Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Classic Cars I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today!
17983 messages, Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 8:46 PM
You are in the Classic Cars Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright
|
Send it back to England For large families As odd as it gets Sharp Z The little wide car Wow Beast Homely Low miles R Uh-oh, someone restored a fintail...burning the money would be more efficient, but I like those tires "rare and beautiful" This is cool 442 of a different era
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: fintail (Aug 01, 2008 5:37 pm) The 73 Electra is great. |
|
|
Replying to: fintail (Aug 01, 2008 5:37 pm)  I had entertained the idea of trying to find one really nice R-body and just retiring the two that I have. Only problem with one like this though, is that it's in good enough shape that I'd be afraid to drive it for fear of messing it up. And that interior won't stay in that condition for very long if it started getting used! Heck, I can see a bit of deterioration on my 5th Ave's interior in the time I've had it. I bought it in October 2001, and I think I've only put about 7200 miles on it. Start slamming doors and such, and it won't be long before trim pieces start popping off, cracking, etc. At least with the two I have now, I'm not afraid to drive them, and I wouldn't cry (too much) if something ended up happening to them. That '77 Cutlass is a nice looking car, but there should have been a law that you couldn't put 4-4-2 badging on something that wussy! I could see if it was a 403, but c'mon...a 260? That 1976 Olds Ninety-Eight is a bloated, disgusting wretch of a car that never should have been built in the first place. I don't know why anybody would want something like that. Oh, who am I kidding? I LOVE it! The '73 Electra is nice too. Too bad it's kind of a poopy color. That fintail is gorgeous...even if the seller probably took a bigger financial hit than my retirement porfolio did this year. |
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Aug 01, 2008 6:00 pm) There was a 160 hp 350, which I guess was a 2-bbl. It was offered only in the Delta 88, with the 170 hp version being optional. The 260 only had 110 hp back in those early years, and had to have been a dog. CR tested a 1977 Cutlass sedan with the 260, and I want to say it took 21 seconds to do 0-60! In that test, they had a newly downsized Caprice with a 305, an LTD II with a 302, and a Monaco or Fury with a 318, and I think they all made 0-60 in about 12.5-13 seconds. I always suspected they picked the 260 for the Cutlass on purpose to make it look bad. A 350 Cutlass probably would have blown all those other cars away. And CR was really pulling for the Caprice.
|
|
|
Replying to: fintail (Aug 01, 2008 5:37 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Aug 01, 2008 6:21 pm) I can remember the brochure. The Cutlass I bought was the 1st one on the cover, tan over metallic brown. I wonder if I still have the sales brochures packed in a box along with my AMC pacer sales brochures...
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Aug 01, 2008 6:28 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: texases (Aug 01, 2008 6:23 pm) '64 Dodge Dart wagon? I thought that was pretty cool.... but, at $28K it hasn't met the reserve? 
|
|
|
|
|
fintail and shifty, I think my question and comments in message #14270, and your subsequent responses, applied to the Mercedes W210 models (years 1996-2002?), not the W124. From further reading, it seems that Mercedes first took cost into (greater) account with the introduction of the W210. Is that correct? Also, whether because of of this change of philosophy, or other factors, such as more features, isn't it true that the W210 has more maintenance/repair issues, and is more expensive to maintain than the W123 and W124 series? The reason I'm asking these questions is that, if you subscribe to the notion that to reduce the probability of high cost-of-ownership one should avoid buying new cars and cars that are very old, then the W210 comes closer to the sweet spot than the W124. In fact, maybe all but the newest W210s may be too old to avoid the expenses associated more with age than mileage. If one can afford it, do first and second year (2003? or 2004) W211s tend to be more reliable than, say, 2001 and 2002 W210s?
|
|
|
|
|
How does the following skrike you?... "1998 E300 Turbo Diesel. 45,000 miles, mint condition, garage kept. Smoke silver. Parchment leather. CD Changer, Mobile Phone, Rain Sensor, ESP, Headlamp Wiper/Washer, Xenon Headlamps, Michelin tires, glass sunroof, Bose Premium Music System. 3.0 Liter 24 Valve 6 Cylinder Turbo Diesel Fuel Injection. 34 Highway 26 City. One family ownership. Currently have a 2008 E320 Bluetec Diesel. Have the 1998 window sticker and can pdf this document. An absolutely fabulous car and the low mileage is your gain. All service performed by Mercedes of Fredericksburg, Virginia currently Central Euromotors. Same Mercedes mechanic performed all work and shop forman. Please email if interested." I know certain post-W123 diesels are problematic, but I forgot just which ones. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Classic Cars I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today!
