Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Favorite Chevelles
My discussion is specific to 1965 Chevelles, but figured that was too limiting for a new thread, so I made the topic more generic. So, feel free to throw in your favorite Chevelle.
Before I start, this discussion might have been a bit more interesting earlier today when both of the cars I'm about to present were for sale. But, since this afternoon, the silver '65 got sold.
OK then, let's have at it. Which one of these '65 Chevelles would you rather have?
Red one: http://inventory.bestofshowautomotive.com/CarDetails.asp?VIN=132176
Silver one: http://www.duffys.com/inventory/view/8060662/1965-chevrolet-malibu%20ss/
The red one is a tastefully done (in my opinion) resto-mod that reportedly cost a bundle to build. The paint job alone is claimed to have cost $30K. This one has all of the comfort goodies like A/C, power steering and brakes (4-wheel disc) and a modern stereo along with leather interior. It has appealing running gear with a 350 crate motor and 700R4 trans plus modern suspension components. Looks like it placed 4th in the “conservative” hardtop class for 1960-66 models at the 2009 Detroit Autorama. Geez! Can we be more specific and random at the same time? With classes like that, how could any car at that show NOT win a prize? I would guess this car is pretty well-sorted and could be driven anywhere with only a turn of the key. The asking price is a cool $39,900. This car wasn’t born as a real SS, but as the dealer aptly points out, does that really matter given the amount of work it has received? My only gripe would be, why did they slap a carburetor on there instead of going with a fuel injection system – thereby making it more reliable to live with?
The silver one is more standard stuff with the endearing 327 mated to a Muncie 4-speed. It has power steering, but manual brakes and no A/C. In short, this one is pretty much stock in nature (though that puny air cleaner looks positively retarded) and supposedly was born as a real SS. The asking price is/was $27,950 – though I’d love to know what it sold for.
So, here’s the question. Which of these ’65 Chevelle’s would you rather have (and why?) and how much would you pay for each?
Before I start, this discussion might have been a bit more interesting earlier today when both of the cars I'm about to present were for sale. But, since this afternoon, the silver '65 got sold.
OK then, let's have at it. Which one of these '65 Chevelles would you rather have?
Red one: http://inventory.bestofshowautomotive.com/CarDetails.asp?VIN=132176
Silver one: http://www.duffys.com/inventory/view/8060662/1965-chevrolet-malibu%20ss/
The red one is a tastefully done (in my opinion) resto-mod that reportedly cost a bundle to build. The paint job alone is claimed to have cost $30K. This one has all of the comfort goodies like A/C, power steering and brakes (4-wheel disc) and a modern stereo along with leather interior. It has appealing running gear with a 350 crate motor and 700R4 trans plus modern suspension components. Looks like it placed 4th in the “conservative” hardtop class for 1960-66 models at the 2009 Detroit Autorama. Geez! Can we be more specific and random at the same time? With classes like that, how could any car at that show NOT win a prize? I would guess this car is pretty well-sorted and could be driven anywhere with only a turn of the key. The asking price is a cool $39,900. This car wasn’t born as a real SS, but as the dealer aptly points out, does that really matter given the amount of work it has received? My only gripe would be, why did they slap a carburetor on there instead of going with a fuel injection system – thereby making it more reliable to live with?
The silver one is more standard stuff with the endearing 327 mated to a Muncie 4-speed. It has power steering, but manual brakes and no A/C. In short, this one is pretty much stock in nature (though that puny air cleaner looks positively retarded) and supposedly was born as a real SS. The asking price is/was $27,950 – though I’d love to know what it sold for.
So, here’s the question. Which of these ’65 Chevelle’s would you rather have (and why?) and how much would you pay for each?
0
Comments
But, I always thought the '66 was really sharp looking, with the slight forward thrust to the grille. And I like the '68-69 alot, again mainly because the way they did that forward slant that made the car look sleek and tough.
Of the two you posted, I'd definitely go for the silver one. I just prefer the more stock appearance. And yeah, definitely swap that air cleaner out! My '67 Catalina had a stupid little air cleaner on it like that when I bought it, but thankfully has been reverted to stock appearance. And trust me, it looked even sillier on the larger Pontiac block!
ChevetteChevelle is the '72.I will also put myself up for ridicule and say I like '73 Chevelle coupes, as long as they have the mid-year bodycolor panel between the grille and bumper, instead of silver. They were way more substantial feeling than earlier Chevelles, and handled very well for the time...all the mags commented on this at the time.
I like the '76 Malibu Classic coupe too.
There's a '64 Chevelle two-door wagon, factory 4-speed, restored with all NOS, that's bone-stock, on eBay that I'm liking a lot now. Customs really don't do anything for me.
The '68 and '69 Chevelle coupes are good-looking cars, but I remember looking at them on introduction night with my Dad. They seemed significantly smaller than our '67. The coupes had a shorter wheelbase and all bodystyles looked narrower. I do like a lot the hardly-ever-seen '68 Concours coupe model (like an early "Malibu Classic"). They are not even in the brochure or big showroom album.
I like the '76 Malibu Classic coupe too.
I like the '73-77 Chevelle/Malibu in general...just didn't want to be the first one here to fess up to it! :shades: I really liked the taillight treatment on the '73, with the two round taillights on either side. In '74-75, the taillights just seemed too small and ill-fitting, and then in '76-77, seemed like they were trying to ape a '74-76 era Impala/Caprice...not bad looking, but going for more of an upscale, pretentious look than the sportier look that I thought the '73's round taillights suggested.
And while they were no longer called Chevelle, I'll always have a soft spot for the '78-83 Malibu, as my first car was an '80 Malibu coupe.
Boy, agreed! The '74 taillights were pretty uninspired, but the '75's were awful! I remember when I first looked at one upclose. The rear panel, with taillights, below the decklid looked like it was done by some second-rate bodyshop, with a lot of visible breaks and seams. I also hated the '75 full wheelcovers, which looked to me like they were meant to look like a moon hubcap with a trim ring.
ChevetteChevelle is the '72.Haha! Now that's funny. I too liked the '72. When my next door neighbor drove a blue/white-striped SS Malibu back then it was almost as nice looking to me as my favorite: 1969 SS.
Choosing between the '65 Chevelles, I picked the Silver car by rating it this way:
The stock appearance/color/lines of 60s cars look more "correct" to me as time goes on. When the streets were filled with those old cars in every day driving, the "Lexus" Red Chevelle's lowered, custom appearance may have looked better to me then. The pure "retro look" Silver car looks better to me now.
The Red car has more resto-mod upgrades but not all appeal. Its crate engine seems more like an afterthought than a deliberate choice - not exactly what I'd expect to find in a 60s muscle car with "$30,000 worth of modern paint." Vintage A/C blows cold but the digital gauge upgrade sucks. The Silver car has a 4-speed advantage but needs upgrades, brakes especially. If it were mine I could make all the "priority choices" myself with the money saved by passing on the $40k Red car.
So on Looks, Equipment, Upgrades and Bang-for-the-Buck the Silver car scores better. I also try to rate Rarity and/or Context (historical significance, breakthrough design, etc.) in a comparison, but both choices are just small block '65 Chevelles so the last 2 categories come down to just one thing: Red car is an SS badge clone and the Silver one is (apparently) a factory SS model.
Overall, my score rates the Silver Chevelle a winner - even with needs compared to the more polished and expensive Red car.
made the mistake of taking it through a carwash. The window sealing was so
poor you needed a raincoat.
My favorite Chevelle is the 69' SS, 66' SS...although I really do like the 70' SS. I have owned more 71' & 72's than any other Chevelle, so I really like them too. The 67's are really nice.
I like most Chevelle's except the 64',65' & 68' models but I can see why the silver 65' sold, it is a really nice car especially with the 327 Muncie 4 speed--->very cool. If I was into the 65's I would definitely buy the silver 65' because that's just the way I like them, I'm really not into the wagon wheels that are hot today like the ones on the burgundy Chevelle....but that's just me. I like the factory SS wheels & the Corvette style wheels with B.F. Goodrich T/A Radials. Anyway for what it's worth... that's my .02 cents. :shades:
BTW, looks like the technoids at Edmund's fixed the website problem. I was able to compose this in less than the minimum one hour it took after the site upgrade. Kudos to the geek squad!
I couldn't get the silver one to download but it sounds like a nice car. Manual brakes stopped those cars just fine and in those days few had A/C/
By 1972, the smog police had stepped in and choked those engines to death.
My favorite would be a 1965 SS 396. yes, they did make a few. I like the 1966's just as well. Give me the 360 HP verson with a Muncie. Yes, I would like A/C/
Paint it yellow or Marina Blue with a black vinyl top. Rallye wheels and red stripe tires.
No "crate" engines for me and I don't need fuel injection. The old Quadrajets always worked well for me.
I'm not the "purist" some think I am but chrome and braided lines under the hood just scream MICKEY MOUSE to me!
Here's a '65 Malibu SS convertible that will go thru the Mecum auction is a couple of weeks in Florida. The ad says its a "true" SS. I know Malibu's and Chevelle's are "somewhat" synonymous. So, I hope this one counts as being worthy of this discussion. Can anybody educate me on the differences between a Malibu & a Chevelle and whether both or just one could be optioned as an SS?
At any rate, I really like this one. The maroon over black is one of my favorite color combinations.
Chevelle is the name of the line of cars. Malibu and SS are models of Chevelle. In '65, there were low-line Chevelles called "300" and "300 Deluxe", as well as the upper-trimmed Malibu and SS.
Malibus were always the best-selling model of Chevelle, and in '64 and '65 the "SS" models had nameplates on them reading "Malibu SS", so in people's minds, "Chevelle" and "Malibu" became (incorrectly) synonymous. That, plus in '78 the Malibu name replaced the Chevelle name completely.
OK then. What's this one worth AND any guesses as to what it'll bring at the auction? . . . . . one isn't always the same as the other. :confuse:
I mean, people used to wear burgundy sport coats and burgundy bell bottoms, so maybe it'll make a comeback.
One of my dad's favorite sayings when he would see an old fashion become stylish again was: "Oh great, now I get to be sick of it twice".
I tend to think of maroon and burguny as more of an upscale car color, but I think that Chevelle wears it well. Not so much modern cars, though. I think maroon is one of those colors that needs chrome to set it off. It doesn't look as good with today's plastic grays and blacks.
But, what do I know? I'm still a sucker for the right shade of green!
Aluminum Boats
MrShiftright
Host
And, I agree about the "over supply" of red cars. When restoring a car, owners need to resist the temptation of changing the color to auction/resale red. I prefer keeping it original. But, if a color change is necessary, the collector car world needs more Gold, Iris Mist and Green. :shades: