• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

32 Excellent

About GT52

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 04/13/1952
  1. What, everybody doesn't enjoy watching no-door Toyota Camrys (at least that's what the headlight and taillight decals look like) going around in circles for 4 hours? Who would have ever guessed? Isn't it fun to watch manufacturers "compete", with cars and engines that don't exist? Have the Japanese manufacturers ever entered a racing series without ruining it by throwing money at it until they dominate? Add to that: A few mega-teams control the majority of the cars, either directly or by engine programs, because they get the majority of the sponsor money. Every year or two the teams shuffle which "car" they run...brand loyalty/association is non-existent. Every month or two Nascar gives whatever brand is "down" a rules concession, or take away something from whatever brand is "up". The difficulty of watching the Nascar awards ceremony at the end of the season without having to throw they all play Hollywood. Is that enough?
  2. LOL, that would be a real good the car, not the story. Having been a part of the muscle car era I have to laugh at all the "low mileage" muscle cars available today. It's funny, in 1975, when they weren't worth anything, most of them already had at least 40-60K on them. And they still seem to have 40-60K on them today, 40 years later. Remarkable. I actually think that "rolling them back" was less common among "consumers" than just not putting the miles on in the first place. Everyone was aware that there was a huge difference in resale value, and acted accordingly...if you traded your car in with high mileage, the dealer was going to turn it back anyway. I'm not sure that I had one friend who had their speedometer hooked up even most of the time, it taking all of about 30 seconds to reach under the dash and unhook the cable at the back of the speedometer. We'd hook them up to pass PA State Inspection, put a few hundred or a thousand miles on them to make the mileage at least believable, then unhook them until the next inspection. Many of the speedometers were grossly inaccurate anyway, because of gear changes, and it was just as easy to use the tachometer to gauge your speed.
  3. A "C" code in a '66 Mustang is a 289, 2 barrel, 200 hp...the 4 barrel was 225 hp and an "A" code. The NADA link that I posted was the prices for exactly what the OP is looking at...C code, 4 speed, convertible. As I said before, the 4 speed adds just 10% to the base price over an automatic, the 4 barrel 225 hp engine (which the OPs car isn't) would add another 15%, both according to NADA. You may not like NADA numbers, but a tremendous number of dealers and buyers rely on them...and the two sold Ebay listings are in line with the NADA numbers, both cars being somewhere between "low retail" and "average retail".
  4. If it was a "rot box" it would not be considered a "low retail" car, and I wouldn't expect it to sell for anything close to low retail. From NADA: Low Retail Value This vehicle would be in mechanically functional condition, needing only minor reconditioning. The exterior paint, trim and interior would show normal wear, needing only minor reconditioning. May also be a deteriorated restoration or a very poor amateur restoration. Mostly usable “as-is”. This column does not represent a “parts car”. What I see in the OPs photos is a car probably needing paint, top, and interior, to even bring it up to "low retail"...although, if it is otherwise very solid and very complete I can see it selling somewhat higher than low retail. NADA prices use member reported sales and tend to be pretty accurate, though they are a lagging indicator for cars for which there are very few sales. The Mustangs that mike6024 linked to seem spot on, and the difference between them and the C code the OP posted is pretty obvious. Both of those cars present well and look ready to get in and drive. I think the first car is the nearest comp, (although it appears in much better condition than the OPs) and a 4 speed instead of its automatic would add only 10%, or about $1500 in this price range. The second car appears to be the nicer car, but that one is a bit tricky since it is really a T code (6 cyl) car with a 289 2V engine installed, and that definitely negatively affects the value...I think it was probably well sold at $22K.
  5. I'd be really hesitant to put a price on the car from photos because there's just too many what's under that paint, is the cowl being held together by paint, are the mechanicals original and functional or does most everything need rebuilding, etc. The car doesn't appear to be ready to jump in and drive. Here's the NADA page, and with relatively common cars with a lot of sales to go by NADA tends to be very good: I'm not seeing anything in the photos that would have me paying much above "low retail", even if it's largely rust free. '65-'66 Mustang convertibles were the rage 35-40 years ago, but that has faded to a large extent in favor of muscle cars, which a C code Mustang is not. They still bring decent money and are easy to sell, but a project can still end up being a money pit, and I'd be wary of starting on one that "needs everything". You can probably buy a better car and end up with much less in it.
  6. The transmission code appears to be a "5", which would make the 4 speed correct for the car.
  7. I guess you could make the same argument about a '65 GT350, but there seems to be a market for such a thing...
  8. While a "rebody" is always a possibility, regardless of VINs, Marti reports, etc., if the car has a matching valid title and intact VIN tag and stampings then there is a valid code K car somewhere in its history. Not that it's relevant to the C code car in question, but there are also all sorts of small and not so small clues throughout a true K GT car that can help identify the car as real or questionable. Given part prices, it would be very expensive these days to duplicate a K GT beyond detection, and most of the fakes out there were done years ago with insufficient attention to details that are today easily recognizable. Still, an expert opinion is warranted in high dollar purchases of cars like a K GT convertible. On the other hand, I think its probably safe to assume the C code convertible is what it appears to be. Faking a C code would be an odd way to try to make a buck, although its entirely possible that the 4 speed is not original to the car.
  9. Not really rare, although certainly interesting. The fifth digit in the VIN (C) indicates it is the base 289-2V, which is dead common, which also means that it cannot be a GT, which would also have added some rarity/value. The 4 speed adds value, but wouldn't make it rare. If the fifth digit was a "K", you would have been looking at a 289 High Performance, maybe a GT, convertible, which would be fairly rare...and quite valuable.
  10. I just watched some highlights of the Kissimmee Auction and the "Old Reliable" '63 Zll Impala went for $525K...and that was still way less than the auction house estimate! Not bad for an old Chevy though. The old drag car prices are on a tear.
  11. Looking at those brochures reminds me how much I like/liked the styling of the Vega. I never owned one, but for me they were best of breed styling-wise, and set the standard for small car styling going forward. Every other small car from the era that I can think of looks dated and fairly ridiculous in today's world...but IMO that Vega still looks good. And, the V8 conversions were, and are, just way too cool.
  12. It's sad almost to the point of being comical that for a couple of dollars for a coolant recovery bottle a lot of the Vega engine woes would have never spite of the engine's weaknesses. I knew of several people who ran Vegas over 100K miles with few problems, but if you ever left them overheat, even once, you were probably going to lose an engine. Vegas, like probably all small cars of the era, would run hot enough when run hard in the heat to puke out a bit of coolant when you shut them off...not a big deal if you top the radiator off somewhat regularly. Unfortunately, the other problem with Vegas was that they were a Chevrolet, and Chevrolet owners just expected they could treat them like their old Impala...don't bother checking the radiator, if they get low on coolant and overheat just wait till the steam stops flying, fill the radiator back up and be on your way. Worked fine with an Impala, but a Vega, not so much. My recollection is that the imports weren't that spectacular either. I can remember a time when every Honda dealer had a continuous row of Civics waiting for a head gasket. Whenever someone was bragging about how great their Honda was I would interrupt and ask if they had blown a head gasket on theirs, and the reply was always, "well yeah, but they covered it under warranty". I will say that the import dealers tended to do a better job of smoothing customer feathers and covering things under warranty.
  13. You might take a look at some new gages the next time you're at a parts store. You may be able to find one with a similar seal, that you could use to "rebuild" your old gage.
  14. The other thing that the early Skylark/F85/Tempest have in common with the Corvair is that they have largely been left behind, in spite of the interesting and innovative technology that they were playing around with...rear transaxles, half-a-389 engine, aluminum V8s, turbochargers...lots of cool stuff there, as GM was trying to figure out "small" cars. In '64 the GTO (pretty conventional by comparison) and the Mustang (a spruced up Falcon) finally defined the trends that eventually defined the sixties, and in terms of value everything else got left behind. Today, the further you get away from what is considered a muscle car, the further down the price ladder you probably are.
  15. I figured as much, and anything you'd spend above and beyond Maaco you would never recover. The value in your Corvair was that it was your father's. If you just wanted a nice Corvair you'd be much better off selling what you have for whatever you could get for it and buying one, like the black one in the link, that is already could never get yours to that point for that price. That's just the way collector cars usually work. Better just to get yours to a point where you can enjoy driving it occasionally without getting a ridiculous amount of money into it. I can imagine that a black over black Spyder convertible with red interior drew quite a crowd sitting on the showroom floor in 1963...maybe next to an all-new Stingray split window fastback. Both beautiful cars. Those were GM glory days. I also imagine a lot of guys drooled over that Spyder before their wife made them settle for a pea green 4 door Biscayne, six cylinder with Powerglide, so there was more room for the fam!