Last post on Dec 07, 2010 at 1:14 PM
You are in the Classic Cars
What is this discussion about?
Chevrolet, Ford, Classic Cars
#246 of 265 Re: Volvo 740/940 [andre1969]
Dec 04, 2010 (4:44 pm)
Back in the late sixties there was a local VW dealership. Kendon Motors.
If you wanted a new VW, you paid full price, picked your color and waited six weeks.
Of course, they kept a few in stock that had another 1000.00 in dealer installed accessories that you cojuld drive home if you didn't want to wait.
#247 of 265 Re: Volvo 740/940 [isellhondas]
Dec 04, 2010 (5:00 pm)
Of course, they kept a few in stock that had another 1000.00 in dealer installed accessories that you cojuld drive home if you didn't want to wait
Yeah, that's one thing I think a lot of people today forget, is how back in the day, cars really came "a'la carte'. When you look in those old car books and they quote the base price, the cars look so cheap, and we think about the good old days, but truth is, once you optioned them up, they got really expensive, really fast.
For example, my grandparents bought a brand-new 1957 Ford Fairlane 500 4-door hardtop, pretty well-equipped. Base price, if you look in the books, is around $2500. Well, Granddad saved everything, and one day, showed me the paperwork from that sale. By the time you added the automatic, big V-8, power steering, brakes, radio, heater, etc, that sucker was around $3500.
My '57 DeSoto Firedome hardtop coupe had a base price of $3,085. But, I spec'ed it out once, using one of those American Standard catalogs, and as equipped, more like $3800. In today's dollars, that's like $28,630. For a car with no a/c, crank windows, AM radio with one speaker, no ABS, traction control, etc.
And that '57 Ford? $26,370 in today's dollars.
A/C added about $500 in those days. Or, about $3700 in today's dollars!
And we whine today about cars costing too much money. Honestly, all things considered, I think cars today are pretty cheap!
#248 of 265 Re: Volvo 740/940 [isellhondas]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
Dec 04, 2010 (9:13 pm)
Solid #3 Karmann Ghia convertible? Maybe....oh...$7500?
#249 of 265 1959 vs 2009 chevy crash test
Dec 05, 2010 (2:53 am)
Well this has been a fascinating thread to read. As a kid and young driver I had experiences with many of the cars talked about here.
The car my parents had when I was born in 1964 was a 1961 Falcon station wagon. They kept it until in 1970 we got a 69 VW Bus. That Falcon has 3 on the tree and seemed ok most of the time, from what little I remember. It had pretty amazing amounts of room all around, even though it was a lot smaller than a full size wagon.
My girlfriend in 1991 (and now wife) had a 1961 Dodge Lancer. That was a superior car to the Falcon in every way I think. It had pretty snappy power for the time (while the only thing that made our Falcon look fast was the later 69 Bus). That slant 6 engine was pretty impressive with the push button transmission. I think flooring it you could maybe get to 60 in about 13 seconds, which was excellent for an economy car at the time. The body was very solid, whereas I think the Ford was more flimsy. That Lancer just seemed like a well engineered car. Even had seatbelts and a padded dash. Amazing visibility. Practically 360. My future wife grandma bought it new, and when we had it it had only 60-80,000 miles on it. Ran like a top and needed almost nothing mechanically. The one thing that broke I remember was the windshield wiper. Passenger side, fortunately. Parts could not be found anywhere, even a junkyard, for love or money. We had only one windshield wiper after that.....
Cars are so much better today. I'm amazed I'm alive, really. Take a look at this 59 full size chevy folding up like an accordion, while the 09 Malibu--a smaller car--does much, much better.
#250 of 265 Re: Volvo 740/940 [Mr_Shiftright]
Dec 05, 2010 (7:16 am)
I don't know what's with the guy with the Ghia.
I called him and he immediatly asked me for my number and told me he would have to call me back in 30 minutes which he never did.
Three hours later, I called again and left a message on his machine which at this point, he hasn't returned.
I've learned that when a seller doesn't put a number on the For Sale sign that it's usually overpriced. I know I won't call him again.
I've always liked those and I can't remember the last tme 've seen one much less a convertable.
7500.00? I'll report back if he calls me. Thanks!
#251 of 265 Re: Volvo 740/940 [isellhondas]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
Dec 05, 2010 (9:18 am)
Biggest issue with the Ghias is, of course, rust, so the car needs to go on a lift before you buy. These K-Gs are very expensive to restore---the rear fenders do not unbolt like on a VW, so it's all about welding in new panels. And "nose damage" is common.
The convertible top is quite pricey if you have it done professionally and correctly. Otherwise, pretty much VW underneath, so easy to work on and mechanical parts should be everywhere.
My brother had a very early Ghia coupe. I remember it had corduroy interior!
#252 of 265 What I Never Understood About Volvos?
Dec 05, 2010 (10:15 am)
I mean, they were designed much like a Chevy-rear drive, live rear axle, recirculating ball steering box, American style front suspension.
You paid a hefty premium for the car-only you got a small 4 cylinder engine (instead of a 6).
Had you ordered a Chevy of the time, and gotten a upgraded suspension (HD shocks and springs)-you would have a Volvo-only better and cheaper.
As for their (alleged) longeveity-if you maintained the Chevy like the Volvo, it would last just as long.
The other thing about Volvos-in their early days, they came with Philips radios-those radios had terrible FM sections-if you were more than 10 miles from a station, you couldn't pick it up.
Most people opted for a japanese radio.
#253 of 265 Re: What I Never Understood About Volvos? [martian]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
Dec 05, 2010 (11:12 am)
The Volvo 544 was really fun to drive. I can't think of a similar Chevy that would have been. I mean, a Chevy II with HD springs and shocks would ride like a 3/4 ton truck and probably not have a 4-speed. Vega was nice looking but pretty nasty to own. Maybe the Corvair was as close as you'd come to "fun" but you had to be careful how much you threw it around turns, and the 4-speed was simply awful.
#254 of 265 Re: Volvo 740/940 [Mr_Shiftright]
Dec 05, 2010 (11:24 am)
Oh, I know about the "nose damage" problem but I had forgotten the rear fenders didn't unbolt.
He still hasn't returned my calls so my interest has waned.
I did look on Ebay and I'm thinking that 7500.00 estimate may have been a bit on the light side.
Heck, he might have sold it!
#255 of 265 Re: What I Never Understood About Volvos? [Mr_Shiftright]
Dec 05, 2010 (11:26 am)
Oh, yes, very much fun to drive and that wonderful sound they made.
I once had a chance to buy a 544 wagon. It needed too much work but talk about a cool car!