- #51 of 345
-
true
by ghulet
-
Aug 31, 2002 (2:07 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
Although I wouldn't want to park or maneuver one in the city. I do see them constantly for like $500-1500, while the sedans carry a bit of a premium (they're big in the 20"/vogues/ghettoish circuit).
|
- #52 of 345
-
"Ghettoish"?
by zueslewis
-
Aug 31, 2002 (6:53 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
That is definitely a new one!
|
- #53 of 345
-
The ultimate Winter Beater
by steine13
-
Aug 31, 2002 (8:43 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
I'm gonna post this over in Real-World too, but check this out, guys:
Saw an '88 Audi 90 quattro Sedan today.
121k miles, gold, good body, good tires, 5sp (yay!), sunroof, leather, locking rr diff, the works. It looks "OK"; the interior needs a cleaning, but there's also a baseball-size rip in the side bolster of the driver seat, and the exhaust looks like it's coming undone very soon. The car's been sitting for 3 years in a garage, being driven by the son when he comes home to visit... now they want to sell it. Engine starts up okay, the typical valve clatter but not much... exhaust is clean (no soot or oily residue), like all VW/Audis I've seen. No evidence of oil in the coolant or coolant in the oil. Tires are good, on nice alloys. No drips, but slight leaks/seapage around the head gasket and the steering rack. Dunno if the AC works, let's assume it does. They're "asking" $2,200 but are beginning to see the error of their ways... this is in a wealthy new subdivision where the houses are big square empty boxes, everyone has 3 garages and keeps the doors open so the neighbors can see the benz/lexus/whatever... I'd sooner live in a trailer park, I think. Anyways, I'm talking to an old buddy of mine who's an Audi nut; he may agree to work on it for me for an hourly rate; otherwise forget it... the driveline on the quattro has ten (10) cv joints plus a center bearing, and they DO need fixing.. but theyre' magic in the snow... So someone slap me silly and talk me out of it....
-Mathias
East Lansing, MI
|
- #54 of 345
-
no, no, a thousand times, no
by ghulet
-
Aug 31, 2002 (6:47 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
Please see my post in Real World. Old Audis are typically nightmarish. Those with five cylinders and Quattro are even worse. Unless you're going to have outrageous amounts of snow, a good FWD car with decent tires should suffice. If you must have four-wheel drive, buy an early '90s American SUV, they're a dime a dozen used ($2-3k should buy you a decent '91-93 Exploder or Blazer). Or how 'bout an old AWD Suby wagon, early Legacys run $1500-3000, Loyales even cheaper, and should actually be reliable and cheap to own.
Call Michigan State and tell them to bust those plows out if it gets too bad, OK?
|
- #55 of 345
-
Old B-bodies...
by andre1969
-
Sep 01, 2002 (8:07 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
...if you can find one with a non-Chevy V-8 (and definitely a non-Pontiac 301!), they're virtually bulletproof. Especially engines like the Pontiac 350/400 and Olds 350/403. I'm personally a bit squeamish about the Buick 350, although others say they're great engines too. It's just that the 231 V-6, which was based on the Buick 350, was a piece of junk back then. The Chevy smallblocks back then were known for premature crankshaft failure and early valve-guide wear caused by faulty EGR valves. IIRC, Chevy engines were also more likely to get stuck with the under-sized TH-200 tranny, which was under-sized for even V-6 engines, let alone V-8's.
GM's RWD intermediates from '78-88 were also pretty good, being based on the B-bodies, but in a much more nimble size. The '78-83 Malibu is about the size of a modern Accord or Camry. The main downside is that the rear windows in 4-door models are stationary, so a working air conditioner is almost mandatory in hotter climates!
If you're going to get an old car with lots of power options, GM is the way to go. While all that power stuff like seats, mirrors, windows, locks, antennas, etc, will all fail eventually, GM's stuff just seems to hold up better. My mechanic said that Fords have the highest failure rate for power windows, with Chrysler somewhere in between.
|
- #56 of 345
-
ghulet
by steine13
-
Sep 01, 2002 (8:19 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
Friends don't let friends drive old German luxo cars, eh? Your point is well taken.
I'm just flailing while being pulled ever closer to that maelstrom that is the Toyota Sienna minivan...
As far as beater GMs are concerned, I agree... I had an '83 Malibu wagon for quite awhile; sold it to trade "up" to an '87 Audi 4000 in early '97. The 4000 is long gone, my Malibu is still running around town; see it occasionally. AC was cold, the electronic carb was actually working, and the engine computer could correctly diagnose faulty sensors (it does not matter how I know).
-Mathias
|
- #57 of 345
-
by bored
-
Sep 01, 2002 (9:19 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
"The main downside is that the rear windows in 4-door models are stationary, so a working air conditioner is almost mandatory in hotter climates"
I heard about this. GM said something about there not being enough space in the door because it was so small. If that was true, then why today are windows going alll the way down these days??? Just lazy.
Was the B-Body the Caprice? Come to think about it, it wasn't really that big....so.......maybe I could handle it. But it's hard to find one in good driveable condition.
|
- #58 of 345
-
old GMs
by ghulet
-
Sep 01, 2002 (7:37 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
If you don't mind so-so gas mileage and biggish size, old RWD GMs are great cars. They're sturdy, cheap to buy and easy/cheap to maintain. As Andre said, the power stuff doesn't fail much either, and the a/c is strong. In the three or so years I had my '77 Caprice, I think the only things I had to replace were the alternator ($200 or so, IIRC, this was in 1986) and the transmission, which was my fault ($500 installed, LOL). In general, their looks have held up pretty well, too.
|
- #59 of 345
-
GM's stationary rear-door windows
by andre1969
-
Sep 01, 2002 (10:57 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
They could have made those things roll down if they really wanted to. Instead though, they hollowed out the door panels to make room for recessed armrests, so there was noplace inside the door for the window lift and guide, and noplace for a window to roll down into. On the plus side, this gave the intermediates about the same amound of elbow room as full-sized cars. On the downside, they were hot and stuffy and made a/c a requirement. As it was, GM's '78 intermediates had more shoulder room than the Ford Fairmont and Granada, and Dodge Aspen/Plymouth Volare, and the LeBaron/Diplomat models that they competed most directly against. But those cars were still considered compact, and the Malibu & company were supposed to compete against much bigger cars, like the Ford LTD-II/Mercury Cougar, and Dodge Monaco/Plymouth Fury.
GM also claimed that having a stationary rear window and a flip-out vent window in back actually gave better airflow than a roll-down window. What it really gave though, was a savings of a few bucks per car, and that's what really counts. Back then though, GM was really pushing to cut weight anywhere they could in the interests of fuel economy. Prior to downsizing, GM's Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) was the worst of the Big Three. It's not that their cars, model-for-model, necessarily got worse mileage than Ford or Mopar counterparts. GM simply relied much more on larger cars than Ford or Chrysler, which were just about held up by models like the Pinto, Granada, Maverick, Duster, Dart, Valiant, etc.
As for whether a rear window can go down all the way or not, it just depends on the design. Cars like the '78 Malibu had enormous glass area, probably moreso than many cars today. Most cars today with rear windows that do roll all the way down use a stationary quarter window as a spacer, and the roll-down window is fairly small, in relation to the door.
As for my own experience, I've had 3 GM intermediates from that era...an '80 Malibu 229, an '82 Cutlass Supreme 231, and an '86 Monte Carlo 305. They all got about the same mileage...15-16 around town and lower 20's on the highway. The Monte had a 4-speed automatic, which made up for the fact it was a bigger engine than the other two. My family also has an '85 LeSabre with a 307. When I drive it, it gets around 14-15 around town, although I've gotten into the lower 20's out of it.
|
- #60 of 345
-
me, too, as to mileage
by ghulet
-
Sep 02, 2002 (1:26 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: raybear (Mar 29, 2001 2:14 pm)
My '77 Caprice (305 2-barrel) got about 20 on the highway, more or less 15 City (IIRC), which incidentally isn't a whole lot worse than the 4-cylinder SAAB I just got rid of. In any case, it was a massive improvement from my previous car (the '71 Electra), which got ~6mpg City, seriously.
Replies to this message:
- graphicguy (Feb 14, 2003 3:49 pm)
- graphicguy (Dec 13, 2002 7:13 am)
- leadfoot4 (Dec 13, 2002 7:33 am)
- andre1969 (Dec 13, 2002 8:25 am)
- yaman (Dec 13, 2002 8:26 am)
- isellhondas (Dec 13, 2002 8:42 am)
- tblazer503 (Dec 13, 2002 8:58 am)
- andre1969 (Dec 13, 2002 8:58 am)
- rroyce10 (Dec 13, 2002 10:02 am)
- mrdetailer (Dec 13, 2002 11:04 am)
- andre1969 (Dec 13, 2002 11:29 am)
- jlawrence01 (Dec 13, 2002 8:29 pm)
- graphicguy (Dec 14, 2002 7:16 am)
- bored (Dec 14, 2002 8:35 am)
- andre1969 (Dec 14, 2002 8:49 am)
- ghulet (Dec 14, 2002 10:08 am)
- andre1969 (Dec 14, 2002 10:39 am)
- bored (Dec 14, 2002 8:15 pm)
- ghulet (Dec 14, 2002 8:20 pm)
- ghulet (Dec 14, 2002 8:22 pm)
- jlawrence01 (Dec 15, 2002 8:04 am)
- anonymousposts (Dec 15, 2002 8:18 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 15, 2002 9:12 am)
- rroyce10 (Dec 15, 2002 1:51 pm)
- bored (Dec 15, 2002 10:01 pm)
- andre1969 (Dec 16, 2002 5:31 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 16, 2002 6:02 am)
- abtseller (Dec 16, 2002 6:26 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 16, 2002 8:03 am)
- andre1969 (Dec 16, 2002 8:54 am)
- jaserb (Dec 16, 2002 8:56 am)
- abtseller (Dec 16, 2002 10:44 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 16, 2002 11:14 am)
- abtseller (Dec 16, 2002 11:25 am)
- andre1969 (Dec 16, 2002 11:30 am)
- bored (Dec 16, 2002 12:41 pm)
- jaserb (Dec 16, 2002 1:26 pm)
- tboner (Dec 16, 2002 2:08 pm)
- morin2 (Dec 16, 2002 4:33 pm)
- jlawrence01 (Dec 16, 2002 10:09 pm)
- ghulet (Dec 16, 2002 10:29 pm)
- graphicguy (Dec 17, 2002 12:23 pm)
- andre1969 (Dec 17, 2002 12:59 pm)
- abtseller (Dec 17, 2002 1:10 pm)
- jaserb (Dec 17, 2002 1:11 pm)
- morin2 (Dec 17, 2002 1:13 pm)
- jaserb (Dec 17, 2002 1:20 pm)
- abtseller (Dec 17, 2002 1:50 pm)
- graphicguy (Dec 17, 2002 2:51 pm)
- bored (Dec 17, 2002 3:24 pm)
- morin2 (Dec 17, 2002 4:52 pm)
- andre1969 (Dec 17, 2002 5:40 pm)
- morin2 (Dec 17, 2002 6:57 pm)
- andre1969 (Dec 17, 2002 7:11 pm)
- morin2 (Dec 17, 2002 8:13 pm)
- graphicguy (Dec 18, 2002 6:36 am)
- bored (Dec 18, 2002 7:38 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 18, 2002 12:14 pm)
- bored (Dec 18, 2002 5:20 pm)
- graphicguy (Dec 19, 2002 6:39 am)
- bored (Dec 19, 2002 1:55 pm)
- graphicguy (Dec 20, 2002 6:15 am)
- rroyce10 (Dec 20, 2002 6:57 am)
- 96_i30_5sp (Dec 20, 2002 8:04 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 20, 2002 8:32 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 20, 2002 8:38 am)
- 96_i30_5sp (Dec 20, 2002 8:57 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 20, 2002 9:12 am)
- bored (Dec 20, 2002 2:08 pm)
- jlawrence01 (Dec 20, 2002 3:43 pm)
- caramo (Dec 20, 2002 4:21 pm)
- bored (Dec 20, 2002 8:04 pm)
- jlawrence01 (Dec 20, 2002 9:04 pm)
- rroyce10 (Dec 21, 2002 2:41 am)
- bored (Dec 21, 2002 5:43 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 21, 2002 8:36 am)
- nippononly (Dec 23, 2002 10:37 pm)
- graphicguy (Dec 24, 2002 11:40 am)
- morin2 (Dec 24, 2002 1:26 pm)
- 96_i30_5sp (Dec 24, 2002 5:49 pm)
- andre1969 (Dec 25, 2002 3:21 am)
- kcram (Dec 25, 2002 3:47 pm)
- graphicguy (Dec 25, 2002 5:47 pm)
- ghulet (Dec 25, 2002 6:35 pm)
- bored (Dec 25, 2002 6:35 pm)
- ghulet (Dec 25, 2002 6:56 pm)
- andre1969 (Dec 25, 2002 8:02 pm)
- nippononly (Dec 25, 2002 10:06 pm)
- abtseller (Dec 26, 2002 6:10 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 26, 2002 7:35 am)
- bored (Dec 26, 2002 1:50 pm)
- nippononly (Dec 26, 2002 2:47 pm)
- bored (Dec 26, 2002 3:11 pm)
- Car_man (Dec 27, 2002 6:24 am)
- nippononly (Dec 27, 2002 9:41 pm)
- Car_man (Dec 29, 2002 7:23 am)
- graphicguy (Dec 29, 2002 7:55 am)
- andre1969 (Dec 29, 2002 3:23 pm)
- tboner (Dec 29, 2002 4:14 pm)
- nippononly (Jan 02, 2003 6:52 am)
- hudnut2 (Feb 14, 2003 11:16 am)
- tboner (Feb 14, 2003 3:49 pm)
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Smart Shopper 
