By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
With wheels that huge, that car wouldn't survive a week in the mean streets of Manhattan (not even counting the likelihood of theft or a rollover around a corner or entrance ramp).
that's probably part of it, but I wonder if those heavy rims might actually exacerbate the twisting forces exerted on the car, such as when you hit a bump or pothole or something with just one side of the car?
This survived better than most
I wouldn't pay 12 cents for this
This is actually worth less than scrap value
Granny had an aerodynamic looking car
On the Continental, again we don't know the mileage on the car, just the replacement motor, so you know it has to be miled up. Also, if it needs an oil change, why not just do it before putting it up for sale. Makes me wonder about the maintenance, or, rather, the lack of it. Okay, I can understand why the seller might choose to not fix the head liner, but the oil? Come on!
Regarding the Austin Marina, it's what you don't see - the dismal reliability - that, among other things, explains the demise of the British car industry. The design of that car is about average for the period, but the execution is below average, even for that sorry period. I sure hope we won't say similar things about our domestic manufacturers one day. That would really be sad.
Luckily the big 2.5 haven't got quite as bad as BL...and I don't think they will. But today I think perception will mean more than reality.
Oh yeah, no ebay dog pound tomorrow as I'll be away for most of the day. Should return next week at its regularly scheduled time.
Fun track car
Hmm... 5 bids, only up to $780...could be fun, but no heat/a-c. Much nicer than previous.
Super Scirocco
How about 500hp? Yours for $15,500!
Show pickup
Imagine this has a high reserve. Those were pretty tight inside, IIRC.
edit - no gen1 GTIs to be found
"miles: 029487 (amazingly ORIGINAL MILES!!) "
For some reason, my eye passed right over it. Since it was a dealer, I guess the 029487 just registered with me as a stock number or something.
I think of the downsized Big Three cars of that generation, the Fords are my least favorite. There's just something that's too upright and boxy about them. Even in 2-door form, that thing seems more like a sedan than a coupe to me. I also don't find them to be hugely roomy inside, either. GM's B/C and Mopar's R-bodies feel like they have more legroom to me, and the Fords just seemed to have huge transmission humps. I mean, they're roomy enough to be adequate, but I'd just say they feel the tightest of the three.
On the plus side, for the most part, Ford built them pretty well back then. My 1985 Consumer Guide rates the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis it tested very high for fit and finish, paint quality, etc. Actually as good as the best of the Japanese and European cars that were in that issue, which I find a bit surprising.
One of the boys had a Scirocco that he was so proud of, though it was a typical VW of the era, ie unreliable. He pulls up in the drive one day and calls out, I think my car is on fire. Very calm, considering the beast was indeed on fire.
Turned out Bosch had used a 20A fuse in a circuit whose wiring was only good for about 10-12 amps. The wiring harness protected the fuse. :lemon:
The VW pickup truck is interesting--so much good stuff and yet the basics of the car have been neglected. The locks don't work, there is no instrument panel life whatsoever, body has a dent, CV boots are torn, etc. How can you spend so much on an engine and then drive the truck with no instrument panel activity whatsoever?
Weird :confuse:
I learned more about that when I tried to sell the Scirocco - went to a used car lot. First thing he does, pops the hood, sees flaking paint around the strut tower bolts on the side I hit. "No sale, that thing's been hit." :sick:
Luckily, no, never bent one, and in Dallas, no rust.
My 1981 Consumer Guide says nice things about Ford assembly quality too.
Some of that may be the 'catalog/bolt on' mentality: "There were a bunch of 'neat' things in the catalog, bolted them on, but don't both me with messy stuff like maintenance."
I also wanted to ask you a Mopar-related question of which I have limited knowledge about- what do you know about the early '90s FWD Fifth Avenues and Imperials? I've got a Mopar-loving friend who is interested in purchasing one for his fleet, although it doesn't matter if it's a 5th Ave or Imperial. He just likes the cars because they're smooth-riding and represent the last of the 'stretched' K-car derivatives. I myself am fearful of getting one because of the infamous 4-speed Ultradrive transmission, the bad points of which you know about.
Summer car
Detail it and flip it on ebay
Good for calendar-timed speed runs
"invest"
The '68 Mercury convert might be a decent deal if it's clean. Might even be a little bit 'o profit in the car.
73 Diesel Benz -- seems fair enough. And diesel is only $5.15 a gallon where I live.
73 Hurst Olds -- might be a good deal if he hasn't screwed it up too much.
to cut out the holes, i went through seven layers of material!
They're kind of a nifty feature, but I just don't find them comfortable. And even though my '76 LeMans is essentially the same car underneath as this Cutlass, mine had a power bench seat that has a wide range of motion. It can adjust into some pretty obscene positions. That's probably the only reason that I'm so comfortable in it, at a mere 6'3". With the nonpower bench seat they're not as comfy but still adequate for me, but I just don't find those swivel buckets comfortable at all. It seems like they don't slide back as far as the bench, but even worse, the bottom cushion seems shorter. And they just seem more thinly padded.
Well, there was a young guy who had stopped by a couple months ago, but I think my honesty about the car scared him off. I never heard back from him.
As for those 5th Aves and Imperials, I don't know much, but in general with that Ultradrive transmission, they started off crappy from year one, but got better (or at least less crappy) with every passing year. So my advice would be, if your friend is searching one out, to get the newest one possible. I think 1993 was the last year for those things?
I think the transmission was the only really bad area on those cars. The 3.3 and 3.8 V-6 engines were pretty much bulletproof, and fairly torquey. I'd say avoid the Mitsubishi 3.0, but I think it was only offered in the cheaper Dynasty and New Yorker. The 5th Ave/Imperial probably stayed with the 3.3/3.8.
I've also heard that with the transmissions, if you use Type +4, which is also called 9196 I think, instead of Type +3, or 7176, the transmissions tend to work better. Supposedly one major problem was that the owners manuals had a misprint calling for the wrong fluid, and that would make them shift rougher, and could cause premature failure.
All in all, those things aren't bad cars. They're comfortable, cushy, and the backseat legroom is limousine-like. I think I prefer the 5th Ave to the Imperial...I just don't care for the pretentiousness of the Imperial's cowcatcher grille, and I like the vertical taillights better than the horizontal theme on the Imperial.
what the hell does "KITSAP" mean on that corvair listing?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Anyone who really knows Olds will tell you the last of the super Olds was the 1970 W30 442. They didn't make many, and a good one nowadays is going to run serious money.
"The Oldsmobile Cutlass (including the Hurst/Olds and 442) changed body styles to the "Colonnade" body style, which was used until 1977. The Hurst Olds was based on the semi-fastback Cutlass S coupe and featured an interior with swiveling Strato bucket seats separated by a console with Hurst Dual-Gate shifter for the Turbo Hydra-matic transmission. The sole engine offering was a 455 cubic-inch Rocket V8 with four-barrel carburetor and dual exhausts rated at 250 horsepower. The '73 model was the first Hurst Olds to be offered in two color schemes-black/gold or white/gold."
The 1970 W30 442 put out a "published" 385HP, but every one that was dyno'ed was around 425HP. Published torque was 500ftlbs, but were actually well above that. I got to drive a brand new '70 W30, and can tell you first hand that it was an unforgetable experience. You could never ever punch that monster from a standing start. It would just sit there melting the tires off the rims. I don't think I remembered to breathe until it hit third gear.
Oh, the sound that baby made at full throttle ... :shades:
It depends on what work it needs Crying shame that the original engine is long gone
Too much money for a timebomb
Nice old Vette
Another Vette What would the 454 have been rated at in 1974
Not a bad driver By 76, were these cars still fun?
I wonder if many people complained about the lack of a '454 in later years? In '75 you could get a Chevelle, Monte Carlo, or full-size Chevy with a 235 hp 454, and in its last year for cars, 1976, it had 225. That last year it was just offered in the big cars though.
69 Vette- I always associate that body style with someone who can't quite pay his rent or who owns a big violent dog. Just me.
1991 M5 -- well it does look like a nice car, but gee, all those miles. I guess a full check up and service records would decide if it's worth it or not. Mostly it's tough to find someone to work on old Ms. Most indy shops don't seem to like 'em.
What I would give up:
1) '98 BMW 323iC convertible, 5 speed, black exterior and top with tan leather.
78K miles, overall in very good, almost excellent shape.
2) '86 Porsche 944, 5 speed red exterior with black leather.
142K miles, very good mechanically, a/c dead, slightly below average cosmetically.
What I would get:
'98 Porsche Boxster, 5 speed, silver exterior with red leather.
97K miles, overall I would say average or slightly above conditon.
The guy wants to trade straight up and will not add any $.
Your opinions solicited.
For me, I've always liked to have a 944 like yours, and have liked my BILs 323iC convert, so I'd take door A. But if you've had enough time with them, door B might be interesting. I'd just want to make sure the Boxster (not an S, right?) has enough ooph for you.
I don't have another 4 seater available right now and I have to have one that will hold one booster seat and one car seat. If I made this trade, I would be lucky to get the wife to agree to spending another $5K cash on a second car.
I will own a Boxster at some point. With Boxsters I've noticed that paying a little more gets you a much nicer car. 97/98s seem to be overpriced for what you get as compared to an '00 S.
did you drive the Boxster? Those '98 base models are borderline, IMHO. Meaning borderline fun.
Heck, if you are talking about doing this AND spending $5k on a 2nd car, why not just take these 2 and the $5k and get one better car overall? Like... I dunno .... M3?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
$15K would get a high mileage RX-8, a lower mileage E36 M3, maybe a decent 330 coupe. Not sure what else would be really fun to drive and have four seats.
In all honesty, I drove my neighbor's '97 Boxster and his '99 Miata and I think the Miata was probably more fun.