LETS HAVE SOME OPINIONS OF WIW ON THIS CAR

[442w30]

[ QUOTE ]
V-code or not, 5K max. Some cars are rare for a reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what's the reason?

Would you say the same excuse if it was a L78 convertible? Or are they rare for a different reason?

[Dave Rifkin]

Am I the only one who thinks it is a cool car? Very rough and would cost way more than it's worth to restore but, a cool car nontheless.

[old5.0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
V-code or not, 5K max. Some cars are rare for a reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what's the reason?

Would you say the same excuse if it was a L78 convertible? Or are they rare for a different reason?

[/ QUOTE ]


Nope, rare for the exact same reason. In 1969, why would you buy an L78 'vert when a hardtop is lighter, faster and cheaper? Same with a HemiCuda 'vert in 1970. Or, in this car's case, why buy a Fury when Six Barrel Runner is lighter, cheaper, and could hand this car it's a** on a plate? Don't get me wrong, I dig L78 'vert's. I like the rarity and now, four decades later, I attach a higher value due to that rarity. But this car is not a Chevelle. Or a 'Cuda. Rare doesn't automatically equal desirable.

Let me put it this way. If somebody announced tomorrow that they had come up with a 70 LS6 Caprice, I would think it was cool, a neat find, but I sure wouldn't assign it the same value as an LS6 Chevelle convertible. Neither car would be the first choice of most performance car buyers in 1970, but no way any 70 full-size is ever going to have the same "cool" factor as a Chevelle 'vert, at least in my opinion.

I'm not dismissing the car out of hand. When I say that in my opinion it's worth five thousand, I'm taking into account it's rarity and desirability. If it were anything but a factory Six Barrel, I would've said five hundred, and choked a little pricing it that high.

This guy is asking Six Barrel Road Runner money for this thing. Which car would you rather have?

[SuperNovaSS]

I agree with both of the last 2 posts.

Darryl,


Financing is absoltuely available on classic cars. That is main reason classic car dealers are so successful. They can show the bank the book on the car and it usually shows a much higher value than the sale price. Why are they selling it for way back of book? Because that is what they can get for it. It works out well. The bank thinks they are buying good paper, the buyer thinks they are stealing the car in relation to the "value", and the dealer has a big grin on his face. I have consigned cars at dealers in the past for this very reason. They can finance a car as quick as a new one. That is very important when a guy planned to buy a car with his home equity and no longer can.

Back to value, I am not at all educated on Mopar fullsize cars. I do however agree with 5.0 that a fullsize car with the same equipment as a pony or midsize car should not command the same money.


Jason

[king_midas]

Back in the day the road test car could only muster a 16.01 / 92.5...

Who cares rare, when it's that slow, not to mention it's uglier than ugly.

[442w30]

[ QUOTE ]

Nope, rare for the exact same reason. In 1969, why would you buy an L78 'vert when a hardtop is lighter, faster and cheaper? Same with a HemiCuda 'vert in 1970. Or, in this car's case, why buy a Fury when Six Barrel Runner is lighter, cheaper, and could hand this car it's a** on a plate? Don't get me wrong, I dig L78 'vert's. I like the rarity and now, four decades later, I attach a higher value due to that rarity. But this car is not a Chevelle. Or a 'Cuda. Rare doesn't automatically equal desirable.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it's not rare for the exact same reason, which is the point that I was unsuccessful in making.

You're talking about a big Plymouth that doesn't carry much weight (pun not intended) in the hobby no matter what engine it has. By 1970, there simply was no demand for a big car with multiple carbs . . . hell, even Chevy stopped promoting the Impala SS (with 427) after 1969. What other full-size musclecar was there in 1970? In the truest sense of the term, there weren't any.

On the other hand, a SS396 Chevelle ragtop with an L78 is very rare, but that's because a solid lifter engine like that wasn't popular to the general ragtop market. . . . not a good motor to tow a boat, requires more frequent tuning, etc.

But the value of a L78 ragtop is high because it's a rare car that has the demand to support it in the marketplace. The GT V-code, in comparison, suffers from being a C-body (even Mopar guys make fun of 'em), and the demand is not there to justify a high price - that's why I'm confused by your analogy because "rare doesn't equal desirable" can't be a blanket statement in my mind.

[ QUOTE ]

This guy is asking Six Barrel Road Runner money for this thing. Which car would you rather have?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, here's an analogy of mine: Would I prefer a '65 Impala with the L78 or a '66 Chevelle with the L78? I'd take the former!

[69hurstSC]

[ QUOTE ]

What other full-size musclecar was there in 1970? In the truest sense of the term, there weren't any.


[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong.

[442w30]

True, that!

[agtw31]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What other full-size musclecar was there in 1970? In the truest sense of the term, there weren't any.


[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong.


[/ QUOTE ]
no way is a Hurst 300 anywhere near a musclecar,not running mid 16's.

[442w30]

Kinda like the 1955 C-300, right?