I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today!

1114411451147114911501214

Comments

  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,544
    The problem with paying $34K for an all-original, low mileage car is that you can't drive it. It is not too different from a concours-level restoration. Drive a mostly unused 50 year old car any length of time and things will happen - an upholstery seam will split, you'll get dinged by gravel, it will unexpectedly rain on you before you get home to the garage and you'll discover it leaks (or even worse, not discover that until some damage becomes apparent), wear part will wear, rubber parts will perish, etc etc. Suddenly it is no longer what you bought.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • explorerx4explorerx4 North Central OHMember Posts: 17,921
    Accessories(alternator, etc) were included which also helped drop the power rating.
    2020 Ford Explorer XLT, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 46,974
    You can drive this. It’s not some over the top restoration, or time capsule 50 miles investment unit.

    Not like old cars like this get driven much. And never in bad weather. To cruise ins, putting around on a nice Sunday, stuff like that. So maybe 1,000 miles a year? 2,000, tops? Obsessively clean and maintain it, and will probably look just the same 10 or 20 years from now.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD , 2022 Ford Maverick Lariat Ecoboost FWD.

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,177
    I think in some cases, they cut compression ratios at the same time, so there was a real loss along with a "paper" loss. But, a couple others that stick in my mind (only because I owned examples of them): 225 slant six: 145 gross/110 net (plus a California version choked to 100). 318-2bbl V8: 230 gross/150 net.

    I think GM actually started publishing gross AND net hp ratings in 1971 in some publications, although I just looked in the '71 Chevelle brochure, and they only list gross hp. And oops, I was off a bit, the 350-2bbl was 245 hp, not 255. It was 255 in 1969, but dropped to 250 in 1970 and then 245 in 1971.

    But yeah, I'd always heard 20-25% loss from gross to net was a general rule, although I think it also depends on whether an engine was over-rated or under-rated in gross hp. The 340 that Dodge/Plymouth used only dropped from 275 to 240. The 426 Hemi was dropped for '72, but I recall reading somewhere, years ago, that it had about 350 net. Its rating was 425 gross.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502

    First car deal I ever did completely on my own was an explorer sport like that in black. Guy bought a 2003 Land Rover Discovery that was a very late build so it had some 2004 parts on it

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,034
    My hometown dealer gave me their seventy-one big showroom album with vinyl cover, at the end of the year. Wish I still had it. I sold it within fifteen minutes of putting it on my friend's table at Carlisle probably twenty or so years ago for sixty bucks.

    Sorry for the awkward typing; for some reason today, none of my numbers on my keyboard are showing up , sigh.
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,204
    Plenty of '71 Chevelles selling for LOTS more than $34k.
  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,544
    texases said:

    Plenty of '71 Chevelles selling for LOTS more than $34k.

    SS models, clones of SS models, counterfeit SS models and resto-mods.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,204
    Yes, definitely. I'm just saying a $34k car can be driven, at least I would. Not a museum piece.
  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,544
    Just came across this pic. Most if not all of the box-style Panther Town Cars came with a vinyl roof. Someone just decided to replace theirs and this is what they found underneath:



    I don't understand the triangle-shaped piece in the C-pillar.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,177
    That is an odd looking crease. It almost looks like some leftover artifacts from something that started life as a coupe with a VERY upright rear window, and was modified from there.

    The Continental coupe, which I think was only sold from '80-81 (not to be confused with the Mark VI) had a pretty upright rear window, but I don't think even it was THAT vertical!
  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,544
    I know Chrysler in the late '60s/early '70s used fiberglass "plugs" on Imperials and I think also on the Challenger SE to make the rear window appear smaller. I wonder is this is something similar? At least Ford painted the area to be covered in vinyl.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • tjc78tjc78 South JerseyMember Posts: 14,386

    @ab348 said:
    Just came across this pic. Most if not all of the box-style Panther Town Cars came with a vinyl roof. Someone just decided to replace theirs and this is what they found underneath:

    I don't understand the triangle-shaped piece in the C-pillar.

    That’s not typical. It never looks good underneath on the box Town Cars, but it shouldn’t have that triangle piece. I’ve seen a few on the Panther forums.

    That TC probably had the standard half vinyl roof.

    2020 Volvo XC90 T6 Momentum / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • tjc78tjc78 South JerseyMember Posts: 14,386

    Here is one that had a full coach roof minus the opera window. Look at the visible seams.

    2020 Volvo XC90 T6 Momentum / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • tjc78tjc78 South JerseyMember Posts: 14,386

    The window is literally taped off

    2020 Volvo XC90 T6 Momentum / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,544
    I that last pic do I see another triangle piece?

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • tjc78tjc78 South JerseyMember Posts: 14,386
    edited January 28

    You know what… I think you’re right. In the Panther forums this is common to “slick top” but that triangle piece never has been mentioned. Looking again I think it’s present in my pics too.

    2020 Volvo XC90 T6 Momentum / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,588
    Spotted a 73-74 Cutlass coupe out on the clear but de-icer covered roads today.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,034
    edited January 29

    I’m reminded a bit of the early ‘74 Malibu Classic and Luxury LeMans coupes with the old triangular quarter windows turned into an opera window. They were available only with a vinyl top the first several months, and when you looked inside those cars you can see the triangle window with a large filler panel installed. In the Chevelle brochure you can even see it. I can only imagine what they looked like outside under the vinyl top.

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,177
    edited January 29
    In keeping with that trend, here's how Chrylser turned the more mundane Dodge 600/Chrysler E-class (and Plymouth Caravelle) into a New Yorker, for '83-87...

    I was actually looking for a pic of the M-body 5th Avenue, but stumbled across this gem, first.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,588
    Wow, that K NYer rear treatment is a new one for me.
  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,194
    Boy that looks like a crude patch job to achieve the roofline change. It created a huge blind spot as well. I drove one of those New Yorkers once. It was a loaner while my car was being repaired. Tufted blue leather interior, a lot of plastic wood, chrome and thick carpet. It was comfy but hardly quick with the non-turbo engine. I think it was the 2.5.

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,588
    I thought this was amusing, posted in a fintail group. JC Whitney used a fintail as their generic car image in an old catalog:

    image
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,177
    On the subject of illustrations, in the past I've seen clip art of both a 1977 LeMans, and a 1979 or so Newport, on those "Junk cars hauled away free! Cash paid for some" flyers. I thought it was amusing, that they're both cars I like, showing up on basically a "we'll take your crap off your hands" advertisement!
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,588
    On that type of illustration thought, I had this image in a banner ad a while back - maybe this web tracking AI algorithm crap really knows something:


  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,204
    I swear sometimes I'll just THINK of something and an ad will pop up...
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,034
    edited February 2
    Spotted yesterday in salty downtown Kent. A '76 or '77 Cutlass Supreme Brougham in pretty decent shape (moldings around rear window gone; typical rear bumper-filler issue on left side). Won't look nice if it continues to be used in this weather. Has Ohio Historical Plates, which you don't have to renew yearly.

    I'm nearly certain I've seen this car around in good weather.

    I can't tell if it's a '76 or '77. Outside, the only way I can remember telling is if the grille nameplate "Oldsmobile" is in script ('76) or print ('77). I don't know why, but my vibe is that it's a '76.

    An hour or so later, saw a red first-gen S-10 pickup with the Tahoe trim (chromed-up trim outside) and Rally Wheels and whitewall tires. Almost certain I've seen that truck too. I like the looks of those better than the second-gen.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Member Posts: 26,599
    edited February 2
    I believe that's a '77 Cutlass.
    I think it says Cutlass Supreme on the trunk, but I believe the Brougham
    models got the logo on the C pillar.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,034
    Something in that pic probably not all that visible to you guys out west when you're at a red light....every vehicle that I can identify in the pic (I can't identify that dark grey SUV to the far-right though) is a domestic nameplate.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502

    @fintail said:
    On that type of illustration thought, I had this image in a banner ad a while back - maybe this web tracking AI algorithm crap really knows something:

    I had that same ad a couple of days ago just micro-targated to my town.

  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,194
    The waterfall grille is slightly different on the 76-77, and oddly, for one year only the dash was slightly revised on the 77. It no longer had the round vents, they were changed to rectangular and the dashpad material was changed from a rubbery type plastic to a less textured and crack prone plastic. At least the passenger side now benefitted from faux wood and on some, a clock. I find this curious as the 73-76 had the same dash design but the 77 and last year of that body style before the downsized introduced in 78 had the revised dash. Money well spent??

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,588

    @fintail said:

    On that type of illustration thought, I had this image in a banner ad a while back - maybe this web tracking AI algorithm crap really knows something:

    I had that same ad a couple of days ago just micro-targated to my town.


    Did it have a fintail in the garage like my ad, or a British Rover-type car? :smile:
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502

    Exact same car and everything. I even thought hey that is a fintail reminds me of you.

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,177
    That dark gray crossover is giving me a Nissan sort of vibe. Maybe a Rogue or Murano?
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,177
    sda said:

    The waterfall grille is slightly different on the 76-77, and oddly, for one year only the dash was slightly revised on the 77. It no longer had the round vents, they were changed to rectangular and the dashpad material was changed from a rubbery type plastic to a less textured and crack prone plastic. At least the passenger side now benefitted from faux wood and on some, a clock. I find this curious as the 73-76 had the same dash design but the 77 and last year of that body style before the downsized introduced in 78 had the revised dash. Money well spent??

    I always thought it was a bit curious that they changed the dash for '77, as well. I like the overall style of it better. There's just something about the passenger side on the '73-76 I don't like. I think with the way the round vents sit above the glovebox door, it looks like it was inspired by some cheesy 1960's science fiction prop or model. Or Rosie the robot maid from "The Jetsons"! It just seems out-of-date for a '70's car.

    I wonder what their rationale was for the change? I'm sure the Cutlass would have been a smash hit, even if they'd left the dash alone.

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,177
    It can be hard to tell from a pic sometimes, but I'm wondering, is that '76-77 Cutlass a faded Firethorn in color? If so, that's the color my '76 LeMans should be, if it hadn't been repainted a darker burgundy.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Member Posts: 26,599
    edited February 3
    I thought it was the Firethorn color. That's one I liked and considered when I bought my
    77 and later my 1980 (big mistake trading for junk).

    That is a 1977. One can tell by the taillights. There is a rectangle outline on the taillight.
    The 1976 model had a vertical line on the taillight. The line or the box outline were coated
    with a light silver paint that gradually wore off.

    My only concern about the Supreme in the picture is what
    is written under the "Cutlass Supreme" scipt on the right
    side of the trunk. Was that a "Salon" or "Euro" type variation
    or is it a dealer logo?









    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHMember Posts: 15,034
    edited February 3
    Under the 'Cutlass Supreme', was a black, blocked "BROUGHAM" in letters.

    Yes, that car is what Chevy called 'Firethorn' although not sure what the other divisions called it.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Member Posts: 26,599
    Thanks for the Brougham info.
    Then the interior might be this tufted, pillowed interior unless they
    opted for the extra cost leather IIRC.

    Note the rectangle for the "digital" clock between the AC vents in front of
    the passenger. I had the clock on the one I bought and it worked for a while...



    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,194
    edited February 3

    Thanks for the Brougham info.
    Then the interior might be this tufted, pillowed interior unless they
    opted for the extra cost leather IIRC.

    Note the rectangle for the "digital" clock between the AC vents in front of
    the passenger. I had the clock on the one I bought and it worked for a while...



    Nice looking interior. I noticed the carpet pulling away at the sill. On my parent's 76 Cutlass Supreme wagon, it did the same in the rear. I guess the carpet was cut a bit short.


    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,177
    Just got a 1974 Consumer Reports magazine in the mail, that has a test of 6-cyl Chevelle, Matador, and Satellite coupes. They tested a Torino as well, but had to do a 302, as Ford gave up on putting a 6-cyl in those cars. Now, how's this for a cry of the times...

    "CU could find no functional reason for preferring coupes. Our advice: Avoid coupes. If you don't care about rear seating room, consider a compact or subcompact, not an intermediate."

    "Something else to avoid is a V8 engine in an intermediate. Under most conditions, a V8 uses more gas. In our experience, a Six has enough power to handle any of these intermediates, even with an automatic transmission."

    Oh, as for enough power? The 0-60 times were:
    Chevelle: 17.0 seconds (250-6, automatic, 3.08:1 axle)
    Matador: 18.0 seconds (258-6, automatic, 3.15:1 axle)
    Satellite: 16.5 seconds (225-6, automatic, 2.94:1 axle)
    Torino: 14.0 seconds (302-2bbl V8, automatic, 3.00:1 axle)

    They also did a 315 mile test trip in each of the cars. The Chevelle, Matador, and Torino all got 16 mpg. The Satellite did 18.

    For their final recommendation as to which one to buy? They actually said "None!" and said instead, to get either a Chevelle or Matador 4-door sedan.

    Oh, they also praised the Matador for being the only one that offered air conditioning with the 6-cyl. Apparently with the Chevelle and the Satellite, if you wanted a/c you needed to order the V8. But, as bad as those acceleration times were already, I'd worry about how much worse having a/c would make it?

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,588

    Exact same car and everything. I even thought hey that is a fintail reminds me of you.

    What old relics are you into these days, anyway?
  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,194
    That was a period when the speed limit was 55, so at 60 you were speeding! It would be interesting to know the time difference of reaching 55 mph under full throttle vs 60 mph.

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaMember Posts: 17,544
    andre1969 said:

    Just got a 1974 Consumer Reports magazine in the mail, that has a test of 6-cyl Chevelle, Matador, and Satellite coupes. They tested a Torino as well, but had to do a 302, as Ford gave up on putting a 6-cyl in those cars. Now, how's this for a cry of the times...

    "CU could find no functional reason for preferring coupes. Our advice: Avoid coupes. If you don't care about rear seating room, consider a compact or subcompact, not an intermediate."

    "Something else to avoid is a V8 engine in an intermediate. Under most conditions, a V8 uses more gas. In our experience, a Six has enough power to handle any of these intermediates, even with an automatic transmission."

    CU's auto editor back in those days seemed really dour, almost as if he hated cars. Some of the editorial comments I remember were pretty over the top.

    I remember reading their test of intermediate sedans from the late '60s/early '70s and seeing a pic they printed of a piece of stainless B-pillar trim on the Torino that they claimed was held on with a loop of tape, back before the days of such things being used in assembly.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,194
    edited February 3
    Cars and trucks were considered appliances, nothing more. CU used to count the number of defects and list the most problematic. Tire pressure, alignment, stalling/surging, rattles/squeaks, poor workmanship were frequently noted.

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,177
    I also think their "all or nothing" attitude is interesting. For example, "if you don't care about rear seating room, get a compact or subcompact". Nevermind the fact that, in most cases, even if the back seat of a midsize is cramped, it's still probably going to be more comfortable than a smaller car. The Maverick coupes were miserable in the back, and a Duster wasn't that much better. You can sort of make the argument with a Nova, or a Dart/Valiant hardtop, compared to these intermediate coupes. But, even if a Nova had slightly more back seat room than a Chevelle, I'm sure the Chevelle's back seat was still thicker and more comfortable. I could fit in the back seat of my old Dart hardtop pretty well, but part of the reason for that is that the seat was low, so it put you into a bit of a fetal position, which isn't that comfortable either. With a thicker, higher seat, your legs are a bit more horizontal, and you're going to need more room, unless you want to seriously manspread.

    I also don't think they were quite grasping the concept that a bigger car is usually a more comfortable car, as well. My '76 LeMans doesn't have much more room inside than my Dart did (and without the LeMans's power seat, I'd swear the Dart had more legroom up front). But the LeMans is a quieter car. More comfortable. Smoother riding, etc. As for a Nova, I can't even fit comfortably in the front seat of one.

    Interestingly, with midsized cars, by and large it was the coupes that were carrying the bulk of the sales. Even when you break out personal luxury coupes. In '74 for example, Chevy sold about 93,000 Chevelle sedans (Malibu and Malibu Classic). They sold about 202,000 coupes(Malibu, Malibu Classic, Malibu Classic Landau). Plus another 22,000 Laguna S3 coupes. And THEN, on top of that, about 312,000 Monte Carlos!

    In those days, if people REALLY wanted a 4-door car, it seemed like many of them went all the way and got a full-size.
  • sdasda Indian Land, SCMember Posts: 6,194
    Of full size cars, were 4 door models more popular than 2 door? I remember dad's 71 Catalina coupe did not seem to have a huge back seat. It was wide and comfortable but legroom seemed modest. His 73 Catalina 4dr sedan seemed larger in the back.

    2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav

  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 212,162
    @andre1969 Man, 1974? Talk about snail mail....

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • explorerx4explorerx4 North Central OHMember Posts: 17,921
    So andre, which one are you leaning towards, the Satellite? :p
    2020 Ford Explorer XLT, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502

    @fintail said:
    What old relics are you into these days, anyway?

    I keep an eye out for a Galaxies 500 or an Impala from 65-70 but I don't have room or time for anything right now.

    New job might give me some more exposure to some interesting stuff from body shops.

    I can't buy anything I total myself though. No self salvage allowed.

Sign In or Register to comment.