When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I think the condition of the entire car plays more into it then being low mileage. I have seen low mile cars that are trashed and need restored and everything replaced. I have seen higher mile cars that look decent for not being restored.
I think the condition of the entire car plays more into it then being low mileage. I have seen low mile cars that are trashed and need restored and everything replaced. I have seen higher mile cars that look decent for not being restored.
This^^^^. I have seen low mile cars that were parked in a dirt floor barn 40 years ago that I wouldn't give $500 for. Totally trashed. I've also seen many high mile cars (a local guy has a '56 with about 550,000 miles on it) that are in near perfect condition. My '67 GTO has 253,000 miles on it and I take it on 1000 mile drives several times a year. The reason is, maintenance. Cars that are always serviced and maintained don't become worn out and unreliable with age and mileage. You simply address issues as they arise. That way, the car is always in top shape and ready to go, regardless of odometer reading.
I know a '69 Camaro with less 15000 miles.
There was also a green '72 454 Corvette on the forum that had less than 500 miles on it.
I know of both of these cars since day 1 and the mileage is legit believe me or not.
I also tend to disbelieve most low mileage cars. I have a 65 with 43,000 original miles on it. I only know its original because I know the whole history of the car. it had 25,000 miles on it in 1972 when my dad got it from a family friend who was getting a divorce. my dad hardly drove the car till 1990 when I did some needed brake work and started to occasionally come over and take it for a spin so it wouldn't be sitting. I inherited it a couple years ago and didn't drive it much. But have decided last year that it is silly to let it sit to keep mileage low for the next owner. So now I take it out regularly and enjoy it.
So in that case, the car's value to you is in the money it will bring when you sell it, not in the experience of driving it.
This car in particular has value in the story behind it, finding it and the relationship I built with the original owner. When I found this car I was also trying to buy my 1960 Corvette because that was the body style I fell in love with. Now the 66 had the history, documentation, story etc. I knew that if it came down to only getting 1 of the 2 the 66 would be the investment, but the 60 would be the fun car if that makes sense? The 60 came up first and I bought it without hesitation and I was fortunate enough to buy the 66 a year later almost to the day. I had to borrow the full amount on the 66 because I had paid cash for the 60 and it takes time to save up that much money. I still owe about $6k, but it has been worth it. I have put about 450 miles on it in almost 5 years but we have had a lot of fun with it especially being honored with Kevin Mackay's celebrity choice award in 2016 when it was on display in Carlisle. It's 3/4 original paint and still has original belts, hoses, exhaust etc. So yes I view the 66 as more of an investment and the 60 more of an antique car to drive around if that makes sense?
In the decade or so that my father had a SWC, he always bought a winter rat. Although it was 2 years old when he got it. He always bought a $300 Beater for the 4 months of winter, a couple of Corvairs, Mustangs, and a Chevelle. That had all had been driven year round and the rear quarters were gone. It was the Chevelle that he said you could almost watch the rust climb the quarter.
In the decade or so that my father had a SWC, he always bought a winter rat. Although it was 2 years old when he got it. He always bought a $300 Beater for the 4 months of winter, a couple of Corvairs, Mustangs, and a Chevelle. That had all had been driven year round and the rear quarters were gone. It was the Chevelle that he said you could almost watch the rust climb the quarter.
LOL, I had a '64 Corvair as a tuna boat in the winter of 68-69. Paid $250 for it. I have heard it said that every guy has one car in his life that he beats the crap out of. That was mine.
As has already been mentioned above by others, I've always regarded the odometer reading in any car that's more than 20 years old as utterly irrelevant, and almost surely inaccurate. With the amount of fraud that's being perpetrated in the special interest vehicle world these days, absent meticulous and verifiable documentation of provenance, nothing is to be regarded as reliable. To illustrate how little it means to me, when I bought my '63 last year, I did not even look at the odometer, and the only way I could tell you what it's showing now would be to step out into the garage and look at it, as I truly haven't a clue. Even reading this thread hasn't piqued my curiosity enough to prompt me to take the ten steps from where I'm presently sitting to go and see. It's just a number, and as meaningless as they come.
My 66 coupe has 26k original miles. The original owner kept a log of date/mileage every time he stopped for gas because he always calculated the fuel mileage.
At a NCRS meeting it still wasn’t enough for some people to believe, so I let some guy crawl up under the drivers side floorboard to inspect the firewall insulation because it apparently would start to deteriorate at about 80k miles? After this they all were satisfied that it was low mileage.
We went through the same crap with proving it had the original exhaust on it.
It is probably true that most C1's were purchased as daily drivers so how gullible or naive does someone have to be to believe that a 50 year old car may only have 26000 miles or some such low number.
The trigger for this thread is: two C3's I have sold in the past surfaced with a deduct of 100000 miles. In one case the buyer asked me to fraudulently sign an affidavit attesting to the incorrect miles which I refused to do.
In both cases the cars had serious chassis rust out which the buyers I sold to were aware of. Each car was an unmolested, original car, but basically very well worn. So over the years the mileage went fron 140000 to 40000. Onecar had an amateur restoration (1973 L82 conv) the other car (1971 BB coupe) had a professional resto and looks new in the pictures I have seen
If it's too good to be true it probably is.
if that owner has all documentation and real deal .. my opinion it’s worth 18 to 20k. 1975 base is not highly desirable
Low mileage cars are out there but in there lifetime rolling back odometers was not illegal and it happened quite often by dealers and owners alike. There are only a few acceptable ways to believe in a low mileage car and one of the best is conversations with ownership chain back to the original owner.
I don't care how many or how few miles are on my vettes (65K, 75K, 116K on their clocks), I drive the shxx out of 'em....I'm too old to be saving fun times for somebody else; despite the money/value part: One thing's for sure: you ain't taking that $$$ with you when you croak anyway!
I don't care how many or how few miles are on my vettes (65K, 75K, 116K on their clocks), I drive the shxx out of 'em....I'm too old to be saving fun times for somebody else; despite the money/value part: One thing's for sure: you ain't taking that $$$ with you when you croak anyway!
When the story of low mileage cars comes up, as it always seems to every so often, it always takes me back to my car and its' crazy story. I know I have told the story before, but for the newbe's (and the fact it's Sunday and i'm bored) here it is again. I bought my '61 off the Chevrolet dealers showroom floor BUT it was January 1971. There were only two cars on the floor (small dealership) and the other car was a 1971 Corvette. Yea, I know. I should have bought both, but I was young,dumb, but mostly poor. Lucky to have bought either. Anyway, the '61 showed 19000 on the odometer. Believe it or not the salesman TOLD me that ,because of some "sprucing up" in the form of replacing worn bushings and other small items they had "rolled back" 50000 miles off the odometer. So the car was actually a 69000 mile car as it sat. It looked good enough to be on the showroom floor right beside a new car. I also verified the mileage with the original owner who lived in the area ,but after the sale as the mileage meant little to me at the time. Fast forward about 35 years,and the time had come for more "sprucing up". The car needed a new interior and engine area cleanup etc. so I decided it was now or never. I'm slow at doing this kind of job myself, but took on the, as I called it "a mini resto". Doing a complete interior required replacing the dash pad (a bitch of a job) but since I could not find anyone local to do it for me I dove in . Now we are back to "mileage". Having the instrument panel completely out of the car, the idea came to me that NOW was a great time to "correct" the mileage. After the 35 years the odometer now had 49000+ miles showing. The only problem was I knew nothing about how to "correct" the mileage problem. Thank the lord for Corvette Forum. I posted on here that I wanted to ADD 50000 miles on to my odometer. The laughter could be heard for miles (no pun intended). However a few forum members (sorry,can't remember who) took pity on me and explained how easy it was.And BINGO-original 99000+ miles on the odometer. A year or so later I rolled over to 000001 and today the odometer shows 15000+ (115000) ORIGINAL MILES.How 'bout that! So now I own a 60 year old car with 115000+ "original miles. I consider that to be "low mileage"
I recall seeing a C2 coupe (don't recall the year) at a Bob McDorman Chevrolet Car Show at Canal Winchester, Oho in the early 2000's. It had only a few hundred miles, and a NOM engine! The story was somebody purchased it for racing and removed the original engine, which got "lost". And racing lost its appeal and the car was parked.
Maybe someone else recalls this car.
Last edited by itsforfun; Dec 12, 2021 at 11:59 AM.
Reason: x
The engineering was much different but cars today are truly way more consumable. You won't be able to drive a C5-C8 Corvette in 50-75 years from now, but you'll still be able to drive a '57 or '67. These old cars were meant to run 8-10 years and 100k miles and be discarded or rebuilt. They can be rebuilt....over and over. For not much $$$, either.
New cars are meant to run 20 years and 300k miles. After that they cannot economically be rebuilt. I know 3 co-workers who junked fairly late model Infinity luxury sedans due to lack of parts. Air bags, modules, modulating valves, ecms and pcms that use data buss tech, and on and on. Today's $300k Bentley Flying Brake is tomorrows soup can. But John Steeds 1928 4.5 Litre is still going strong!
I have seen a select few documented low mileage cars. About 99% of the 'claimed' low mileage cars had been around the clock at least once. Corvettes seem to be the worst offenders...they are the only genre I've been involved in where re-stamping numbers is actually OK. In the Pontiac world, it would get you tarred and feathered.....which would suit many of our politicians today!!
Not to put too much of a fine point on it, Jeff, but 100,000 miles back in the 50s and 60s--without a rebuild--was a stretch. The '57 I referenced that I bought in '67, had 52,000 miles on the odometer and had .008 of taper. That is getting close to the limit.
My Dad, who owned his own company and was on the road a lot, traded every 3 years with under 50,000 miles for the reasons stated above. A high mileage car back then was in the 80K range and you took a serious hit when trading with mileage like that.
There are always exceptions, but back then, every parts store had a machine shop and rebuilding was big business. We have two shops that perform rebuilding in a town of 50,000. Fifty years ago there would have been a dozen---and one of the shops operates at a breakeven, at best. It is, simply, a loss leader for their parts business.
Last edited by Dan Hampton; Dec 12, 2021 at 01:41 PM.
They are out there, but, lots of fake mileage claims cars also. Sooo as is often said “ let the buyer beware”. I bought my 66 with 56,000 original miles. Now a couple things of note. I’ve known the seller over 25 years. He bought the car right out of high school. He owned it for almost 50 years. It had been parked and not run for over 20 years. The car still had original exhaust and mufflers from the factory. All original interior showing appropriate wear for mileage. Speedo working correctly. Original soft top. I could go on but you get the idea. If low mileage is claimed a careful inspection is in order.
Last edited by Vette5311; Dec 12, 2021 at 01:25 PM.
That would be the one.
