| silvia s13 |
| .........................VVVVVVV |
|
|
| BigTrucker |
| That's gonna be one hell of a detail job. |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
Thats pointless. The car is shit now.
Jamie |
|
|
| ehos |
Good idea, bad execution. Sounds pretty typical of (insert favorite hated thingy... such as government, Americans, Utahians etc etc).
Should've buried some gold or some stock or something useful (waterproof would be nice). |
|
|
| tokes |
| Why in the sweet chocolate christ would they bury a car? |
|
|
| Prudz_lude |
| rofl, i bet someone was dissapointed. what did they expect, a spanking new car? That reminds me, now that its summer. I made a time capsule as well in parkallen. I am going to go dig that bitch up lol. I think i put 2 allowances in it so something like 4 dollars :thumbup: and if i am lucky they will be 2 dollar bills! |
|
|
| dance_of_curse |
quote:
Originally posted by Prudz_lude
rofl, i bet someone was dissapointed. what did they expect, a spanking new car? That reminds me, now that its summer. I made a time capsule as well in parkallen. I am going to go dig that bitch up lol. I think i put 2 allowances in it so something like 4 dollars :thumbup: and if i am lucky they will be 2 dollar bills!
they did theres a video of an old man saying it will be in pristeen condition brand new..boy ws he wrong |
|
|
| Cobra_R |
| reminds me of the titanic. rusted history. |
|
|
| 4thGenLude |
Wow what a disappointment.
Too bad it wasn't in decent shape at all.
Like stated above, cool idea but horribly executed.
You gotta think you're going to need a pretty solid vault if it's going to be underground for 50 years. :blink: |
|
|
| euro_fcuk |
| bet that old bitch runs like new:rolleyes: |
|
|
| SilviaDrifter |
hahahahaha
can someone do carfax on that car? |
|
|
| the_fornicator |
they buried it in a concrete encasing.
boooo. |
|
|
| Fazda |
| that thing is fucked, i would crush it, there is more rust than metal. |
|
|
| ImporTuner |
| such a waste of time digging that shit up... |
|
|
| Prudz_lude |
quote:
Originally posted by the_fornicator
they buried it in a concrete encasing.
boooo.
Concrete lets water through..... Were they actually that retarded? |
|
|
| 4thGenLude |
| Judging by the pictures, yes. |
|
|
| WorkInProgress |
50 years ago? Give them a break.
Cement nuclear bomb shelter is what it was I think? I wonder how it would have stood up to a nuke... |
|
|
| Prudz_lude |
| hahaha not very well. Appreantly it can't stand up to mother natures soil. |
|
|
| midnite |
someone must have been really disappointed
they would have been better off leaving it under a tarp for 50 years |
|
|
| RangerMan |
quote:
Originally posted by midnite
someone must have been really disappointed
they would have been better off leaving it under a tarp for 50 years
ya likely man
hard to say priceless now.. |
|
|
| THUD |
LOL so very owned and I bet barret jackson was looking so forward to selling it on his auction floor some day.
It's funny a barn stands a better chance of keeping it dry and in WAY better condiont than a pit full of water. |
|
|
| h22civic |
| I think they said the concrete case had 4 feet of standing water in it when they opened her up. :blink: |
|
|
| 4thGenLude |
| Yeah the pictures look like there's about 2 feet in there :lol: |
|
|
| ~sanj~ |
gah i remember talking about this in like jr.high
now seeing this killed all my excitment |
|
|
| ReasonOne |
I've been saying this for years. Friends have told me they thought it would be pristine when it comes up. There's just no way.
Luckily I placed bets with buddies on this years ago and I am collecting my winnings in short order. (Collecting over $500 :-)....)
Never mind the fact that the metal that Chrysler used in '57 was inferior, and they are well known for being prone to rust under regular driving conditions - never mind throwing one into a pit for 50 years....
:rolleyes:
....Let alone placing one (without being raised, elevated or put on blocks) into a dark, damp spot encased in concrete that weeps and seeps with no possibility for any sediment or water to drain out of it. I guess the term "airtight" meant something entirely different 50 years ago. But a lot has changed between then and now.
If there was no water in that pit that car would be ugly (uglier than normal), nasty and disgusting, but perfectly restorable. Now its scrap metal. Junk. The cost of repairing the damage to that car would be astronomical.
But you know someone out there is going to want to restore it. And if they pull it off, owning one of the lowest mileage '57 Belvedere's in the world with a fully documented history and no mileage will be nothing to sneeze at..... it will be worth a fortune.
Barrett Jacksons might want it after all. |
|
|
| SkiTLz |
quote:
Originally posted by ReasonOne
I've been saying this for years. Friends have told me they thought it would be pristine when it comes up. There's just no way.
Luckily I placed bets with buddies on this years ago and I am collecting my winnings in short order. (Collecting over $500 :-)....)
Never mind the fact that the metal that Chrysler used in '57 was inferior, and they are well known for being prone to rust under regular driving conditions - never mind throwing one into a pit for 50 years....
:rolleyes:
....Let alone placing one (without being raised, elevated or put on blocks) into a dark, damp spot encased in concrete that weeps and seeps with no possibility for any sediment or water to drain out of it. I guess the term "airtight" meant something entirely different 50 years ago. But a lot has changed between then and now.
If there was no water in that pit that car would be ugly (uglier than normal), nasty and disgusting, but perfectly restorable. Now its scrap metal. Junk. The cost of repairing the damage to that car would be astronomical.
But you know someone out there is going to want to restore it. And if they pull it off, owning one of the lowest mileage '57 Belvedere's in the world with a fully documented history and no mileage will be nothing to sneeze at..... it will be worth a fortune.
Barrett Jacksons might want it after all.
I don't see how its restorable. Your basically fabricating the entire car from scratch. Which means the car is nowhere near original anymore. |
|
|
| 4thGenLude |
Yeah I was actually thinking about this last night.
The original motor is obviously not going to be used. So they'll build one up from scratch. Any motor which is built brand new is going to have 0 kilometers on it anyways. So theres no positive in advertising the "Low KM's"
A whole new shell would be built or they would restore this one. Same thing as the kilometers, it's not original.
Interior needs to be gutted. Not original.
So theoretically if they "restored" this car, in such bad condition, it would be the same as building a brand new one.
None of the parts on it would be used. Maybe the tires etc but when the build was complete, it wouldn't be the same car that was buried for 50 years. They could advertise it as such, but maybe 2% of the parts would actually be from the original vehicle.
I see absolutely no extra value in this restored compared to any other 57 restored in the same fashion. |
|
|
| ehos |
ADS SUCK.
.
It would've been better to put it in plain view for 50 years, like a plastic encasement or something. At least people could look at it and I'm sure it would've held out better than it did.
Instead of blowing 90 Million on an 'art' gallery, Edmonton should've done something like this for a few sweet cars. |
|
|
| 300zxhunter |
quote:
Originally posted by ReasonOne
I've been saying this for years. Friends have told me they thought it would be pristine when it comes up. There's just no way.
Luckily I placed bets with buddies on this years ago and I am collecting my winnings in short order. (Collecting over $500 :-)....)
Never mind the fact that the metal that Chrysler used in '57 was inferior, and they are well known for being prone to rust under regular driving conditions - never mind throwing one into a pit for 50 years....
:rolleyes:
....Let alone placing one (without being raised, elevated or put on blocks) into a dark, damp spot encased in concrete that weeps and seeps with no possibility for any sediment or water to drain out of it. I guess the term "airtight" meant something entirely different 50 years ago. But a lot has changed between then and now.
If there was no water in that pit that car would be ugly (uglier than normal), nasty and disgusting, but perfectly restorable. Now its scrap metal. Junk. The cost of repairing the damage to that car would be astronomical.
But you know someone out there is going to want to restore it. And if they pull it off, owning one of the lowest mileage '57 Belvedere's in the world with a fully documented history and no mileage will be nothing to sneeze at..... it will be worth a fortune.
Barrett Jacksons might want it after all.
You said that it would be fully documented... how can a car with a vin number thats rusted to shit have an history if it doesn't have a vin plate anymore... I wonder if it lasted? |
|
|
| ReasonOne |
300zxhunter:
There would be records from the dealership that donated the car. I've also restored VIN and cowl tags that looked like they've come off the Titanic into readable condition. With all the fanfare surrounding the original burial, I'm sure the dealer would have set aside the documentation. Sometimes dealerships do that with specialty or public relations vehicles.
I've owned cars of this vintage, and with a little work you could easily track down everything you would want to know - right down to the factory invoice, date of manufacture, date of delivery, etc. I've done it many times before, and my dad used to be a wholesaler of classic cars - he's done this hundreds of times.
SkiTLz and 4thGenLude:
I agree with both of you. But that's not going to stop the right person with a whole wad of cash from going through the expense of restoring it. In my opinion the cost of repairing it exceeds its value. But rumours have already been flying that Boyd Coddington is considering restoring the vehicle before it's officially presented to the winner. The publicity of bringing a vehicle back from beyond the grave that was tied to a specific event would probably net him 10 times the restoration fee in referrals.
People dump tens of thousands of dollars into a car fully knowing they will never get that money back. If you want an answer to that just put this question to half the people on this board.....
Why would someone put more money into a car than its worth?
....and you know what the answer is going to be.
It's a labour of love. It's not about the bucks.
Just think of "Pimp my Ride". Why dump $20K into a Daihatsu? They're not worth anything.... but they're priceless for publicity purposes for the restorers and the companies that supply the accessories/parts.
Classic car owners are a funny breed. My dad spent years living and breathing this lifestyle by being in the business. Some collectors are so picky - even downright fanatical to a point. Some people want a mint original low mileage car. A few are obsessed with documentation and will not touch a classic - no matter how nice - if it doesn't accompany the car. Others want a fully restored car and could care less about documentation or a history. Some people just want a car that runs. Others will pay through the nose for a car that was once driven by So-and-So, appeared at Such-and-Such event or was delivered new from Dealership XYZ.
There are even people willing to pay thousands of dollars for a set of 40 year old tires that still have the original 40 year old air in them (I'm NOT kidding). Just try to order a set of wide whitewalls for a classic car or motorbike, and you'll begin to get my drift.
Once again, my two cents. |
|
|
| ~sanj~ |
| you always have great 2cents btw :whut: |
|
|
| ReasonOne |
Maybe I should call it "My 2 bucks worth"...
:beer:
lol |
|
|
|
