1997 Lexus SC400 - Snooze You Lose

 

I came across this 1997 Lexus SC400 about ten days ago when I was doing one of my "cheap car" searches on cars.com. With only 63,000 miles on it and an asking price of just $5,999, it seemed too good to be true.

I've been in love with these luscious cars ever Lexus first rolled them out in 1991. Combining the subtly elegant styling and superb performance and build quality of the game changing game-changing Lexus LS400 hat debuted in 1989, the original SC, or "Sport Coupe", in my opinion, was one of the best looking automobiles to be mass produced in the 1990's.

The SC400 was not a two-door version of the LS400 but rather, save for sharing the same V-8 engine, an entirely different automobile. And although undercutting BMW and Mercedes luxury sports coupes, were still priced way, way out my price range when new. Also, living in the northeast, an expensive, rear wheel drive luxury car would have made little sense even if I could have afforded one. So, for the last twenty to twenty-five years, I've stood and admired them from afar as the few that actually got produced and sold succumbed to old age. 

With my filters on cars.com set at a maximum price of $10,000, imagine my surprise when this car came up in my net for sale at a Volvo dealership out in Warren. Although the pictures of it are gorgeous and there's not a spec of rust anywhere on it, priced at roughly half of what other SC400's with similar mileage were going for across the country, not that there was that many of them, something just didn't seem right. I called the dealership and much to my delight it was still available and the salesman said the title was "clean"; it was not a salvage. I made an appointment to drive out to see it that night.   

It all seemed too good to be true - how could this beautiful car be listed at only $5,999? I mean, look at this thing - it's perfect. At least from the looks of these pictures. The last thing in the world I like to do is waste my time but from the looks of this car and it having a clean title, it seemed worth the shot to drive out to BFE and have a look. 

Then I clicked on the Carfax and I found out why the car was so cheap - it's a "TMU" - true mileage unknown. Well, shoot. Not wanting a freak show of a car, I called the dealership, told them about the "TMU" on the Carfax report. While they steadfastly denied any wrongdoing, not that I accused them of doing anything wrong which was kind of weird, I told them I'd pass on the car and canceled my appointment.

 



It was my wife who insisted that I go out and take a look at it anyway. From the pictures, it certainly doesn't look like a car with more than 63,000 miles but you never know. And from what I could tell from the Carfax, the issues with the odometer had occurred back in 2000 or 2001 when the car had less than 10,000 miles on it. Besides, as my wife pointed out, it's a Lexus - they run forever and at just $5,999 and my Monte Carlo on its deathbed, it might be worth the gamble.

I called the dealership back to make another appointment to go see it but they told me some guy in Maryland found it online like I did but scooped it up and was shipping it down there. Snooze you lose. And I lost. 

1967 Jeep CJ - American History

 



I've never aspired to own one of these but I do believe in any proper museum of motor vehicles, an entire wing should be dedicated to the grand daddy of all SUV's, cross overs and really anything with all wheel drive, the Jeep CJ. Our subject here is freshly restored 1967 CJ-6 for sale up here in Cleveland for a not unreasonable $8,800. Here's the listing.

 

 

The Jeep "CJ" was a series of vehicles built by Willys-Overland, Jeep-Kaiser and The American Motors Corporation between 1945 and 1986 and was essentially a commercial version of the "general purpose vehicle" (Jeep for short) used by the military during World War II. "CJ" was short for "Civilian Jeep" and accompanying numbers early on denoted the series, as in CJ 1-4 and later, wheelbase length; CJ 5-10.

 



 

The myriad manufacturers of the CJ continually upgraded suspension, engine and drive train components in attempts to make them more civilized or "car like". No easy task given live, rigid axles fore and aft sprung by leaf springs. Our '67 CJ-5 here, brutally crude and primitive by today's standards, was fairly docile compared to what came before it and in particular the military grade Jeeps it was based on. Still, compared to a modern cross over, they rode like garden tractors.

 

 

One of the most significant upgrades to the CJ came after Willys sold Jeep to Kaiser in 1964. To counter complaints that the CJ's flat head "Hurricane" in line 4 cylinder engine was underpowered, Kaiser  bought a license from General Motors to produce Buick 225 cubic inch V-6 engines. The 90 degree "Odd-Fire" V-6 was so popular that by 1968 more than 75% of CJ's sold were powered by it. When Kaiser sold Jeep to AMC in 1970, they dropped the V-6 for their own in line six and V-8.

Allegedly, there are charms to these things above and beyond their manly good looks - but they're lost on me; they're too crude, too loud, too rough - what's the point? To me, I can hit myself in the head with a hammer and get the same experience. Blame my suburban upbringing for that as much as anything else. There weren't many near by places to off-road twenty minutes east of Times Square. Perhaps if I grew up in a rural part of the country, areas I find far more conducive to a healthy, family first lifestyle than living outside one of the world's largest population centers, I'd feel differently about them and I'd "get it".

 

As it is, I see them only for what they are - seminal vehicles that literally paved the way for the modern sport utility and cross over vehicles. The most popular vehicles on the planet had to had to start to somewhere and what better way than with with a vehicle so important to the United States during World War II. If you're interested in getting your own part of American history, here's the listing again.



1985 Ford Mustang GT - Trust Me. It Was a Very Big Deal

What more can I say about an '80's Mustang that I haven't said already? Good question. I'm only blogging about this mint condition '85 because I love it to death. And it reminds me of the 1983 Mercury Capri RS "bubble back" my wife had when I first met her. Sigh. It's times like this I wish we didn't have our Corvette.

 

 

Thank me later for sparing you the melodramatic details of when I first met my wife and I was impressed as hell that she was driving a "5.0". This is a serious car blog and it's all about the cars. Well, for the most part. Anyway, this being a 1985 Mustang GT, it is historically significant and worthy of being blogged about given that the '85 Mustangs were the last of the "5.0 H-O's" with carburetors. Big deal? Trust me. It was a big deal.

That fact lost on anyone who isn't an ardent fan of these cars but the switch to fuel injection on the "5.0 H-O" was a huge change and one that was not welcomed at first. Fuel injection was still in its infancy back then and the false starts and problems The Big Three had with it going back to the 1950's didn't bode well for it. Besides, Ford was doing a great job tweaking this engine adding carburetor barrels, bumping up compression, changing cams, pistons, exhaust and intakes until it made a heady 210 horsepower for 1985. Somehow Ford squeaked this through corporate average fuel economy and emissions regulations which were getting increasingly stringent. So stringent that there was no way they could be where they would need to be in the near future using a carburetor. Therefore, Ford didn't switch to fuel injection because they wanted to; they had to.

The only thing with these cars is that if you got it with the "real 5.0", they only came with manual transmissions. I'm man enough to admit that as much as I enjoy driving and I can handle a stick, given a choice, give me an automatic. That's a five speed, by the way. My wife's car had a four speed; for 1983 Ford was transitioning between transmissions. Starting in 1984, Mustang GT's did come with automatics but the 5.0 you got was the "centrifugal fuel injection" engine you'd also find under the hood of Grand Dad's Mark VII. CFI was a batch fuel injection system similar to GM's throttle body injection system where one injector was mounted where the carburetor was. Fuel and air was mixed together "up there" and then sucked down on a torturous journey through the intake manifold  to the cylinders. For 1986 the "HO" got port fuel injection that injected fuel into each cylinder individually.

 

 

 

Look at me brattling on and on here when I thought I had nothing more to say. Well, when you love something or someone you'll always find something to talk about. This gorgeous little gem is for sale in Toledo, Ohio with a fairly high asking price of $10,500. Here's the listing. But look at it this way - you could spend less for one and dump the money you didn't spend into it or buy a complete car right from the get go. Up to you. But still do your best in negotiating and make me jealous and get it for less than $9,000. Good luck.







2004 Lincoln Town Car - Smart Kid

 

Last weekend the wife stumbled upon this 2004 Lincoln Town Car for sale near our home here in Cleveland. With my Monte Carlo on a morphine drip and us not wanting to jump into 48 - 72-month "paper" right now, with an asking price of $3,000 and her knowing of my penchant for big old cars, she thought it a good idea that I kick its tires and see what was up with it. 

 

Ten, fifteen...twenty years ago, I would have leaped at this car but as I've gotten older I've actually become younger; at least in terms of my taste in cars. I was ambivalent about test driving this but I did it anyway. Hey, you never know, maybe there was some magic in its plastic chromed grill that would entice me. I dragged our 21-year-old son with me who was even more incredulous about it than I was.  
 

 

My opinions about these cars has eroded slowly over the years to the point now I can't look past them being "old man cars" at worst and "service cars" at best. Who would buy such a moth bally thing new as a daily driver? Some people did although the reasons why are lost on me. It's not that they were bargains either. This well equipped "Signature Series" stickering for more than $45,000 back in its day. A far superior Lexus LS 430 about $10,000 more. Shoot, you're ready to drop $45G on a Lincoln what's another ten or fifteen grand?

 

 

It's been a while since I've been up close and personal with one of these and I'd forgotten just how big they are. 215 inches long and 78 inches wide. That's more than a foot longer than my not small Monte Carlo and two inches wider. The length is manageable - it's the width of big cars that throws me for a loop.

 



  

That extra width enabling "comfortable" three across seating fore and aft. That center armrest folds up making a seat back of sorts although the practice of three across up front these days seems as crazy as smoking.



Back here three across would be better although I pity the fool who'd have to sit on the hump. Kids today have no idea how good they got it. 

My driving experience with this car was, no surprise, disappointing. While this big rig of a car held together like no Town Car of yore, compared to most anything else on the road today it felt squishy, jiggly and soft. Part of that might have been the pounding 140,000 miles and 14 years of Cleveland roads has done to it but the owner bragged how the entire front end had been "redone" recently. You'd never know it. I felt so disconnected from the road in this car that I thought there was something wrong with it. There was nothing wrong - it's just the way cars used to be.  

 

There is something to be said about a massive trunk and styling details afforded by this much sheet metal. There's a full size spare in there with enough room left over for a stash of luggage and a couple of golf bags. It's a matter of taste of course but I've always found these cars to be at least interesting looking - although that doesn't mean I like them enough to seriously considering buying one. If these came in two door guise with a ranked back windshield perhaps I'd feel differently but Lincoln hadn't offered a "Town Coupe" since 1981.

 

 

After my test drive I gave the keys back to the owner with my standard, "lovely car...let me talk to my wife" speech. On the way home I contemplated making him a serious offer. What I liked about the car was that, given a mechanic's inspection, I'd have a sound car on the cheap that has none of the issues my ailing Monte Carlo has. When I mentioned it to my son he looked at me cock-eyed and reminded me that anything special that I saw in the car would fade quickly and then I'd be stuck with a Lincoln Town Car. Smart kid.

 

 

2002 Chevrolet Monte Carlo - How Much Longer Can I Keep This Thing Running?

 





Last weekend I got a diagnosis from the local service center than my 2002 "Dale Earnhardt" Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS with "only" 160,000 miles on it needs a new oil pan gasket, exhaust system, power steering rack, right front wheel bearing, and a front stabilizer link. That on top of the air conditioning system that needs a condenser and the top to bottom cost of getting my car as  mechanically sound as possible would be just under $4,000.

 



 

In the past, every time I've gotten rid of a car because I believed the cost of the repairs wasn't worth it, I've regretted it. I have no intention of replacing this car nor am I going to spend that kind of money on it either; repair shops love old cars like mine because they can make money off them. Big time. I'm going to see just how long I can keep this thing going with it leaking oil and power steering fluid. This should be interesting.

The oil pan gasket - the repair doesn't sound like much but it's quite labor intensive to get at it -  and steering rack are leaky but they're not leaking; big difference. If either start gushing I've got a decision to make but right now they just have very slow leaks. The exhaust is noisy but tolerable. The only "have to do" is the wheel bearing. I bought the damn things on line on the cheap and I got what I paid for. Not 1,000 miles on them and the one I installed on the right side is vibrating. My bad. The stabilizer link is a quick and easy fix too. Living in north east Ohio, air conditioning is not as important as in other parts of the country. I can continue to live without it as I've done the last couple of years. Sucks when it rains during summer but outside that it's ok. Really. It is.

  

This all might sound like rote rationalization or my cheapness is on display front an center. Two kids in college and a modest income will do that to a man. Also factor in fear of buyers remorse. The good news is that I still really like this car. It's comfortable, reasonably economical, handles well, and it's paid for. I do 99% of the repairs on it myself so it's as close to a "free" car at this point as you can get.

 

 

Besides, what else is out there that's a fraction as cool?

 

1977 Chrysler Cordoba - Another Cordoba?

 

Another Cordoba? Well, yeah. And, c'mon. I haven't blogged about one for a while and this 1977 is really nice. An absurd asking price of $13,850 and the ugliest interior pattern I've ever seen is not going to dissuade me from taking another drive down memory lane in Ricardo Montalban's "small Chrysler".
 

Since I was so fond of my Cordoba, I feel compelled to blog about them whenever I come across one. Sadly, that's becoming increasingly less frequent; I haven't seen one in person in years and they come up less and less whenever I search the net for one. At car shows, I see plenty of Monte Carlo's and Grand Prix'. Even mid '70's Thunderbirds but I've never seen a Cordoba at one. 



I've written so often about these cars and what mine meant to me that I can do little more than simply marvel at this car's condition and be slack-jawed at its asking price. Would anyone really pay anywhere near the asking price for a Cordoba? And this oh-so-1970's interior? Good lord. Ricardo Montalban's much heralded and ridiculed "soft, Corinthian Leather" was a significant upgrade from whatever this is. For the record, this was called "Checkmate cloth".
 



Much like the home you grew up in, it's the memories you had in the house or experienced while you lived there that flood you emotionally whenever you drive by it or see a photograph of it. Cars do that for me too; especially Cordoba's. It's not that they were good or bad cars; if anything they were atypical American cars of the time. It's that I did a lot of growing up in the 4 1/2 years I owned mine all those years ago and my ride through all the good, bad, ugly and indifferent was at least something fairly unique and memorable.

 

https://charleyconnolly.blogspot.com/2017/09/1977-chrysler-cordoba-two-birds-with.html

https://charleyconnolly.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-green-cordoba.html

https://charleyconnolly.blogspot.com/2014/07/1975-chrysler-cordoba-anything-is.html

https://charleyconnolly.blogspot.com/2014/03/chrysler-cordoba-slip-sliding-away.html

https://charleyconnolly.blogspot.com/2012/12/toyota-corolla-fx-one-that-got-away_23.html

 

 

 

 





1969 Chevrolet Impala - Life's Too Short To Be Practical

 

An all-new-for-1969 Chevrolet Impala was a "company car" of my father's years ago and I was enthralled with it in ways that nothing he ever had from Ford or Chrysler ever did. Not to mention that god awful Rambler he actually owned. These relatively rare and whimsical Impala convertibles transfixing me even more so since even at the tender age of five or six I was transfixed by whimsy. Family sized convertibles made absolutely no sense what-so-ever and for that reason alone I want one so badly; even though I certainly know better.
 

I don't want this particular beat to death, rusted out, overpriced rolling death trap but a '69 Impala SS convertible would be front and center in my Jay Leno-esque fantasy garage of cars. Particularly with it's "Victory Red" finish sanded down by mother nature. Too bad as we say this car is a "basket case".

Meaning that it needs everything and is beyond help. Mechanical issues are easy to deal with but this being a northern Ohio car it's got lots of nasty, unforgiving, foreboding rust. Floor boards need to be replaced and the trunk floor needs to go too. Good thing replacement floor boards come with the deal; just bolt 'em in, right? Quarter panels look like they're falling apart and, maybe it's just me but from the looks of things the interior needs a little work too. This is a parts car at best. And with an asking price of $5,000, an expensive one at that.



Now, onto my knowing better about family sized convertibles. Convertibles were never that popular and if anything were created as a way to efficiently ventilate automobiles before the widespread use of air conditioning. Even by the late '60's they were seen as frivolous and in the case of a large two door sedan, greatly diminished the vehicle's practicality. Not to mention compromising an already questionable structure. Chevrolet sold approximately one of these to every ten pillared four door sedans they sold. Even fifty years ago Americans were practical first and foremost. Damn it. Well, life is too short too practical; to be practical all the time anyway.

That Impala my father had rented was of course one of those soulless pillared four doors and not something awesome like this. Honestly, though, not sure how awesome this is anyway. The late, great Bud Lindemann's review of a '69 Impala hard top left me with the belief that the car was an underpowered, squishy dog with horrible brakes. And that car had front disc brakes and a 396 V-8 for crying out loud. This car is a heavier convertible with a 327. Still, if it were in anywhere decent shape the asking price would be twenty grand more and it still wouldn't be perfect but perhaps a better buy. You get this thing for less than four thousand and drop twenty into it you're still not going to have anything really. Here's the link for the ad if you're interested. Looks like you're going to need a trailer too. Good luck.



Here's Bud Lindemann's review of a '69 Impala. The piped in sound effects and cheesy production music don't do anything to take away from Mr. Lindemann's wonderfully deadpan frankness about the car.
 

1977 Chevrolet Corvette LS Swap - Cleopatra

My planning to swap the perfectly good engine and transmission out of my 1977 Corvette reminded me of when my sister-in-law's first marriage was going down the tubes. Rather than work on saving her marriage, she made plans to remodel the kitchen in her home. Not acknowledging something and attempting to divert one's attention is what people in denial do. And my sister-in-law's name should be "Cleopatra", the Queen of Denial.

Much like that kitchen remodel that never happened, they split before any work started, my "LS swap" in my Corvette is not going to happen either. And I'm as disappointed as much as I'm relieved. I'm relieved because I knew the swap would be a time consuming, frustrating, logistical cluster-eff and a half. I'm disappointed for the obvious reasons - an LS swap into our car would metamorphosis it into a screaming, high-performance monster; now that's not going to happen. I'll get to the reasons why in a second.

Unlike my sister-in-law, however, I'm not in denial about what needs to be done on our car first and foremost; the woe begotten rear end trailing arms need to overhauled asap. They're so bad I get the feeling they're going to fall out of the car.

My "LS swap" dreams were happenstance anyway. One of our station vans was totaled recently in a fairly minor accident and corporate insists we junk it. Amazingly, when I asked about it, they granted me permission to be the "disposer" of the vehicle. Wow. I couldn't plate it but I could take possession of it under the auspice that I would junk it after I removed it's luscious 6.0 liter LS2 V-8 engine making 300 horsepower and 370 foot-pounds of torque. I'd grab the transmission too since my little ole '70's vintage turbo 350 probably couldn't handle the pounding of the more than 100 additional pounds of torque the LS2 would be driving through it.

If that big mill could yank this 5000+ pound van around with gusto, imagine what it could do with a car weighing more than 1,500 pounds less. Be still my beating heart.

I had done a considerable amount of research on what I'd need to get the swap done and the things did add up quickly. Keep in mind, though, I'd be getting the engine and transmission for free. If I was to buy them from a junkyard I'd be looking at least $3,000 for them and I'd have no guarantee they'd be any good. Buying them new would be insanely expensive. All I'd have to pay for were various conversion kits and sundry parts and of course, pay my mechanic under the table for his efforts. All in, I figured, if I could do the swap for maybe $2,000, why wouldn't I do it? What's more, with the car in the air I'd also take care of the damn trailing arms.

This was coming together very quickly until I found out that the transmission attached to the van's engine wouldn't fit in my car. For the record, the GM 4L80e transmission that's found in many trucks, including our wrecked station van, will not fit in the transmission tunnel of C3 Corvettes without major modifications to the tunnel. I'd need the car based 4L60e. They make bell housing adapters so the LS engine could bolt up to my existing transmission but I have cold feet about doing that; it sounds messy and troublesome. It's why LS swaps into cars are best done using LS engines and transmissions that came from cars in the first place. I mean, you can use the 4L80e if you're willing to modify your car but I wasn't willing to do that.

Onto what needs to be done on our car and that's getting the rear end sorted out. It doesn't need the engine swap anyway. Oh, by the way, my sister-in-law's second husband is a bigger loser than the first guy was. However, unlike her first marriage, she has remodeled her kitchen several times since she's been married to him.

1987 Cadillac Allante - Old Trappings of the Wealthy

The old trappings of the wealthy are fascinating to me since it nearly always appears what rich people spent their money on years ago doesn't look like that much of a big deal today. Case in point, Cadillac's infamous Allante which stickered for nearly $60,000 in 1987. Adjusted for inflation that's more than $135,000 today. For that kind of money, for what is ostensibly nothing more than a stubby, two passenger, mid-'80's, GM E body, one would hope to find gold bars inside the door panels. Our subject is from the first year Cadillac sold these things back in 1987. 

It's sobering to realize that "yesterday" was more than thirty years ago now. Critics eviscerated these cars for a number of things but first and foremost because GM charged so much for them. Something being expensive not necessarily bad but when you take into consideration what you got, more importantly, what you didn't get for your money with the Allante, it was no Mercedes or Jaguar, the value proposition simply wasn't there. This isn't a bad looking car, mind you, but priced twice the price of an Eldorado with half the seats? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how and why these things tanked.

A big reason why these cars were so expensive was because Cadillac commissioned the famed Italian coach builder Pinninfarina of Turin, Italy to design and build Allante's handsome body. Ok, fine  - but Cadillac shipped the chassis over there for them to bolt the body onto; then it got shipped back here for Cadillac to install the engine. The hell, right? That engine, at first, was a warmed over HT4100 that had a tad more horsepower and torque than the head gasket eating original mill but it wasn't enough to make a difference in the performance of the 3,700 pound roadster. Contemporary road tests of a 1987 Allante had it scooting from 0-60 in 9.3 seconds which was  on the "fast" side of things for its day but it was about two seconds slower to 60 than the benchmark it was targeted at, the Mercedes Benz 560SL.

Cadillac dropped the first generation Northstar V-8 into the Allante just as they pushed the whole project off a cliff. That big engine solving only one of the Allante's myriad problems; the biggest problem was that GM never figured out how to make the Allante appeal to the buyers they targeted it at originally. In many ways Cadillac still has the same problem today - if a buyer has the means to purchase a very expensive car, why would they buy a Cadillac? Doesn't really matter anyway since in thirty years whatever rich people spend their money on today won't be that impressive. And people wonder why I drive a 24 year old Chevrolet Camaro as a daily driver.