I'm in the process of consolidating my fleet, and one of my precious garage spots is about to open up. As this spot is precious, I'd like the car that fills it to be one I love, and an automobile that serves a useful purpose. As such, I'm wondering if I can fill this spot with a drool-worthy classic that will behave as well as a modern car in the areas I care about most.

Yes, I could just buy a modern car for less money that will be better in every way, but anyone who owns a car from the 60s has already lost all semblance of rational thought in this department. I'd rather build a 40-year-old car into something special. I'm just trying to figure out just how far off my rocker I am.

Most of my driving these days is just driving an hour or two out of Brooklyn on weekends to escape. 90% highway, in varying states of disrepair, in all weather but snow. I currently have an E39 M5 that handles this task phenomenally well, but it's a very heavy, very complex car that just doesn't capture my heart the way a monster like it should. If I could replace it with a classic that hits the bullet points above, that would be too cool. My goals for this vehicle:

- Comfortable. Quiet. Smooth.
- Rock-steady at 100mph.
- Excellent heat and air conditioning.
- Dead reliable; cheap/infrequent maintenance.

Sound/volume are very subjective, and I know plenty of people that insist they have no problem driving for hours on the highway with straight pipes or something. I am not one of those people. Most cars are pretty quiet at 65mph. Most are not at 85mph, and that is regularly the average speed of highway traffic around here. Most cars handle pretty well at 65mph, very few inspire confidence at track speeds (even in a straight line).

My plan would be to buy a rust-free car in good running-project condition, make sure the seals are good to keep down wind noise, then add a healthy amount of sound deadening material (CLD, CCF, MLV) to keep the noise out. Sound deadening goes a long way towards quieting down old cars if done right (and weight is not a huge concern), and this could be done to any on my list.

Originality means nothing to me, and I would prefer to get a modified example that would keep the price down and maybe get me down the road for my goals (while also absolving me of any guilt from wrecking a clean classic). Something with a modern engine and suspension would be ideal, but that may not even be necessary for my purposes...I really don't know—the only American V8 I own is the LT1 in my Volvo wagon.

My cost ballpark: I'm expecting to drop maybe $20k on a car and $10k to get it "right" for this purpose. Does that seem reasonable for an RS-looking '67 Camaro in good shape? Other vehicles I'm considering are: '69 Mustang, Datsun 240Z, BMW 2002.

I guess I'm looking for first-hand accounts of classic Camaros that have fulfilled this role for people. Maybe some builds that had similar goals in mind so I can get a better idea of what it would take? I don't need an LS9 pro-touring monster, but I'd like something that behaves better than a ratted out Buick. Is there anything inherent about a 1st gen Camaro that makes this a bad platform for my purpose? I've only driven one (stock), and it handled poorly to say the least, though it was just one fish in the sea.

Thoughts?

 

Are you doing the work? $10,000 seems light to upgrade to a modern driveline and upgrade the entire Brakes/suspension even if you are doing the work.

For 20k you should be able to find a rust free (meaning already redone) chassis but its not going to have a $8,000 mirror like finish on it. These bodies were rusting out in the early 70's so most bodies have gone through several repairs. Finding one that has been repaired/restored correctly in a sea of putty and fiberglass can be tuff. I have seen life long body men faked out on cars they thought were solid only later to find out they were not even repairable.

Keep in mind, in the 60's car where designed to last 5-7 years and about 100,000 miles. They are now approaching 50 years old. No part of the car was designed to last 50 years. Even if the car was brand new it would not be considered reliable by todays standards. The nice thing about the 1st gens is that just about every part is available in a upgraded more modern version but replacing every part of the car is very costly.

So to go a builder and say build this, 30k is very lights. To build it yourself 30k is a little light assuming you want modern EFI, modern transmission, modern brakes, and a suspension that feels good/safe a 100 MPH.

In many cases when you find a car that has been upgraded like you are describing it does not sell for top dollar. Finding one already done may be a better option. The money makers are the all original perfectly restored cars. Cars build like this tend to sell for less then they cost to build. They can be hard to find for sale as it is normally due to a death or divorce.

Also keep in mind safety, I know there has been a huge surge in people just updating older cars but they will never be as safe as a modern car. A 50 MPH wreck in a 2016 Camaro would end with you sitting in a cop car getting a ticket. A 50 MPH wreck in a 67 will probably be life altering.

 

It sounds like you are looking for a pro-touring car. Even with you doing the work, your budget is light. Figure on $40k plus. Go on ebay, oldcarsonline, or autotrader classics and see how much people have invested in pro-touring style cars. It will give you a better idea of what's involved.

 

My first F-body car was a fine shape 1970 Firebird Formula. It was well cared for with no dents or rust, good paint, few rattles, stock engine and transmission in very good shape, and no real chassis problems. But it was a "no contest" win for the 1986 Trans Am I bought new many years later. The differences in handling and ride were dramatic. I went through the same process in 1998 with another new Trans Am. Same story, handling and ride (and fuel economy) were vastly improved. In short, the car designs are simply better every year. I doubt you can do much to make an old car anything like a new one.

 

Gary, I believe it can be done at least to the 4 gen level but it is all bout cost, at one point there was a company down in Florida that was putting 1st gen bodies on 4th gen Chassis. I say that only to prove the point that it is cheaper to put very pricey body kit on a 4th gen then it is to make a 1st gen handle like a 4th gen. I think once Dynacorn started building bodies and other companies started building chassis using C4 suspension parts there was no reason to use a 4th gen anymore.

I also agree that each generation got better. One of the old common upgrades to the 1st gen was to adapt a 2nd gen sub-frame to it. That alone was a major upgrade in handling. I too have owned Camaros through the years. I would say the biggest jump in handling and braking was the 3rd gen. I had a 74 with gas charged shock heavier springs and sway bars off a 79 z28 and my 82 would still kill it around a corner bone stock.