Originally Posted by +fireamx
The 390 AMX H.P. rating was nearly identical to that of an NA Crossfire.
It's 1/4 mile times listed in Magazine Roadtests of that era coinside exactly with those of a NA Crossfire.
As for "WOW" factor, most people at the time couldn't tell the difference between an AMX and a Javelin, and many still don't know there was any difference today. Even though it was a two seater, that was smaller, and lighter than a Vette.
If WOW factor=Shock value, then along with the Superbird, I should have mentioned the 1969 red/white & blue Rambler SCrambler. Another car hardly anyone wanted to be seen in, (and even harder to sell) with the identical 390 engine of the AMX. It brings $50k at the auctions now. Even the 1970 red, white, and blue Rebel Machine is considered a collectable today. Nobody wanted them either back then.
Sorry you don't get my sense of humor James.
Anger Management Directory of Tennessee
Your points are well taken, but you still feel the need to make a personal jab---wow! I have shown zero anger---I am not mad at all. Your sense of humor is based on cutting people and putting them down. I have never found that to be funny---if it was directed at me or toward others. The only thing that I have done to you is disagree---that is it.
But to your point, The 390 motors were muscle for their day---well from AMC. The average V6 sedan today can out do a zero to 60 and quarter mile compared to 40 year old cars---even muscle---NOT all but most. The N/A are great cars---I have owned them since 05, but high 6's low 7's to 60 is not that special compared to the cars of today---great compared to cars of the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's....etc, but not today.
So hard to impossible to compare performance out of the same time period!!! If you are going to take the TOP from the 60's and 70's---you need to take top performers from today. That's my point and only way to truly compare---the Crossfire can not be compared to a car that won on the NASCAR tracks driven by Petty. 510's driven by the Brock team are worth money---avg 510's? Find an avg performer with good looks that had low demand, but 76k made. That's what we have---not the muscle of the day! I am not "trying" to turn things around. You said that you sell cars---dad in the business forever; I have seen very very few cars that even hold their value. Just trying to understand if I may be missing something.
The other cars that you listed have road the "muscle tide" up and with their big motors---for the day. You have heard that saying---a rising tide lifts ALL boats. The fact that muscle got hot sent ALL "muscle" cars higher---the great main stream like the LS6 Chevelles, to your examples---even the ones that did not sell the first time. My point is ALL muscle era cars went up. The era from 2004 to 2008 will lift the Crossfire? The Crossfire does not have an oversize motor shoved in it and a time period to hold on to other winners that will pull Rebels up with 429 'stangs---it just does not.
You stated that the AMX was tearing up drag strips--- High performance---for the day. If they were avg for the day in performance, they did not do as well. What is a 6 cyl Ramber worth? Way less than the same car with a matching 390. That's why I said the SRT 6 has a chance. The 80's T/As---avg performance for the day---if that, so low value. 1969/ 70 455 SD---high performance, higher value. N/A Crossfires---avg performance for the day. SRTs---higher up the food chain.
I stated above, but I will restate for you what I think our problem is:
My point is that our car is in the middle. Production at 76k or so is low but not rare. Performance is average for the day---not the muscle of the day (except the SRT). Good looks, but not designed by Bertone or one of the other houses---Shelby did not touch it---was not raced to several victories. Demand was low but 76k worth of cars---not 2k or 5k. The fact that Vegaslegal made that the trend of older people bought them first and now the younger crowd is coming in is backwards to all the muscle car examples that have been given. For the most part the younger crowd bought muscle---and MANY more wanted them, and today they are older and have the money to get them and PAY to fix them up. Exotics were bought by the older/ richer crowd, but the 16 years old did not move in---there has been two in the last month or so just on here. Everything just stated, I believe is true, and it does not sound like money in the bank to me.
It boils down to your definition of collectible. I agree with above about keeping up with inflation or close if we stay down here--probably, more like dead money. I was basing my points on MAKING MONEY over the inflation rate. And with show car looks there will always be a buyer for a running car. There is somebody collecting---EVERYTHING. So yes, I see clubs in 30 years---for sure. NOT all will go to the crusher!!! The definition that I had in my head was "HIGHLY" collectible to the point that someone would spend big money on a purchase, and big money on a restoration, and with all the electronics these days, it will make all of today's car harder to restore---and more costly---if not cost prohibitive. And ones that had low demand or lack a race history or that did not change the automotive world will just be even lower on the list, if it makes the list at all.
I think they are drivers---best bang for the buck on the road, but not a money making investment like a Hemi Cuda, etc from back in the day. More like the Sunbeam Tiger from "Get Smart"---great for its time, but not the best car to put away---that was the only point I was making.