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
914s are okay, pretty good little car...I wouldn't exactly call them a "hot rod VW", since it's a stock VW engine in there (suitcase 411 engine if I remember correctly) but in 2.0 liter form it's not too bad a performer. My only real complaint about the car (I owned two of them) is that they are very tough to work on--accessibility I mean. Also I hate the 901 Lemans 5-speed with that silly low gear position.
Hey, nothing wrong with an old Dodge Dart except you'd have to live with 1960s/70s steering and brakes. Sturdy old cars though. Also kinda large for city driving. But I bet you'd get a lot of miles out of it for your money.
This is the same guy who had a really cool 69 Chevelle SS, a 78 Z-28, and an 82 Corvette before these two turkey's.
Corvairs look relatively affordible today. I will check out the late 50's Bel Airs & 210's as well. I've been thinking of waiting a while as I would guess a recession would drive the prices of collector cars down as people have to sell to buy food after they are laid off. Obviously exaggerating, but the theory of supply and demand sounds logical.
What cars from the 70's under $10,000 would be a good candidate for collector status? Most of them don't seem that appealing to me due to pollution control, fuel economy requirements, poor build quality, bad styling, and lack of power.
How about a 75-79 Chevy Nova police car? Not bad looking in a four door, 350 + handling package is actually a pretty decent running and cheap to deal with situation.
For hotrods, I've actually always sort of liked Chevy Monzas (aka the Vega in drag). Once saw a Hotrod magazine featured car at a show in Pleasanton with a 454 (with tri-power!) and a Nash 5-speed that was very well done. Oops, not a collectors item.
Panteras are more than 10k, so I'll skip that.
Are Renault Alpines available throughout the '70s?
Cosworth Vega?
Volkswagen Thing? (actually, those seem to have done pretty well price-wise).
A really nice later, small, Bronco?
Dart w/360?
BMW 3.0 CS maybe? (assuming the iron oxide gods haven't taken it home yet).
... and ...with a bullet....
One of those bitchin' LM Capri's with the black and gold paint jobs.
The '69 was IMHO the best car I've ever owned. I bought it with about 49,000 miles on it in 1989 (typical little-old-lady car), and it got totaled with about 77,000 on it. I paid $1100 for it. The only real problems I had with it was the brakes...I needed a new master cylinder and wheel cylinders. And a water pump. Mileage was pretty decent, about 15-18 mpg around town, and 20-22 or so on the highway, even cruising at 70-75 mph, with the A/C on, and a few passengers on board. 0-60 times weren't so hot, but I guess it held its own. It would blow the doors off of the cars most of my other friends had, like an '80 Accord, '85 Cavalier, '86 T-bird (V-6), 4-cyl Mustangs, etc.
My '68 is a different story, though. I bought it about a week after I totaled the '69. It had about 253,000 miles on it, but the 318 had just been rebuilt at around 242K, and the tranny/rear end had just been replaced. I paid $1700 for it, and it passed inspection needing very little work. It now has about 338,000 on it, and I've never had any engine, tranny, or rear end trouble. Plenty of suspension problems, though, and it eats brakes about every 10-20K miles. The front ones go faster. The starter went twice, the alternator once, and the radiator popped the seal at the top of the tank 4 times. Had the exhaust system replaced back in '93. It also tends to eat engine mounts...I've gone through the one on the passenger side twice now, but the driver's side only once. This thing has had a rough life, though. It was hit a couple times before I had it repainted in '93, and then hit about 5 times since then. And I put about 30,000 of its miles on delivering pizzas. Still, I drove it from Maryland to Oklahoma City with no problems, and also from MD to Ohio. I never had any fears about driving this car long distances, because it just had a safe, sturdy feeling about it that it would get you there no matter what! Fuel economy on this one was not a strong point though...about 13 mpg city, and 16-17 on the highway. My best was 17.8, on my trip to Oklahoma. I hit an isolated spot in the middle of Arkansas, running on empty, and limped the car for about 50 miles until I finally found a gas station! The idiot that had the car before me (I feel I have the right to call him this, after all, he bragged how it would hold first gear up to about 52 mph...no wonder he needed the tranny replaced!) had hopped up the engine a bit, but stuck the same 2bbl carb on it, which probably cancelled whatever he'd done to the engine. Still, it felt like it had a lot more power than a 318 should.
As for Darts in general, I think the years to have are '67-69. The ones before that feel like they're better built, but I think they're less "cool" and "tough" looking. The '70-72 are also kinda cool, but I never liked the sloped-off rear end as much as the squared-off '67-69. Because of the design of the trunk and fuel tank, the spare tire is stowed in a compartment under the trunk floor, much like a modern FWD car. As a result, these things had trunks that rivaled some intermediate cars in their day (and some full-size today!) Also, as the years went on, emissions controls took their toll. My grandparents had a '75 Swinger, and to this day swear it's the worst car they ever owned!
As for handling, Shifty's right, that they've got 60's technology in the steering and brakes. A V-8 will at least get you 10" drums, versus the standard 9". And front disk brakes started becoming more common in the 70's. Supposedly, it's not hard to swap disks onto an older Dart, although you do need to change one of the control arms (can't remember if it's the upper or lower, though). Putting modern radial tires on them improves the handling immensely, though. I ran 205/70-14's on the '69, and the '68 has those on the front, and 225/70-14's on the rear. Most of 'em had power steering but manual brakes. When I bought my '68, the power steering pump was broken, and it felt like it actually handled better than when I got the steering fixed! It was a tricep-builder, though!
As for daily driving, they're actually easy to maneuver. At around 69-70" wide, they're narrower than a lot of modern compacts. They're about 196" long (the ones with the federally-mandated bumper-blocks were about 204"), so imagine a car the length of a Taurus and the width of an Accord, but where you can see exactly where all four corners of the car end. They're very light-weight, too. Probably any Dart ever built (well, except for the big '60-62, some of the big blocks, and some of the more option-laden models of the mid-70's) would be lighter than a modern Accord or Camry.
Nose heavy and has small exhaust manifolds so the big block fits, but I was always intrigued by the idea. The 340 is a better performance engine but the 383 has lots more torque.
Did they beef up the suspension any more to accommodate the 383 and other big-blocks? I know that the suspension under a 318 is no sturdier than the suspension under a slant six, but would hope that they'd do something, considering that I think a big block weighed about 100 lb more than a smallblock (if not more)
I replaced a 318 in a Challenger with a built 360 and then read you can't do that because one of the motor mounts is in a different location. If that's true then my favorite motto, "If it doesn't fit get a bigger hammer" got me through yet another project. I used the 318 exhaust manifolds so I didn't have to redo the exhaust but I don't recommend this, especially with a performance cam.
While I realize one will never be worth what an original is, does the price of a clone move in line with the original? If an original GTO increases in value 5% a year, will a clone car increase in value 5% of it's previous year's value as well?
Have to say, went to a Mopar Auto Show over the weekend, the size of some of these cars rules pretty much any 50' & 60's full size (and many standard size) out, will not fit in the garage. so I'm moving down in size right now.
Still, nothing at all wrong with a "clone" as long as you are up front about what you have.
http://communities.msn.com/HPMUSCLECARINVESTMENTS/forsalecustombuiltboss429conv.msnw
I really love the concept of a 1970 T/A Challenger or AAR cuda convertible (as an example). No argument over authenticity, with a cool result.
Another (cheaper) example might be a 1967/68 notchback Shelby (I've seen pictures of a prototype, but lets call it non-existent for the sake of the argument).
You're bound to get bugged by know-it-alls informing you of lack of originality, but unless you've got a national show winning car, believe me, it'll happen with the real thing anyways.
I would be buying the car for the enjoyment of owning it, so whether it would be considered a show car would strictly be secondary. If it's restored, by definition it is not really completely authentic anyways.
It's also amazing how much money some of these restorations cost.
Yes, the idea of "cars that never existed" in a way makes more sense than building a clone of a car that does exist. At least there's more of a point to the exercise.
I think there are too many "experts" in the old car hobby and way too much pedantry. Arguing for hours about "matching numbers" on mass-produced Chevrolets seems totally out of control to me. Many Ferrari and Jaguar and Rolls collectors do not care about matching numbers, as long as the engine is correct for the type.
Whoever thought of matching engine and VIN numbers when building a mass produced car? Bad idea and now we see the result. Better to spend all that creative energy on a good restoration and on driving the damn car and not at pointing at numbers in a book.
Some kind of hybrid for whatever reason.
While mechanical parts should be easy to find, what about body parts if restoration/repair becomes necessary?
Found several XL's with the 429 rated around 360 horsepower. Any major changes needed to bring up to the Mustang Boss power ratings?
I know they may be boats, but so was a Mustang by 71.
I always thought they were a cool style, but then I like the Pontiacs from that era as well, and they share a common theme!
They have not really appreciated much, nor will they probably. However, if you could keep them from rusting, they were durable as hell.
The redesign was for 73, and those were tough durable cars too, just slow.
In 72, the engines were detuned, so not really as interested in that year. My parents had a 72 429 with the 2v carb.; they tried a new carb to get better mileage, thing never ran the same again. Rust killed it, but the interior was still beautiful even after having 7 hell raisers for children. Dad would always speed in that car, smoking cigars and listening to the Reds games, while us sons beat each other senseless in the back seat.
I guess that styling similarity up front must've appealed to this guy, too!
Interesting idea though. It reminds me of a '63 Galaxie I read about with a SOHC 427.
Looking to terrify myself and all others on the highways with this beast.
thanks.
Now the Canadian car felt terrific, newly rebuilt engine (Canadian Pontiacs were Chevy chassis and engines for the most part) and Hurst shifter 4 speed, brand new dual exhaust with 2 inch pipes, interior in great shape, everything works, etc. It ran extremely strong, and had that nice Chevy big block sound to it. Had all interior and exterior trim pieces, all in good condition.
Only problem is some paint work is needed. Based upon only building 4,800 convertibles in 1966, I'm thinking if I buy it, putting up big money to strip it to the metal and starting over would be money well spent over looking for body panels down the road.
Seems like sellers are not getting what they want right now, maybe the economy is starting to drive prices down again. The seller was willing to settle for $2,500 less than what he paid, not the mention the money he has put into it the last two years, pending a collector coming out to look at it at a price way over what I was willing to go.
I don't think new models will pull them up either. Remember the restored ones the factory sold out of showrooms for $25K. They are also heavily depreciated now.
67-70 Olds 98, Buick Electra, Cadillac de Villes
60s-early 70s Chevy sedans (coupes are pricey)
60s-early 70s almost any Ford or Mercury (Mercs are rare and sometimes interesting, think Marauder or the older ones with the breezeway window)
late 60s Pontiacs are stylish and fast, if you're not obsessed with a GP or convertible, they're cheap
I don't know much about Chryslers, they are kind of rare but are inexpensive.
Also, station wagons are making a real comeback, they're kind of nostalgic/kewl and comparitively rare (I saw a 55000 mile *perfect* 68 Impala wagon the other day for $6k on autotrader.com, wish I coulda bought it).
The same could be said for the grand prix, cutlass, and regal from the same era. Good looking cars with a nice ride.
You might get a bit more out of it if you changed the rear-end ratio. Also, what engine is your Monte currently running? If it's just a 305, you could get a 350 in there without butchering too much up. It wouldn't give you the performance of a 454, but would be a much simpler swap, as well. If you already have a 350 well, nevermind ;-)
The 305 isn't a great engine but what's killing it is a smog cam, exhaust gas recirculation, lean carburetion, retarded ignition and all the other band-aid fixes they were using to reduce smog in those days. Give it a low-tech rebuild with an Edelbrock Performer intake and cam and recurved advance and I think you'll enjoy the car more. You won't be racing anyone for pink slips but at least you'll have some throttle response.
1. '68 Mustang hardtop, 200 I-6, 3-speed manual
2. '72 Duster, 225 slant-six, TorqueFlite
3. '76 Eldorado convertible, 500 V-8 4-barrel
4. '77 Cutlass Supreme coupe, 260 V-8 2-barrel
5. '77 Camaro Z28, 350 4-barrel, 3-speed auto
I'm just curious to know if these cars are worth buying and restoring because all five of them were owned by both my parents at one point or another.
The Mustang is a dog with the 6, and isn't that valuable restored. Dusters have virtually no collector value (except the 340). 76 Eldo convertibles are cool, but fairly cheap even in great shape (you can probably get a great one for $7k), so probably not a wise choice to buy a crummy one and spend a bunch of money to fix it up. The Cutlass, no way. 77 isn't the best year for any car, including Z28s, but they're probably better than most other American cars made then.
As for the Cutlass, well, I remember an old Consumer Reports road test of a '77 with a 260. It did 0-60 in something like 20-21 seconds! Remember, these cars were pushing 4000 lb by then, and the 260 only had about 100-110 hp. That was another car they made tons of. In fact, it was 1977's 2nd most popular car, right behind the Chevy Impala/Caprice (which they usually lumped into one total). The vast majority of 'em had Olds 350's, and that majority was so vast that it depleted the Olds 350 supply, and forced them to put Chevy 350's in some of their other cars. But that's another scandal...er, I mean, story. I'm sure a few of 'em had 403's that year, the biggest engine available now that the 455 had been retired.
The TC is the most valuable, followed by the TF. So the best buy would be the TD model, made from '50-53. You can buy a basically sound one in the range of $9,000-12,000.
Parts are plentiful and many clubs exist.
Are they fun? Yeah, they really are. But you have to be a reasonably compact person to fit in one.
70-73 camaro/firebird excluding Z-28/Formula/
Trans am. Low mileage/good condition ones can be had for well under 10k.
Last night I saw a *very* nice '62 Cadillac coupe. That was probably about a ten thousand dollar car, too.
'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