the next Supercar??

[Dave Rifkin]

I am no fortune teller but, I see the Fox body Mustangs; particularly the coupes as the modern day Camaro. They were plentiful, inexpensive and easy to work on. I also think the 4th Gen F-bodies are worth watching as are the Buick GN's. Those would be my picks for cars that might increase in value; but what do I know?

[327fan]

I think you are dead right on the Grand Nationals. I've watched their prices rise over the last 2 years.

Something else I have considered is pocketing my cash until they start taking orders for the new Camaro. Has anyone heard anything about engine option and trim packages?

I know GM will offer race prepped Camaros for competition, how would you order one?

[king_midas]

Regarding domestics, the Fox-body Mustang and the GN/T-Type. My opinion is the 1986 Mustang-- MPFI, 8.8 axle, and pre-1987 Tempo headlights. For the GN, obviously the 1987, because it's intercooled.

For both platform, all parts interchange, so you don't have to be married to the most desirable year. It's really a grab-bag for either car, and you can have more fun than kicking a beehive with either for under $10K total.

I'd stay away from 3rd Gen F-bodies mainly because of the rear end and weight. And then there's the 4th gen, which look like landed catfish (yuck...). If you don't care about the looks, bargains are all over the place for worn-out pre-96 Z28's.

[YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY]

What's a 'bargain' pre '96 Z in $'s?

[king_midas]

[ QUOTE ]
What's a 'bargain' pre '96 Z in $'s?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen cars that need work and have gotten to the point where they've been abused in the $3 - 4K range. I'm assuming you'd call that a bargain...?

[tom406]

I really like the Fox 5.0's, but IMO the '86 is the weakest purchase. They have really crappy heads and pistons with no valve reliefs to deal with better heads or any hidden mods to cam or rockers. I think really nice '85 GT/5sp cars are good (Last of the Holley 4bbl cars, but remember 5sp ONLY, autos got crappy CFI injection) Also really nice LX 5.0/5sp models. Stripped '87/'88 Coupes and loaded '91-93 hatches are the cream of the crop, IMO. 1993 Cobra models are the peak of that model, with good brakes, GT40 heads and intake, etc. They will always have value, and are already appreciating. '86/'87 Grand Nationals are great, and I think they will usually have broader appeal than the Turbo T's and T-types, even though they're more common. Less sure for collectibility but a whole lotta fun are the GMC Syclones. I'm not a big late model Camaro fan, but even I really like the last few years of Camaro SS models, no T-tops in either Red or Black with the 6sp. For any of these, buy the nicest unmolested car you can find, preferably with low miles. But I wouldn't discount a well maintained car with higher miles from a fussy owner.

I don't think any new car purchase should be made if you're at all concerned about investment. You'll be waiting a while for the value to come back up to what you paid, and for most cars, that day never comes....

[king_midas]

Tom,

With all due respect, you don't know your Mustangs very well. The '86 head is a myth; everyone knows that any stock Ford head needs to be replaced to take advantage of a cam swap, so you're swapping heads on any 85 - 93 FI car to begin with if you're opening it up for internal mods. The '86 responds to bolt-ons just like the rest of them, and the speed density computers in the '86 are more aggressively tuned out of the box; most are misinformed because of the heads, making the '86 is a bargain compared to the rest. On top of this, the '86 is lighter than 87 - up, carries the EECIV and all applicable wiring, upgradable fuel pump hardware, etc., etc., making for easy upgrades.

The '85 is a terrible choice due to the Holley, the 7.5" axle, and a single exhaust. I would never recommend an '85 to a non-knowledgable Mustang person.

All that being said, the GM turbo cars, including the Syclone and (whatever the Blazer was called) are incredibly cool. Other than the Corvette (obvioulsy) and new Cadillacs, they are the most significant GM cars of the last 20 years, due to the application of technology for drivability, mileage, and performance. I love me my small-blocks, but look at the performance world today-- Turbos everywhere, and smaller engines that rrrrrip. GM, where are you?

Speaking of which-- Does anyone remember the chrome-yellow Camaro concept in C&D; would have been about 1987 or so, that was equipped with the GN-turbo six tuned to 300 or so hp...? This was the car that was supposed to be the 4th-Gen, but GM dropped the ball...

[Hotrodpaul]

What about the 1989 Trans Am Pontiac Turbo coupe? I saw one of these click off consistent 12.80's at Houston Raceway Park back in 1990 or 1991 with nothing more that a flowmaster muffler and computer chip. Same engine as a grand national but in a sleeker body. I believe they only made a limited number, something like 2000 or so. White with Beige interior and Gold spoke wheels, it really was a good looking car.

I also had a 1986 Mustang LX which I purchased in 1986 with 2000 miles. Finally modded it up to the point of building a 347 stroker, 5 speed Tremec, Cobra R's, etc. That car was a blast!


Paul

[king_midas]

Paul,

You're correct-- The Turbo T/A is also way under the radar. By the way, that's a great looking Mustang. You do know that that particular car is very rare...

I guess the only problem (well, some may consider it a problem...) is that all performance offerings from GM w/a turbo were automatics. Now, turbos are better in automatics because they constantly stay spooled up and under boost, but the fun-to-drive, and possible track-day events (if you're into turning rather than straight-lines) are constrained by not having a manual.

Hooray the GM turbos...

[tom406]

First off, I have to apologize for dismissing the '86 Mustangs King Midas went to the trouble of recommending with such a cursory excuse. Though I bristled when told I don't know Mustangs, I realized later that I brushed off his advice to the poster without much tact or explanation. So here's what I SHOULD have said about Fox Mustangs:

I like '85 5.0/5sp cars. They were the first ones to really make me take notice (I was 16, and I read the Car & Driver article over and over...). They're the last hurrah of carb musclecars, and are probably the easiest ones for "old school" guys to get into, if only because they look nice under the hood. The dual snorkel air cleaner and finned valve covers are just neat looking, even with all of the smog stuff. I liked the new styling, and they had real 60 series tires (no more goofy TRX wheels and tires).

'87/'88 was really when 5.0 stuff started catching on, and you start seeing a lot more articles, especially in the East Coast magazines with Tony DeFeo and Steve Collison's LX's (among others) doing impressive stuff. This seemed to be the time when you could order a truly stripped down model, with basic seats, roll up windows, and no radios showing up on car lots. I'm pretty sure Ford started upping the options into packages later, so you don't find '90-93 cars that stripped down.

I've had two '90 LX 5.0 hatches, a '93 Cobra, and an '85 GT 5sp convert that I bought from the original lady owner with 50K miles on it. I don't like '87-'93 GT's with their hokey taillights and their unnecessary ground effects. I'd put up with them if there weren't LX's, but thankfully I never had to make that choice.

My anti '86 bias mostly comes from that late'80's/early '90's mindset. Those flattop pistons with no valve reliefs meant that you were going to have to buy pistons and really get into the motor if you were going to build it up at all. This seemed a waste, since '87-'92 HO 5.0's had forged pistons that could take a lifetime of abuse, and had the valve reliefs. I only wanted to deal in bolt-ons. Here in 2007 its less of a factor, especially if you're planning on rebuilding the engine anyway.

But I would argue that '86 5.0's are always going to be the middle child, a 'tweener like '64 Vettes. They're not the first of that body style, and '87 is really when that engine got embraced by the masses in its 225hp tune. And rightly or wrongly, the heads/pistons issue is what dogged them then, and they carry that stigma whether deserved or not. So value-wise, I don't think they're ever going to break out, at least compared to the '87-'93 cars. You can call them the best of both worlds now, but they never had that rep "back in the day".

(Wow, I'm finally old enough to have car "back in the day" stories )

I've never had an '86, so correct me if I'm wrong, but the piston deal precludes you from doing an E303 cam or even 1.7 rockers, even with aftermarket heads, does it not?

Obviously I know what you can build 5.0's into, but if collectibility is kept in mind, you really don't want run a bunch of aftermarket hardware on the car. There's a lot of modified cars out there, that's why stock ones are gaining in value!

The stripped '87/'88 LX cars are the epitome of 5.0 story (going fast for cheap), and the '93 Cobra is the ultimate development of the concept by Ford. The '85's are a sentimental favorite of mine, and could be a good fit for traditionalists (weak rearend be damned).

Respectfully,
TOM BRESKE