Need classic car advice

File: engine.jpg (17KB, 258x195px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 258x195px

>Inb4 old cars are shit, get a civic.

I refuse to buy a new car; ill spend my money on a classic car. I am mechanically inclined and dont mind extra maintenance.

>>16177994
>Tl;dr: which one of the vehicles will be best to daily drive?
They're all pretty driveable. 74 and older are emissions exempt.
>So im looking at daily driving a classic car once im back from basic
These cars used to be daily drivers on worse roads than we have now. No reason they can't be again. Just make sure the drive train and fuel system is solid and carry a new set of plugs and small shit like that.
>but would like opinions and of anyone can give me their experience for mpgs and performance.
You can get decent mileage out of any size engine, even a V8. It depends on your habits.

>65-70 mustang with a 200 I6 and 3spd.
They're nice but they'll be anemic. There's a reason 3 speed manuals are the first things swapped out.

>Good mpgs to me is 17mpg hwy for me
Even the big blocks will manage 17 if you have a light foot.
The thing is big blocks make enough power to carry themselves with very little throttle even though they consume more gas, small blocks will need more throttle but burn less gas. It's hard to explain.

My advice, whatever one you buy, replace the whole cooling system because eventually that shit turns to acid, give it some seafoam and clean&rebuild the carb, check and see if the wires are clean and you should be alright.

>>16177994
Old cars are shit buy a regular cab F-150 EcoBoost with the FX4 package.

File: 1966-chevrolet-chevelle-ss-396-2.jpg (34KB, 400x267px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 400x267px

Bumping with a sexy 396

>>16178032
Big blocks are capable of 17mpg if you dont go over 55 sadly. Im trying to drive a 50-60 year old car like a normal vehicle.

>>16178039
Fuck off with the eco shit

File: 1973-6-pack-challenger-not-camaro-1969-1967-1970-cuda-mustang-charger-roadrunner-1.jpg (269KB, 1000x730px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 1000x730px

>>16178039
>Old cars are shit
no u r

>>16178008
Get an old civic.

>>16178054
Id love an old dart with a 318, but muh mopar tax and rarity...

>>16178052
>Big blocks are capable of 17mpg if you dont go over 55 sadly.
Pretty sure the auto industry accidentally made cars get good mpg with semi-fastback layouts.
This is where your choice of final drive ratios matter.

>>16178071
What would be cheaper? (Assuming i have a shop do the labor, but i supply parts)
-swapping rear gears
-swapping rear ends
-swapping to an od transmission
-gear vendor

File: Fury.jpg (362KB, 1024x691px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 1024x691px

>>16178067
http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/search/cto?query=318+dart

Mopars only get expensive when you try to buy E-bodies and Chargers.
Basically they were considered ugly as shit back in the day, nobody bought them and now they're rare as fuck.

A, F, most B bodies and C bodies are available. One unfortunate characteristic is that Mopars are rust fucking buckets.

>>16178097
I would do all of that to be honest but if you had to cheap out i'd just swap the rear gears.

>>16178104
I plan on keeping the car forever, but ill have to start cheap on sailors pay. I will be finacing max 10k for it (so purchasing at a max of 15k) which i think can get me a good vehicle to start with.

Can you give me the popular examples of those bodies?

>>16178127
>Can you give me the popular examples of those bodies?
Here's the platforms and a list of their cars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chrysler_platforms

This is only Mopar shit though, obviously there's Ford an GM too.
I sure wouldn't mind a 4-speed Falcon either.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYhTQx-NxAU

List of best classic cars of all time
>1990 miata
>1990 240
>1987 corolla gts

>>16178330
Kys

>>16178052
Then why is my slant 6 only getting 15mpg? Would a 15min warmup each morning take off that much?

>>16178413
Not a good tune or carb? Or you just drive strictly city? A lot of people claim to get at least 20mpg out of an i6

>>16178413
Oh wait. You said slant 6. Yeah, those notoriously get shit mpg. What is it in?

>>16178330
>1969 Nissan 240z
>1955 Toyota Crown
>1958 Subaru 360

>>16178484
Any reason for that? And it's a 1971 Valiant. Daily I drive (both ways) is about 2 miles in 35mph, 4 miles in 65mph, the rest in 55mph roads.

Does this mean a 318 would bet better mileage depending on carb?

>>16178413
>Then why is my slant 6 only getting 15mpg?
this depends entirely on your intake setup.
What's the displacement of your slant?

>>16178346
Much nicer and more usable classics than some obese pile of boomer trash.

>>16178330
LEL

>>16178563
>Any reason for that?
Because most people tune the carbs for more power.
Keep in mind the 225 is a 3.7 liter engine.

>>16178563
Is that possibly stop and go driving? Ive read a lot about slant 6's sucking gas while a properly tuned 318 can get around 20. You could have too big of a carb on it as well?

>>16178567
Those are hair dresser cars. Only a classic by years, but they have no value to most people.

>>16178601
I'll have to check what it has in the day, but there's another in the trunk. I think it has a 1v on it now. I do some stop and go but it's mainly 2 to 4 miles stretches of 65 or 55. I will admit it's less continuous stretches than when I'd go to college (which were three 10-15mi stretches of 55 or 65 but in a car that got 43mpg), but my commute each way to 12 to 20min (depending on if I drive lunch)

As for 318, how expensive/how much work to put one in?

>>16178646
>1v
Autolite?
How heavy of a foot do you usually need to give it?

you can go the other way and get more power and that way you won't need to give it so much gas to keep moving, you know what i mean?

>>16178039
fuck it bro, get the crew cab and its future proofed because you can put your seed back there

>>16178668
Not...TOO heavy, though the kickdown linkage is missing so it's in 3rd at 20mph unless I move the shifter to 2.

There's a 2v in the trunk, though I'm not sure it'll fit the same manifold.

>>16178723
>so it's in 3rd at 20mph unless
A:if your gearbox isn't on its last legs, it will be soon, you need to get a kickdown on a mopar transmission ASAP.
B: if this is true then the more you put your foot down the more gas you're burning whether or not you're getting power.

Honestly i'd go with a two barrel carb minimum on a /6.

Also these engines are supposed to idle at 750 RPM, pretty low considering modern cars but you could be losing gas there.
Have you read the articles on slantsix.org?

>>16177994
>military guy
>making shitty financial decisions
Carry on. Nothing out of the ordinary here.

>>16178844
Nonono, what I mean is, the actual linkage between the carburetor, and the kickdown on the transmission, is missing, so it's just not being told to downshift by throttle movements

A littole but I shall read more.

>>16178844
Oh, just noticed "if it isn't, it will be" I misread that as "if it is, you need to..."

>>16178861
>the actual linkage between the carburetor, and the kickdown on the transmission,
Yes, that will brick a mopar gearbox.

>>16178890
I was considering buying one anyway...I would probably need a new intake manifold for the 2v carb as well, right?

>>16178911
>I would probably need a new intake manifold for the 2v carb as well, right?
I dunno, i know next to nothing about Autolites.
my /6 has a 4 barrel Holley on it.
There could be many reasons you're getting bad mileage. 2bh the aero of Valiants isn't that great. If you had a more fuel efficient vehicle i'd just go for broke and slap triple DCOEs and split exhaust manifold and make like 290 hp out of that sucker.

File: IMG_20161117_205043610[1].jpg (2MB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4320x2432px

>>16178929
Huh, looks like both carbs are 2v.

>>16179003
Well then you should be getting better mileage than that.
How long has it been since the carb has been rebuilt and tuned?

File: IMG_20161117_205105199[1].jpg (2MB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4320x2432px

>>16179003

>>16179007
I don't know, I've not had it very long. Should I put the other 2v on (a Holley) and see if it makes a difference?

>>16179027
it can't hurt, your accelerator pump may be mis-timed or the carb is burning rich for some reason.

>>16179039
How long should it take for a choke to close after cutting engine? It'd been off for nearly 4 hours when I took that second photo and you can see it's wide open. Would that affect it any?

>>16178525
I am talking about the numale 240 not the ricer/vaper 240.

>>16179048
It'll only close if you hit the gas pedal so the plate hits the steps that hold it closed. That's normal. Now if it was closed all the time then your mileage would be like 7-10mpg if it ran at all.

Your carb may just be dirty, try swapping to the other one if it's complete and see what happens.

>>16179076
Oh, I thought it would be closed when cold and then open when warmed up, that's how it is on a relatives car with 4v carb. (Then again that one's electric choke)

>>16177994
Personally I'd find a smaller mid 60s coupe like a nova or ford falcon, manual with either a V8 or barn-find style straight six.

>>16178851
Military guy
Need a car
Dont want to buy a 3k civic
Fuck me, right?

>>16179320
Cant get much smaller than a mustang. Id go for a nova, but thise are pricey

>>16178567
>buying into the /o/ memes
Get off that bench boi

>>16179365
Try to get your hands on a falcon
Them being so small even with a straight 6 you could get 20 to 30 mpgs

>>16179003
>>16179015
That poor SOB needs a rebuild, man. Carter's are usually pretty solid for OE applications when they're running right.

>>16179454
Yeah, this weekend I'll see if that 2v holley in the trunk will go on and if so, see how well it works.

Also got the fast idle to work this morning, I guess I wasn't playing with the pedal right.

>>16178008
Don't be a fucking retard mate. Buy something cheap and realizable to daily, and then drive your other car for enjoyment. I have probably 400k worth of cars and I daily a 2005 LeSabre that I paid 5k for.

>>16181088
Best advice.

>>16181088
Solid advice. I made the mistake myself of having a 67 fastback as my only car. Christ, when I finally saved up enough to buy a reliable shitbox, it was nice to walk out in the morning and know the motherfucker was going to turn over.

>>16181088
What this guy said, any car you really like is going to be a pain to DD and when another driver inevitably fucks up and hits you, it won't be your baby that's been ruined.

>>16181128
>>16181088
>>16181112

I already have a modern truck that is a gamble to drive. Idk why people think im gonna buy a pos. Im looking at restored vehicles; new parts in an old body.

Besides; i have a motorcycle as an alternative.

>>16178032
'74 and older? Where do you live?
In my state, you're exempt from emissions if it was made before '96.

>>16181742
New parts don't make a ducking difference. Unless you're converting a classic car to efi, it's going to be a crap shoot when you turn the key in the cold.

>>16181765
>it's going to be a crap shoot when you turn the key in the cold.
I can't tune my choke: the post

>>16181765
Nigga, i live in coastal Tx, shit doesnt get cold.
>new parts dont mean shit
Kinda think they do...

>>16178032
California has emmisions from 66+
There is no exemptions.

File: 00606_70HQ7b1QKHA_1200x900.jpg (98KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1200x675px

>>16179365
Get a Nova.

>>16182032
California is so fucked

>>16182151
and put a mighty ducks hood ornament on it.

>>16182151
Sadly any decent early 70s nova is 23k and it has a big block. Not saying thats bad, but more than i need right now.

>>16182786
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1978-Chevrolet-Nova-/132002494742?forcerrptr=true&hash=item1ebbf63916:g:NCgAAOSwImRYKOH~&item=132002494742

Always get a 4 door, theyre cheaper than boomer coupes
>Plymouth Valiant
>Chevrolet Nova, Chevelle or Impala 4 door
>Dodge Monaco
>Dodge Coronet
>Ford Torino
>Ford Falcon

>>16182893
Tbh I find the less sporty cars (ie not a pony car or charger or GTO and such) like the ones you listed to be better looking as a 4 door

>>16182844
What about that is nice? Or early 70s?

>>16182893
Sadly impala 4 doors are the rare ones due to supernatural

>>16183143
M8 you have to actually look, they made hundreds of thousands of Novas a year.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/eBay-Motors/6000/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=Nova&_dcat=6172&rt=nc&_mPrRngCbx=1&_udlo=0&_udhi=10000

File: 1479522039742.jpg (570KB, 1174x1600px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 1174x1600px

Buy a jap classic

>>16183254
Sadly to get out of my state, id have to drive 10+ hours

>>16182032
75 and older are exempt brah
"Currently, smog inspections are required for all vehicles except diesel powered vehicles 1997 year model and older or with a Gross Vehicle Weight (GVWR) of more than 14,000 lbs, electric, natural gas powered vehicles over 14,000 lbs, motorcycles, trailers, or gasoline powered vehicles 1975 and older."

Why is the 68 - 70 Charger so expensive compared to other Muscle cars of that era.

>>16185850
They're probably the ones everyone wants, much like a Gen1 Mustang.

Speaking of Gen1 mustangs, why are most the ones you see 65-66? Sure, those two were the most produced years of that generation, but surely 67-73, combined, would outnumber that.

>mfw have 66 mustang 200/auto
>barn find in Iowa brought up to wi
>been in a body shop for minor gram damage and floor pans
I just want my baby.

>>16186472
>gram
Frame**
Phones are dumb.

>>16186268
There were like 2 million 65-66 Mustangs made. Most of the other years were 200,000 or less.

>So im looking at daily driving a classic car once im back from basic (please hold back the keks) but i need some advice on which would be better for a daily driver.

First advice is avoid all the "noob G.I. with too much money" mistakes. I grew up wrenching your examples when they were a few years old. I'm also a vet and aircraft mechanic.

I strongly suggest the El Camino or a truck. Whatever you get, make fucking SURE the body is good and straight unless you want to learn how to do body work and even then avoid typical rustbuckets. Pay more for a better body. I'd put a small block in the El Camino though. The trucks of that era were better vehicles than the cars, you can buy everything for them easily, and you can easily upgrade brakes and suspension if you are so inclined.

I totally agree with wrenching everything you own for life. It destroys your overhead, you can wallow in quality tools, and you can pay off your eventual mortgage easily. BAH is my friend, but don't buy land until mid-career in most cases.

Old Mustangs are pretty if you like them but they were cheap ass cars and it shows. Trucks are vastly more useful to a G.I. who is a mechanic. Get a truck first or Camino at minimum. They facilitate the rest of a gearhead lifestyle.

Chevy C-20 and C-30 are more useful trucks and often sell for less because hot rodders want five lugs. I'd rather have the stronger springs and bigger brakes and towing capacity. Straight 6 is fine too.

Lastly, think "career" in everything you do and pick NCO and SNCO brains. Any NCO who isn't a shitbag will be happy to school a new troop in wise career moves. Play it right and you can retire without ever having to work again. MAINTAIN HARD COPIES OF ALL YOUR FUCKING MEDICAL RECORDS FOREVER, AND SCAN THEM TO THE CLOUD TOO. If you do a career you'll likely have some sort of compensible disability or condition later in life. Be the smart mofo who knows the system. Words mean shit unless they are regs or laws on paper.

>>16178008
You fucking retarded. Classic cars are cool, but to refuse to buy a new vehicle shows that you're a moron. As if 40-50 years of research and development hasn't made cars better.

>>16187893
safety regulations made them shittier

>>16185850
>Why is the 68 - 70 Charger so expensive compared to other Muscle cars of that era.
it's a pony car and everyone wants one.
E-bodies were just produced in such low numbers they have a reason for being expensive.

>>16186268
>why are most the ones you see 65-66?
There's a company making new production mustang bodies.
http://www.cjponyparts.com/dynacorn-complete-body-shell-fastback-1967/p/67FB/

>>16187893
If OP has no need for anything newer, refusal is logical. Operation and maintenance on his proposed vehicles are inexpensive and he can get parts forever.

Not buying new vehicles saved me tens of thousands of dollars. That helped pay my homes off. It's a nice return.

I started the same way as OP except bought my first classic when I was 16. Have DD'd one since (15 years). Driven cross country, commuted, never felt like I needed a modern car. One of two things will happen, you'll find out you like it and have the knowhow to keep one going, or you don't. If you don't it's not the end of the world because classics generally stay the same price or appreciate. It's extremely easy to maintain cars from the big 3 between 63 and 74 and the parts are dirt cheap. They are also very reliable as they are so simple. Anyone that says otherwise has never owned/driven one regularly, period.

>>16189592
>Anyone that says otherwise has never owned/driven one regularly, period.
This, the chance of a drivetrain failure from a classic American car is minimal and if it does happen it can be fixed for like $25.