Classic? Collectible? Special Interest? Just Old?

Mr_Shiftright · December 2000

I think the leaded fuel issue is a non-issue really, as valve deterioration from unlead fuel in a "leaded" engine only occurs with hard use (towing, racing, long trips at very high speed, etc.). Given what you plan to do with the car, I wouldn't even worry about it.

Regarding what to look for in a Cadillac of this vintage that has been idle for a year, I would definitely get the car started and thoroughly check all the complex gadgetry...power windows, seats, and especially the heat/a-c control systems. Be quite certain that all this gimmickery works, because if it doesn't you'll have to do some major excavation to get at it. I'd say this is the most important thing to check (and feel around under the heater to see if the heater core has rotted out after all these years....another tough job). Other than that, the cars are fairly sturdy, and presuming it's had decent maintenance, all you need do is the usual checks that one would perform on any car of this vintage. I'd certainly give it a thorough mechanical inspection on a hoist (or lift or whatever you call it over there!).

Last of all, you're quite correct--the cars do not have much collector value and probably never will, especially the 4-doors. But as you say, it's a lot of car for the money, and if you can afford the petrol (ouch!), have fun and be happy!

northstart · December 2000

Thank for the info, Im now in the process of negotiating the price and luckily, for me that is, the owner knows little about the American car scene over here, and therefore might be somewhat flexible when cash is waved in his direction.

Although from first inspection, I know the car will require some work, as you pointed out, the final decision will made once I have had a chance to fire it up and test the engine and transmission, and accessories as Cadillac parts still carry quite a hefty price tag over here when compared to Ford, Chrysler or Chevy components, which ironically can be cheaper than many European Japanese cars!

Hopefully, the car will be as good as my first impression suggested, and the fact that it is a four door was one of the key attractions. Over the last few years Old American cars have become very popular for weddings and special occasions, I know several people that absorb the running costs of their cars in this way, and the market is still growing. Although, its not my intention to put the car into full time service, just the occasional outing to pay the bills.

Again, many thanks, and yes we call it a hoist.

rea98d · December 2000

One weak area on the Caddilac's body is the rubber between the chrome taillight housing and the rear fender. It's also used a few other places in the body, and tends to dry rot, and looks bad. Also having the innards of the taillights exposed to the elements isn't the best thing in the world for them either.

lokki · December 2000

Gosh, it's been so long since I looked at a 70's car, but new cars tend to have a build date on a panel stamped on somewhere on the inside of the driver's door. Another possibility is if you can get the VIN (Vehicle Identification Number) you could run it through the CARFAX system, or we might be able to find a Caddy enthusiast who can decode it for you.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2000

If you post the VIN # for that Caddy, I think I can do some of the deocding for you...in fact, copy numbers from whatever plates you see...we may be able to find body color, etc. as well.

Shifty the Host

77cutlass · January 2001

I have a 1977 Olds Cutlass S, mine in particular isn't in great condition (185,000 miles, 307V-8, TH350 trans, a little rust) but I was wondering if I could get input from some on if they would classify this as a collector car, and if they project it going up in value. Thanks

Mr_Shiftright · January 2001

What is the body style? 2 dr. 4 dr. or convertible?

77cutlass · January 2001

The body style is two door hardtop

Mr_Shiftright · January 2001

Well, most 70s cars have a hard time getting much respect from collectors. except perhaps a few early 70s "muscle cars". By the late 70s, there just wasn't much that was very special about most American cars, and as a consequence most collectors aren't very excited about them today.

I'd say that your car is just a good old used car and has little chance of any serious appreciation, aside from your own appreciation of a job well done.

netranger4 · January 2001

My definition of Classic, etc is as follows.
Classic: 1937 Packard V12 with Brunn Limousine
Body. 1934-36 Duesenberg Boattail Roadster.
Special Interest: 1936 Hupmobile 8 4dr Touring Sedan. 1927 Nash Ajax 6 Rumble Seat Roadster
Collectible: 1947 Cadillac Sedanette. 1940 LaSalle Opera Coupe.
Antique: 1912 Oldsmobile Limited Touring Car. 1915 Winton Doctors Coupe. 1909 Royal Tourist Touring Car.

b

Mr_Shiftright · January 2001

Yeah, you got the right idea......."classic" refers to very very special cars, and rarely if ever to mass produced cars, , but "collectible" or "special interest" is very much open to argument.

joeolds · January 2001

Suggest you check out www.cutlasscoupes.com This is web site for an Olds Club of America chapter dedicated to preservation of 73-77 cutlass, 442, and Hurst Olds.

dweezil · January 2001

I think that the focus of this subject is indicative of what nearly ruined the hobby in the late 80's with baby bummer speculators bidding on and running up the prices of any and every vehicle more than 30 years old.No flames please, but consigning an old car to the junk pile because it has no "value"certainly lowers the chances of finding good used parts for the "more desirable" 2 doors and convertibles.
Getting into the old car hobby is the wrong thing to do if you are planning on building a retirement nest egg.Either do it because you love the car and want to keep it on the road or jsut buy something late model that you're interested in and trade it off when you're tired of it.
My own "old" car is a 63 Plymouth Valiant Signet 2dr. hardtop with 3 speed manual trans.and no power assists, a very basic heater radio and whitewalls car.Is it "valuable"? Probably not for the money I have put into it over 20 years of ownership.Do I care? No.For me it's a repository of memories of evry one I have ever cared about, from my parents who found it for me in Arizona to friends who have worked on it, pushed it, heard me curse it out, ridden in it and have had good and bad times in it.Edith Massey, one of John Waters early "superstars" rode in it. I cannot put a monetary value on that and won't.
I had it out last Sunday and came upon a stretch of road that looked like California in the 60's, the weather was perfect, right out of an old car ad and suddenly I was with my family in our 63 Dart wagon on vacation in California on a vacation road trip and transported completely back in time to the 60's. THAT is the "value" of an old car, whatever it might be, from 4 door to station wagon.
I went to a Mustang meet about a year ago and the most interesting car there was a little red 64&1/2 200 cubic inch 6 cylinder that had been restored to it's original condition, right down to the stickers under the hood.For me it was the most interesting car there. It's easy to go after the big blocks and V8s,the muscle models, everyone does that, especially if you don't trust your own interests.At a European car meet I saw cars I would not normally have seen [because they were of no "value"]like tiny Fiats and Citroen 2CVs, Minis Isettas and bizarre old Rovers.
At one Mopar meet I saw a full size 61 Plymouth 4 door with 225 Salnt Six and 3 speed manual for 1900.00.I wish I had had the money.What a perfectly ordinary [and uncommon] vehicle. To me definitely "valuable".
Remember;no one thought anything built in the 60's would be worth any money or interest 35 years ago and surprise, look at what we desire today.The same will happen with the next generation of car nuts who will want to preserve the cars THEY grew up with.
Take it all with a pound of salt. I STILL wish I could find a 71 Plymouth Cricket as a friend for my 63 Valiant!!!!!!

Mr_Shiftright · January 2001

Thanks for your post.

The topic at hand is in fact about the "market", that is, the actual money value of certain old cars. It's not about worthiness or dependability, any more than the artwork you see in a gallery. Many cars have gone beyond being cars, they are works or art or cultural icons.

But I think the money value of a car does in fact reflect that people find the car special and distinctive. It shouldn't bother you that some folks pursue exotic or over restored cars, as this won't affect the value of sturdy old cars like your Valiant.

I dont' believe it is true that speculators are in charge of the collector car market. Today's collectors are very knowledgable, and most speculators get burned these days. So justice has been done to them already, I think, when the bottom fell out of the collector car market in 1990.

And lastly, going to the "scrape yard" is a great way to store old parts for other people still driving certain old cars. The worst offenders are those people who just hold onto an old car and let it rot in the back forty until it is worthless. I can't tell you how many cars are ruined by people who claim to "love them".

dweezil · January 2001

But;your question that began the discussion was not about worth or value; but about the definition of"classic", "special interest" etc.I guess I am naive,then,in thinking that a car in each of those categories cannot be separated from it's worth.
It doesn't bother me that people pursue the exotic and popular cars. Those that were popular when they were new are generally the ones being restored and "collected" today.From what I was getting in reading the posts was that the ordinary or day to day stuff of the 50's and 60's was not worth even being interested in or preserving.
I remember during that time of speculation a great many sought out those lesser cars as a way of entering the old car hobby inexpensively and to the pleasure of a lot of us who never realized it had been 20 years since a 62 Rambler Classic had been seen, much less spied in a pristine incarnation.
My Father is correct; I DO see cars as something more than transportation;they are almost living things to me which I guess is why I could never be an automobile appraiser.
What I seemed to be seeing,though,was the exact opposite of what I've been observing at the car shows and in publications like "Special Interest Autos","Collectible Automobile" and Britain's "Practical Classics" and I would find it a negative thing to consign what the sophisticated would call ordinary to the scrap heap.There are many 4doors,station wagons,2dr.sedans that have been brought back to life and featured in these magazines;with a guise to valueas well. I was surprised to see a 1970 Chrysler Newport 2 door hardtop on a lot this afternoon in original,but weathered condition for 1395.00. A great place for someone to start as a good many of the mechanicals are readily available and the body was straight.
I guess it is consistent with my personality to have an interest in the off-beat and that puts me in a curious position when coming up with a definition; I think CCA's standards are limited as re: the definition of "classic" and the "milestone" status a little more useful."Special Interest" really has no definition which is pretty much a catch all for all us odd balls out here who can find a 78 Pontiac Sunbird coupe interesting.
In addition;I have always been at odds with my demographic co-hort- the baby boomers as regards money/value/worth;when they zig,I zag as I find most of their "beliefs" repulsive.No offense to anyone out there, but sometimes I think their "value"system is waaaay off. Thx for taking the time to respond Mr. Shiftright,I'm just one more out there muddying the waters.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2001

Could be, could be, things are never perfectly clear....one could make the same arguments about art....why in the world is Jackson Pollack's paint splashes worth millions of dollars?
Ultimately because people think they have this "merit", that there is something SPECIAL about those paint splotches.

Why is a 1957 Chevy convertible worth saving and a '62 Rambler Classic not worth saving?
And why is one a "collector car" and the other not?

I suppose we need these definitions to differentiate our sense of quality and achievement; otherwise, baseball player A with 50 homers and 125 rbi's is as good as player B with 100 strikeouts and 2 rbi's because...because I SAY SO, that's why!

That really doesn't cut it with me, sorry. A '62 Rambler is a sorry thing...it is not attractive to most people, it is an engineering disgrace, and it is incompetent in braking performance, styling, durability, you name it. As a car, it isn't much. Sure, if it's your baby, fine. But don't point at it and say "collector car" and then point at a Ferrari GTO and say "collector car". Say what? Is one really the same as the other? What happens to the very meaning of the word then?

But like you imply, there are people who keep moth-eaten horses and dogs, out of compassion, and I think that's great. Just don't go around bragging that they are thoroughbreds or great sled dogs or terrific seeing eye dogs when in fact they can barely stagger around the block.

All I''m proposing with these definitions is to "get real" in terms of RELATIVE value and worth and merit.

Ultimately we're all dead and the universe will explode, and none of this will matter and in fact we are all making this stuff up out of our mental concepts....I'd agree...but for now, while there are old cars around and we are alive to look at them and enjoy them, I'd prefer to recognize and acknowledge that some cars are much more lovely and interesting creations than others, and more worthy of restoration, collection and preservation.

Basically my argument is that if no one is willing to pay more than $1,350 for a "classic" car, then the majority of car lovers obviously dont' think much of it....and their "vote" must be taken into account as a very credible rendering of what appeals to people.

if people can't see any difference between a Ferrari GTO and a '62 Rambler, then they need to get educated, just like in art or music or whatever.

dweezil · January 2001

any of that.People save string;acrylic grapes etc. I'd save them all!!! Some have more value than others and as you say a 62 Rambler is not a classic or collectible; but it is for that small group that has a "thing" for them and it is just an old car.I feel as if I have insulted you and I didn't intend that.I have NO quarrel with the best being preserved. People have been discussing the same thing since I was old enough to read.Robert Gottleib's old columns in Motor Trend in the 50's [I got the back issues in the 70's for 25c a piece]about classic versus antique and what was just old ran well into the 60's as did Ralph Stein's column on classic cars. Neither of them felt as if anything built so recently as the 50's was worth preserving;and they were even closer to the era of the true CCA defined era of classics than we are now.That would have narrowed the list of worthy cars considerably had that been the only allowable definition of admission into the hobby.
What I meant about the Chrysler was that if you are a Mopar fanatic and want an interesting daily driver it would be a great base on which to cut your teeth in the clubs, with parts and support easily accessed.The people and cars you encounter in that way are a valuable experience and probably makes it easier for younger people to get involved. It still does not make it any more than an old car as is my Valiant,but hopefully skills that are learned in the experimentation with that less valuable vehicle are ones that will be used on one more popular.
I agree with you about Pollack and I don't care much for what passes for "art" these days either.

netranger4 · January 2001

Chancing on an article in Special Interest Autos quite a few years back, there was an article on a single lady in San Francisco who drove a '34 Plymouth PD Rumbleseat Roadster for almost 30 years. It illustrated a change in values held by different generations. 1934 was a Depression year and car companies had to make the cars better than they needed to be or face ruin. This lady drove it until she no longer felt comfortable driving and sold the car to an associate. What happened to this type of thinking.

netranger4 · January 2001

Speaking personally, I purchased a new 1975 Jaguar XJ6L in 1975 and drove it as my primary car while in California. After my transfer back East, the car went into fair weather service until 1998. For a car with a terrible reputation, it covered 178,000 miles in 23 years. The man who bought it before I retired in '98 drove it to Oregon and back with nary a problem. Things that went bad or wore out were replaced and according to my records a total of $7,450.00 was spent in 23 yrs to keep the car in top shape.

speedshift · January 2001

but maybe what did in long-term ownership is leasing or, before that, EZ payments. A new car every three years! Life is good!

We're a little different from the Depression generation, for better of worse. My father grew up then and he's always bought beaters and drove them for years. In my younger days I put my own twist on that: I always bought beaters and drove them for months. Now I need something that's under warranty.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2001

You know, I do occasionally hear good reports on these early Jag XJ6s, but I must tell you that when I actually get in and drive one of these "no problem" cars, I find about 65 things wrong with it that the current owner is either tolerating or is oblivious to. Of course, if it gets down the road, it can't be all bad, I won't argue with that. My buddy has one and it, too, is a high mileage car that is used almost daily, but you know, rain leaks in, the driveshaft is thumping, half the windows don't work, the trunk leaks, sometimes it takes forever to start, the paint is cracking, it's leaking a bit of every fluid, it has no real power anymore and it eats fan belts and you don't want to climb a big hill in summertime. But he loves it and really things it has "no real problems".

I could destroy this car in one hour of my driving.

Verdict? Jag xj6 is just "an old car"....a pretty one with a nice ride, but not collectible by any stretch. Maybe someday far away, who knows? The 60s Mark II series 4-doors are collectible, but of course the stickshift cars with wire wheels are the ones people are paying big money for, not the automatics. Also, the Mark II is not very common.

netranger4 · January 2001

You are right on one thing, the things that did go wrong with my car were generally fiddly little annoyances. But when I sold it the only thing not working correctly was the Smith's clock. That was another Lucas product of course. Outside of normal wear/tear items, the manifold gaskets, rear axle seal, electrical faults were the things that were annoying but never fatal. At that mileage the car still had 60# oil pressure at idle and the carburetors still had the original needles. The trick is to keep the reservoirs filled with oil. Always used Castrol oil/fluids per the owners manual. Maybe it was just luck and the tea hadn't gone cold that day.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2001

The Jaguar engines are the best thing about the car for sure! This is why is always amuses me that people put Chevy V8s in these cars, at great expense, and basically throw the best part of the car away in the process! And then all the problem accessories get re-attached to the Chevy engine, and you have the same nitpicking problems, but now with a car that is noisier and harsher than the original ever was---thereby destroying the second nice thing about an XJ6, the smooth and quiet ride. And it only cost you $5,000 to make the car worth $2,500....oh, well...

wilcox · January 2001

So please be patient with me.

The reason I'm writing this is because of an article I read about the Pontiac Aztek. It said that 11,202 units have been sold of this vehicle between August and December. The anticipated annual sales forecast was targeted at 75,000 units!

GM says that they quickly must do something in the short term about the styling. Something that will change the overall perception of the styling.

If "everybody" is aware of the Aztek and discusses it at length (even if it is called making fun of it), then it may remain in everyone's memory for years and years to come.

Could it begin to qualify as a classic in infancy?

They are going to change the grill, front and rear facias and other non-sheet exterior element, such as clading. all this in a "second year" freshening. Would buying a deeply discounted originally styled one several years from now (in excellent condition, of course) make sense?? If you had a place like a ole barn or chicken house to store it in and keep it up?

lokki · January 2001

likes to wear polyester leisure suits and funny hats from the 20's to parties?

I think that there is always a 'smile factor' that makes cars like this or the Edsel: fun, but I don't think that the car would ever get back to being worth what you initially paid for it, factoring for inflation. Additionally, cars can't just be put in a barn and forgotten; you'll have maintenance and repair costs when you pull it out, adding to your costs.

You'd do much better to put the same amount of money in the bank and accept the interest in 20 years.

Of course, if you got one for absolutely free, and already own a barn, 4 cement blocks and a tarp, well.....

wilcox · January 2001

Although I do wear some hats and caps that some folks might comment about.

Putting money into the bank is one of my favorite pastimes. But there's more to life than that. Sometimes we really have to do something (and not worry about the returns).

I guess a Cadillac Allante would be a better hobby for me to think about. But they were pretty ugly(to most people) when they came out.

lokki · January 2001

I agree that life should be fun and that there's a lot more to enjoying living than putting money in the bank. I apologize; I didn't mean to offend.

I always liked the Allante quite a lot. I was disappointed when Caddy quit making them. I always thought it was another example of GM quitting on a great car just as they finally got it right.

I see one regularly during my commute, and it looks great.

I think there will be much more of a market for them in 20 years.

AND they follow Señor Shiftright's basic rules of collectibility:

Prestigious name; big engine; convertible; limited production; popular (with those who could afford them) when new....

Mr_Shiftright · January 2001

The Allante really doesn't fit my criteria on one big point....they were not popular when new, and in fact were a complete failure in the marketplace...by the time they got the car reasonably reliable, and gave it some performance with the Northstar, the car was a dead duck with a not so great reputation.

That being said, the later cars with Northstar have the best chance of some collectibility, but I don't expect it will ever be a high dollar car. They have a small following now, and I think it will continue to be small but loyal. I think it is a reasonably atttractive car for a Cadillac especially of that era.

BobbyLama · January 2001

My best friends mother has a 1941 Lincoln V-12, 2-door, maroon in color with red leather interior ( has ALWAYS been garage kept ) coupe with 9800+ original miles on it. It has been in the family since new, and now, since my friend's stepfather has passed away they are looking to part with it. Too much sentimental baggage I would imagine. They are unknowledgeable about the interned or computers and have asked me to find a new home for this very well cared for automobile. I have a number of images I can send to anyone interested. My cell # is 904-993-3266, ask for Bob. Thank you.

isellhondas · February 2001

Sounds like something that would be right up your alley!

Mr_Shiftright · February 2001

I'm not a big heavy car fan myself. Those old Lincolns are nice cars but they are hell to put right, so if the car isn't tip-top, they can be a money pit. The 9800 original miles sounds implausible, but you never know...I'd certainly ask for proof in writing with service records or DMV records...the post reads like a dealer on the sly but I'm just guessing and don't mean to be cruel....if the car's straight, I'd bid it at about $10,000. Wouldn't mind seeing it, though...sounds neat.

mark156 · June 2001

Hi Folks, I'm thinking of getting a 1976 Cadillac Eldorado convertible that has ONLY 18 original miles. It's being advertised in another city so I can't see the car in person. The pic's look fantastic. The owner states the car has been in a climate controlled garage all of it's life. Do you guys think it would be a good purchase as far as being mechanically sound? Since the car has been virtually not used at all, would the mechanical parts be like new? Your opinions (especially from mechanics) will be greatly appreciated and I would like a response pretty fast since I need to make a decision. Thanks again, Mark

badgerpaul · June 2001

A car that's sat unused for the past quarter century is sure to have tried out seals. I would worry about all the mechanicals on this, most things like A/C compressors, etc. need lubrication. The thing that gives this car its value is that it has no mileage on it. If you're buying this car to drive and enjoy, every mile you put on it will destroy that low mileage value.

mark156 · June 2001

Thanks Paul, I appreciate your imput. Mark

Mr_Shiftright · June 2001

Yes, mark, I would agree with Paul. I don't see why you would want such a low mileage version of this car....here's my logic, see if it makes any sense to you.

If you buy this car with such low miles, then the more you drive it, the less it is worth. And if you intend to keep the miles this low, I don't think this car will appreciate much in value, so NOT using is also a waste of money. So if you use it, you lose, and if you don't, you break even.

If you really like this year of Caddy, buy a very clean driver with reasonable miles, and continue to enjoy it by driving it around . I can tell you right out, you are not going to get rich off this car (not saying this was your intention, but if the seller is giving you this line, do not believe it.)

As for damage done by low miles, most of the seals will be rather hard, so there's a good chance of engine leaks and transmission malfunctions. Also you'd need a complete brake safety check and probably an overhaul, just to be safe. Also, tires are no good by now, and battery would have to be new. I'd also check for rotted radiator hoses and belts, and you'd need to flush out the cooling system and the block.

mark156 · June 2001

Thanks Mr. Shiftright. It looks like I have been out bid on the car. My intentions were to just have fun with it and not consider it an investment. I have a '64 RR SC III that has been a pleasure to own and drive so I thought the last of the "big momma's" ('76 convertible) would be a nice compliment to the garage. Having a brand spanking new 25 yr. old car was very tempting. I just needed to know what to expect from a car that was sitting so long. I was hoping that the owner kept the engine component parts "wet" but probably wouldn't have been that lucky.
Thanks again, Mark

Mr_Shiftright · June 2001

Well, I'm glad you are out shopping for what you like, but also glad you have sense to bid a certain number and stick to it. Sometimes when two people want the same car, things get very silly. In fact, auctions thrive on this silliness principle. Personally, I find a car that shows the use and love of the former owner much more attractive than something that looks like the factory just spit it out. It has no character until it is used and appreciated, IMO.

jrosasmc · April 2002

I wish to add some new comments here. My father arrived in this country from Manila, Philippines in early 1973. Just about every car sold here, as you and I know, were hitting some new lows in quality and performance, thanks to primitive anti-smog devices. However, there were some bright spots in '73. The Americans were going downhill fast. The French and Italians had serious problems with their sales arms and cars' quality. The Japanese may have been the most reliable, but the thin sheetmetal sure corroded and rusted quickly.

In your opinion, what makes of cars do you think was the most reliable and best-assembled of the many marques (and there were many) that were available in the States in 1973? To me, Mercedes and Volvo come to mind. Every single Mercedes had superb build quality, and the drivetrains could run for a long time if you knew how to keep up with the maintenance. Volvo also had its legendary run-forever cars as well, and it was also the last hurrah for the aged P1800. Triumphs, Austins and Jensens? No way; the Lucas electrics killed them? Fiats and Maseratis? Built out of low-grade Russian steel? BMW? Rusted like crazy.

Just my $.02 worth. I apologize for the long speech. I think it's worth reading, though, about the thirty years that's gone by.

Mr_Shiftright · April 2002

I don't think the gap between American and foreign cars was so great in 1973 as it was in 1983. While the American cars were just beginning to suffer from rather poorly engineered emission controls and some quality control, the foreign cars of the day had their own sets of maladies. Certainly Volvos of today were much better than the old 240s, which were rugged by plagued with all kinds of weaknesses in design, and a real crudity. Benzes and BMW were much more refined and better assembled than Volvo, but still they had some glaring deficiencies, like worthless A/C and complex automatic transmissions. But Benz build quality was unsurpassed in the world at that time.

Aside from the convertibles and sports cars, not many 70s cars are very collectible today.

speedshift · May 2002

I think this car is flat out gorgeous and it may even qualify as a post-war classic:

http://classiccars.de/cccd/brougham/57story.htm

It even has a few engineering advances although they're along typical American lines: memory seats, self-locking doors, auto starting.

I vividly remember the last time I saw one on the street. Actually it was parked in a parking lot. I can't remember exactly when but maybe it was the early '70s.

Mr_Shiftright · May 2002

It's certainly collectible today--not a "hot one" necessarily, but it has always maintained a steady value and if totally restored and perfect, can even bust the $30K mark.

packv12 · May 2002

I always thought the definition of a collectible car worked off the bigger fool principle. You know, once you are done with the car, you need a bigger fool than yourself to purchase it from you.

I dabble in what I find pleasing, but it is a strange list indeed. I recently sold my 1955 Imperial for a loss, but it is now road worthy and looks pretty sharp. The new owner even lets me tinker on it when the need arises. I guess that there aren't many who can adjust a dual point distributor any more.

Trying to find a definition for the mundane words of Classic, Collectible, S.I. are very difficult. The Imperial was "Collectible" because it was a "Milestone" car; First year of the Exner Styling, first year Imperial was granted Marque status and the only year of the shift lever sprouting out of the dash. It was also "Collectible" because my dad had one, and it's the car I grew up with. I'd favor a 1967 Pontiac Catalina Convertible as a "Collectible", as it's the first car I ever owned, but in fact, it's an old car. (That hurts ;-))

Most post WW-II cars are denied Classic status, but fall into the S.I. and Collectible classification. Most only recognize a car listed on the list as collectible, but wouldn't a '39 Packard 120 four door Convertible Sedan by classic, especially with dual side mounts. Well, yes and no. To me it would be, but to the C.C.C.A. it is not

Bottom line is, buy what you enjoy and enjoy what you buy. Anybody who thinks any of this as an investment should place their money elsewhere. It's more of enjoying the fruits of your labors and being seen as slightly skewed for wasting your money on an old car. By all means, keep the hobby alive, but buy and enjoy what fits your needs and floats you boat.

packv12 · May 2002

Can we ever agree on the terminology for automobile bodies? I see sedan and coupe used interchangably quite often, but in fact, they mean something quite different. I've seen the same for Roadster, Phaeton, Convertible Coupe, Convertible Sedan, and Opera Coupe/Sedan.

My reasoning for this is; I've traveled to look at cars, only to find that they are not what is advertised. A Convertible Coupe is not a two door convertible, but a car that can carry two-three people. A Roadster does not have roll-up windows and has a minimum of weather protection, say it otherwise, and you're misleading the public.

I know that the Big Three changed the terminology in the '50's, but there should be some consistency to it all. A Coupe De Ville is really a two door hardtop Sedan. A "Convertible Coupe" is really a convertible Sedan. People are basing their decisions on how many doors the cars have, but that's wrong.

Coupe: Enclosed seating capacity for two or three. (One bench seat, but some may have a rumble seat.)

Sedan: Seating capacity for five or six. (Front and rear seat.)

Roadster: Minimum of weather protection, usually has side curtains rather than roll up windows. On many, the windshield folded flat for the true wind through your hair. Usually sat two, unless a rumble seat was included.

Phaeton: A four door Roadster, except it never had a rumble seat.

Convertible Coupe: See Coupe above

Convertible Sedan: See Sedan above

Opera Coupe/Sedan: Usually a gussied up "Business Man's Coupe" with jump seats in rear compartment for carrying the occasional passengers.

blh7068 · May 2002

'However, there were some bright spots in '73."

Such as the 73 Pontiac SD-455 Trans Am...

andys120 · May 2002

Obviously you're talking about prewar cars and a terminology that has changed over the years. The definitions of coupe vs. sedan for example. I'd suggest you request photos via e mail or snail mail to make sure of what you're traveling to see.

I know a little about prewar cars but I wouldn't know a Convertible Sedan from a Phaeton. I do know the difference between a 30s Ford or Chevy coupe and a 2-door (Tudor) sedan.

andre1969 · May 2002

...basically a 4-door convertible with snap-on curtains instead of roll-down windows? At least that's what I always took it to be. However, Mercury had a 4-door hardtop in the '50's that had "Phaeton" written on it. It was similar I think, to the way Buick used to call all its hardtops "Riviera" or DeSoto, "Sportsman".

I also saw this big, long neoclassic-styled pimpy thing once that had "Phaeton" written on it. It looked like someone took a Lincoln Town Car and grafted a 30's style front-end and rear on it. I see this same thing done to a lot of '80's Mercury Cougars, too.

speedshift · May 2002

Andre, the Mercury Phaeton was actually something a little different from the run-of-the-mill four door hardtop. The top was "chopped" an inch or so shorter than the standard four door hardtop.

There's a sadist who lives a few blocks from my parents' house who's had one--with OD no less--mouldering in his driveway for years. Many years ago I talked to this guy, apparently an elderly recluse, to see if he wanted to sell it. No, he wanted to watch it disintegrate in his driveway.

Mr_Shiftright · May 2002

Oh, don't you just love that type? It's a power trip, the only power they have in their little insect lives, to control the fate of a car that someone else wants.

jsylvester · October 2002

Was there ever any cars imported from the Eastern bloc to the United States, pre or post collapse of communism.

I was thinking it might be a good idea to keep a few running, just in case anyone gets the idea that maybe life under Communism wasn't such a bad thing after all.

Maybe a nice Trabant, or a Lada for the future car collection?

rea98d · October 2002

Yes, there were eastern bloc cars imported here. They were made famous because of their near bulletproof reliablity. They are highly desired cars today, and only the super-rich can afford them. What is the name of this brilliant brainchild of communism?
Why, the YUGO, of course!

Classic? Collectible? Special Interest? Just Old?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles