Holy Moly, only 2664 original miles! It sure looks it. I'd be tempted to detail under the hood but it would have to be done correctly. That would make the car absolutely perfect.
__________________
67 Chevelle Malibu Sport Coupe, Oshawa-built 250 PG never disturbed.
In garage, 296 cid inline six & TH350...
Cam, Toronto.
I don't judge a man by how far he's fallen, but by how far back he bounces - Patton
Holy Moly, only 2664 original miles! It sure looks it. I'd be tempted to detail under the hood but it would have to be done correctly. That would make the car absolutely perfect.
I thought that same thing but I also though, how would a guy know if he's done it correctly? It HAS to be done right on a car like that.
__________________
1966 Strato Chief 2 door, 427 4 speed, 45,000 original miles
1966 Grande Parisienne, 396 1 of 23 factory air cars
Not arguing the point on its age and miles but man that engine bay looks like its been around the odo a couple of times. Was it left in the garage with the bonnet up? Really out of step with the rest of it...where do they find gems like this?
__________________
cutting a roof off a four door is NOT a convertible.....
65 Parisienne convertible.one of 49 built for RHD export market,402BBC, T400, 2500 stally, posi rear, upgraded brakes with front discs, FUEL FAST efi custom built by me.
Not arguing the point on its age and miles but man that engine bay looks like its been around the odo a couple of times. Was it left in the garage with the bonnet up? Really out of step with the rest of it...where do they find gems like this?
That was my first thought as well. Why is the rest of the car so well preserved yet the engine room looks like crap?
My first thought was that the paint quality under the hood was no good, but when you look at it, several areas that were painted at different stages all have peeling paint and rust: inner fenders, cowl, engine parts, radiator, bulkhead, hinges, hood latch, etc. So rather than paint quality, it must be the localized environment.
Then I thought perhaps it was left with the front end outside with the hood up? But first of all that wouldn't make sense and secondly the outer surfaces, grille, bumper chrome, etc. are mint. So that rules out that theory.
My conclusion is that it must have been stored in a garage with a dirt floor. The engine room is the only part visible in the pictures that is directly exposed to the environment under the vehicle, as it's open to the bottom. If it was parked on a dirt floor garage (which wasn't uncommon in the old days, and this was parked since 1967) then all the moisture that would be coming up from the floor would be trapped under the hood, probably causing condensation as the temperature fluctuated (which would happen quite a bit if the garage wasn't well insulated). All that moisture collecting under the hood over a period of almost 50 years would definitely cause rust to start.
Curiously, there aren't any photos of the underside of the vehicle, so I'd be curious what it looked like there. No mention of replacing the exhaust system in the description, though, which would probably be the first to go in wet conditions.
That said, it's an amazing time capsule that would be well at home in a museum (with the hood closed... lol). If I bought something like that I'd feel guilty driving it....
Exactly. Anybody who buys a car like these with an express intention of never driving it has to be a museum or a speculator or is kind of nuts. For ordinary guys like us who probably cant afford to buy a car that shouldn't and probably can't really be driven anymore, they are not worth looking at except to marvel over as a reference copy.
At show and shine's I tend to want to look at the cars with bug stains on the bumpers and talk to their owners as they usually have interesting stories to tell. Trailer queens are boring.
A friend of mine bought an 8000 original mile 1967 Impala 4-door back in 1994 down in Hershey PA. Today it is still mint and probably has 16,000 miles on it. The worst thing he did was cut the door panels & rear shelf for speakers
__________________
67 Chevelle Malibu Sport Coupe, Oshawa-built 250 PG never disturbed.
In garage, 296 cid inline six & TH350...
Cam, Toronto.
I don't judge a man by how far he's fallen, but by how far back he bounces - Patton
Exactly. Anybody who buys a car like these with an express intention of never driving it has to be a museum or a speculator or is kind of nuts. For ordinary guys like us who probably cant afford to buy a car that shouldn't and probably can't really be driven anymore, they are not worth looking at except to marvel over as a reference copy.
At show and shine's I tend to want to look at the cars with bug stains on the bumpers and talk to their owners as they usually have interesting stories to tell. Trailer queens are boring.
I would never buy a car I didn't intend to drive. After all, that's what all those engineers sweated over back in the day, they are designed and built to be driven, and their place is on the road. Plus, I worry that there will come a day when all old cars are "too valuable" or "pollute too much" to be driven on public roads, then they will be lost to future generations.
Thing is, you go to a car show and it's sensory overload. Hundreds of cars all deserving of your attention and you only have a few hours to go through them all. You see something really neat and it's like: "ho hum" on to the next one. However, if you see it out on the road it stands out among a sea of monster trucks, SUVs and jellybean cars. You say "wow" does that ever look/sound cool, even if it's a straight six with powerglide, it stands out. Get 'em out on the road, that's where they belong.
That said, a car has been preserved for fifty years and is 95% made up of the parts it rolled off the assembly line with, most in mint, original condition. Some texting-dork in a Camry runs a red light and *poof* preserved history gone forever. That's why I would feel a little guilty driving something that should probably be in a museum as a restoration reference car or something similar.
Gotta say, though, it's awfully attractive to think about buying a "new" 50 year old car and driving it as such. Not many people get to experience history first hand like that...
Exactly. Anybody who buys a car like these with an express intention of never driving it has to be a museum or a speculator or is kind of nuts. For ordinary guys like us who probably cant afford to buy a car that shouldn't and probably can't really be driven anymore, they are not worth looking at except to marvel over as a reference copy.
At show and shine's I tend to want to look at the cars with bug stains on the bumpers and talk to their owners as they usually have interesting stories to tell. Trailer queens are boring.
Well said and i also agree totally with MC s post. Its about driving them not having them on static display on your carpeted garge...know guy like that.
I love the car and yes engine bay needs help but its a easy and fun thing that can be remedied....
I agree with MC. The other day I was at a light and a 62 impala was waiting next to me. That thing stood out so much compared to the crap around it (my truck as well), and for those few minutes I was really able to notice all the little details. Sounds stupid but it made my day.
__________________
51 pontiac chieftain straight 6...work in progress
It will be interesting to see what it sells for...............
As NICE as it appears to be.....it's STILL only a low mile,6 cyl. 4dr.....that WANTS to be driven.......and that's the BEST thing that could happen to that car.....
The engine compartment IS a bit of a mystery.......wonder if the car didn't get a respray...35 years ago? (the paint is almost TOO shiny....)
All the engine compartment needs is inners/hood hinges and exposed portions of rad support painted in semi-gloss.....and respray the valve cover....add appropriate sticker....then drive it....to create some grime.......It would still maintain it's "survivor image" that way....
Not arguing the point on its age and miles but man that engine bay looks like its been around the odo a couple of times. Was it left in the garage with the bonnet up? Really out of step with the rest of it...where do they find gems like this?
I was thinking that very same thing.
__________________
1957 Pontiac Pathfinder Deluxe sedan restored 261 six
1974 Chevrolet Caprice Estate wagon low mileage original 400 V-8
A friend of mine bought an 8000 original mile 1967 Impala 4-door back in 1994 down in Hershey PA. Today it is still mint and probably has 16,000 miles on it. The worst thing he did was cut the door panels & rear shelf for speakers
Cam, i think i know this car. Did he put rally rims on it that were not correct for 1967?
__________________
1957 Pontiac Pathfinder Deluxe sedan restored 261 six
1974 Chevrolet Caprice Estate wagon low mileage original 400 V-8
A friend of mine bought an 8000 original mile 1967 Impala 4-door back in 1994 down in Hershey PA. Today it is still mint and probably has 16,000 miles on it. The worst thing he did was cut the door panels & rear shelf for speakers
Cam, i think i know this car. Did he put rally rims on it that were not correct for 1967?
Yup. The car is wearing the original Sierra Fawn paint with original Capri Cream 2-tone on the roof. A 327 Powerglide car.
__________________
67 Chevelle Malibu Sport Coupe, Oshawa-built 250 PG never disturbed.
In garage, 296 cid inline six & TH350...
Cam, Toronto.
I don't judge a man by how far he's fallen, but by how far back he bounces - Patton
Me thinks something out of kilter with the original paint claim. I think car has been repainted, as said, firewall paint. Nice runs and drips, should look like the rest of the engine bay. Look closely at the firewall above the brake booster and theres body colour overspray. Not completely original paint but a gem just the same.
__________________
cutting a roof off a four door is NOT a convertible.....
65 Parisienne convertible.one of 49 built for RHD export market,402BBC, T400, 2500 stally, posi rear, upgraded brakes with front discs, FUEL FAST efi custom built by me.
I was looking at the underhood photos again - the paint there is really at odds with the rest of the car.
I wonder if someone hit the engine compartment with a steam cleaner. Crank up the heat and flowrate on those and they'd strip a lot of paint off, which would quickly oxidize and leave something very much like what we're seeing. I wouldn't be bidding without inspecting the undercarriage though in case the engine compartment is just the tip of the iceberg.
I'm pretty sure the black firewall is correct for a US built Chevy II Nova. Ditto for the speckle-finish trunk.
It is a real gem. Sure be nice to see it with the engine compartment properly detailed.
Good call....on the steam cleaner.......I'll bet that's what happened....
When I get a an old car...with a greasy engine compartment....I won't clean the gunge off....until I'm ready to detail....OR work on it.......otherwise you will end up with what this gem has.....
