Barret Jackson Auction is ON!

[lordbiotree]

looks like a 78 zed is getting sold off.

[daddz]

Did anyone happen to see the four Callaway Corvettes that were purchased by one gentleman? He spent $685,000 for all four cars and in an earlier segment he had purchased an older Corvette for more than $100,000! This was really a Chevy and Hot Rod auction as far as record prices were concerned with a few Hemi powered vehicles doing holding their own. Just think that on top of the purchase price the buyer and seller each have to cough up 8% commission to Barrett-Jackson.

The comment by Brock Yates regarding Japanese cars was offensive given his position with Car and Driver and as a journalist at large. He stated that "there are too many Japanese cars for them to be considered collectible". I fired off an email that argued the point and at least the announcers did mention that they had received alot of emails but, they still asserted that you can "check the value in the Blue Book and see if a loan oculd be had"; WTF?

Honestly, do they think that someone would be going to an auction to spend $400,000 for a hot rod Lincoln and then attempt to get a loan for it?

If they were looking for low production Japanese cars then look at the following:

1990 Mazda RX7 GTUs

1988 Nissan 300ZX Turbo SE (1000 produced)

1979 Datsun 280ZXR (1000 produced)

1984 Nissan 300ZX Turbo A.E.

1988 Mazda RX7 10th Anniversary

1978 Datsun 280Z Black Pearl

1980 Datsun 280ZX 10th A.E.

Granted these cars on their best day still wouldn't be $50,000 cars but, give them time. Once all of the old farts and muscle car crazies get too old to drive and/or have to buy Long Term Care Insurance watch the values start to level off a bit. The generation that once thought T-buckets were the "it" cars have now but all died off.

[Bambikiller240]

Originally posted by TomoHawk

I finally found it in the Results section. That one car must have a special history, because the serial #162252 doesn't seem to special either. Plus it has aftermarket a/c.

Te results went back about 10 years and most of the Zs were

Last February, I was searching the B-J site and found that Z car pictured with the $75K sale price was also sold a few years later at a FAR, FAR lower price. Same picture, same SN listed. I called B-J and talked briefly to someone who looked up the transactions and said that he believed the $75K price was a misprint on the site. He would not give me any further info about the car or the sale price.

Lot #24 sold in 1995 HLS3015653

Lot #304 sold in 2000 HLS3015653

[sblake01]

Originally posted by lordbiotree

looks like a 78 zed is getting sold off.

I think that's a late 74 260Z.

[Rusty1]

I am sooo glad that those bumpers never made it to oz, although fuel injection could have come a bit earlier...

[daddz]

That would be a 74.5 260Z with the bad carburettors and heavy bumpers. At least the '75 280Z had the fuel injected L28 to offset the additional weight added by those big arse bumpers. One of these days I plan on converting my 280Z's to the early chrome bumpers of the 240Z. It should provide a weight savings of about 115lbs. (later ''77 and '78 style bumpers) with all of the shock absorbers removed. The '74.5 -'76 bumpers are little bit heavier still!

When those bumpers were still available the back bumper for a '77/'78 was listing for more than $600!

[240ZX]

Interesting observation made while watching the Barrett-Jackson auction on the SPEED channel. They were auctioning off two white Mustang fastbacks.......anyway, they were calling them 1969 models but they are actually 1970 models. I would have thought they would be a little more particular about car's information. Every Mustang person that saw this was probably saying................Geeeeeeeeeeees, come on guys, get your info correct. Everyone knows the difference between a 1969 and a 1970 mustang!!! This kind of mistake makes you wonder about all the other cars that go up for auction???

Just one man's opinion!

[Zrush]

If I'm thinking correctly the 69-70 Mustangs look the same. In 1971 they changed the body. Then in 1974 they went to the Mustang II. What a sorry excuse for a Mustang, IMO.

[TomoHawk]

Originally posted by daddz

I plan on converting my 280Z's to the early chrome bumpers of the 240Z. It should provide a weight savings of about 115lbs. (later ''77 and '78 style bumpers) with all of the shock absorbers removed.

I don't think I would recommend that you remove the bumper shocks. They keep your frame rails and maybe the bumpers themselves from getting bent if you do get bumped.

Instead of the 240Z bumpers, how about something a little more available, like early corvette? I think it would still look decent. Maybethe gap in the middle would be a problem to work around?

[daddz]

TomoHawk,

Thanks for the suggestion, I will look into that shortly. I was also looking into the thin fiberglass bumpers that Motorsport Auto was selling a few years back.

Ideally I would like to acquire a 240ZG similar to the one that Alan has in the U.K.

[TomoHawk]

i've seen the guts of the bumpers of my 97 Escortand it's just a square CF box, but it weights about 40 lbs. there's no reason I can think of that you couldn't take a mould off somerthing you like and pop out some CF copies.

Might make you famous.

[TomoHawk]

In another topic, I asked if there was something shorter than the stocck bumper shocks. A combination of bringing the bumpers a little in and down(maybe) with a more compatible shape might be better both weight-wise as well as aerodynamically than just removing them entirely. A little extra thought now could make a BIG difference later. Besides, it's winter in Ohio, and I'm stuck in the house with nothing to do but spew all over the 'Net.

I think the police-types would prefer to see something like a bumper on there, assuming they know there was one there originally. Should make the insurance company happier, too, as well as a little CYA for the car's sheetmetal.