I DD this 70 Wildcat. Drum brakes work fine for regular driving. This car came stock with 12" aluminum finned drums and a 455 Stage 1 engine. Mileage isn't great so I don't check it because, well, because it just wouldn't matter. I'd drive it anyway.
[URL=http://s240.photobucket.com/user/NOTATA/media/WILDCAT/018.jpg.html]
[/URL]
[URL=http://s240.photobucket.com/user/NOTATA/media/WILDCAT/003.jpg.html]
[/URL]
Beautiful car!
wae wrote: I wandered across a YouTube video a while back demonstrating an IIHS frontal impact test with a '59 Bel Air hitting a 2009 Impala or Malibu. I know that a '70s Luxo-Barge isn't really the same thing, but the difference is pretty wild. But, hey, if you want to be sure that you're safe, stay in your basement and clothe yourself in bubble wrap. I say go for it, but depending on where you're DDing to, be prepared for parking challenges. I DD my E-150 and today's parking spaces/garages/lots are not meant for things bigger than a Camry.
A rusty old X frame car that allegedly had no engine in a offset impact, pretty predictable results. By the late 60s those car had perimeter frames and at least some thought as to what happens in a crash.
This is more like it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIYkaEV4A60 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfW-8BdqA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Xm_h0qiLBA not great by today's standards, but certainly survivable.
EvanR wrote: Problem with a lot of big 70s iron is that it's very popular with the "donk" crowd, and so they get stupid pricey for what they are.
For what it's worth, at least down here that tax mainly applies to just the GM cars, Chevys in particular. I have seen early '70s Fords and Chryslers nicely priced.
Personally, I'd go for either a '71 Impala or '73 Delta 88.
JohnRW1621 wrote: The biggest drawback for me is the lack of intermittent wipers. To expand on that, I will never go back to DD'ing a vehicle that has a dashboard mounted wiper switch that is not easily reached like a stalk mounted switch.Here is the dash of a typical '77 Malibu like I had years ago. The round knob is the pull out for the headlights. The rectangle next to it is the wiper switch which slides sideways. Not particularly easy to operate and certainly not easy to reach. It is as far away as the tuning knob of the radio.
that's your biggest gripe? simple stuff that you get used to after a couple of days of driving it? i actually find the Malaise era GM dash layouts to be very well thought out- everything that the driver needs to get to can be reached without moving your torso in the seat and taking your eyes off the road.
look at it this way- if either the wiper switch or headlight switch goes bad, you are only out a $15 switch that can be replaced in 15 minutes with a couple of extremely basic hand tools with the interior totally intact (except for the AC duct that runs under the column if it has AC) and not a $150 "multi switch" that requires you to take the steering column apart and use a couple of different torx bits.. the hardest part of replacing that headlight switch is figuring out how to get your arm up there to push the button that allows the knob to pull out..
Kenny_McCormic wrote:wae wrote: I wandered across a YouTube video a while back demonstrating an IIHS frontal impact test with a '59 Bel Air hitting a 2009 Impala or Malibu. I know that a '70s Luxo-Barge isn't really the same thing, but the difference is pretty wild. But, hey, if you want to be sure that you're safe, stay in your basement and clothe yourself in bubble wrap. I say go for it, but depending on where you're DDing to, be prepared for parking challenges. I DD my E-150 and today's parking spaces/garages/lots are not meant for things bigger than a Camry.A rusty old X frame car that allegedly had no engine in a offset impact, pretty predictable results. By the late 60s those car had perimeter frames and at least some thought as to what happens in a crash. This is more like it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIYkaEV4A60 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kfW_-8BdqA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Xm_h0qiLBA not great by today's standards, but certainly survivable.
That's a much better result on those 70s-mobiles, for sure.
growing up with these cars made me fall in love with them. good examples are getting harder and harder to find, so many have gone to the scrapper or the derby. rot on these cars are so much easier to deal with, if it has frame rot and you have a welder very easy to repair i had a nice side business in the 80's plating and welding frames on these cars in Pa. i know its not right but i have used more pop rivots on some GM cars trunk and floor pans that my hand would cramp up at night. we didnt have low priced mig welders back then and welding sheet metal with a stick welder was a little hard
i feel the best ones are 1976 to 1979 sevilles. the only trouble is so do a lot of other people price just keeps going up on them.....i do have one sitting in a sea container waiting for when i retire to bring back to life
I think it is funny that the same general group that is busy whiling away nights and weekends putting more HP into home made Locosts and Spitfires than a new 911 Turbo came with 10yrs ago think a 70s era car is inherently unsafe.
We are a berkeleyed up bunch.
EDIT: Find cutter67 and buy his Monte Carlo.
nicksta43 wrote:Mmadness wrote: My real concern for one of these would be safety. Not only is handling, braking and acceleration appalling, but there are virtually no safety features whatsoever. If you were going for a car of this nature, I'd consider a W116 or W126 Mercedes.Personal opinion but I would much rather have something from the big three from that time period than a Merc.
The W126 is generally a pretty reliable car, it might get better mileage and I am willing to bet it is safer but parts will be more expensive and it won't be quite as easy to work one.
Anyway I am not going to discourage anyone from buying a massive '70s land yacht and DD'ing it. 
Rad_Capz wrote: I DD this 70 Wildcat. Drum brakes work fine for regular driving. This car came stock with 12" aluminum finned drums and a 455 Stage 1 engine. Mileage isn't great so I don't check it because, well, because it just wouldn't matter. I'd drive it anyway. [URL=http://s240.photobucket.com/user/NOTATA/media/WILDCAT/018.jpg.html]
One of the first cars I drove when I was in high school was my mom's '64 Wildcat with those same drum brakes, but no power booster. I used to stand on the wide pedal with both feet to stop that beast. My regular car was a '73 Mazda RX-2, so you can imagine the contrast.
I daily drove a '66 Pontiac for a few years, about 10 years years ago. Other than gas mileage there's no reason not to do it. Well, mine only had lap belts and would have been horribly dangerous in a collision, but that's why you try not to get into accidents. It would have been much safer than the motorcycle I commute with now.
I recently picked up a 71 Ford LTD 4 door for $1250. It needed paint, but the interior is damn near perfect, the old guy I bought it from went through all the mechanicals, so it runs and drives great, and it even has good tires! I just painted it (dark metallic green) and am in the process of cutting down the clear, then will polish it, so I hope to have it on the road in the next couple of weeks and split my commuting days between it and my k1200s (DDing an early 70s car and a bike...take that safety!!!). I didn't calculate mpg on the trip home, but I highly doubt the 351c with 2 barrel gets worse than my old 4x4 suburban, so no real worries there. I say find a car you like and go for it.
cutter67 wrote: growing up with these cars made me fall in love with them. good examples are getting harder and harder to find, so many have gone to the scrapper or the derby. rot on these cars are so much easier to deal with, if it has frame rot and you have a welder very easy to repair i had a nice side business in the 80's plating and welding frames on these cars in Pa. i know its not right but i have used more pop rivots on some GM cars trunk and floor pans that my hand would cramp up at night. we didnt have low priced mig welders back then and welding sheet metal with a stick welder was a little hard
There's a '77 on my local Craigslist that's under the challenge budget. I'll go plop it in the $2013 classifieds.
Disadvantages: They drink gasoline like it's going out of style and handle like an old lady in sweatpants.
Advantages:?
In reply to chaparral:
Why do people think EVERY older fullsize car sucks down gas like a pro dragster?
My 71 454ss Chevelle with a holly carb and 4.10 gears drinks gas...yes that is true.
My 78 Trans Am all stock with the Quadrajet and 3.42s does pretty good.
I'm curious to see what the LTD gets with the 351/2 barrel, and highway gears. Hopefully I will have a chance to test it soon.
cutter67 wrote: growing up with these cars made me fall in love with them. good examples are getting harder and harder to find, so many have gone to the scrapper or the derby. rot on these cars are so much easier to deal with, if it has frame rot and you have a welder very easy to repair i had a nice side business in the 80's plating and welding frames on these cars in Pa. i know its not right but i have used more pop rivots on some GM cars trunk and floor pans that my hand would cramp up at night. we didnt have low priced mig welders back then and welding sheet metal with a stick welder was a little hard
My late grandfather had a black one with red leather interior. It also had a RR grill and wire wheels and some sort of hump on the trunk like a continental. Overall, it did not look bad.. but was definatly "pimpin"
And one of the most comfy cars to ride in ever
chaparral wrote: Disadvantages: They drink gasoline like it's going out of style and handle like an old lady in sweatpants. Advantages:?
Advantages....Hmmmm you know what i cant think of any really......there is just something about driving these big old tanks that puts a smile on my face and the people in the car with me. its like being in a time machine. they take me back to a time that i really enjoyed. the boats from the 60's really does it for me.
how many here are old enough to remember laying up on the back shelf behind the backseat and sleeping on long trips when you were a kid.
i learned to drive in a 1973 caddy fleetwood and the first thing we would do is flip the lid upside down on the air cleaner for the induction noise.
there is something to be said about skinny steering wheels and sofa like front seats
Cotton wrote: In reply to chaparral: Why do people think EVERY older fullsize car sucks down gas like a pro dragster? My 71 454ss Chevelle with a holly carb and 4.10 gears drinks gas...yes that is true. My 78 Trans Am all stock with the Quadrajet and 3.42s does pretty good. I'm curious to see what the LTD gets with the 351/2 barrel, and highway gears. Hopefully I will have a chance to test it soon.
I'd rather hit 20's in a fun, powerful car with a nice growl than 30's in an econobox that's frustratingly slow and soul suckingly tepid.
David S. Wallens wrote:EvanR wrote: Problem with a lot of big 70s iron is that it's very popular with the "donk" crowd, and so they get stupid pricey for what they are.For what it's worth, at least down here that tax mainly applies to just the GM cars, Chevys in particular. I have seen early '70s Fords and Chryslers nicely priced. Personally, I'd go for either a '71 Impala or '73 Delta 88.
A '73 Delta 88 like Sam Raimi's? Cool.
I still want a '72 Fury III 2-door with hidden headlights.
cutter67 wrote: growing up with these cars made me fall in love with them.
Growing up with these cars firmly cemented my love and appreciation for contemporary European cars with smaller dimensions and displacement and better manners.
Now I admit I'm coming back to appreciate the ridiculousness of these cars, and the ease of maintenance and price for parts. Whenever I see them I think of the "Streets of San Francisco", with the cars moving and bobbing over the road like boats on the water.
CL is full of Galaxies, LTD's, late 70's Grand Prixs (which I argue qualify for this category) but what I like to look out for is a nicely kept Diplomat, no vinyl on the roof, working A/C and a 318.
OK, had to make a quick check for Diplomats and New Yorkers. Check this out:
http://stjoseph.craigslist.org/cto/3734916252.html
I love the 70's Chrysler big cars. Find one with a 318- they are stupid reliable. I used to daily drive a '74 Plymouth Satellite. With a 2.76 rear, 3 speed auto, and a 2 bbl carb I eeked out 20mpg on the highway, more typically 17 or 18 in mixed driving. Then I got silly and dropped in a warm 360, 4 barrel, 3.23 gears, dual exhaust, and was lucky to hit mid-teens. The 318 is really where it's at, and they even put them in full-size cars like the Fury and Monaco. The only problem is body parts can be hard to find, so watch out for collision damage or rust.
Torsion bars up front and leaf springs in the back. Such a nice ride. And the patented single-finger Mopar power steering.
I'd likely be DD-ing one now if it would get better mileage. I keep thinking about a diesel swap and veggie oil conversion.
I DD'd a 1971 Eldorado for a couple of years. The gas consumption would have been comical--- if I wasn't paying the bill.
( 7-9 around town--- 12.5 once on the highway)
In 1971 it had automatic climate control, a tilt (and telescopic) steering wheel, auto-dim headlights, and of course power everything.
After a hard day of work, it was fantastic to sink into that huge leather couch of a front seat and float home.
With the 500cid engine it had plenty of power too. What people forget about the "Malise" days cars is that although they were way down on horsepower, they still made tons of torque, so most weren't terribly slow.
It was longer than a Suburban--- the only longer car I found (yes I used to pull up along side of cars to judge their length as a game...) was a mid 70's Chrysler New Yorker 4 door. Mopar made some absolutely enormous cars in the mid - late 70s!
Joe Gearin wrote: Mopar made some absolutely enormous cars in the mid - late 70s!
I have no proof, but it always seemed to me that Plymouth Furys like this has the single largest body panel in existence. Just look at the length of that rear fender!
You'll need to log in to post.
