Frugal auto transportation: theories?

On 2005-01-05, Nate Nagel > wrote:

> Not if you're in the rust belt. Perhaps the OP will respond with a
> location. Some of my other favorite "run till ya drop" cars are also
> excluded from the list because I still live in an area where rust is
> somewhat a concern.

I live in Iowa.

--
Jonathan Grobe Books
Browse our inventory of thousands of used books at:
http://www.grobebooks.com

James wrote:

> "Roger Blake" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 00:10:44 +0000 (UTC), Jonathan Grobe >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>you recommend as the type (age, mileage, foreign vs
>>>domestic...) of vehicle to purchase?
>>
>>I would go with a domestic compact such as Rambler American, Studebaker
>>Lark,
>>Plymouth Valiant, Ford Falcon, etc. Each model has its own strengths and
>>weaknesses, but as a group they are durable, easy to work on, and the
>>pre-1973 models get decent gas mileage. I guess the foreign tin can
>>be somewhat attractive due to better gas mileage, but that can be offset
>>by the price and availability of parts and service. (Ever try to get
>>a fuel pump for your Borgward while stuck out in the middle of nowhere?)
>>
>>--
>> Roger Blake
>> (Subtract 10 for email.)
>
>
> Yea, right. You are joking right? Where do you suggest one find a
> Studebaker or a Rambler? I have not seen one of those in over 35 years.
> However, there are some Ford Falcons still around, my neighbor that lives
> across the street has 2 of them. One of them is for sale, he wants $600.00
> for it and it does run.
>

Ummm... if you're serious I have two Studes right now and know where
there's several more decent ones for sale...

I wouldn't recommend one for a daily driver though just because of the
rustmonster. That and 20 MPG ain't crap today. Decent cars though.
For a driver I'd probably try to find a Dart/Valiant with a 273 or 318.
The slant six is a great motor but a little slow for my tastes. If
you can deal with the lack of power the slant six will run forever, and
truth be told it's not *that* slow, I'm just a power junkie.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

"Nate Nagel" > wrote in message
...
> John R Weiss wrote:
>
>> "Tock" > wrote...
>>
>>>Lots of cheap VW bugs still out there, and parts are still easy to come by.
>>>Best years, IMHO, are 69 to 71, after the switch to 12 volts and before they
>>>put air pumps on the engine. Pre-67's are ok, if you don't mind the single
>>>circuit brake lines . . .
>>
>>
>> IIRC, the 67s had the best power/weight ratio; also, 12V, large rear window,
>> pre-smog rules...
>>
>> OTOH, they have become a cult car, and may be relatively expensive to buy...

> IMHO that's a good thing. A "cult car" will have a thriving aftermarket parts
> supply.

Dont need it with a beetle tho, essentially because its so common in south
america.

> But I still would recommend a watercooled.

I wouldnt for that reason alone, just a decent body with a Golf.

The beetle body is WAY past its useby date.

> I'm currently driving a Porsche 944. You wouldn't think it would be possible
> to drive it on a budget, but I've been doing all right by doing as much work
> on it as I can myself and buying my parts from online aftermarket sources.
> Fits right in with my theory that you want to buy a car with a thriving
> enthusiast base. Also vehicle-specific newsgroups and web boards are great if
> you're a DIYer, there's lots for Porsches, VWs, but not so many for stuff like
> Cavaliers, etc. It really does pay to drive an interesting car, that's my
> story and I'm sticking to it

Jonathan Grobe > wrote in
:

> My traditional view of frugal auto transportation has
> been to have two beaters: (a small car I use most of
> the time and a larger vehicle for hauling larger cargoes
> and for backup). I've given up on my small car (a 1984
> Chrysler Laser with 265,000 miles and am considering
> what I should buy next (I got the Laser about 6 years
> ago when it had 145,000 miles on it). So taken
> everything into consideration (initial cost, repair
> costs, insurance/license costs, gas costs...) what do
> you recommend as the type (age, mileage, foreign vs
> domestic...) of vehicle to purchase?
>
> Thank you.
>

A Neon....
Other than a design issue (water pump running off the timing belt -
replace the pump when you replace the belt-there will be no problems)
these are *FUN*, cheap, dependable vehicles. Mine ('96) with 140k and
*automatic* still averages 35 mpg in mixed city/hwy driving.



--
Anthony

You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make
better idiots.

Remove sp to reply via email

"Nate Nagel" > wrote in message
...

>
> I vote for an A2 chassis VW Golf or Jetta, base model, no power options.
> The froofy stuff is crap on VWs but the basic mechanicals are solid and
> easy to work on. I know DS will disagree with me vehemently, but I have
> had excellent luck with them. Do try to find one in good condition
> though, a "beater" can be more trouble than it's worth if the PO has let
> everything go to hell. Beware of blown heater cores, there was a recall
> on them but VWoA is a pain in the keister about it.
>

> http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

I second that one and if you aren't concerned with acceleration a VW diesel
from that era will go forever and ever and ever and ever......

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Nate Nagel wrote:

> I vote for an A2 chassis VW Golf or Jetta, base model, no power options.
> The froofy stuff is crap on VWs but the basic mechanicals are solid I
> have had excellent luck with them.

That's the problem: These cars are a literal crapshoot. If you're lucky,
you get a good one. If you're not lucky, you get a moneypit.

> Beware of blown heater cores, there was a recall
> on them but VWoA is a pain in the keister about it.

VWoA is a pain in the keister. Period.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 01:49:30 -0500, Nate Nagel >
wrote:

>Not if you're in the rust belt. Perhaps the OP will respond with a
>location. Some of my other favorite "run till ya drop" cars are also
>excluded from the list because I still live in an area where rust is
>somewhat a concern.
>
>Now the watercooled VWs seemed to have better rust protection...
>
>nate

I was going to mention that too. Besides all the difficulties the
bugs had, they were susceptible to rust and salt corrosion like no
other car I know of. One I had ended up literally dragging the
battery down the road when it dropped through the floor where it sat
under the rear seat. And it never did have a working heater because
the side channels that conducted the heat forward from the heater
boxes had literally disintegrated.

The one thing they had going for them was their uncanny ability to get
up hills in the snow. Couldn't see out of them because the windows
were always fogged up but they sure got me where I wanted to go in the
winter in Vermont. I'd just ram it into the snowbank for the night,
then rev it up in the morning, drop the clutch and no matter how deep
the snow, or how badly I'd stuffed it into the snow bank, it backed
out.

Corky Scott

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Tock wrote:

> Lots of cheap VW bugs still out there

....if you're a masochist, they're a perfect car to use on a daily basis.

Otherwise, they're grossly polluting deathboxes with no defogger or heater
to speak of and *certainly* no A/C. It only seems like they were good cars
because there were a lot of mind-altering drugs going around in the '60s.

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:43:06 -0500, Daniel J. Stern > wrote:
>On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Tock wrote:

>> Lots of cheap VW bugs still out there

>...if you're a masochist, they're a perfect car to use on a daily basis.

>Otherwise, they're grossly polluting deathboxes with no defogger or heater
>to speak of and *certainly* no A/C. It only seems like they were good cars
>because there were a lot of mind-altering drugs going around in the '60s.

uncomfortable
don't accelerate
don't brake
don't handle
get lousy gas mileage (about 25mpg on a sunny day when
brand new, otherwise often below 20mpg)
and are as unreliable as a car from the 30's. They only look reliable
compared to detroit's dark age of the 70's. When I had a bug there wasn't
a major system that didn't have multiple failures (electrical,fuel,
steering, suspension, body integrity, etc.)

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Tock wrote:
>
>
>>Lots of cheap VW bugs still out there
>
>
> ...if you're a masochist, they're a perfect car to use on a daily basis.
>
> Otherwise, they're grossly polluting deathboxes with no defogger or heater
> to speak of and *certainly* no A/C. It only seems like they were good cars
> because there were a lot of mind-altering drugs going around in the '60s.
>
Hey Dan,
Would you approve of an 83 Caravelle (Canadian) with a 318 and a
Manitoba safety for $1200? My Jimmy's clutch is starting to go and I
can't imagine putting $500 worth of hydraulics and clutch into it...
it's a rustbucket... but I need another winter car and I don't do FWD.
My old 82 Carvelle was great until it got totalled by some dipwad...
$400 to buy, $400 to run for a year and a half...

Ray