Rusted out, overpriced, POS G-bodies are everywhere. That car is worth about a thousand bucks.......maybe. Show us a rust free G-body of any brand for less than 5K.
Here in WV rust free typically means bondo'd up and painted.
'Rust Free' actually means zero rust EVER, ANYWHERE, and it's a global term that is extremely mis-used. Those cars are still out there. My Malibu was a perfectly rust free example and I gave $5000 for it with a super nice interior, so they are available. It was also a low optioned V6 car which makes $5000 a little much to pay. Most people just don't want to spend $5000 for something when they can get the somewhat rusty cars for $2500 and work their A$$ off fixing them. Not even slightly sensible, but true nevertheless. And I don't pretend to understand that mentality. It doesn't make them wrong or stupid...……………………………………..
There are also those that go buy a $20000 or more completed G-body and prance it around town and to car shows and act like they have some pride in it from a 'I built this with my own two hands' standpoint. The guy that fixes up the rusty $2500 POS has more right to be proud. Guys that don't have to use the terms 'my engine builder' or 'my body man' are a very rare breed I guess, and are stuck in the middle somewhere. The culture is so muddy at this point you can only tell car guys apart by having conversations with them.
I'm ranting...…………………
Let's see those cheap 'rust free' G-body ads. I'm in the mood to buy...…………..again.
Agree 100%. Economic relatively, I guess. When I was younger, I bought what I could afford. I'm older know and recognize the value in a solid car to begin with. I recognize that I don't have the skill or patience to do quality body work so paying more up front for a straight and rust free car makes more sense to me know.
Care to back any of that up with facts of any sort? Please educate me! I love learning new g body stuff. Every 86 cutlass I have owned including the 442 in my garage has had lacquer paint and every 87 I have owned or parted out has been base clear. I am pretty sure the 86 gns or at least allot of them were lacquer but you may be correct on some of them, just like everything gm does they tended to try new things on the high end cars and I know they had a recall on paint. But we are talking about a fraction of 5500 cars. I have owned probably 20 86 regals and cutlass over the years and guess what, all lacquer cars. As far as Montes, I honestly have never had interest in them and never owned one. So whatever you say
The point of my post is that car is more valuable being a 87 bc/cc car. If anyone wants to go inspect the car and tell me it isn't bc/cc, feel free to, I'll throw a nice crisp Benjy on the table saying it is bc/cc. just sick of people posting all over the net talking trash on listing price. Most of the time they are not even actively looking or even have funds to buy them.
Have fun bashing me now, that's what the net is all about now
No one here was bashing you. But seemingly from your standpoint, it seems anyone who disagrees with you or has another point of view is bashing you. You're not the only one with many years of G-body experience up in here. We all don't know everything about what they did when building these cars. Even GM can't tell you half the time. Especially as far as where they used which type of paint. This could vary greatly and there's not a database anywhere that says they used this type of paint here and that type of paint there during which parts of which years. That's why we're here. To share and learn from each other. If I wanted to bash your ideas, I'd have just said you were incorrect and then run off.
Interestingly, during my search for the proof you desire, I found where you made the claim yourself several years back that your 86 442 has bc/cc in this post, so which is it?
i "think" that most 84 and back g's had laquer and then there was both single stage and base clear jobs on g bodies. my 86 442 had base clear on it and i am guessing most high line g bodies but there were also case line cars that had base/clear that i have seen. there is info out there on this...
gbodyforum.com
There was a long period of time, which spanned more than a decade, before GM swapped everything over from lacquer and enamel to bc/cc and that depended on the plant, and even sometimes in the same plant with multiple makes they would use different types of paint. GM was weird that way. My dad worked for Corvette and when they moved the plant to Bowling Green, KY from St. Louis, he said they started to use clear coats on all the Corvettes when they started up, where they did not in St. Louis. There are some reports that some late 85 F-bodies had clear coats (they started whole hog use on F-body in 1986), but I don't know much about that as I've never seen any evidence to say one way or another.
Based on what I do know about 86 Olds SPIDs, that was the year that seemingly showed the RPO color code in the RPO listing, but the WA numbers or any other color references at the bottom of the SPID weren't there in most instances. This may not be true on every 86 Olds, but for US built cars, that's pretty much what I've seen. Other makes did have that info. WTF? I have come to the conclusion that there were certain leeways (outside of mandatory info) given to each assembly plant as to what information was on the SPID labels and how it was presented.
I haven't came in contact with that many 86 cars, but I do recall a light blue metallic (I've always hated that color) 86 Cutlass the guy down the street had and the paint started to fade, check, and burn on it, so it could not have been base clear. Otherwise it would have frosted and peeled as it degraded. It would not surprise me if the 86 G-cars has some base clear and some lacquer, especially if they were made at different plants. I'm not a paint expert. And it doesn't make much difference to me, in actuality.
And I'll be the first to admit I'm not Regal-Knowledgeable. However, I did find evidence of lacquer being used on 86 GNs, which most of them probably were. But I know for certain my buddy's 86 GN he bought brand new off the lot had a base/clear on it. Otherwise it wouldn't have peeled like it did, which I saw with my own eyes. They initially claimed he wasn't washing it properly peeling the clearcoat. Dafuq? He pampered that car. It was a big deal at the time, although it was more about how GM was trying to be dlckholes about fixing it 8 months into his ownership.
The thing is, I don't know if they used lacquer just on early 86 GN's or when the paint went to base/clear or did they go the other way? Back then I didn't follow the G-bodies that much because they were "new cars", but I know the issues his particular car went through. Because of his issues, back then I thought lacquer was the cat's azz and I wouldn't want to paint my car base/clear. How times have changed. I still don't WANT to repaint my 85 in bc/cc, but I'm not likely going to have much choice. Can you still paint lacquer in Canada? Or even get it?
Even with all that, you haven't convinced me about the value of an 87 simply based on the type of paint. I don't think just having bc/cc means much as far as overall value. The quality of the existing paint job is what matters most IMO. Some people love the Euro noses which makes them likely a bit more popular and not as frequent as the quad headlight style, so I'd place that as a value adder perhaps. I personally like the quad headlight system just a bit better, but it's the overall body lines of a G47 Olds, 442, Salon, Supreme, Classic, base/clear paint, or not, that make them my favorite G-body. I've also seen 84 and 85 cars priced higher than 87 cars of what I would consider equal condition. It's going to vary a lot on location, condition, and many other factors.
But you stated that 87 Cutlasses were the only ones to get bc/cc and all I was trying to say is that the Ste. Therese-built 87 Cutlasses were, indeed, lacquer. I'm sure many GN's and the majority of the G-bodies got lacquer paint jobs as well. But the ones that are left get repainted in bc/cc so the number of bc/cc paint jobs is rising from the restorations. It's just when you start throwing out the terms like "only", sometimes there are other examples that actually exist. I did also find that they built Monte Carlos in Arlington in 87 as well and those were lacquer. Maybe those Monte nuts may know whether any of the Montes got a bc/cc? Or were all of them lacquer?
I also do not agree that the GN was a "high-end" car. That's just another opinion. To me, all of them were G-bodies, so inherently they weren't high-end. Fit and finish was fairly poor across the genre, generally speaking.
Here's a spid from a teal metallic 87 Salon V8 T-top made at Ste. Therese with lacquer paint for sale, 19K miles. And it's priced pretty sporty IMO. If it were bc/cc, I don't think it would affect the price, IMO. Nice car, but oof, that price tag.
...just sick of people posting all over the net talking trash on listing price. Most of the time they are not even actively looking or even have funds to buy them.
I am guessing you are not directing the above specifically at me and just talking in general. See my sig statement. I am ALWAYS looking. I have been doing the buying, selling, parting, dreaming Gbody thing for the same period of time. Since 1995. This part of Florida (and most areas inland from Ocala south) has always had nicer ones with the prices reflecting Florida's generally lower cost of living, especially in the more rural areas.
OK, pile on now?🤣😆
I don't take any of this seriously. I'll do some more searches and see if there is anything new within a 100 mile radius for the past week...
GBodyForum is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com. Amazon, the Amazon logo, AmazonSupply, and the AmazonSupply logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
www.facebook.com
gbodyforum.com
www.facebook.com
