutting a hole in the floorpan but at least it seems more "period"--in other words, something we boomers can relate to ;-). My first ride in a hotrod was in a car like that, as a 13-year-old hitchhiker, and from then on I was a believer.
Where I live we have this debate about the earliest houses built here. One side says their owners have a responsibility to at least keep the exterior original because these houses are a big part of the quality of life that makes the area special for everyone. You want a Taco Bell mansion? Then buy in a community that doesn't have a heritage.
The other side says "hey houses are meant to be lived in and if I spend $2M for a house I have the right to change it anyway I want".
So far the purists are losing that battle too.
I also hate "trailer queens". I would want my 57 Bel Air to look and be as original as possible. If my 283 was tired I would have it rebuilt along with the Powerglide. I wouldn't care about the color of the windshield washer fluid.
I would want people to look at it and smile, perhaps remembering a happy time in their childhood.
A hood scoop, flared rear wheelwells or even a later model chromed engine wouldn't accomplish that.
But..again, that's me.
I'll tell ya what I think is really tacky...seems like the most common seats to swap into any old car are those thick leather seats with the little buttons that were in the M-body Chrysler 5th Avenue!
As an appraiser I never deduct value for, say, adding hydraulic brakes to a Model A Ford, as long as the owner keeps all the old parts. For a '57 Chevy with a modern engine in it, I may deduct depending on the rest of the car....if it has been much modified internally, one could almost put it in a street rod category. I have seen much modified '57 chevys sell in the $50K range, which is about what you'd pay for a decent, nice #3 '57 Chev convertible anyway.
So modification per se need not devalue a car, but it has to be very careful, tasteful, extremely well done and must appeal to the market place.
This is why heavy cosmetic modifications often do not please the marketplace, since the modifications are too personal for the new buyer....like trying to sell someone your jewelry or your clothes. But a basically stock '57 with a beautifully installed very hot modern engine, well, there is a lot of appeal in that I think.
That '60 Olds should have had a four speed Hydro but maybe it was missing a few gears. In '61 they came out with a 3 speed Roto Hydramatic that we've kicked around quite a bit here so I won't get into that. The '64 88 had the Cutlass 330 and a two-speed auto. I know, more than you wanted to know...
Then again my '63 Olds shop manual calls both the full-size and F-85 AT "Hydra-Matic".
Maybe Isell would know.