Owner of this 1974 vehicle tells me it only has 57k miles on

File: photo_2017-01-26_20-52-49.jpg (78KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1280x720px

it loops around obviously.

unless you somehow think this ancient shitbox is brand new

>>16858539
check the pedals. if they have excessive wear then hes lying

>>16858552
This. Car probably has 157k not 57k.

>>16858552
hahaha... Thanks. I figured as much. What a goddamn asshole.

>>16858557
They're warn, thanks for the tip

>>16858573
thats what im here for senpai

>>16858539
got a vin?

>>16860501
Vin isn't 17 digits, no info exists.

>>16858539
>>16858552
>>16858573

They key with this though, you can sometimes tell its rolled over, as in the 2nd picture the numbers are not even going across.

>>16858539
you can tell it is rolled over. look at the position ogf the 4 and the position of the 5

>>16860543
Lame, I forgot about the 1981 cutoff.

>>16860567
That's common seeing as how the number slowly move as the mileage rises. Only large inconsistences such as the 2nd picture are a good sign of roll over.

>>16860567
The 4 is about to become a 5, it's normal it's like that.

>>16858539
It's usually easy to tell if the car has rolled, because if it's seen 100,000 miles more than he's claiming, it should be very obvious in the condition. Wear and tear spots, like the driver door handle, steering wheel, driver seat, arm wrest, seat belt, shifter, common touched things will be severely worn down, textured things like vinyl or plastic with that vinyl like detail to it will be worn down and smooth or even glossy.

>>16858539
Also I wouldn't trust it

I could be easy rewinded or faked the mechanical odometer

>>16858539
It's a '74. Does it really matter if its 57k or 157k? If it looks nice and runs nice than its probably 57k.

>>16862860
edit -if it looks nice. At 57k it may run like crap just from not being driven much.

>>16858539
Remember nissan people are scum
He is likely lying

>>16858552
87-91 f series fgt

Speaking of this, what the fuck were they thinking with a five digit odometer?

Were they just like "lol cars won't make it past 100k", or what?

>>16863180
back in the day 100k was considered a long full life for a car.

>>16861320
Honestly does it even matter? I swapped the cluster on my 78 Bronco for one with more miles just because it works better.

At that age, the condition is what it is. Unless its a numbers matching Ferrari with verified original 30k on the odometer, it really means fuck all.

>>16863185
This. Oil quality was fucked back in the day. Old mechanic I work with confirmed you were lucky to see 70K before the main bearings were trash. Even bottom barrel generic brand oil these days is better than anything you could get 40 years ago.

>>16858539
>Owner of this 1974 vehicle tells me it only has 57k miles on it.
You can check carfax and see how many oil changes. Even the lady down the street that bought a new grocery-getter car with 4K miles per year will exceed that 57K. Unless the maintenance records (eg. carfax) are consistent and show tiny mileage increases each year, it rolled over. If there is a big gap, then it might have an odometer disconnect because that was done to some of those old cars. I rode in such a 70's car before.

>>16864252
carfax DOES NOT GO THAT OLD

>>16864285
Just check on the OBD2 port dipshit

>>16864304
Just check skynet, duh you fucking dipshit. It has all the information.

>>16858552
Kill yourself my man

>>16858557
nice