Found this in my local listings. 1976 type s3 chevy. Ad says

Wouldn't mind some input. Asked CCG but it's been 1.5 hours and no reply.

smog era
pass unless you want to redo the engine

>>15374963
No smog taxes in my state.

>>15374778
Neat. Take off the smog shit and you might gain a couple HP.

>>15374980
What I mean is that it'll be shitty to drive without new cams and heads unless someone has already done it of course. Go test drive it and you'll see.

>>15375014
It's a shop selling it. I'll be able to test drive it Tuesday since they're doing a weekend lake trip for the 4th.

That price seems pretty good if it's working well enough with no major rust. Might be a nice little project to restore cheaply.

>>15375026
If you say so, Man.

File: yea.png (285KB, 990x634px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 990x634px

>>15375038

>>15374778
>classic cars

it's a fucking boat

File: image.jpg (886KB, 3968x2976px) Image search: [Google]

886KB, 3968x2976px

Do it. That's a car you can fall in love with.

swap in a vortech gm truck engine later on. Fix the front panel and paint it.

>>15375294
I'd paint mine metallic gray or maybe a dark metallic green.

man that is one of the ugliest cars Ive ever seen

its probably objectively shit in every way but its your money so whatever

>>15375533
Why. It'd be fun upgrading suspension. Brakes. Tires. Engine. Way more fun than a new car.

I bet that year one company has new interior and exterior parts for it.

>>15375120
F-bodies are not boats, platforms like the e-body are.

>>15375294
It needs a rear spoiler like a '74-'81 Camaro Z28

>>15374778
I'd rock that shit, you never see those, and Laguna S3's are pretty rare. You could build a mean 350 for it for like $200 anyway.

>>15375564
>Way more fun than a new car.

I loled

a new Civic would be more fun than that shit

>>15375014
>new cams
Yeah, take advice from this guy, he really knows what he is talking about.

that is a car from the darkest age of American automobiles. Its has the worst traits of 1960's cars AND 1980's cars combined, with none of the pros. Offer 800 bucks if it runs good.

>>15376682
>I read Jalopnik, and take it seriously.

>>15376731
hes right tho

that car isnt worth more than $1000 or so

File: 0810phr_01_z+1975_chevrolet_laguna_project_talledaga+basset_custom_racing_wheels.jpg (50KB, 660x495px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 660x495px

>>15376731
What is good about 74-80s American cars?

>>15376731
hardly, i've just dealt with these cars and there is nothing there that would make me buy one over a mid 60's a body or a thirdgen f body.

>>15376333
He can buy as many as he wants even if he can only use one at a time

>>15376997

What does the 60's body have over this one?

arent there only like 9.5k of those made though? rare isnt it?

>>15376731
he's right you know.

>>15374778
>Has a 350 engine with a Turbo 350 transmission
Literally every car ever built by a boomer

Not worth 1900 in that condition unless it already has engine mods. Offer less 1500-1700 would be OK.

>>15374778
Do it mate, I regret not going for the ugly duckling

>>15378625
I wouldn't. look at that front end. disgusting

>>15377589
collectible value and even if you keep them period stock, most "hot" models have pretty good performance.

>>15377589
they dont look like fucking trucks with giant 5mph mandated bumpers.

File: mustang_II_nice_74.jpg (43KB, 639x402px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 639x402px

>>15375294

yes. mid 70's were the peak of american styling and performance

I'm 53, and I was around for the Mustang II and Laguna era.

Yes, the malaise-era cars were a total letdown. Really quick cars were less than 10 years old, and cheap- back then $2000 would buy a used GTO.

A friend had a 2.3 liter Mustang II notch. It was surprisingly fast for what it was. It would do an amazing burnout, because the axle-tramp was really over the top. It cornered on the doorhandles, but despite how hard my friend drove it, I never saw him start to lose it.

I understand that 2.3 can make 200 hp- it was a common sand-rail motor.