1998 Cadillac Sedan de Ville - Word Association

This 1998 Cadillac Sedan de Ville with only 83,000 miles on it is for sale in Elberfield, Indiana with an asking price of $1,000. Why's a pretty clean car like this with so few miles on it going for so little in this insane used car market? Let's play some word association. I say "Cadillac Northstar" and you say? Ding-ding. "Blown head gasket?"  Correct. 

That's too bad. These last of the K-body DeVille's aren't handsome and have aged terribly but they're super comfy cruisers and are packed with features. These seats are to die for. And when the Northstar isn't breaking your heart and back account, it runs smoothly and provides adequate scoot. And it runs on regular. 

I'd figure $2,500 to $3,000 to swap the head gasket on this. Hopefully with the fix it won't eat another one. Get a good warranty too. I wouldn't use a cheapie garage and it's certainly not something shade tree hacks like me should do either. What might be fun is to swap in a 3800 V-6. Certainly, more than doable and could be less expensive. It won't have near the punch of the Northstar but it would be far more reliable. However, you're going to have look hard to find a shop that will do it if you can't do it yourself. 

Problem with the Northstar engine was the head bolts didn't stay seated in the block. They became "loose" and compromised the head gasket causing overheating. Problems arising usually on engines that would have these issues between 80,000 and 110,000 miles and 1996-1999 Cadillac's were the most notorious. This '98 here is like a case study. 

Problems with these engines wasn't allegedly rectified until 2005 so that means there's a lot of Cadillac's with the Northstar that have gone to an early crusher. I can't tell you how many Eldorado's with the Northstar I've swooned over but passed on because of it. Damn shame. Personally, I wouldn't buy this car or any Cadillac with the Northstar even if the head gasket was good or had been replaced. Just too risky. 

Cadillac switched the DeVille to the K-body chassis in 1994 that underpinned the Seville. 1994-1996 models have pseudo fender skirted rear quarter panels that they eliminated on the 1997-1999 models. Made for an awkward look akin to what GM did with the Chevrolet Caprice starting in 1993; it wasn't meant to look like this from the start. Combine wonky styling with the Northstar issues and it's no wonder Lexus got such a foothold in this county as quickly as they did.  

Elberfeld, Indiana is a tiny town on the Indiana-Kentucky border less than an hour from Evansville and roughly 90 minutes or so west of Louisville. Population as of 2010 was 625. 
 

1980 Buick Regal - When in Kentucky

Finally. I've figured out why it is I find all 1978-1987 General Motors intermediates so off-putting. It's their proportions - they're totally out of whack. Although they're hardly "small" at two-hundred inches long, they're narrower than GM's then current compacts and with their stubby, truncated wheelbases, the designers had their hands full cobbling together cohesive designs. So, to that end, you almost have to applaud the job Buick did with their Regal, this one a 1980, seeing how relatively clean, although quite dull, subjective as that is, the overall design is. 

Amazingly, our Regal is four and a half inches longer than GM's seminal if not iconic 1955 Chevrolet. What helps make the Chevrolet better balanced looking is that it's nearly three inches wider and has a wheel base that's a whopping eight inches longer. There's also the fact the Chevrolet is more than a foot taller allowing for more sheet metal to be sculpted below the car's belt-line. The "longer, lower and even wider" idiom still several years away. 

This Regal looks all but appliance like in comparison to the Chevrolet, don't you think? The cheesy "half-landau" top and chunky chrome safety-bumpers doing this poor little car no favors either. GM did a great job updating all of these cars for 1981 doing the best that could be done with a very awkward canvas. Well, they cleaned up the coupes; the sedans and wagons they left the same. GM replaced these cars with the front-wheel-drive "GM10's" (to be known as W-bodies) in 1988. 

Best that can be said about this car in particular is that in this insane used car market, it's refreshing to find something like this that isn't priced out of this world; although I might be numb at this point thinking that $1,000 is reasonable for a non-running, rusty bomb. Might include a parts car if the owner is able to recover it. Apparently it was stolen. As we say up here in Ohio, "when in Kentucky". Seriously, if this was a '55 Chevrolet in this shape the asking price would be north of ten-grand. And how crazy is that? 

Hot rodders like these cars because they're front engine, rear-wheel-drivers with full-perimeter frames. They're also relatively light weight with large engine compartments that can swallow just about anything. Bonus, you get a power driver's bucket, power windows, locks, tilting column and a front passenger seat full of trash. 

And the ad for this car is one of those obnoxiously written ones telling potential tire-kickers not to waste his time or low-ball him because he knows what he has here. Err, ok. Well, at least it's not a 1978-1980 Chevrolet Monte Carlo or Pontiac Grand Prix so it's got that going for it. 

1982 Datsun 200SX - A Different Universe

When I first met my wife in 1988, her younger sister Helen was driving a 1982 Datsun 200SX just like this. And I liked it. A lot. 

Introduced in 1980, Helen's model of the 200SX was a reboot of the car Datsun (now Nissan) rolled out for sale in the U.S. starting in 1977. Based on the new for 1975 Datsun S10-chassis that was sold in the United States as the B210, even it's impeccable build quality wasn't enough to counter its "what-the-hell-is-that" styling that, in my opinion, may have aged better than anyone thought it would back in late 1970's. Then again, to some, it's still butt homely. 

After just three short model years of dismal sales Datsun unveiled a new 200SX on a modified version of the previous model's chassis. Just like that, the ugly goose was now a swan. Especially the notchy hard top models like Helen had although I wouldn't have kicked a hatchback out of my garage. Well, I say that now. When I was in my early twenties, for some reason that to this day escapes me, I was content to drive what my wife still calls, "Farty Old Man Cars". 

My only time behind the wheel of Helen's 200SX was on a bright Sunday morning after I had stayed over at their house. A friend of Helen's had driven her home in her car after a night of barhopping but left it parked across the street from the house. Bleary eyed, nursing a hangover, and with the first smoky treat of the day dangling from her mouth, Helen asked me if I wouldn't mind moving her car into the driveway because her dad would have a fit if he saw it parked where it shouldn't be. Didn't have to ask me twice. I even offered to run down to the bakery and pick up fresh rolls and bagels. What a nice future brother-in-law I was. 

It's hard to fathom now just how different that little car was from the comparatively brutish 1982 Buick Riviera I was driving at the time. And that Riviera, despite being horribly assembled, was a German sports sedan compared to the Riviera's its styling was inspired by. The two cars seemed to be from not only two different worlds, two different universes. Newsflash - this just in - they most certainly were. 

The interior of Helen's 200SX, despite reeking of cigarettes, was all but jewel like whereas my Riviera's insides where a cheap, plasticky knock-off a wood-lined bank lobby. Comfortable buckets that held you in place and everything you needed right at your fingertips. Including the cigarette lighter and ash tray. Forget the trip to the bakery, let's hit the Hamptons (fifty, sixty miles away). 

Much like the little Toyota Corolla FX I rented after I wrecked my Cordoba before I bought the godforsaken Riviera, at the time I was like, "I gotta get me one of these!" But of course, I didn't. I did soon after ditch the Riviera but instead of a hot, little Japanese coupe, I got a 1990 Chevrolet Lumina Euro. A step in the right direction but I still had a long way to go. I've amended my ways. I swear. And I'm a much better (car) person for doing so. 

I don't recall why Helen eventually got rid of her 200SX but she was on her own when she needed another car; her father had bought her the 200SX. She called me frantically one night asking if I would go with her to look at a 1991 Pontiac Grand Prix SE she was thinking of buying. Priced right and in my wheelhouse, I gave the car a resounding two-thumbs up. First day after she bought it the damn thing broke down. No wonder we never got along. 

She did, bless her heart and her health, eventually quit smoking. 

 

2023 Cadillac Escalade V - I'm as Drunk as Cooter Brown

Cadillac dropped a big tease this past week when they semi-kinda took the proverbial sheet off their new for '23, Escalade V.  Just so you know that's "V" as in "Vee" not five. Can't blame you for perhaps being a little confused since this "V" is, coincidentally, part of the fifth generation of 'Slades. And "V" in Cadillac-eese since 2004 means super-duper performance. Super-duper expensive too. Rest assured this will come in north of $125,000 making it the most expensive Cadillac ever. 

Cadillac was vague on details, there's a full reveal in May, but rumor has GM's LT4, supercharged, 6.2-liter V-8 will be behind this massive grill that's larger than the already too big grill on lesser Sladers. It's the same engine found in the CT5-V Blackwing where it makes 668-horsepower and 659-foot-pounds of torque. Holy. Crap. Where has that thing been all my life? Anyhoo, the big sell with the Slade V is that with the LT4, it'll be amongst the fastest and most powerful luxury SUV's in the world.

A three-ton-plus, $125,000 Cadillac that can do 0-60 in under four seconds. Well, I'm as drunk as Cooter Brown. Where do I sign? 

If I don't "get" luxury SUVs in general so what am I to make of a high-performance one? Especially from Cadillac, a brand that I still liken to trash from the 1970's and 1980's. '90's too if you throw in anything powered by the Northstar V-8. Aren't there better ways to spend enormous amounts of money on a vehicle? And one that's not a freakin' Cadillac? 

For my money, if I had it in the huge troves that would allow me to write the monthly stipend for one of these and not think twice about it, although they're not quite as fast, I'd spring for at least a Mercedes-Benz GLS AMG or BMW X7 M50i. I'd also cross shop an Aston Martin DBX and even a Lamborghini Uros just to tell the boys down at the country club I looked at those before settling on the Benz or Bimmer. Not some Cadillac. 

1972 Chevrolet Nova - Almost Criminal

Stumbled across this 1972 Chevrolet Nova recently and it brought me back. Way back. Not sure when exactly as some memories don't line up chronologically for me anymore. Funny how that happens as you get older. Details once so crystal clear to you suddenly begin to fade. 

Anyway, I was dating a girl named Regina through my senior year of high school and freshman and sophomore years of college and sometime during that time her older sister Sandy and her husband Wayne offered to sell me their Nova for, are you sitting down? $75. 

Even in 1982 or 1983 that was the deal of a lifetime. And, of course, I didn't take them up on it. It looked just like this '72 here save for that super-rare and strange optional "Sky Roof". Fun facts, the Skyroof was an odd, quasi-convertible top meets a massive sunroof and was only offered on 1972 and 1973 Chevy Nova's. Just over 10,000 or so were ever sold making this one here quite rare. Anyhoo, back to Sandy's Nova. 

They wanted to get rid of it because it was a hassle to park it where they lived. Parking then as now was a premium in the overcrowded commune like community of Long Beach, New York on Long Island. Many times they'd have to park one of their two vehicles upwards of a mile from their apartment. Better to have just one car to worry about. Only having one car would save on insurance, shoes and sneakers too.  

No surprise, it was far from perfect. Rear quarter panels were rusted through exposing the trunk, the finish was all but gone (like on this one) and the interior was torn up. Dash had cracks in it too. I don't remember how many miles were on it, but it had a lot of wear for a car that at the time was just ten or eleven years old. Then again, years ago cars didn't age nearly as well as they do today. Says the guy who uses a twenty-year old car with almost a quarter-million miles on it as a daily driver. 

What I really liked about it was how it rode and handled. Although it had Chevrolet's 307 cubic-inch V-8 like this car and not a "350", it had far more "go" than my Comet had. Way smoother too. Despite it having a funky, "when-is-this-thing-going-to-shift" two-speed Powerglide. The muffler was shot so it seemed as though it had a lot more power than it actually did. Sounded great too. Why didn't I pull the trigger?

Frankly, I've never been the biggest fan of these cars. Anything "Chevy Nova" to be honest. Too small while at the same time being too big, in my humblest of opinions, they have little of the design magic that many Bill Mitchell era designs have. And the safety-bumper era Nova's (1973-1979) look as clumsy as my Comet did. I also didn't think it that much of an upgrade from my shit-box Comet. Perhaps if it was in better shape but as it was, the move would have been lateral. 

In the end, Sandy and Wayne couldn't even give it away. After I rebuffed their offer, they said they'd let me have it for nothing. Save for the $1 they had to charge me for it to make the sale official. I politely declined. Again. They offered the same deal to others, and no one took them up on it either. The poor little Nova sat unloved. They eventually junked it. Seems almost criminal in retrospect. 

1967 Chevrolet Chevelle - How Much More Will Classics Appreciate?

This 1967 Chevrolet Chevelle caused a bit of a dust up on the General Motors appreciation page I follow on Facebook. Some members taking exception to the $29,000 price the owner is asking for. Here's the rub - NADA pricing guidelines indicate it's not unreasonably priced. Yikes. That's a bit of a head scratcher but it is what it is. 

I get that some would be upset. $29,000 might be a somewhat pie-in-the-sky given this car obviously needs a paint job and some interior mending. However, its numbers matching and a Tennessee car! Anybody got a trailer they can loan me? 

I also get how many chafe at what these are going for these days. Back in my day this was a $1,500 beater and then many would say I wasted my money on some old Chevy that doesn't have power steering or brakes. What's more, if I said it was going to appreciate greatly they'd think I'd really lost my mind. 

Back in the 1980's when cars like this started taking off in value, there was some quasi-discernible line in the sand dictating what cars were worth more than others. Some drew it at the drop in compression ratios in 1971 and 1972, others said safety-bumpers mandated by the government in 1973 and 1974. Meanwhile others say it was the advent of catalytic converters in 1975. Suffice to say, most cars made after 1975 aren't worth nearly as much as anything made before then. 

Nowadays, seeing that everything old seems to be commanding a premium, those lines are less important or matter. Even that lime green Pinto wagon I found the other day has an asking price that defies reason. Keep in mind, that one was a pre-safety-bumper Pinto. I say that rolling my eyes. 

The values of first (and second) generation Chevelle's has been great for decades now and over the last ten to fifteen years they've gotten, frankly, insane. I can't help but imagine the expression on my wife's face if I was to attempt to justify spending any where near 29K for this red-head in particular. And then dropping, in theory, that much more in restoring it. 

My greatest concern, and I've been saying this for years now, is how much more are cars like this and countless others going to appreciate? And who's going to buy them? Who would buy this now? Granted, they've always found buyers but these days I'm more concerned than ever. 

Why? Because kids today, in general, don't care about cars let alone "classics" like this. To them, cars are mere appliances to get the from point A to B because they haven't developed a teleportation app yet. 

Even my semi-car crazy older son, who's about to turn twenty-five, is fairly ambiguous when it comes to old cars. Sure, he loves the look of them but he knows better than to think that an old Chevelle like this would come anywhere near the driving experience of his 2017 Chevrolet Camaro 1LT/RS. 

Can't say I blame him but he's more cognizant of the differences between antiques like this and modern automobiles than most young adults his age. Chalk that up to his dear old dad who refused to resto-mod our 1977 Corvette. Everything I do to our plastic-fantastic is to restore it as close to its 1977 glory days as possible. 

To most kids today, even older folks who don't know better, the driving experience of a car like this would have them thinking that there was something wrong with it. Nope. There's nothing wrong it, kiddo. It's just from a different time. Now get off my lawn.

Oh, and if you find that teleportation app in the app store please let me know. That might come in handy.  

2022 Jeep Grand Wagoneer - They Can Afford it, Right?

The other night I was gassing up my son's 2003 Chevrolet Malibu after using it for the day and a handsome couple in their early thirties pulled up next to me in one of these new Jeep Grand Wagoneer's. After I lied to them about how nice I thought it was and they thanked me, I drove away wondering not only how a couple that young could afford such a thing but how anyone would drop as much as they did on a Jeep. And a really homely looking one at that. Sorry, but I like to reassure people who I believe have foolishly spent an enormous amount of money that they've done so wisely. 

These sticker for around $70,000 and top out at more than $110,000 so that couple must be pulling it down in buckets or they're spending everything they make as fast as they can spend it. I should have spoken with them longer and quizzed them about their purchase. Why a Jeep and not an established luxury SUV brand with more snoot appeal like a BMW, Audi or Mercedes? Shoot, why not a Cadillac Escalade or Lincoln Navigator? Because it has features like eight touch screens, genuine wood trim and an available cooler in the center console? Then again, it could be they simply love the darn thing, like they both intimated, and could care less about bouchie labeling and such. That would be refreshing to hear. 

Then again, driving my sons beat-to-death Malibu and me in pajama pants, an old hoodie and slippers I know I would have come across more like a homeless person than a consumer research wonk. Worse yet, a serial car-blogger. Surprised they even acknowledged me. I'm so not worthy! 

We blindly assume that people that live in extravagant houses and drive fancy cars are of the financial means to afford such things. We've all heard about people who make good if not excellent money who've gone bankrupt. And gone bankrupt multiple times. People do, newsflash, have a habit of making horrible, long and semi-long term financial decisions like buying the most expensive house on the block and pricey vehicles with dubious or yet to be known resale value. Not that it would make any difference if "Grand Wagoneer" was as vaunted a luxury nameplate as established makes and models. It was at one time but that was now long ago before those kids were even born. God, I feel old. 

Jeep, now a division of Fiat Chrysler, is without question the primogenitor of sport-utility-vehicles but they are very late to the monster luxury SUV party. And to come with one that doesn't look like any other Jeep, to say nothing about not have any semblance to the gloriously luscious Wagoneer's of yore, is a grill scratcher. Oh the hopes we had for a retro-themed Wagaoneer but alas, we got this rolling meat locker. If it's not going to look like a Wagoneer from back-in-the-day, why use the name? Why not call it a Grand Cherokee XL? More like XXXL. They already have a Cherokee "L". Confusing? 

Fiat Chrysler all but doesn't even brand this as a Jeep. Someone explain that to me. The only "Jeep" logos are on plastic stampings on the back of the exterior rear-view mirrors on the driver and passenger doors. Everywhere else it's branded as either a "Wagoneer" or "Grand Wagoneer". Odd. Perhaps they're aware it doesn't have the slightest shred of "Jeep" that even a cheapie Compass has. 

By the way, a "Grand" Wagoneer is a trim level of the Wagoneer unlike a Grand Cherokee being totally different from a Cherokee. Again, you got that? What's with the whole "Grand" scheme too; so "Malaise Era". Grand Marquis, Grand Torino (that was actually "Gran"), Grand Fury etc. Grand Buffet anyone? 

Yeah, yeah. This thing is feature rich, handles way smaller than it actually is and has a gorgeous interior, but it's so expensive the value proposition is obliterated that even (some) rich people can or should appreciate. Years ago, Lexus cut its teeth successfully aping European luxury cars and doing so at a steep discount, they were all about exceeding expectations. The new Grand Wagoneer is as expensive as anything with a tri-star or blue and white propeller on its hood but with none of the driveway showoff appeal you'd think would be important to the well-heeled sect. Doesn't even look like anything else either. In this case that's not a good thing. No wonder Fiat Chrysler doesn't want to call it a Jeep. 

Even if that young couple loves their Grand Wagoneer simply for what it is I sure hope they leased it. Otherwise they're going to take a bath at trade in time. Then again, they can probably afford it, right?