|
|
PARTS
| | |
| |
  
 
Subject:
Re: Value of `71?
From: "tony kujawa" <tjktjk2003(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Value of `71?
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 08:09:30 -0500
Lines: 57
________________________________________________
"Bob G." <rg327_remove_(at)adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:18is11hbkgnqrr0jatum0t0oec9k6l2mi1(at)4ax.com...
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:55:19 -0500, "tony kujawa"
> <tjktjk2003(at)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >There is a red `71 by me for sale and I`d like to know if it is worth
> >looking at or not. I have not seen it yet, but am going tomorrow or
> >Saturday. 350 (Not original) 4 speed, A/C, PW, $8500. I had a 68 about
6
> >years ago that was a decent driver that I bought and sold for $6500. I`m
> >sure that very car would fetch 10K today. All that being said, if this
71
> >is in the same shape as my 68 was, I`m jumping on it. I guess I just
need
> >some confirmation of what you all think. I`m just looking for a decent
> >driver, no desire to restore. I knew my 68 pretty well and the inherent
> >problems they had so I`m not going into this blind, I was just wondering
if
> >there are any frame issues I should look for. i.e. weak spots where it
may
> >rust out etc.
> >
> >Thanks, Tony
> >
> ====================
> Impossible to even give an opinion....
>
> That said you should have enough experience gained via your 68 to make
> a reasonable decision...
Yes, with WayneC`s advise I think I`m pretty well informed.
>
> That said...my NOM 72 Ragtop would NOT leave my hands for twice the
> asking price of this 71 and it is nowhere near "perfect" .t even if it
> were for sale...
Yeah, I bought my 68 when I was like 26 with 1 young one and another on the
way. I had no business buying it then, and had to sell. Now I am no longer
with the money sucking ball and chain, have come along in my career, and
inherated some $. I want a Stingray again.
> Look it over.. see what it needs then walk or buy
>
> Bob Griffiths
> 64 72 76 79 & 95 Corvettes
> Come to think of it NONE of my Corvettes wouild leave my hands for
> $8500.
SUBJECT: Re: Value of `71?
From: Fast1970Vette(at)webtv.net (dave)
Subject: Re: Value of `71?
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:20:00 -0600
Lines: 8
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.webtv.net
________________________________________________
Major things to look at for that year :
1. Rusted frame just in front of the rear wheels.
2. Windshield pillar rusting ..on the top and both sides.
3. Check all fenders inside on the top, for being in a wreck.
From: Fast1970Vette(at)webtv.net (dave)
Subject: Re: Value of `71?
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:20:00 -0600
Lines: 8
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.webtv.net
________________________________________________
Major things to look at for that year :
1. Rusted frame just in front of the rear wheels.
2. Windshield pillar rusting ..on the top and both sides.
3. Check all fenders inside on the top, for being in a wreck.
From: Bob G. <rg327_remove_(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Value of `71?
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 10:50:53 -0500
Lines: 22
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.49.37.230
________________________________________________
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:20:00 -0600, Fast1970Vette(at)webtv.net (dave)
wrote:
>Major things to look at for that year :
Almost any year That I can think of...
>
>1. Rusted frame just in front of the rear wheels.
Same comment as above
>
>2. Windshield pillar rusting ..on the top and both sides.
Well the rust that is also common on the bottom is 10 times
harder to deal with../
>3. Check all fenders inside on the top, for being in a wreck.
You lost me on this one...I have no doubt you have your
reasons what I honestly would like to know is why do you specifically
say inside on top... Inside I can understand (anywhere)...
Just curious?
Bob G.
NEXT POSTS:
| | |
