need advise on 69 plymouth satellite

[turbobitt]

Split monoleafs and caltracks aren't stock. QUOTE]

And extra leaf's are not either, but you had no issue using that towards your argument. You can keep you 5.0 and drive in circles or whatever you would do with it and I'll enjoy my mopar.

 

[bison]

Split monoleafs and caltracks aren't stock. QUOTE]

And extra leaf's are not either, but you had no issue using that towards your argument. You can keep you 5.0 and drive in circles or whatever you would do with it and I'll enjoy my mopar.

He probably cant afford to own a Mopar like yours Bitt. So he wants to compare it to a $1500 Mustang that will handle better than it . Maybe he will race you with his 5.0. Ill put my money on your ****ty handling Mopar:biggrin:

 

[Pronto]

Not much of a Mopar fan but that Challenger is sweet.

 

[UNGN]

He probably cant afford to own a Mopar like yours Bitt. So he wants to compare it to a $1500 Mustang that will handle better than it . Maybe he will race you with his 5.0. Ill put my money on your ****ty handling Mopar:biggrin:

You are right, I couldn't afford them

Here was my "driver" a factory 440-4bbl 'cuda

Here was my other "driver" a factory 340 Cuda convertible will all matching numbers.

and here was my "show car" a factory 440-6 with all matching numbers and 27K miles (even has NOS E-6015's):

I made the mustang comparison, because I bought a new Mustang in 1986 and stopped driving my convertible 'Cuda because the Mustang was so far superior it wasn't funny. What good is a car if you don't like driving it, even if it looks cool?

Mopars are cool to look at, they just suck as cars to drive (of course unless you dump buckets of money into them to overcome their factory shortcomings, then they drive great )

I've owned a lot of different musclecars from Fords to AMC's to Chevys and am speaking objectively. I'm not a one brand is the greatest!!!! type of person. If some aspect of a car sucks, I'll say it, even if its a car I like.

 

[bison]

You are right, I couldn't afford them

Here was my "driver" a factory 440-4bbl 'cuda

Here was my other "driver" a factory 340 Cuda convertible will all matching numbers.

and here was my "show car" a factory 440-6 with all matching numbers and 27K miles (even has NOS E-6015's):

I made the mustang comparison, because I bought a new Mustang in 1986 and stopped driving my convertible 'Cuda because the Mustang was so far superior it wasn't funny. What good is a car if you don't like driving it, even if it looks cool?

Mopars are cool to look at, they just suck as cars to drive (of course unless you dump buckets of money into them to overcome their factory shortcomings, then they drive great )

I've owned a lot of different musclecars from Fords to AMC's to Chevys and am speaking objectively. I'm not a one brand is the greatest!!!! type of person. If some aspect of a car sucks, I'll say it, even if its a car I like.

...and your posts are helping the starter of this thread how? Need advise on 69 Satellite. Maybe you should tell him to just sell it:biggrin:

 

[UNGN]

...and your posts are helping the starter of this thread how? Need advise on 69 Satellite. Maybe you should tell him to just sell it:biggrin:

He Already knows what its worth. It was worth $4500 to him, but the guy who bought it wants $10K for it, now, which is approaching Crack territory, since it will take at least $15K of mechanical and cosmetics to deturdify it.

My posts are to try to cut through the BS hype that surrounds Mopars that they are gods gift to musclecars, even when they are a 383 2bb automatic in a grampamobile B-body Sport Satellite and that you can buy a lot better platforms to restore for $10K. But the original thread starter knows this.

My mom even had a 4 speed 383 4bbl Charger "back in the day" as her daily driver. She would look down on a 383 2bbl Auto sport Satellite.