I am going to raise a few eyebrows withthis, but I am curious: WHY do old "standard"(and by that, I mean, non-muscle type, non-exciting ) cars, attract people for, anyway? NOW-- Let me be CLEAR on what I am talking about-- specifically, late '60's to early '80's non fuel-injected cars,in particular, 70's cars, that were a JOKE, in that they had NO power(typical accelleration figures of 14 seconds or MORE, from 0 to 60, WITH a v-8 of 350 or bigger, )TERRIBLE gas mileage, (12 MPG was considered GOOD), took FOREVER to stop, Cornered like a big rig,they WORE OUT, at UNDER 100k,the bodies rusted away, and so on . This applied to cars like a 1973 Caprice, montego, grand-am, dodge coronet, etc. I mean, a 1975 mercury Monarch, with a 302, ONLY put out 130HP!!, Form a 302!!
As some know, I am thinking of buying an older car, right now. BUT-- the "old" car, I am considering, is an '89, with port injection, and good suspension. It does 0-60 in UNDER 10 seconds, handles corners like some sports cars,and stops from 60 in about 150ft. Whats more, the fuel mileage is about 23mpg average--, and with care, it would go to over 200-250k miles, before it is ready for the junkyard.
SO, after seing some reports on those old '70's cars, and the pi$$-poor ratings, I must say ,that I would NEVER want to get one, for ANY reason. I can understand the fascination with the cars from the '50's, and to the nmid-60's, but the '70's cars , in my opinion, were pure JUNK. I owned one, a 77 buick regal, and it was SLOW, it drank the gas,(350 v-8) it was VERY unreliable, I couldn't usually go more than a month or so, before it needed serious repairs, and it handled poorly. My Olds I had recently, (till 2003) would had left it about halfway behind it, in a race, with a SMALLER engine, and nearly DOUBLE the gas mileage!! And, up till about 200k, I had good luck with the Olds, needing only general repairs, every 6 months or so, and the biggest thing to fail, up till then, was the ball-joints and wheel bearings, at about 160k. The same applied to the 78 Dodge Magnum XE, my mother owned, I driove it a couople of times, and it was NOT that fast, for a 360v-8.
Unlike old audio equipment, which seems to go forever, with a little maintenance, 70's cars seem to be junk, at under 100k, and as far as I am concerned, 70's cars, wiht a few exceptions are pure JUNK!!!!!
As some know, I am thinking of buying an older car, right now. BUT-- the "old" car, I am considering, is an '89, with port injection, and good suspension. It does 0-60 in UNDER 10 seconds, handles corners like some sports cars,and stops from 60 in about 150ft. Whats more, the fuel mileage is about 23mpg average--, and with care, it would go to over 200-250k miles, before it is ready for the junkyard.
SO, after seing some reports on those old '70's cars, and the pi$$-poor ratings, I must say ,that I would NEVER want to get one, for ANY reason. I can understand the fascination with the cars from the '50's, and to the nmid-60's, but the '70's cars , in my opinion, were pure JUNK. I owned one, a 77 buick regal, and it was SLOW, it drank the gas,(350 v-8) it was VERY unreliable, I couldn't usually go more than a month or so, before it needed serious repairs, and it handled poorly. My Olds I had recently, (till 2003) would had left it about halfway behind it, in a race, with a SMALLER engine, and nearly DOUBLE the gas mileage!! And, up till about 200k, I had good luck with the Olds, needing only general repairs, every 6 months or so, and the biggest thing to fail, up till then, was the ball-joints and wheel bearings, at about 160k. The same applied to the 78 Dodge Magnum XE, my mother owned, I driove it a couople of times, and it was NOT that fast, for a 360v-8.
Unlike old audio equipment, which seems to go forever, with a little maintenance, 70's cars seem to be junk, at under 100k, and as far as I am concerned, 70's cars, wiht a few exceptions are pure JUNK!!!!!