Jump to content

Do I have a 150 or a 210 car?


Recommended Posts

Quarter looks wavy some old rust repair? , glass out and needs headliner? My guess as it's sitting 5500-6500.  That's a real sell out the door price assuming it needs various mechanical work as well. Depending on condition of interior aside from headliner and if it's not rusty or patched up,  maybe 2 grand more , so 7500-8500 if everything else is great but that would probably be about tops as is.  Will most likely need full servicing including brakes and tires to be made a driver so you get banged for that maybe gas tank, and exhaust system. 

Nice examples you can drive home start in the very low teens with no rust or repair and nice turn key shape. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has Bel Air trim but you’d have to post the vin to know what it really is. Adding trim to 150’s and 210’s was common. Remember the. 210 I sold and dad had all the Bel Air trim to go with it? I found out researching that car that it is very common. 

 

I got 10k for my 210 with a 70’s SBC on eBay. It wasn’t running and it was apart, but there was a good body and no rust. Had good glass also. The floor boards had been repaired for rust. The paint needed to be wet sanded and/or redone. The value was mainly in the rust free body. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1dXsbLUT7ueP19wHV_VD1jpg704K3wckC

Edited by victorialynn2 (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, victorialynn2 said:

 

I got 10k for my 210 with a 70’s SBC on eBay. It wasn’t running and it was apart, but there was a good body and no rust.

The photos suggest that your car was a 2 door sedan, whereas the OP’s car is a 4 door.  Two door sedans are much more in demand than four doors.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Dosmo said:

The photos suggest that your car was a 2 door sedan, whereas the OP’s car is a 4 door.  Two door sedans are much more in demand than four doors.

True. I just posted my car for some frame of reference but neglected to make this valid distinction. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just throwing this out there but the younger crowd doesn't seem to make as much of a distinction between 2 and 4 doors on these cars - they didn't grow up with 2 door cars the way some did and it's harder and harder to find 2 doors in decent shape to work with so if they are after a particular model and year they are more willing to take a 4 door.  As an added bonus as VictoriaLynn has pointed out this is a real BelAir

1 hour ago, victorialynn2 said:

Looks like an 8 cylinder Bel Air from the factory as designated by “VC”. 

http://www.sanjosechevys.org/Tech/tech_decode_trifive_55_57_VIN.htm

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, 3macboys said:

Just throwing this out there but the younger crowd doesn't seem to make as much of a distinction between 2 and 4 doors on these cars - they didn't grow up with 2 door cars the way some did and it's harder and harder to find 2 doors in decent shape to work with so if they are after a particular model and year they are more willing to take a 4 door.  As an added bonus as VictoriaLynn has pointed out this is a real BelAir

 

I have noticed on various sites that the 4 doors seem to be gaining a fan club as well. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone driven a 1955 Chev Bel air?

 

The only reason I do not spend any money on it.. It drives like crap.. It is like driving an old farm truck..

 

I should know I was ask to drive it to local cars shows..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a 57 4 door sedan in recent enough history to remember how it drove and it drove quite well.  No wander, started and stopped well other than some brake fade on a series of long downhill grades with corners a friend who was copiloting forgot to mention were coming up.  My guess is it's probably tired mechanically and in need of work to bring it up to snuff.  Worn suspension and steering will drastically effect the way it drives. My friend always says if they drove this way when new,  they never would have sold.  So many cars get used up then parked.  People find them,  make them pretty but often never touch anything mechanical.  

Edited by auburnseeker (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a 55 Bel Air 30 yrs. ago. At that time it was a sound original car with a good but faded original interior and 1 1980’s repaint (in fact I saw your post and almost asked if it was bought out of Ingham Co. MI).

 

At anyrate, that car drove like crap! Engine ran beautifully and never had any problems (other than slight leaks we never looked into). But it handled like an old hay wagon. If the suggested speed limit on a curve was posted at 35mph I had to do 25 — felt like it was going to turn right over and probably would’ve. At the same time I had a 1952 Studebaker V-8 - that car seemed like it had a lot more power (even though at 120hp it didn’t), but the handling was 40 years ahead. Could take a 35mph curve at 40 at least, better than a ‘modern’ car.

But mostly I hated that Bel Air’s automatic transmission - claimed to be a 3 speed/overdrive but I swear it only shifted ONCE. (Someone tried to explain this to me - didn’t sink in) Real sluggish.

As someone just pointed out, the suspension + steering must be maintained - they do wear and will have drastic effect. This may have contributed to the ‘hay wagon’ riding characteristics described earlier, but maybe because I hated that transmission so much I never looked into it. 
Beautiful car — hated the way it drove. Never took it out much. Would never get another one. Had it I think about 10 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S. When I 1st got that Bel Air my grandfather actually drove it. He had owned one brand-new, and if the handling had deteriorated from what he remembered he didn’t say anything. He was a pretty particular and thoughtful guy and certainly would have said something — so I always assumed that’s the way they always handled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember your Chevrolet was the entry level GM product in a long lineup of vehicles when each division designed, engineered and built their own products.  Not like today when platforms, engines transmissions etc are badge engineered.  Thinking that a Chevrolet (from the begining to the 70's) was a 50,000 mile vehicle and Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac were each a step up in everything that made an automobile.  Why would they overbuild a Chevrolet when you could buy a better vehicle just by going a step or two up the scale.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My Dad's car was a 1957 Chevy Bel Air convertible, at the moment in my life when I was totally in love with cars, but did not yet have a driver's license. When I finally started driving, I fell in love with this car...even though it now had a lot of mileage, plenty of rust, and was fading away. 

 

On the other hand, I had a chance a few years ago to drive a clients' 57 convertible to a car show for him, and I must admit I had forgotten about that HUGE diameter steering wheel, etc. 

 

Like my old Hupp, a 55-57 Chevy is great fun to drive as a vintage car, but I'm glad that my daily driver 2014 Silverado is so much more refined. 

  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, nick8086 said:

This two door 1955 Studebaker did not drive very good also..

dictator.JPG

Well, that surprises me. I don’t think Studebaker altered their suspension much even with the ‘53 re-design. But maybe the body weights had changed? (I think they were still calling it planar suspension then? Don’t remember.)

 

I don’t know... Here’s a photo of my ‘52 taken around 1986. Looked like hell but it sure drove nice. After I gave it to a co-worker 30yrs later he took me for a drive in it around the sandy hills in Ionia MI. He remarked, “Man, this thing really drives like a modern car!” I had to think about that and said, “Well, it was designed near hilly areas around S. Bend — I suppose it was made for roads a lot like this.” It did handle nice. I always got the 26mpg the factory claimed in ‘52 too.

Man I wish I still had that car....

 

Good luck with your car

1BD6BF01-5C3F-4813-B196-E440DC1C4571.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Studebaker suspension had almost no changes after 53, and was similar back to 51 at least if not further. Steering bellcranks are often shot due to lack of maintenance. That causes huge amounts of slop. It is also a kingpin suspension, so bad kingpins are fairly common. Studebakers drive really nice when they are not all worn out.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...