1987 Honda Prelude Si - Gravy on the Cake

I set my maximum price filter on my latest "cheap car" search on cars.com recently at $20,000 and this 1987 Honda Prelude Si came up in my net. Not unusual. What was unusual, odd in fact, is that it came up near the top of the list when I sorted by "highest price". 

I figured it had to be a super low-mileage barn find. Not quite. While it has only 54,000-miles on its thirty-eight-year analog ticker, I don't believe that warrants its suck your eyes out asking price of $18,000. Now, Prelude Si's of this vintage have sold recently for more than $24,000 at auction, but those had less than 5,000-miles on them not some 54,000. 

I'm of the old-car school of adage that 1980's cars, foreign or domestic, ain't worth squat. Sure, there are a handful of domestic pony cars that command a decent dollar, GM "G-bodies" in good condition too but I wouldn't use those as a daily; they're not reliable and they're terrible on gas. Forget German cars, even some Porsches, you can get them cheap enough, but they'll burn you alive in repair costs. Because they're so well built, Japanese cars from the '80's make some sense as a daily driver but you have to "buy them well". That meaning inexpensively.

Paying too much negates any value proposition. $18,000 is a good chunk of change and I'd just as soon use it on something less old and more contemporary or older with better appreciation upside. This '87 Prelude, while providing a surprisingly modern road-going experience, aesthetically, hasn't stood the test of time like, for instance, Preludes from the early 2000's have. Your opinion may vary, see dealer for details. 

Another thing to keep in mind is getting this insured for what you paid for it will be a tough putt. Classic car insurers like Haggerty don't insure everything "old" and they have limits on how much you can use your classic too. A "State Farm" is going to give you "book" if it gets totaled. Again, this ain't worth really anything. Buyer beware. Call your broker before you head to the bank. 

Honda had already established more than toehold in the United States when they introduced their first semi-Accord based Prelude in 1979. A somewhat sporty 2+2, what the Prelude featured superior fuel economy and build quality, always important attributes but particularly so in the darkest days of the Malaise Era. The fact it performed decently was gravy on the cake. 

Honda really got it right, well, performance wise anyway, with their second generation, 1983-1987 Preludes. These things, while not as powerful or fast as a V-8 powered Chevrolet Camaro, Pontiac Firebird or Ford Mustang, could run circles around them, sip gas and stay bolted together better long after the payment coupons were all filled out. 

Again, where they came up short was aesthetically. Sorry, this little guy is pretty homely. And that it's "resale red" does it no favors either. 

After five-generations, each one seismically better than the prior, Honda pulled the plug on the Prelude after 2001. Made sense since their Accord coupe, especially the V-6 models, were such ringers and having two coupes in a day when coupe sales were lagging, wasn't a best practice.  

What's a fair asking price? Hard to say. Others of this vintage on cars.com right now are in rough shape and have much higher mileage and are priced around $3,500. Still, given the mileage, condition and that it's a Honda, I'd offer no more than ten thousand for it. Seeing the high asking price, you'll get rejected as a low baller which is fine. 

Spend your money elsewhere. Keep looking and good luck! 

 

1950 Ford Custom Deluxe - Feel Old Yet, Methusaleh?

 

I collected hubcaps and wheel covers when I was a kid growing up on Long Island in the early 1970's. While it wasn't my favorite, the oldest one in my collection was a simple chrome disc with two semi-circle F O R D stampings around its middle exactly like one of the hubcaps off this 1950 Ford Tudor Custom Deluxe. 

My old man didn't find it amazing or humorous when I'd go on and on that I couldn't believe I had a hubcap as old as the one from a "1949 Ford" in my stash. Well, a person's perspective on passages of time, large or small, changes as they get older. 

To him, these 1949 era Fords were still the latest and greatest "new thing" not unlike the way us older Gen X'ers look at the internet. Wasn't that long along we were using dialup modems, was it? 

Now that you mention it, we were using dialup models longer ago than that Ford hubcap was old back in the early 1970's. Feel ancient yet, methuselah? 

So-called the "Shoebox Fords" due to their slab-sided, "pontoon" styling that did away with running boards and integrated the fenders into the body, the 1949 Ford was the hit the Ford Motor Company desperately needed after years of mismanagement by Henry Ford left the company on the brink of bankruptcy. 

They were also the first Fords to be released after the deaths of both Edsel in 1943 and Henry in 1947. 

Introduced in July of 1948, in the race to have the first new "post-War" car introduced, Ford beat Chevrolet to market by six-months, Plymouth by nine. Whether it was due to a protracted model-year run, customers desperate for a "new car" or the popularity of the cars themselves, most likely a combination of all three, Ford had the best-selling car in America in 1949. 

There were minor changes made to the 1950 models like our redhead here. Ford made significant changes to it for 1952 including ditching the simple chrome hubcaps. Ford rebooted their lineup completely for 1953. 

This car underwent a comprehensive restoration back in 2002 but still looks fresh. Amazing it has the flathead six-cylinder engine it came from the factory with, you'd think some "Fordie" would have swapped it at least a "Five-Point-Oh" into her by now. 

It's cool they didn't but on cars of this vintage, originality isn't as important as cars from the muscle car era. This car has been sitting for months now and has had its price dropped from $23,000 to $19,500. That says a lot about the market for run-of-the-mill, restored or mint condition '50's cars; seems like its slowly melting away as, sadly, those that have memories of these cars pass on.  

What's more, frankly, I don't think the cars themselves have the styling chops to be transcendental like, for instance, a 1957 Chevrolet does. Then again, I am a GM girl so my take on this is some skewed. 

I've always found the proportions of '49 and '50 Fords wonky, especially the two-door "Tudors". I find the styling dowdy and I have no love for any flathead from any manufacturer. This one has a "three-on-the-tree", brakes and steering aren't boosted. Charming. 

My hubcap collection went into the dumpster the day I called in a junk company to clean out my father's garage that was so strewed with junk and trash that we couldn't get one car in it. A constant source of embarrassment, for me at least, I regret now telling the junkman to haul away all my hubcaps in a short-sited attempt for young adult me to make a break from my childhood. Most of them were junk anyways but it would be nice to have one or two of them today. 

1960 Ford Fairlane - Hate To Say I Told You So

Can you imagine being right all the time? Not only would you never learn anything, but no one would want to be around you. That's why, sometimes, I enjoy being wrong. It not only keeps me humble, but on occasion, I do appreciate the company of others. Being wrong always means I'm constantly learning. Example - the other day this bizarre looking 1960 Ford Fairlane popped up on Facebook Marketplace with a $16,000 asking price. "Good luck with that, pal", I chortled to myself but after I checked what it could be worth on Haggerty, turns out this may be priced right. I was wrong?! Imagine that. 

No doubt the seller used Haggerty's online pricing tool to determine what they want for it. Haggerty says these things in "good condition" should or could go for $18,600 but that's one with Ford's 292 cubic-inch V-8. They suggest taking twenty percent off if the car has Ford's six-cylinder engine like this one has. It's also priced in line with what other 1960 Fairlanes in similar condition are going for these days on Marketplace. 

Haggerty values these in "Concours" condition at more than $35,000. Frankly, although I'm a big fan of everything Haggerty, I find their online pricing guidelines extremely generous. Pie-In-The-Sky if you will. Might be great to help make the owner of a classic feel good about what they have, but when it comes time to sell, we need a more realistic gauge. Sellers sees what Haggerty says and can be resistant to drop the price on what they're selling to something that will get the car sold. 

This car has been restored and there was considerable effort put into it. Trunk and floor pans are new, gas tank is new too. The interior has been redone but it's nowhere near factory spec, that's a big strike against it in my opinion. The paint job is not a factory color and it looks like it's on too thick as well. Strike two. The rims are cool but they look out of place on this, but I can deal with that. Again, this is a six-cylinder car and what's more, it has a column mounted, three-speed manual, the old three-on-the-tree. Brakes aren't boosted and there's no power steering. Strike three, four and five. 

If the powerplant had been modernized, power brakes and steering installed it might increase its appeal. As it is, this thing is a handful to drive. I can just see lovers of mid-century aesthetic sprinting back to their late model Toyota after a test drive. 

Speaking of aesthetics, there's also the issue of what you can't change about this car, it's somewhat off the wall styling. These cars ain't everyone's cup of coolant. 

The design story of these 1960 big Fords is that when Ford Motor Company executives got wind of the new-for-1959 Chevrolet, they freaked out, trashed what they had planned to do for '59, worked around the clock and came up with this design that more than apes Chevrolet's "batwing" '59's. Problem was, they didn't get it online in time for the 1959 model year, so it had to wait until 1960.

Irony of ironies, the 1959 Chevrolet was part of General Motors' haphazard reboot after their suits lost their minds when they saw Chrysler's 1957 models. Eyes on your own paper, boys. 

How much is something worth? Only what someone is willing to pay for it, naturally. Haggerty's generosity be darned. I don't know what price would help move this blue bomber but seeing it's been on Marketplace for forty-nine weeks and counting seems sixteen-large is way too much. 

Hate to say I told you so. 

1974 AMC Gremlin X Turbo - Turbo?

Our Facebook Marketplace gem today is a 1974 AMC Gremlin X for sale over in Buffalo, New York. Asking price is a staggering $12,900 but, get this, it's not really that far above what these are going for these days. Granted, that kind of money is for unmolested or mostly unmolested originals and this one is far from original. While I don't like to blog about cars I've already written about, you can read my past Gremlin soliloquies here and here, this Gremlin has enough uniqueness I've deemed it worthy of another go-round. 

Like me, no doubt the first thing you notice about our Gremlin here, aside from the comically large rear tires, is its lack of a hood and that trucker stack sticking up out of the engine room. 

The stack is bolted to a swapped in, Jeep 4.0-liter, inline six-cylinder engine that someone, no idea if it's the poster of the ad, added an aftermarket turbocharger to. Sadly, the post has little information about the turbo; I could message them about it, but my experience has been folks selling a car on Facebook have little interest in answering questions from some car blogger about what they're peddling. Besides, if I do and they don't like what I write about their car, they'll come after me wanting my head on a whip antenna. 

Anyway, even without the turbo, heck, even without the damn car, the Jeep four-point-oh deserves a blog of its own. It was a heck of an engine. 

Developed by American Motors just prior to their being acquired by Chrysler, the 4.0 evolved from another legendary AMC engine, their 258 cubic-inch (4.2-liter) inline six. The 4.0 was known for its power, tractor-like torque, fuel economy, durability and longevity. Popular Mechanics noted years ago that the engine was as reliable as a block of wood. Chrysler built the engine through model year 2006. 

I'd have just swapped in the 4.0 rather than "turbo it", the turbo the ointment that scares the tread of my tires. Well, aside from this being a Gremlin. 

As great as an engine as the 4.0 was, it was never intended to be turbocharged. And putting a turbocharger on an engine, while back in the day may have been little more than a literal "bolt-on", today requires considerable knowledge and a deft hand to tune it properly; there's a lot, I mean, a lot that can go wrong. Not just with the turbo, but the added stress the turbo loads onto the engine can make things go sideways. 

With around 190-horsepower, an un-boosted 4.0 would have made this thing go like stunk seeing it weighed maybe 2,600-pounds with the 5.0-liter V-8 it was born with. The complexity and drama of the turbo doesn't seem worth the hassle. In addition of having to find a shop to work on it if you weren't a turbo head yourself, where would you drive this thing anyway? 

 

 

 

1974 AMC Gremlin X ( real X trim ). Southern car its entire life until shipped up here. No rust or rot anywhere, all original metal. Only driven in summer months to shows and for fun. Some body filler, paint is single stage. Alot of time and effort went into redoing this car, all of the modifications done to it have been done in a way that can be removed and the car made to be stock again minus the 4.0 swap. An extra hood comes with it with the intention to cut a hole in it for the hood exit exhaust as the original hood is perfect and comes with the car. In addition, a normal exhaust system can be run exiting downward if desired, or put back to stock. The front bumper has been removed for cosmetic reasons but is in perfect condition and comes with the car also. Ebrake works perfectly, every light and feature on the car works as it should also. Car is NYS inspected and on the road currently. Many extra parts included not mentioned here.

$12,900.

 

1990 Jaguar XKS 12 Convertible - Don't Meet Your Idols (Take 243)

About a year ago, just as I made the somewhat painful decision to sell my 1977 Corvette, a neighbor of ours had a 1990 Jaguar XJ-S convertible for sale just like this one and I had to take it for a spin. I had absolutely zero interest in buying it but, you never know. Maybe I'd be so enthralled with it I'd do the necessary mental gymnastics to convince myself to cut a check, or cheque for it. Besides, after living with the '77 Corvettes for years and everything it put me through, how bad could one of these be?  Thus, wife in tow, off we went. Top down and all. 

If you're of a certain vintage, you may have swooned over these dreamboats. I know I did. Growing up on Long Island's South Shore, to me, nothing embodied unobtainable levels of class, sophistication, refinement and success more than any Jaguar, in particular the 1975-1996 XJ-S and even more so, the XJ-S "dropheads". Drophead? Oh, sorry. That's what the Britt-Tisch refer to as convertibles. 

Built on a shortened wheelbase chassis of their XJ sedan and with some tuning to the suspension to make it seem more sporting, Jaguar introduced the XJ-S in 1975 to, technically at least, replace the ancient and old-timey looking E-Type that had been around since 1961. More of a luxury grand touring car than sports car like the E-Type, while a hit with buyers, critics damned the XJ-S with faint praise not so much for what it was, but for what it wasn't. That being it was not an E-Type. 

Available only as a hard top at first, Jaguar came out with a semi-fixed roof, canvassed-topped, targa-like "convertible" in 1983 they called the XJS-C. Above is a 1983. Reminds me of food in Great Britain. Not only is it weird looking, but its taste can also be revolting. I'd leave the top up. All the time. 

After much huffing, fussing, buttressing and expensive reengineering, Jaguar finally did right by us XJ-S fans when they came out with a, please clench your jaws when you say this, lovey, "proper convertible" in 1988. What a looker it was too. So, when a neighbor had, ostensibly an "open house" on theirs, I jumped at the chance to live life like someone from the North Shore. 

Now, granted, I knew it wouldn't come up to the clandestine driving experience I've had on racetracks in in a NASCAR stock car and Ferrari 488, but I expected it to at least ride, handle and accelerate with the aplomb of a fourth-generation Corvette. Long story short, it didn't. 

The big V-12 turned over reluctantly coughing, hacking and belching like my mother used to before her first Pall Mall in the morning. "She's got to warm up!" my neighbor noted as she saw the concern in my face. Once it did, I found the engine to have far less pop in its bat than my '77 Corvette's engine did.  The steering was sloppy, the suspension janky banging thunderously over the impossibly bad roads of our town. The car had only 36,000-miles on it but the struts or shocks or springs needed to be sorted out. At least the transmission shifted imperceptibly. Well, of course it did. It was a General Motors Turbo 400. 

While we felt like rock stars in it, when I asked my wife if she wanted to drive it, I mean, how many times in your life will you get to drive a Jaguar XJ-S convertible? She sensed my ambivalence if not disappointment and begged off the opportunity. 

Back at the ranch, I handed the keys to my neighbor noting the engine's sluggishness and rough suspension. The car had a general feeling of delicateness to it too, make that expensively delicate. She said it had been her late father's car, and they had had a number of challenges with it over the years. Electrical gremlins, mostly. Also, problems with the fuel injection and the air conditioning was constantly on the fritz. Repairs were expensive and it was hard to find someone to work on it and shops they did find that could, had a wait list sometimes three-months long. If not longer. She was asking around $12,000 for it - I don't know if I would have paid half that for it. 

Sigh. Just another case of, "don't meet your idols". 

 

1979 Dodge Lil Red Express Truck - Holy Jimmy Carter, Batman

When I was growing up on Long Island back in the '70's, no one drive pickup trucks as daily drivers. Tradespeople might have but work-a-day hacks? Nope. Sure, some did, one guy in my friend group had a small Toyota pickup but he wasn't originally from the Island, so he got a hall pass. Anyone else who dared to drive "a truck", was gently chided as being a hillbilly, bumpkin, hayseed or worse yet, a farmer. So, when Dodge came out with their "Lile Red Express" in 1978, they looked to me like someone wearing a Batman costume to church on Sunday. Our subject here is a 1979. 

We dig beneath the shiny red paint, pinstripes, and good grief, are those (factory) exhaust stacks?! And we find there was a (fairly) sound reason Dodge rolled these out. 

Dodge's (Chrysler's) problems began long before the government backed bailout, and Lee Iacocca came to the rescue. Years of product planning gaffes and internal strife left the company with little money for product development in a day of increasingly strict emissions and safety mandates. The energy crisis of 1973 only adding to their misery since most of their models were older, fuel-inefficient designs. 

So, Chrysler had no choice but to resort to repurposing existing models. Change the model nameplate here, gussy up the bodywork there. Worked for a little while too before cork came out of the beer can.  

This included not only their car lines but their light trucks as well. Thus, in the mid-1970's, Chrysler started peddling "adult toys" which weren't much more than lightly disguised versions of trucky stuff they already had in showrooms. The Lil Red Express was one of those "adult toys". 

Exploiting a loophole in the EPA's emissions regulations regarding light trucks with a GVWR (Gross Vehicle Weight Rating) of over 6,000-pounds, Dodge was able to slip Chrysler's "E58", 360 cubic-inch V-8 "cop engine" into these things with some perfectly acceptable modifications like the cam from their old (and awesome) 340 V-8 that helped the Copper make 225-horsepower (net) and 295-pounds of torque. Along with their stump pulling 3.55 "Sure Grip" inside their heavy-duty 9 1/4-inch pumpkin, this thing went like (relative) stink. All had Chrysler's wonderful 727 Torque Flite automatic. 

I mean, zero-to-sixty in 7.5-seconds and the quarter mile in 15-seconds kind of stinky. That this could keep up with Chevrolet Corvettes, Camaro Z28s and Pontiac Trans Ams of the day probably says more about those cars than how fast this was, but still, pretty impressive. Even today, you drive anything that can churn those kinds of numbers you wouldn't say it was underpowered. 

Also, with big rig trucks as popular as they were back then, well, us myopic, stuck-up Long Islanders didn't care about them but what did we know, the factory stand up exhaust pipes or "stacks" and step side rear box added to the "truck" aesthetic. The bed and tailgate trimmed in oak, along with the step side design reduced their practicality, and made as much sense as Long Island having an NHL franchise as well.  

This popped up on Facebook Marketplace recently about an hour south of Erie, Pennsylvania with an asking price of, holy Jimmy Carter, Batman, $29,500. 

 

1978 Mercury Grand Marquis - Catch Me If You Can

Back when I was a wee-little nipper living on the concrete and blacktop paradise known as Long Island, New York, dinosaurs like this 1978 Mercury Grand Marquis roamed the earth. I was all of 13- or 14-years old when this was new and to make myself feel even older, with this car now, gulp, 47-years-old...

I fired up the old wayback machine to take a look at what a 47-year-old Ford looked like in 1978. Wowza. Now, granted, automobiles don't evolve aesthetically at nearly the pace they did years ago but still, the difference between these two cars in "just" 47-years is remarkable. In fairness, by 1931, the auto industry was about to transition to all steel bodies and away from the spindly, old-timey designs from the 1910's and '20's, this 1931 Model A was in many ways, the last of its kind. 

Much like our big Merc here was the last if its kind. For 1979, Ford followed General Motors down the Great Downsizing Epoch rabbit hole shrink-raying their full-size Ford (division) and Mercury lineups. Big Lincoln's got the Sawzall for 1980. 

Gigantic, squishy and quiet, these cars evolved from the jarring, noisy, truck-like beasts my parent's generation grew up with. My father marveled at their smoothness even some of the cars he drove when I was a kid, to me at least, weren't that much more than Model A's. 

Its massiveness, though, our '78 here is roughly 19-feet long and nearly 7-feet wide, was part of the Big Three corn-feeding the buying public after World War II that the bigger the car, the bigger your wallet was. Or you wanted it perceived to be. My father's car-crazy son getting sucked into that bigger-is-better-vortex. At least for a little while. The plush ride and sheer bulk seemed to go hand-in-hand, but in reality, one has nothing to do with the other. 

Our '78 Grand Marquis here, looking splendid sans a vinyl top, was part of Lincoln-Mercury's full-size reboot for 1973. For 1974, all full-size became "Marquis'", the "Grand Marquis" the top-of-the-heap ahead of the Marquis Brougham and base Marquis. The Grand Marquis offering most if not every luxury accouterment the tonier and more expensive Lincoln Continental did. I think these better looking than the slab-sided Lincolns too. 

I don't care for this front end, though, I think it looks like a baroque headboard for a bed. The aftermarket rims are hideous too - Mercury had a handsome alloy rim for these cars but those are very rare. 

I have no idea what's going on here. With its 460 cranking out all of 202-horsepower, me thinks I can.  Looks like paint too making removing it a challenge.

This is for sale up near Detroit with an asking price of $4,900. Rims and wonky trunk lid paint job, this is a lot of car for the money. Literally and figuratively.