Beware this seller. Larry Brown Quincy Illinois

Nate Nagel wrote:
> John S. wrote:
> > Holden McGroin wrote:
> >
> >>Read my Story at:
> >>www.skywolf.com
> >>
> >>or contact:
> >>
>
> >>for his story.
> >
> >
> > That's a sad story, sorry you got burned.
> >
> > It is unfortunately also a very good example of how risky it really is
> > to buy a car sight-unseen from a seller that you know nothing about.
> > Most of the cars I looked at on the site you listed are bone-yard
> > specials, so I would have found that to be a warning sign. His
> > statement: "No real rust to speak of... the car has no big problems and
> > would make a great Driver" is unfortunately vague and open to some
> > interpretation since we are talking about a car that is almost half a
> > century old.
> >
> > $5,500 is a lot of money and I would have wanted a lot more proof that
> > the car was as advertised.
> >
>
> Just to rub it in, I've seen this car/story before but I just finally
> noticed that it appears to have the steering wheel, horn ring, and horn
> button from a '57 President.
>
> The good news is that SASCO still has wheels that would be correct for
> your car, although I think they are all two-tone (for Larks.)
>
> Of course, I expect you will be doing some repairs before worrying about
> an incorrect steering wheel.
>
> nate

There is of course the possibility that the buyer thought he found the
steal of the year in an underpriced fully running clean stude and
rushed in to grab it before someone else did. And in the excitement
forgot to ask the right questions or didn't really listen to the
answers.

"Holden McGroin" > wrote in message
oups.com...

Honesty, after looking over Larry Brown's website, I should think you
would have been VERY nervous about buying anything from him.

All these old cars are apparently pulled out in a field, in the weather, and
in pretty dispicable condition.

It is a junkyard, in so many words.

While I understand you may feel you have been misled, this merchandise
looks pretty scabby.

I would never buy anything from a site like this without traveling
personally
to see it.

And, I would NEVER have bought a rustbucket like this. I can deal with a
lot of imperfections, but a ruster is beyond my interest and my finances.

Hope you two manage to work it out.

John S. wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>John S. wrote:
>>
>>>Holden McGroin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Read my Story at:
>>>>www.skywolf.com
>>>>
>>>>or contact:
>>>>

>>>>for his story.
>>>
>>>
>>>That's a sad story, sorry you got burned.
>>>
>>>It is unfortunately also a very good example of how risky it really is
>>>to buy a car sight-unseen from a seller that you know nothing about.
>>>Most of the cars I looked at on the site you listed are bone-yard
>>>specials, so I would have found that to be a warning sign. His
>>>statement: "No real rust to speak of... the car has no big problems and
>>>would make a great Driver" is unfortunately vague and open to some
>>>interpretation since we are talking about a car that is almost half a
>>>century old.
>>>
>>>$5,500 is a lot of money and I would have wanted a lot more proof that
>>>the car was as advertised.
>>>
>>
>>Just to rub it in, I've seen this car/story before but I just finally
>>noticed that it appears to have the steering wheel, horn ring, and horn
>>button from a '57 President.
>>
>>The good news is that SASCO still has wheels that would be correct for
>>your car, although I think they are all two-tone (for Larks.)
>>
>>Of course, I expect you will be doing some repairs before worrying about
>>an incorrect steering wheel.
>>
>>nate
>
>
> There is of course the possibility that the buyer thought he found the
> steal of the year in an underpriced fully running clean stude and
> rushed in to grab it before someone else did. And in the excitement
> forgot to ask the right questions or didn't really listen to the
> answers.
>

Maybe I'm frugal, but I think what he paid is probably about right for a
cosmetically shot but mechanically functional (with maybe a few minor
issues) Hawk. OK, maybe a little low, but that money should buy you a
sweet Lark.

I've seen Hawks driven home that were bought for not much more than that.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

Nate Nagel wrote:
> Al Bundy wrote:
> > Nate, is that really that terrible of a price for what he got? I know
> > it's a fairly rare vehicle. Where I live I would expect to see a price
> > af about $5K on anything in the 55'-65' range that was fairly complete.
> > If the desire is to make it exactly original, then it's going to take a
> > lot. Based on the pictures he posted, what is the most a person should
> > pay for it?
> >
>
> Well, let me put it to you this way... I bought a '55 coupe (same basic
> car, although it looks completely different) with *no* rust, a 20-footer
> paint job, a few missing chrome pieces (actually hard to find ones, one
> of which I still need to locate) a ratty but much more presentable
> interior, and a tired but functional '63 289/auto for probably $7-8K
> worth of other auto-related stuff in trade.
>
> The best people to actually answer the value question would likely be
> found over on alt.autos.studebaker; I am just a guy who works on cars
> and makes an occasional trade, and I'm not really tapped into current
> prices. However, the car in those pics, while still salvageable, I
> personally wouldn't pay more than $2K for (actually I probably wouldn't
> buy it at all because it's more of a project than I have time for.) The
> thing that really worries me about it is the mishmash of different year
> parts; the carb and intake on there is from a much earlier car and the
> lack of breathers on the valve covers and the presence of the oil fill
> "stack" at the front of the block makes me suspect that it's an earlier
> partial-flow engine (i.e. no provisions for modern full-flow oil filter
> which was introduced in mid '62.) Not a big deal to some (although I
> would get a bypass filter for it) but if for some reason someone was
> counting on having a full-flow block, or wanted to do a 100% correct
> show resto, that might be disappointing.
>
> nate
>
Well, I was sure off in my valuation. And I gave the guy a bad time in
the other group. My appologies to him to the tune of about $3k. He's
going to have a hard time with it legally unless he can get the state
AG or somebody to carry water for him. It's an expensive lesson.
There's an old saying in stock trading that may apply. It goes, "A loss
quickly taken is half a gain."

Nate Nagel wrote:
> John S. wrote:
> > Nate Nagel wrote:
> >
> >>John S. wrote:
> >>
> >>>Holden McGroin wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Read my Story at:
> >>>>www.skywolf.com
> >>>>
> >>>>or contact:
> >>>>
>
> >>>>for his story.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>That's a sad story, sorry you got burned.
> >>>
> >>>It is unfortunately also a very good example of how risky it really is
> >>>to buy a car sight-unseen from a seller that you know nothing about.
> >>>Most of the cars I looked at on the site you listed are bone-yard
> >>>specials, so I would have found that to be a warning sign. His
> >>>statement: "No real rust to speak of... the car has no big problems and
> >>>would make a great Driver" is unfortunately vague and open to some
> >>>interpretation since we are talking about a car that is almost half a
> >>>century old.
> >>>
> >>>$5,500 is a lot of money and I would have wanted a lot more proof that
> >>>the car was as advertised.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Just to rub it in, I've seen this car/story before but I just finally
> >>noticed that it appears to have the steering wheel, horn ring, and horn
> >>button from a '57 President.
> >>
> >>The good news is that SASCO still has wheels that would be correct for
> >>your car, although I think they are all two-tone (for Larks.)
> >>
> >>Of course, I expect you will be doing some repairs before worrying about
> >>an incorrect steering wheel.
> >>
> >>nate
> >
> >
> > There is of course the possibility that the buyer thought he found the
> > steal of the year in an underpriced fully running clean stude and
> > rushed in to grab it before someone else did. And in the excitement
> > forgot to ask the right questions or didn't really listen to the
> > answers.
> >
>
> Maybe I'm frugal, but I think what he paid is probably about right for a
> cosmetically shot but mechanically functional (with maybe a few minor
> issues) Hawk.

Very possible at that price. But in this case the car is not
mechanically functional. I suspect that it has set in some boneyard
with rodents nesting in the engine compartment for the past 20 years.


OK, maybe a little low, but that money should buy you a
> sweet Lark.
>
> I've seen Hawks driven home that were bought for not much more than that.
>
> nate
>
> --
> replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
> http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

Al Bundy wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
> > Al Bundy wrote:
> > > Nate, is that really that terrible of a price for what he got? I know
> > > it's a fairly rare vehicle. Where I live I would expect to see a price
> > > af about $5K on anything in the 55'-65' range that was fairly complete.
> > > If the desire is to make it exactly original, then it's going to take a
> > > lot. Based on the pictures he posted, what is the most a person should
> > > pay for it?
> > >
> >
> > Well, let me put it to you this way... I bought a '55 coupe (same basic
> > car, although it looks completely different) with *no* rust, a 20-footer
> > paint job, a few missing chrome pieces (actually hard to find ones, one
> > of which I still need to locate) a ratty but much more presentable
> > interior, and a tired but functional '63 289/auto for probably $7-8K
> > worth of other auto-related stuff in trade.
> >
> > The best people to actually answer the value question would likely be
> > found over on alt.autos.studebaker; I am just a guy who works on cars
> > and makes an occasional trade, and I'm not really tapped into current
> > prices. However, the car in those pics, while still salvageable, I
> > personally wouldn't pay more than $2K for (actually I probably wouldn't
> > buy it at all because it's more of a project than I have time for.) The
> > thing that really worries me about it is the mishmash of different year
> > parts; the carb and intake on there is from a much earlier car and the
> > lack of breathers on the valve covers and the presence of the oil fill
> > "stack" at the front of the block makes me suspect that it's an earlier
> > partial-flow engine (i.e. no provisions for modern full-flow oil filter
> > which was introduced in mid '62.) Not a big deal to some (although I
> > would get a bypass filter for it) but if for some reason someone was
> > counting on having a full-flow block, or wanted to do a 100% correct
> > show resto, that might be disappointing.
> >
> > nate
> >
> Well, I was sure off in my valuation. And I gave the guy a bad time in
> the other group. My appologies to him to the tune of about $3k. He's
> going to have a hard time with it legally unless he can get the state
> AG or somebody to carry water for him. It's an expensive lesson.
> There's an old saying in stock trading that may apply. It goes, "A loss
> quickly taken is half a gain."

Well, I've been told that I'm "frugal" before, but that seems to be a
common trait among Stude owners. IMHO Studes are a great bargain for a
"classic" car (loose definition of classic, obviously not the AACA one)
with interesting styling, torquey V-8 engines, and other than a few
models they've remained below the radar for high-dollar rod builders so
values are still low.

nate