I think the 300E was a pretty good car from what I remember. The other models are rather obscure and I don't know much about them.
of course, it is a Benz so it's going to nickel and dime you, no getting around that. These are the types of cars where you never ever buy a "fixer-upper". You buy the cleanest, nicest, lowest miled one you can afford to own.
The W124 was the last of the real old fashioned MB, overengineered but not laden with technology for the sake of technology. It was also a great platform, used for everything from an elegant convertible to an AWD wagon and everything inbetween. It was also a very safe car.
The M103 I6 as seen in most 300E cars is a smooth and durable unit, not too powerful (180hp I think) but it can move the car along as they aren't as heavy as a modern car. The engines can also take a lot of mileage if maintained, but they do seem to like value adjustments or work at maybe 250K miles, even with proper maintenance. It was replaced by a DOHC I6 for a couple years that bumped up the power a bit, but was still durable. There was also a 2.8l 300E that developed less power. Powertrains on these cars are solid, electrical glitches and HVAC issues are the main problem areas, I think. I wouldn't call them unreliable, they just need more TLC than a Corolla. If that is ignored, the cars will fail.
If I was to choose a V8 car it would be a 500E, and those still cost...however a I6 car should be just fine for most people.
Yeah, I thought about advertising it as the Worlds Smallest British Car Show..........but I think the sign costs would have been greater than ticket revenue.
spotted in the parking lot tonite, outside the grocery store. It was antique white, similar to my Dart, and a bit rough around the edges, but still cool to see something like that still plying the streets.
The red and white 442 caught my attention. I had to read that twice. It has a 260 cu. in. motor. I didn't recall that was offered in the Olds. I have some reviewing to do. Seems awful small. My 77 had the 350 quadrajet motor.
I'm impressed that the bidding on that '79 5th Ave got up so high! I wish the seller would have just replaced the headliner rather than wedging that strip up in there. That can damage the plastic trim pieces that it's wedged under. I dunno how much a replacement would have cost though...maybe $250-300? Also kinda sucks that the heater core is bad and the rear window doesn't work. I don't think the heater core is too bad to get to in these cars though. And I know how to replace the power windows. My '79 5th Ave gave me some practice.
I had entertained the idea of trying to find one really nice R-body and just retiring the two that I have. Only problem with one like this though, is that it's in good enough shape that I'd be afraid to drive it for fear of messing it up. And that interior won't stay in that condition for very long if it started getting used! Heck, I can see a bit of deterioration on my 5th Ave's interior in the time I've had it. I bought it in October 2001, and I think I've only put about 7200 miles on it. Start slamming doors and such, and it won't be long before trim pieces start popping off, cracking, etc.
At least with the two I have now, I'm not afraid to drive them, and I wouldn't cry (too much) if something ended up happening to them.
That '77 Cutlass is a nice looking car, but there should have been a law that you couldn't put 4-4-2 badging on something that wussy! I could see if it was a 403, but c'mon...a 260?
That 1976 Olds Ninety-Eight is a bloated, disgusting wretch of a car that never should have been built in the first place. I don't know why anybody would want something like that. Oh, who am I kidding? I LOVE it!
The '73 Electra is nice too. Too bad it's kind of a poopy color.
That fintail is gorgeous...even if the seller probably took a bigger financial hit than my retirement porfolio did this year.
The 260 first popped up in 1975. It was the base V-8 in the Omega, as well as the Cutlass coupe and sedan. A Chevy 250-inline 6 was actually the base engine, though. But then the next step above the 260 was the 350 V-8. The Cutlass didn't mess around with 305's or 301's. For 1977, the Olds 350 had 170 hp, and I think that was the 4-bbl. Then above that was a 403-4bbl with 185 hp.
There was a 160 hp 350, which I guess was a 2-bbl. It was offered only in the Delta 88, with the 170 hp version being optional.
The 260 only had 110 hp back in those early years, and had to have been a dog. CR tested a 1977 Cutlass sedan with the 260, and I want to say it took 21 seconds to do 0-60! In that test, they had a newly downsized Caprice with a 305, an LTD II with a 302, and a Monaco or Fury with a 318, and I think they all made 0-60 in about 12.5-13 seconds. I always suspected they picked the 260 for the Cutlass on purpose to make it look bad. A 350 Cutlass probably would have blown all those other cars away. And CR was really pulling for the Caprice.
Like that Z, no idea what it's worth. Always wondered how they put such ugly hubcaps on such a great car. And only $500 difference between minimum and buy it now? Odd...
The 231 was new for 1977 as the base engine in many Cutlass models (and Omega). The 5 speed manual was an option with the 260, so that was the saving grace since it was a manual--but the axle ratio was 2.73. No burnouts there. The 442 was neutered by 1977. If I read right, a 350 or 403 would each have the automatic as the transmission; the 260 was the only manual.
I can remember the brochure. The Cutlass I bought was the 1st one on the cover, tan over metallic brown. I wonder if I still have the sales brochures packed in a box along with my AMC pacer sales brochures...
Too bad you don't still have that '77 Cutlass. It would look cool with that car and my '76 LeMans, side-by-side! You don't have any old pictures of it you could scan in, do you?
Yeah... the Z car is really nice.. I don't think the guy is really concerned about selling it on Ebay.. I think he just wants to get it advertised.. Otherwise, he needs to go back to school on how to get the bidding started...
'64 Dodge Dart wagon? I thought that was pretty cool.... but, at $28K it hasn't met the reserve? :surprise:
fintail and shifty, I think my question and comments in message #14270, and your subsequent responses, applied to the Mercedes W210 models (years 1996-2002?), not the W124. From further reading, it seems that Mercedes first took cost into (greater) account with the introduction of the W210. Is that correct? Also, whether because of of this change of philosophy, or other factors, such as more features, isn't it true that the W210 has more maintenance/repair issues, and is more expensive to maintain than the W123 and W124 series?
The reason I'm asking these questions is that, if you subscribe to the notion that to reduce the probability of high cost-of-ownership one should avoid buying new cars and cars that are very old, then the W210 comes closer to the sweet spot than the W124. In fact, maybe all but the newest W210s may be too old to avoid the expenses associated more with age than mileage.
If one can afford it, do first and second year (2003? or 2004) W211s tend to be more reliable than, say, 2001 and 2002 W210s?
"1998 E300 Turbo Diesel. 45,000 miles, mint condition, garage kept. Smoke silver. Parchment leather. CD Changer, Mobile Phone, Rain Sensor, ESP, Headlamp Wiper/Washer, Xenon Headlamps, Michelin tires, glass sunroof, Bose Premium Music System. 3.0 Liter 24 Valve 6 Cylinder Turbo Diesel Fuel Injection. 34 Highway 26 City. One family ownership. Currently have a 2008 E320 Bluetec Diesel. Have the 1998 window sticker and can pdf this document. An absolutely fabulous car and the low mileage is your gain. All service performed by Mercedes of Fredericksburg, Virginia currently Central Euromotors. Same Mercedes mechanic performed all work and shop forman. Please email if interested."
I know certain post-W123 diesels are problematic, but I forgot just which ones.
I think I've posted this before, but I had a '76 Cutlass 4-door with the 260 V-8. I learned to drive in it, and my dad ended up giving it to me. It was a dog. The only V-8 I've ever driven that had absolutely no torque. Pretty good mileage for a heavy car with a V-8, though.
I think you could only get a manual tranny in a 442 those years if you had the 260.
2012 Mustang Premium, 2013 Lincoln MKX Elite, 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander.
W210s got better with time. The earlier years almost seem to be a beta-test by MB, and they have electrical glitches, especially in engine management. As with older cars, the powertrains are solid, but various sensors are known failure issues, and of course rear window regulators, as is common on MB for decades. These cars had more gadgets than a W124, with the maintenance needs to follow. Another issue on early W210s is rust, if the car has been neglected in a harsh winter climate. Some suspension components will rust and break with alarming severity (spring perch) and some of the body can bubble too - unacceptable in a modern car. These issues seem to strike most in pre 1998-99 models. Some of the interior materials also don't seem as good as the old days, but I will say the W211 seems even cheaper inside than the W210, I have read many statements about W211 build quality falling from the W210 (which fell from the W124). The W210 was the first "new style" MB, with the negatives and positives that come along. They are comfortable cars, are relatively economical, and can be had for little money today.
I would recommend a late W210 over an early W211. Although they have both lost a lot of value, the W210 will still be significantly cheaper even if only a year older, and it is no less reliable.
I own a W210, an E55 from the last few months of W210 production. It's well put together, the upgraded interior is very nice, and of course the tuned V8 is fun.
That diesel you mention sounds like an exceptional car - good colors and options, and the history sounds ideal . The diesels and AMG cars tend to have less issues, in my experience anyway. The diesel engines have less electrical issues I think, and back then the AMG cars were still assembled at a seperate facility.
Nice collection this week. I like the Electra, and that white Wagon, especially the story behind it how it was stored for 28 years with survival supplies in case of a nuclear war.
As for the Peugeot truck, the guy has other cool rides on his site that he ledns out for films and tv, but not for sale. Check them out .
and the rat rod is cool too. I like rat rods, but that one is too much finished for my tastes. I'd like one with flat black paint, or rusty colored metal, unpainted.
-'62 Tempest Kustom - That thing is cool, it shows real imagination and flair in it's use of components from many different cars. With different wheels,paint, cycle fenders and a sexier windshield you'd have an awesome street rod.
Wow, that's quite a collection...kind of surprising to see it exists as one can often see inaccurate cars in so many movies
And hpmctorque - if you buy one of those cars and it turns out to be a headache, don't look at me! :P ...of course, if it turns out to be awesome, I'll be more than happy to take credit.
"if you buy one of those cars and it turns out to be a headache, don't look at me! ...of course, if it turns out to be awesome, I'll be more than happy to take credit."
I know full well that with used cars you win some and you lose some. I know your statements were tongue-in-cheek, at least somewhat, but, again, the info you provided hit the bulls eye, in terms of what I wanted to know. I have confidence in your opinions, and Shifty's. If I bought one and it was disappointing, well, hey, that risk is factored into the depreciation.
My situation is such that I don't NEED another car right now, but if I came across a really nice, well maintained E300 I'd consider it. I prefer to buy one owner cars from private parties who've kept maintenance records. That limits the number of offerings, but it gives me greater confidence about knowing what I'm buying. Dealers throw away all records, including the owners manual, for liability reasons, I guess. If I were in a hurry, I'd check out the dealers, but I'm not. Cars with above average mileage don't scare me, if I have the sense that they've been well maintained and driven with reasonable care.
I checked Craigslist today but there weren't any E300s in my area that I'd seriously consider.
Incidentally, the new E Class cars are really nice, but they have many more features than I want in a car. That's more or less true of all luxury brands, at least the ones sold in North America, and it's only getting worse. That's one of the reasons why I generally prefer the older ones.
If you get a car with all records of necessary work being done, and you then take care of it, you will probably be OK, especially if you choose a diesel like that one you mentioned. I know that you realize regular maintenance will be both more thorough and more expensive than on a "normal" car - but these things drive pretty well, so that's the price you pay.
I think the modern cars are becoming a bit overburdened with features too. The W210 is like a W124 compared to the current W211. MB purists will say this is not what MB is supposed to be about, oftentimes pointless technology. The advent of Lexus scared MB into this new role, IMO.
Ah, I remember that...I forget the name of the guys who made it. That hardtop is pretty sharp, but from what I remember it is not based on a real Volga, but on body panels made to look like one.
That Commer Imp van would be rare here - they made an estate version of the Imp, basically the same shell with windows, and that is pretty rare, but the van was a non starter commercially - it had to compete with the Mini van, which was brilliant, the Bedford HA, based on the Vauxhall Viva, the Ford Anglia based van which was cheap, then it's successor the Escort which was far better, and finally with the Morris Minor van, which went on until the early 70's and was basically indestructible...
Liked the Peugeot ambulance, an ugly old bus - although not as famous or desirable as it's main rival, the Citroen H, which was a corrugated shed on wheels. You still see those even over here, and they were never sold in UK when new,,,
The Pacer always amuses me. When someone tried to sell that here in the mid seventies, they made the mistake of trying to appeal as a sort of hi-tech car for people who wanted something different - they converted to RHD by some sort of chain arrangement behind the dashboard, I think, so the steering column stayed in the same place, as a sort of stump, and the driver on the passenger side had a wheel with no feel whatsoever... Also the passenger door on the original car was wider to allow safe access for people from the rear seat onto the pavement - but here, of course, that was on the driver's side. No wonder they never sold any - the only ones I can ever recall seeing were LHD, and they would have been rarities even when new.
That car site for European cars for the TV/Film industry was great - I liked the Routemaster buses, and the old Bristol VR, which we took for granted but which are so foreign to everyone else. It's funny seeing a Ford Transit on such a site - here you would have trouble shooting a street scene that didn't contain one... You do see a lot of inaccurate stuff on TV etc, with cars out of period, on our domestic productions, let alone filmed overseas - yet it's not as bad as with aircraft. How often do they show an airliner taking off, it's got two engines, and yet suddenly you get a stock shot underneath the fuselage of a 747, with all the wheels folding, and then when it lands again somewhere else, its a completely different aircraft....
I have never heard of that UK Pacer, sounds like a disaster waiting to happen with that steering system. I wonder if any of those conversions survived.
In traffic yesterday, while we were going to the local suburban shops, we passed a Lagonda drophead coupe - I've just looked it up and it was a 2.6 litre Tickford bodied car, they only made it 1949/51, as a drophead, and only in small numbers - less than 100. Nice to see one in use.
Last Sunday I went to an American car show, north of London, which was great - loads of old sedans from the chrome and fins era, at least fifty pre-war ones, and even the only pre-war Jensen to use a Lincoln V-12 engine... There were several prewar Lincoln Zephyrs, and although there were more Cadillacs say than Plymouths, it was a pretty good show, because there was a wide range of models represented - I can't recall seeing more American cars in one place over here...First time I've ever seen an Avanti II, and there were a smattering of cars from France as well as about eight 50's Buicks from Holland and Belgium, who had come over together... I took loads of pictures, and will eventually try to download a few. Going home, I also noticed how the cruising speed of these leviathans seems to be about 50/55 mph, probably at least in part to conserve fuel..
I love the 1964 Buick Sportwagon, but I'd ditch those stupid wheels in favor of Buick's factory wheels or even stock steel wheels with the cool Buick wheelcovers with the spinners.
To me, that 1976 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight is rare and beautiful.
Holy smoke, andre1969! That R-Body is just called out to you! That's got to be one of the nicest R-bodies out there!
Holy smoke, andre1969! That R-Body is just called out to you! That's got to be one of the nicest R-bodies out there!
It may be calling, but I'm not answering the phone! :shades: Tempting car, even with its shortcomings. I mean, I could replace the power window myself. I guess a new headliner might run $300-400, tops? And I don't think the heater cores are too terribly hard to get to on these cars.
I think if I had one in that kind of shape though, I'd obsess over it too much, and stress out every time it got nicked or scratched, or a piece of interior trim fell off. Plus, I think I'm just getting tired of that color. I mean, I've had my 5th Ave for almost 7 years now. My '79 Newport and '69 Dart were both beige, too. And my '67 Catalina is a pale, creamy yellow, not too radically different in hue.
What I really should have done was bought that midnight blue one we saw at the Mopar show back in 2006. It was an '80, with the weaker 120 hp 318-2bbl (versus the mighty 150 hp 360-2bbl from '79). And it wasn't a 5th Ave, but still had leather and was nicely equipped. It had 34K miles on it, versus the 5K this eBay one has. But it was also priced at $4300 asking, which was much more reasonable. And I think the midnight blue is a much nicer color.
A lot of those prewar cars were sold there when new, right? I know having an American car in prewar England was something of a status symbol, especially something like a Zephyr or another ultramodern machine.
I hate the big wheel fad, I wish it would end. In that auction an old pic of the car was shown with stock wheelcovers, much better. That deluxe model is begging for stock Buick wheels though.
You mean the St. Regis headlight covers? Those things are actually built in, and when you turn on the headlights they drop down. Well, when they're working, at least. I heard that the mechanism could be troublesome, and when the CHP used these things as patrol cars, they tended to just disable them, so they stayed open all the time.
I dunno if the mechanism is designed any different from the body-colored flip-down headlight covers on my two New Yorkers.
Ironically, the day after I bought my '79 5th Ave, a '79 St. Regis in that same 2-tone green color scheme showed up for sale right around the corner from my condo. The body was in good shape except for a big dent in the passenger side front door. It wasn't as well-equipped as the 5th Ave...crank windows, 318-2bbl, cloth interior (which I actually prefer). But the seller only wanted $500 for it. If I had the place to keep it, and the money to waste, I would have bought it. And if I had seen it before I bought my 5th Ave, I would've gotten it instead.
Yeah the covers with the horizontal lines. I can't recall ever having seen those on an R-body...but they were always older cars in my experience. Are they like the covers on a late 70s Magnum?
Same here, seems like the 'resto-rod' craze really got people thinking a '68 whatever looks good in 22" wheels. Chip Foose seems like a talented guy, but I just don't go for his wheels.
Yes, I believe Chrysler for example actually had an assembly plant at Kew in London, before the war, although some of the UK Chryslers were actually re-badged versions of cars you would know as Dodge, Plymouth etc. Buick was sold here as McLaughlin Buick, as the Canadian plant got round tariff restrictions, due to Empire Preference. But there were dealers in London for Lincoln, Oldsmobile, Studebaker, Hudson, etc... They would have been sold as advanced cars... so far ahead of most European, and especially British, offerings.. I think there were 7 or 8 V12 Lincolns including the Jensen at that show, but some of those must have come in later....
Worst thing about big wheels is the ride noise. Every time I've driven something with low-profile tyres it has had loads of rumble on the road, and given the most pimped-out wheels are often on the most luxurious cars, that must have their design engineers cringing.
"given the most pimped-out wheels are often on the most luxurious cars, that must have their design engineers cringing. "
Yes, and imagine how bad a car rides where not effort was made to handle those tires? Folks over here love to put them on Suburbans, Tahoe, Escalades - must ride like a dump truck (edit - 'tipper lorry', right?)!
What people also don't realize is that the big wheels will increase your braking distance. Not too too much, but if you need to stop in 50 feet for a semi up ahead and you stop in 54, well.......
How do they affect stopping distance because of the short, stiff sidewall?
I picture a "normal" tire, say a 75 or 70 series having some give as it scrapes over high and low spots allowing it to maintain grip; I picture the narrow sidewall wheel acting more like hard plastic as the pavement under goes up down and sideways, and not maintaining contact with the road.
If one compares those Yank tanks to the period British and European iron, one can see the appeal. They were more expensive, but offered a lot of bang for the buck (or pre-decimalized pound back when it had value) compared to finicky European machinery. I am sure the American cars were also more durable...I know the Wehrmacht when conscripting cars into service loved to get American cars, due to durability.
I am sure driving something like a Zephyr or Airflow in 1937 Europe was even more of a shock to the passerby than in NA, too. Must have been an interesting time.
Comments
of course, it is a Benz so it's going to nickel and dime you, no getting around that. These are the types of cars where you never ever buy a "fixer-upper". You buy the cleanest, nicest, lowest miled one you can afford to own.
The M103 I6 as seen in most 300E cars is a smooth and durable unit, not too powerful (180hp I think) but it can move the car along as they aren't as heavy as a modern car. The engines can also take a lot of mileage if maintained, but they do seem to like value adjustments or work at maybe 250K miles, even with proper maintenance. It was replaced by a DOHC I6 for a couple years that bumped up the power a bit, but was still durable. There was also a 2.8l 300E that developed less power. Powertrains on these cars are solid, electrical glitches and HVAC issues are the main problem areas, I think. I wouldn't call them unreliable, they just need more TLC than a Corolla. If that is ignored, the cars will fail.
If I was to choose a V8 car it would be a 500E, and those still cost...however a I6 car should be just fine for most people.
The Jag isn't huge, so one can see how tiny a Mini really is.
For large families
As odd as it gets
Sharp Z
The little wide car
Wow
Beast
Homely
Low miles R
Uh-oh, someone restored a fintail...burning the money would be more efficient, but I like those tires
"rare and beautiful"
This is cool
442 of a different era
The 73 Electra is great.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I had entertained the idea of trying to find one really nice R-body and just retiring the two that I have. Only problem with one like this though, is that it's in good enough shape that I'd be afraid to drive it for fear of messing it up. And that interior won't stay in that condition for very long if it started getting used! Heck, I can see a bit of deterioration on my 5th Ave's interior in the time I've had it. I bought it in October 2001, and I think I've only put about 7200 miles on it. Start slamming doors and such, and it won't be long before trim pieces start popping off, cracking, etc.
At least with the two I have now, I'm not afraid to drive them, and I wouldn't cry (too much) if something ended up happening to them.
That '77 Cutlass is a nice looking car, but there should have been a law that you couldn't put 4-4-2 badging on something that wussy! I could see if it was a 403, but c'mon...a 260?
That 1976 Olds Ninety-Eight is a bloated, disgusting wretch of a car that never should have been built in the first place. I don't know why anybody would want something like that. Oh, who am I kidding? I LOVE it!
The '73 Electra is nice too. Too bad it's kind of a poopy color.
That fintail is gorgeous...even if the seller probably took a bigger financial hit than my retirement porfolio did this year.
There was a 160 hp 350, which I guess was a 2-bbl. It was offered only in the Delta 88, with the 170 hp version being optional.
The 260 only had 110 hp back in those early years, and had to have been a dog. CR tested a 1977 Cutlass sedan with the 260, and I want to say it took 21 seconds to do 0-60! In that test, they had a newly downsized Caprice with a 305, an LTD II with a 302, and a Monaco or Fury with a 318, and I think they all made 0-60 in about 12.5-13 seconds. I always suspected they picked the 260 for the Cutlass on purpose to make it look bad. A 350 Cutlass probably would have blown all those other cars away. And CR was really pulling for the Caprice.
I can remember the brochure. The Cutlass I bought was the 1st one on the cover, tan over metallic brown. I wonder if I still have the sales brochures packed in a box along with my AMC pacer sales brochures...
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
'64 Dodge Dart wagon? I thought that was pretty cool.... but, at $28K it hasn't met the reserve? :surprise:
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
The reason I'm asking these questions is that, if you subscribe to the notion that to reduce the probability of high cost-of-ownership one should avoid buying new cars and cars that are very old, then the W210 comes closer to the sweet spot than the W124. In fact, maybe all but the newest W210s may be too old to avoid the expenses associated more with age than mileage.
If one can afford it, do first and second year (2003? or 2004) W211s tend to be more reliable than, say, 2001 and 2002 W210s?
"1998 E300 Turbo Diesel. 45,000 miles, mint condition, garage kept. Smoke silver. Parchment leather. CD Changer, Mobile Phone, Rain Sensor, ESP, Headlamp Wiper/Washer, Xenon Headlamps, Michelin tires, glass sunroof, Bose Premium Music System. 3.0 Liter 24 Valve 6 Cylinder Turbo Diesel Fuel Injection. 34 Highway 26 City. One family ownership. Currently have a 2008 E320 Bluetec Diesel. Have the 1998 window sticker and can pdf this document. An absolutely fabulous car and the low mileage is your gain. All service performed by Mercedes of Fredericksburg, Virginia currently Central Euromotors. Same Mercedes mechanic performed all work and shop forman. Please email if interested."
I know certain post-W123 diesels are problematic, but I forgot just which ones.
I think you could only get a manual tranny in a 442 those years if you had the 260.
I would recommend a late W210 over an early W211. Although they have both lost a lot of value, the W210 will still be significantly cheaper even if only a year older, and it is no less reliable.
I own a W210, an E55 from the last few months of W210 production. It's well put together, the upgraded interior is very nice, and of course the tuned V8 is fun.
That diesel you mention sounds like an exceptional car - good colors and options, and the history sounds ideal . The diesels and AMG cars tend to have less issues, in my experience anyway. The diesel engines have less electrical issues I think, and back then the AMG cars were still assembled at a seperate facility.
As for the Peugeot truck, the guy has other cool rides on his site that he ledns out for films and tv, but not for sale. Check them out .
and the rat rod is cool too. I like rat rods, but that one is too much finished for my tastes. I'd like one with flat black paint, or rusty colored metal, unpainted.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
And hpmctorque - if you buy one of those cars and it turns out to be a headache, don't look at me! :P ...of course, if it turns out to be awesome, I'll be more than happy to take credit.
I know full well that with used cars you win some and you lose some. I know your statements were tongue-in-cheek, at least somewhat, but, again, the info you provided hit the bulls eye, in terms of what I wanted to know. I have confidence in your opinions, and Shifty's. If I bought one and it was disappointing, well, hey, that risk is factored into the depreciation.
My situation is such that I don't NEED another car right now, but if I came across a really nice, well maintained E300 I'd consider it. I prefer to buy one owner cars from private parties who've kept maintenance records. That limits the number of offerings, but it gives me greater confidence about knowing what I'm buying. Dealers throw away all records, including the owners manual, for liability reasons, I guess. If I were in a hurry, I'd check out the dealers, but I'm not. Cars with above average mileage don't scare me, if I have the sense that they've been well maintained and driven with reasonable care.
I checked Craigslist today but there weren't any E300s in my area that I'd seriously consider.
I think the modern cars are becoming a bit overburdened with features too. The W210 is like a W124 compared to the current W211. MB purists will say this is not what MB is supposed to be about, oftentimes pointless technology. The advent of Lexus scared MB into this new role, IMO.
Liked the Peugeot ambulance, an ugly old bus - although not as famous or desirable as it's main rival, the Citroen H, which was a corrugated shed on wheels. You still see those even over here, and they were never sold in UK when new,,,
The Pacer always amuses me. When someone tried to sell that here in the mid seventies, they made the mistake of trying to appeal as a sort of hi-tech car for people who wanted something different - they converted to RHD by some sort of chain arrangement behind the dashboard, I think, so the steering column stayed in the same place, as a sort of stump, and the driver on the passenger side had a wheel with no feel whatsoever... Also the passenger door on the original car was wider to allow safe access for people from the rear seat onto the pavement - but here, of course, that was on the driver's side. No wonder they never sold any - the only ones I can ever recall seeing were LHD, and they would have been rarities even when new.
You do see a lot of inaccurate stuff on TV etc, with cars out of period, on our domestic productions, let alone filmed overseas - yet it's not as bad as with aircraft.
How often do they show an airliner taking off, it's got two engines, and yet suddenly you get a stock shot underneath the fuselage of a 747, with all the wheels folding, and then when it lands again somewhere else, its a completely different aircraft....
Last Sunday I went to an American car show, north of London, which was great - loads of old sedans from the chrome and fins era, at least fifty pre-war ones, and even the only pre-war Jensen to use a Lincoln V-12 engine... There were several prewar Lincoln Zephyrs, and although there were more Cadillacs say than Plymouths, it was a pretty good show, because there was a wide range of models represented - I can't recall seeing more American cars in one place over here...First time I've ever seen an Avanti II, and there were a smattering of cars from France as well as about eight 50's Buicks from Holland and Belgium, who had come over together... I took loads of pictures, and will eventually try to download a few.
Going home, I also noticed how the cruising speed of these leviathans seems to be about 50/55 mph, probably at least in part to conserve fuel..
To me, that 1976 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight is rare and beautiful.
Holy smoke, andre1969! That R-Body is just called out to you! That's got to be one of the nicest R-bodies out there!
It may be calling, but I'm not answering the phone! :shades: Tempting car, even with its shortcomings. I mean, I could replace the power window myself. I guess a new headliner might run $300-400, tops? And I don't think the heater cores are too terribly hard to get to on these cars.
I think if I had one in that kind of shape though, I'd obsess over it too much, and stress out every time it got nicked or scratched, or a piece of interior trim fell off. Plus, I think I'm just getting tired of that color. I mean, I've had my 5th Ave for almost 7 years now. My '79 Newport and '69 Dart were both beige, too. And my '67 Catalina is a pale, creamy yellow, not too radically different in hue.
What I really should have done was bought that midnight blue one we saw at the Mopar show back in 2006. It was an '80, with the weaker 120 hp 318-2bbl (versus the mighty
What I'd really like to do is find a nicely kept R-body in a 2-tone, either light green over dark green, or light blue over dark blue. Here's the second page for the blue spread.
I dunno if the mechanism is designed any different from the body-colored flip-down headlight covers on my two New Yorkers.
Ironically, the day after I bought my '79 5th Ave, a '79 St. Regis in that same 2-tone green color scheme showed up for sale right around the corner from my condo. The body was in good shape except for a big dent in the passenger side front door. It wasn't as well-equipped as the 5th Ave...crank windows, 318-2bbl, cloth interior (which I actually prefer). But the seller only wanted $500 for it. If I had the place to keep it, and the money to waste, I would have bought it. And if I had seen it before I bought my 5th Ave, I would've gotten it instead.
You need to start an R-body conservatory :P
You need to start an R-body conservatory
Yeah, I'm sure the neighbors would just LOVE that! :surprise:
Same here, seems like the 'resto-rod' craze really got people thinking a '68 whatever looks good in 22" wheels. Chip Foose seems like a talented guy, but I just don't go for his wheels.
I think there were 7 or 8 V12 Lincolns including the Jensen at that show, but some of those must have come in later....
Yes, and imagine how bad a car rides where not effort was made to handle those tires? Folks over here love to put them on Suburbans, Tahoe, Escalades - must ride like a dump truck (edit - 'tipper lorry', right?)!
I picture a "normal" tire, say a 75 or 70 series having some give as it scrapes over high and low spots allowing it to maintain grip; I picture the narrow sidewall wheel acting more like hard plastic as the pavement under goes up down and sideways, and not maintaining contact with the road.
Are there any studies?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I am sure driving something like a Zephyr or Airflow in 1937 Europe was even more of a shock to the passerby than in NA, too. Must have been an interesting time.