What 1967 or older car?

Kind of a thought exercise more than anything.  The EPA thread had me thinking, if it ever got bad enough that whatever state I am living in decides to start doing equipment inspections on any car that falls under the clean air act, what would I buy as a moddable weekend/fun car.  I think I'd avoid anything too large, so, probably mid-sized or compact.  It'd be nice to have some aftermarket, so it doesn't require a ton of work to improve the handling.  If I was loaded, I think a 67 Camaro would be a good bet, but I suspect I'd have more of a Ford Falcon budget.  Since the Mustang is based on it, there should already be an easy button for changing up the front suspension, cutting down the front shock towers, and throwing in an LS.  I'm sure there are hundreds of other options out there, too.  If I didn't care about driving in bad weather, a t-bucket kit car would be fun.

Just look at what the California-based hot rodding magazines build, because that's why they build what they build :) Also be aware that "throwing in an LS" may mean you have to meet the emissions requirements of the newer engine - or maybe you can use the EROD, which has an EO for any car built before 1996. Generally speaking, engine swaps with a newer engine means you have to use the emissions of that newer engine.

Handling is not a concern of the EPA, just emissions. You're mostly musing on handling mods. Something to think about there too. I'm not really seeing the need for a pre-68 given what's in your post, you could go nearly 30 years newer.

Volvo Amazon

Falcon wagon or 4 door for cheapness 

In reply to EvanB :

I think that would be my pick as well. 

You can have a car that you mod without disturbing the emissions equipment too.

Chevelle, because they are a much, much better driving car than a Falcon or Dart.

Or Cutlass, with 455.

Keith Tanner said:

Just look at what the California-based hot rodding magazines build, because that's why they build what they build :) Also be aware that "throwing in an LS" may mean you have to meet the emissions requirements of the newer engine - or maybe you can use the EROD, which has an EO for any car built before 1996. Generally speaking, engine swaps with a newer engine means you have to use the emissions of that newer engine.

Handling is not a concern of the EPA, just emissions. You're mostly musing on handling mods. Something to think about there too. I'm not really seeing the need for a pre-68 given what's in your post, you could go nearly 30 years newer.

Oh, I'd want to go fast in a straight line, too .  And while the car needs to meet the emission requirements of the engine, I'm operating under the assumption it'd never get inspected in the first place.

1st generation Buick Riviera. They are very competent.  I have run the Ortega Highway between Dana point and lake elsinore many times in 64 and 65 Rivieras the brakes need improvement. Going uphill they are fun

Mustang is the easy button. Falcon somewhat less so, but same idea. Ford's suspension is...not great, but there are solutions aplenty. If you go to a 66 Falcon/Fairlane you get a wider engine bay, better dimensions for handling and a nearly identical light curb weight. This was the motivation for my current project:

You're in Ohio right? They'll have to do something about rust destroying the vehicles long before emissions I imagine. That's where all the cars too rusty for PA get dumped. 

Maybe I just don't understand. I don't like government, period full stop. But I like being uncomfortable even less, and vehicles that old are not usually comfortable places to spend large amounts of time. Sure they're fun to look at, but even "restomodded" they're slow, reliability is entirely whimsical, and insurance rates aren't getting any cheaper as parts supplies dry up. 

Yes, I absolutely want a 50s and a 60s caddy. To stare at, and take long summer rides with. To commute in year round? Hell no. Disc brakes, working HVAC, enough power to get out of its own way and maybe not need to stop at every single gas station between here and there are much more desirable traits for me personally. 

I'm not saying don't, and I'm not saying it can't be done on the cheap, I'm just saying for me there are better places to spend that kind of headache.

Now all that said, the real answer is a late 50s el Camino with the massive fins like SVREX had/has. Or a caddy convertible, again with the massive fins. Unless you're talking lottery money or entire retirement account money, in which case, the answer is 1930s Rolls Royce.

GM A-body or an X-body.  Falcon is cute, but flimsy and not much on the excitement.  At least with the GMs you get parts-bin performance pieces.

Not much from Mopar excites me in those years.  Floppy, long-throw shifters with truck-like ratios (because they were truck transmissions), and dopey styling (my opinion).

If you're thinking about AMC, drive one first.  They were the Lada/Yugo of their time.  Bare minimum to meet loose standards.  Braking:  Yes, they technically have brakes, but they don't work.  Steering:  Yes, they steer.  Not very far, and the ackerman is somewhere between north and north west.  I've owned a couple and they were fun and bulletproof, but a chore to drive.

In reply to RevRico :

I dailied a 71 Cutlass with 4 wheel drum brakes for a few years.  Other than the brakes, (and the lack of modern safety features), it was pretty much up to the task of being driven regularly.  Had enough power, and was pretty comfortable on long road trips.  I agree with you about Ohio and rust.  At least southern Ohio isn't as bad as northern Ohio for that.

I say this carefully, as a pro-liberty conservative who thinks that the EPA should only have jurisdiction if the constitution is amended to enumerate its powers.

In the 80's I read a quote (lost to time no doubt) from a GM engineer saying that we would never see engines making more than 250 horsepower because of the strict emissions regulations coming into effect. The hot rodding days were over.

Now we can buy cars from the dealer making over triple that number, and hopping them up is still emissions legal if done properly.

I am glad SEMA and other organizations exist to keep these things going, and I believe they will continue to keep an avenue for us.

All that to say that this is a fun exercise, but don't get all doomsday. I think we're going to be OK

Also Datsun Fairlady

Bug.

In reply to eastsideTim :

I'd like a 1955 Jaguar D type long nose.  oops you mentioned a budget. 
  Well I'd buy a driver quality MG. TD MGA, MGB  all can be acquired for around $5000 

    With a family I'd buy a Morris Minor Traveler ( the Woodie)  and sneak the earlier trafficators on it.  Along with MGB Wire wheels. 
     
   If I have to buy  an American car I'd take a Ford Model A and modify it with Juice brakes and a V8 Flathead. ( I wonder how hard it would be to make a woodie body?). 
     
But frankly I'd rather have a modern car for day to day use.  They are safer and more efficient. Not to mention a massive amount of work easier. 
     
 

pilotbraden said:

1st generation Buick Riviera. They are very competent.  I have run the Ortega Highway between Dana point and lake elsinore many times in 64 and 65 Rivieras the brakes need improvement. Going uphill they are fun

Where do you get replacement aluminum drum brakes for one of those?  

A 1959 Zamboni can be entertaining to drive.

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

Not much from Mopar excites me in those years.  Floppy, long-throw shifters with truck-like ratios (because they were truck transmissions), and dopey styling (my opinion).

You're right - and yet I want a 1960-62 Valiant with the 225 slant six and three-on-the-tree.  Reliable as a sundial, so ugly it's cool, can be maintained/repaired by anyone with a brain and basic hand tools, and exempt from most big-guvmint schemes.  Even an EMP won't stop it.

Aide from the last swap I'd look for 65 to 67 corvairs they are the best deals out there for good condition classics and have some of the best stock handling for that era.

I would go looking for another '64 Plymouth like my first car although I'm clearly biased having owned one already.  

Similar era A body like a Dart might be nice.  I liked the suggestion of a Volvo Amazon but I have no experience with those.

Can you build a Beck 904 and title it as something that fits your requirements?  

Keith Tanner said:

...Generally speaking, engine swaps with a newer engine means you have to use the emissions of that newer engine....

Unless... the car you are putting it in does not require smog tests or inspections.  Then you can do whatever you want.  Which would seem to apply in the OP's case.

That said of course, not a lot of reasons not to put a smog compliant new motor in an old car.

eastsideTim said:

If I was loaded, I think a 67 Camaro would be a good bet, but I suspect I'd have more of a Ford Falcon budget.  Since the Mustang is based on it, there should already be an easy button for changing up the front suspension, cutting down the front shock towers, and throwing in an LS.  I'm sure there are hundreds of other options out there, too.  If I didn't care about driving in bad weather, a t-bucket kit car would be fun.

I'm on a Falcon budget as well.  They are fun, still cheap, and surpisingly light weight.

Falcon engine bays are narrower than mustangs.  V8's are really tight in there unless you ditch the shock towers.  A turbocharged 4 cylinder, however, fits real nice and keeps the lightweight theme.  

Check out my 62 falcon ranchero build if you want some dumb ideas.  

The funny thing is that I used to have to smog my 1965/68/67 Mustang back in the 1990s in CA.  It sucked.  If anything was ever wrong, it was the carburetor adjustment or timing (or failed visual, which meant open element air cleaner or missing vacuum advance on distributor).  Basic EFI would destroy any emissions requirements they used to have.  Lots of states have smog checks, but most will never have equipment or the will to "invest" in equipment that will analyze older cars; it would cost a billion dollars, and there just would not be enough people to bother to make it economically viable.  Even CA smog stations, most of them, will just laugh at you if you roll up in anything pre-OBDII.

On that note, the LS is the best upgrade for a Falcon, with Corvette chassis/suspension being close behind.  My '63 Falcon has had a 5.3 LS for like five+ years now . . .

frenchyd said:

pilotbraden said:

1st generation Buick Riviera. They are very competent.  I have run the Ortega Highway between Dana point and lake elsinore many times in 64 and 65 Rivieras the brakes need improvement. Going uphill they are fun

Where do you get replacement aluminum drum brakes for one of those?  

I would convert to a disc set up. The original brakes were not great going down hill. My uncle was a Buick dealer in Hemet  CA while living in Laguna beach. He had disc brakes on his Rivieras. I recall the brakes coming off more modern Buicks. Between 1980 and the late 90s he took them in on trade for next to nothing and ran them hard. When he sold the dealership in the early 2000s there were eight or nine old worn-out Rivieras

 in the back lot