Big Beat
-
Posts
201 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by Big Beat
-
-
The car I miss most wasn't even mine. It was a Dodge Dart owned by my neighbor. Two door hardtop, dark green with a black vinyl roof. She was the original owner and kept it in mint condition well into the late 1980's. I drove that car a couple of times on errands for her and replaced the grille on it for her once when it got damaged. Always thought it was the most beautiful car on our street and kept dreaming about buying it off her some day. She wouldn't sell it, but said that if she ever did, I'd be the one. One year while I was away at college, the old lady passed away, her daughter got the car and immediately wrecked it.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">specifically box sets or annual collections.
</div></div>
I have a bunch of these to sell, PM me.
As for records in general, I have been collecting them for over 20 years now. Mostly LP's, but some 78's as well. The oldest record in my collection is a Victor from 1899. And yes, I have an original vintage Victrola to play it (and the other 78's) on. If I had a 1920's or older car, I'd bring the Victrola and some records to the car shows. Some people do that, and I think it's great. This wouldn't work with my '79 Chevy, though. With that, I sometimes bring a big 1980's JVC boombox
These days I'm just as likely to get the music on CD, just for the convenience. By now, just about everything has been reissued, and the stuff that hasn't, you're not likely to find in any format anyway. Some records sound better than CD's to my ears, but not always. The collection is still mostly vinyl though.
-
Great drawings there, by the way. That pic of a kid doodling in class sure rings a bell. Here's some of the doodling I've done in my schooldays:
-
I was car-crazy since the youngest childhood.
At 4, I could name every car that drove by.
At 5, I stole my uncle's car for a very brief ride (folks, don't ever leave a kid in a car with keys in it, not even for "a minute". If uncle hadn't done a championship sprint to jump in as I was driving off, I might not be here telling this story today. But even while barely big enough to see over the dashboard, I already knew how to take off in a car with a MANUAL
)
At 11, dad bought our first family car, a used '74 Mazda RX-4 Rotary wagon. Nobody in our family ever owned a car prior to that. So knowing no better, of course our first car just had to be the worst lemon ever. The car died a few months later. Having no money - or garage, or proper tools - dad and I rebuilt that damned rotary engine in the street in the middle of winter.
At 14, I started working part-time jobs and saving every penny. So at 17, I was able to buy my first car with my own money, a '79 Monte Carlo.
20 years later, I found one just like it, same year, same color. And that's my baby today. During those years I've had several much older cars ('58 Chevy, etc.), but had to let them go. The Monte may not be a very interesting choice to most folks here, but it's for keeps.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Some folks have this ideological romance with having an old car without realizing they aren't for the faint of heart. Obviously this guy wanted the romance without the work. </div></div>
That is pretty much my take on it, too. I find this situation quite common, actually. If you grew up driving carbureted, pre-computer, pre-safety era cars, you learn to appreciate all the modern conveniences, but also have the necessary background to handle a vintage car even if it's much older than the ones you drove back then. But jumping into a vintage machine when your only automotive experience was with crumple-zoned, fuel injected Hondas, can be a real rude awakening. At that point you either adapt, learn and become an enthusiast, or miss the point and start whining.
-
I don't know any owners, I just have a minor interest in old Russian cars. If I ever come across a nice one at a good price, I'll consider buying it. But right now it's all just theoretical
-
I remember that cover. Good luck with your search!
There is also a Zis-110 in California somewhere, captured in Korea in 1951 and brought back by an American general. There were pics of it in October 1951 Popular Science. That's a year BEFORE your Pobeda. Let us know if you find it too
-
Why the interest in the Pobeda? Just because it's something exotic, or is there something about that specific one?
As far as I know, no Soviet car was ever officially brought into this country, though a few may have come through Canada or Mexico. I personally saw a Chaika (GAZ-13) convertible in New York about 8 years ago, supposedly one that Kruschev brought with him in the early 60's and then left behind.
Throughout the 90's, a lot of vintage cars left Russia because they were very cheap, as the Russians only wanted the newly available used imports and financial hardships forced many sales. These days, they are far more respectful of their own automotive history and far less likely to let good examples go cheap. Nevertheless, I'm sure finding and importing a Pobeda shouldn't be any more difficult than with any old car from Europe. If it was me, I'd go for a Volga (GAZ-21, the next model after Pobeda).
-
Dynaflash8,
thanks. I'm 40 and have been into old cars for as long as I can remember. My father taught me how to do my own maintenance and simple repairs on our family cars since I was about 10, and it only snowballed from there. I learned to drive on my uncle's '67 Chevelle, which was just a used car then but already a year or two older than me. I used to go to junkyards and collect emblems off of old cars. Inherited a collection of old car books from a Model T owner (sadly, the car was sold before I ever had the chance to see it). By the time I bought my own car at 17, it was a '79 Chevy only because I couldn't afford a '56 Packard
-
>>>>There is a tendancy to like to restore what you learned to drive with
This is certainly true in my case, as my first car was a '79 Monte, so I bought my current one because it was like coming home after 20 years. The age of the car wasn't an issue that influenced my choice, it's not as if I have any special affinity for 70's cars in general, just this specific one.
But I owned 50's and 60's cars in the past, cars made before I was born. And if I ever have the time & money to have more than one old car at a time, I'd like something even older, maybe even pre-war. Not because of any personal significance, but just because I like the style. And also because I prefer the unique and the different, something that's not just another street rod or muscle car like a zillion others.
-
I took my '79 Monte Carlo to a local "antique car show" for the first time last year. I was worried that I would be turned away at the gate and told to park it in the visitor lot instead of the show field, that my car wouldn't be considered old enough. I was SHOCKED to discover that at least a third of the cars were no older than mine (late model Mustangs and Plymouth Prowlers, anyone?), and most of the rest were just late 60's / early 70's muscle cars. Silly me, I expected to see mostly 1920's - 1950's vehicles. There were only about 5 pre-war cars out of about 500 cars total and the 1950's cars were mostly represented only by the '55-'57 Chevys.
I realize that a small local show is no Hershey, but it is far more indicative of the general trend. THIS is what most people call "antique".
I too find 1950's and older cars far more interesting and collectible. But in a few months, my '79 will be 30 years old. Back when it was brand new, people were already buying and restoring "antique cars" that were far less than 30 years old at that time, and nobody was saying they weren't old enough. Just how old does an old car have to be before it's percieved as old, anyway?
-
'69 Pontiac Catalina hardtop. I bought it off an old lady original owner for $100 and was in the process of restoring it, my first old car project. The car ran beautifully and had a dead mint interior, but had rust issues and needed lots of bodywork. Then the frame rusted out under the engine and the car was no longer drivable. I was a student, living in an apartment, no place to store a car, no money to rent a garage. I begged my father to leave it in his driveway through the winter, so that I could save a little money and pick up the restoration in the spring. He refused. I couldn't even hold the car long enough to sell it because I kept getting parking tickets every week, so I wedged a 2x4 under the engine and drove the car to the junkyard under its own power. I still cannot calmly look at an old Catalina, especially considering what they cost now. And it was mine, for just $100. Ughhh.
-
Paul
thanks. I checked the DMV site too, and as you quote, a '79 should be old enough to be exempt. What's strange is that out of the four shops I went to, ALL FOUR didn't know this. That's what confused me and made me think there's some new law or something that I wasn't aware of. Strange.
-
I'm currently in a bit of a runaround to get my '79 Chevy inspected here in New York. Three of the shops I stopped by were all smiles and "sure, we can do the inspection for you today", until they came out and saw the car is an older one. Then all of a sudden it was "uh... sorry, our machine is broken".
After I got fed up with getting the same excuse everywhere I went, I asked the fourth guy point blank what the deal was. He reluctantly explained that all cars made prior to 1995 need a special test on a dynamometer machine, which is very expensive and fickle, and which every station tries to avoid using if they can help it. It is simply not worth their hassle for a busy shop to do inspections for the odd old car.
Now I am totally confused. I thought that cars over 25 years old are totally exempt from the emissions part of the inspection anyway. So my '79 wouldn't even need to use their precious dynamometer, and it should have been just be a simple, quick safety inspection at any shop I went to. But apparently if not one of four different repair shops thought of this, maybe I'm wrong to assume so? Does anyone here who has recently had an old car inspected in NY know what the deal is?
Just in case, the car is in excellent condition and I cannot see any reason why it wouldn't pass inspection with flying colors... if only I can find a shop to inspect it at!
-
If a '58 Buick was anything like my '58 Chevy (which of course it had to be), then I'm sure it was a very nice car.
But styling-wise, I much prefer the early to mid-fifties Buicks. Up until '56 they were just great. But Buick kinda dropped the ball in '57 and was totally lost in '58. Both were one-year-only bodies that sold poorly. Going by 50's perceptions, they were simply unpopular because of that bloated, overdecorated, graceless styling. Today, they're cool out of kitsch and sheer perversity
-
If you have nobody to leave it to, SELL IT yourself while you still have your facilities and some control over who to sell to. I have seen what happens with an estate full of stuff where nobody with any kind of sentimental attachment is around to make decisions, and it's not pretty. Enjoy it while you can, pass it on if you can. But if not, then just let it go. Sell it to another collector. Even sell it at a price below value if you know it's going to a good home and the young enthusiastic buyer truly appreciates the gesture. Don't wait until the last minute. Unless you know exactly which of your surviving relatives will get the car and take good care of it, SELL IT when you can no longer enjoy it yourself. Trust me, while your car is special to you, your other relatives would much rather have the cash.
-
I was into cars since my earliest childhood. At 4, I was already a pro: I "borrowed" my uncle's car and managed to start it and take off (folks, never leave a car crazy kid alone in the car with the keys in the ignition, even for a minute, even if you're just a few feet away). At 14, I started saving my pennies from all the little after school jobs, and at 17 I bought my first car with my own money. It was just a used car, but it was very special to me because it was my first. I drove it for five years until the engine died, and was always sorry for letting it go instead of repairing it.
Since then I had many other cars, including some vintage ones ('58 Bel Air, '69 Catalina, etc.). They came and went, but after a while, I started to really miss my old Monte. In over 25 years, I had never seen another in that exact color combination, yellow with black cloth interior. For some reason, these cars are far more common in 70's colors like polyester pantsuit blue, squished avocado green, generic tan and burned prune juice burgundy. These tend to look dated rather than classic, especially the ones with vinyl interiors and Landau vinyl roofs, which are inevitably found cracked, greasy and peeling. A lot of Montes were also modified and hot-rodded with absolutely no taste or appreciation. So when a couple of years ago I saw this nice, clean, all-original Monte in the exact same colors as my first one, I just couldn't pass it up. What a blast from the past! Quarter of a century later, it's good to have my baby back again. I enjoyed my Bel Airs and Catalinas, but this time it's personal.
The car is bone stock with the original 305 V8. A proverbial southern "little old lady car", it had only 32K miles when I bought it. I'm the second owner. It already gets lots of nice comments at shows - there is always a whole row of Corvettes and '57's, but mine is usually the only '79 Monte.
Third generation Montes are very underrated, I think. They're just the right size. Those classic coke bottle lines look great on them, they have their own understated elegance. And they pretty much define the end of Detroit's golden age. These were the last classic Chevys. There's a quarter century between the two pics. She may not be universally appreciated yet, but time is on her side
-
By now, pretty much anything from the late 60's and older already has some collector interest. I also think that eventually almost every car from the 70's will become collectible too. Just like today every single pre-war car is instantly collectible, regardless of what make it is.
The 70's cars, aside from the quality issues, had some interesting designs to them, and reflect their era nicely. They may have been terrible as transportation when new, but as collectibles, their visual and nostalgic aspects are far more important than their poor build quality. I wouldn't want a Pinto or Gremlin as my daily driver, but when taking one out to the occasional car show, its poor durability is a moot point. In fact, these cars' general crappiness makes them more collectible, not less. They're fun to make fun of, and they engender a sort of reverse snob appeal for some people. There was a time when an old Edsel screamed "loser" too, but few think that today, nor does it prevent anybody from appreciating Edsels at shows.
Also, while these cars may have been common as used junkers not too long ago, nice clean ones are already much more rare than people think. My avatar shows my '79 Monte Carlo. It looked good to me 23 years ago when it was just a used car, and it looks only better with age. It already gets lots of nice comments at shows. A few more years, and nobody will expect a Monte owner to have a mullet anymore
-
Gotcha. Now, just for the sake of argument, what if it wasn't a '79 Chevy but rather some Packard or Maxwell or a Wills St. Claire or something? Would adding "retroactive options" make a difference then?
-
Thanks for the welcome
The car is certainly "off the pedestal". It is driven and enjoyed. I am also not averse to functional upgrades, for example I converted the A/C to the modern refrigerant, and I'm afraid the air in the tires is no longer original either. Or the tires themselves. And while well-worn '79 Montes in black primer and a zillion tacky low-rider type add-ons are indeed a dime a dozen, a mint original with only 33K miles on it is indeed a rarity. It may not be as appreciated as a 30's or 50's car is today, but it will be just as "classic" in a few more years, so don't knock it.
I have owned older cars in the past, including a '58 Chevy and a '69 Pontiac. Both required all sorts of repairs, from engine work to frame welding to sheet metal replacement, and in such situations worrying about things like the original radio was a moot point. But owning a car that has been completely unmolested, offers a slightly different perspective, hence the question.
-
What's your opinion on adding a "retroactive option" that is correct for the model year, but not original to the specific car?
For example, my car, a 100% original and totally stock '79 Chevy, has an AM radio. I can easily find a Delco AM/FM/cassette radio from that era and retrofit it. The same kind of radio that the original owner could have ordered, but didn't. And it would look just fine in its place, and no one would know. But I myself will know, and it will grate on me. Because then my all original car will not really be all original anymore, the dash has now been opened up and messed with, so why not just go the whole hog and put in a brand new CD changer, it's just as bad...
Or, let's say, finding and upgrading to a fancier set of "rally" rims, optional when new but still not original to THIS car? A car is only original once and all that. I know it's a minor point, but what do you folks think?
Need advice on car selection -- thanks
in General Discussion
Posted
The '85 Riviera is the only one I'd consider off that list. The Allante is too fussy, a car you really have to be into to put up with. And that Dynasty looks better to me than any of the others.