Projects Five Kustom Bargains to be Had!

Jive-Bomber submitted a new blog post:

Five Kustom Bargains to be Had!

Continue reading the Original Blog Post

 

Love the factory customs!
At the top of my list are the 1960 Pontiacs…

 

Jay @Jive-Bomber Ward -

Just an FYI that the 1955 Chrysler 300 (with a 331ci HEMI) was actually known as the "C 300" . . . it wasn't until 1956 that the Chrysler 300 "Letter Series" began:

• '56 "300 B" (with a 354ci HEMI)
• '57 "300 C" (with a 392ci HEMI)
• '58 "300 D" (with a 392ci HEMI)
• '59 "300 E" (with a 413ci Wedge)
• '60 "300 F" (with a 413ci Wedge)
• '61 "300 G" (with a 413ci Wedge)
• '62 "300 H" (with a 413ci Wedge)
• '63 "300 J" (with a 413ci Wedge)
• '64 "300 K" (with a 413ci Wedge)
• '65 "300 L" (with a 413ci Wedge)

Note that the photo you posted is the "VIN #1 '55 C 300" . . . a car once owned by HAMBer Josh @Hyfire Ackerman (checkout his Help! Chrysler 300 Racecar (Daytona Beach) thread).

Josh ended up selling this car (& his Norm Thatcher '58 300D Bonneville racecar) to Mike McCandless (son of Herb "Mr. 4-Speed" McCandless).

Mike had Whitehall Auto Restorations bring the "VIN #1 '55 C 300" back to its 1955 Daytona Beach racecar configuration:

​

- Todd @HEMI32 Olson

 

One minor correction, Pontiacs had ball joint suspensions beginning in 1958.

 

It's an interesting consideration that these cars are bargains. I think it depends on what your goals are. If the goal is to buy a finished car, and go cruise, then sure, I can get behind that. If the goal is to do a complete build with a refurbished drivetrain, rebuilt chassis, new chrome, and so on, then I disagree. Any orphaned model or make is going to cost more in every facet than a more common model/make other than initial buy in. This applies ten-fold if you have to pay for labor. It is ALWAYS cheaper to replace than repair, and parts cost significantly less than labor.

I can attest to this first-hand. When I put my 61 Olds on air, no kit exists for this car. It took me hours of sawing up steel plate, welding, fabricating, reengineering, and so on, to make it happen. If I had to pay someone $100/hr to do that work, it would have been a $10,000 job. If I had a 61 Chevy, I could have just bought the parts for like $1500 and installed them.

Then compare the cost of rebuilding the drivetrain. Just using the examples set forth, consider the cost of a brand new SBC delivered to your door, or parts to rebuild one, then consider the cost to rebuild a Hemi, a 368 Lincoln, a 365 Cadillac....

So I agree that these cars may represent strong values on the turn key market, but if the purpose is to build one, it's a losing proposition in the end. But the money isn't why we do it, right?

 

I guess many of the so-called "orphan" cars, unless bought complete, are going / will have to be restomoded with the usual drivetrain suspects... Which IMHO is still better than being scrapped.

 

The 55-57 Ford Thunderbirds can be purchased at a reduced rate.
There is a ton of support for them as well

 

I couldn't agree more. First and foremost, the most important thing is that your car is out on the road, or at minimum, having meaningful progress consistently made in the build. Having non-running cars laying around is exactly what we don't want.

Of course we all like to see unique engines, but I would rather see a cool old car out driving around with a Chevy or Ford for power than than a non-running vehicle with an obsolete engine sitting and deteriorating because the owner can't afford to get an expensive drivetrain repaired.

 

"Baby bird" value has fallen off a cliff. The problem with these is two-fold. A) a lot of the owners still think they're worth $60K and want absurd prices for them, and B) if you're over 5'10" or are carrying extra weight, you don't fit in them.

 

Here's a 1955 Chrysler 331 Hemi that out of a C300 that I pulled out of my merc.

 

So true!