A very good example of resto cost and value of a 69 Cuda

-
jimharvard said:
i will argue confidently that ALL 1968 340 mopar engines were painted RED from the factory and that RED is the only "correct" color for a 68 340. beginning in 1969 is when "OEM engine paint" seems to have been "whatever was on the shelf" at the manufacturing plant. the majority of restoration sources i've seen say "hemi orange" is the "correct" color for a 69 340. HOWEVER - there were turquoise (Chrysler Blue) 340's in 69 and a few "carry-over" 1968 Red 1969 340's. i "believe" all 318 motors were painted Chrysler Blue in 1969 and i suspect some of the small block engine assembly lines just painted 340's with the same paint as the 318's.
Click to expand...

I don’t know who these “majority of restoration sources” are, but the default color for 69 340’s is Turquoise. I believe there have been rare instances of proven original cars with orange and med blue 340’s.

If you don’t have strong proof your motor was not turquoise, then paint it turquoise.
 
Last edited:
IMFURYS said:
Damn:
Click to expand...


68 and 67 are same or more. They repro 69’s and that effected selling price. Before the repro’s I think 69’s were more expensive.

That would be a good price for 68’s if they are solid good pieces.
 
YY1 said:
For comparison-

2020 Don Garlits car corral had a 68 318 auto, bench seat car in metallic brown.

Had a built 340 and an 8 3/4 under it.

Really, really NICE driver street/mild strip car with time slips taped to the door.
Not a radical build at all though.

I believe it was driven there about 160 miles.

Body looked very solid, int was nice.

22K

About a month later, I saw it on local craigslist for 20K and it sat there for a few months.
Click to expand...

Was it a show field car?

If so it was at both Garlits and FMA shows and there was a for sale sign and very nice!

I loved the car and it reminded me of my 68 notch grocery getter! Car was solid and nice! He won at least one trophy at FMA for it.
The owner was very nice!
 
Last edited:
I’m currently looking for a ‘69 coupe self, and not having much luck.
 
I know this is a little off-topic from OP, but I can't resist throwing my two cents in.
Just a little color to add to the discussion about restoring a car back to OEM condition, from a guy that has one in OEM condition.
In my opinion, you will never restore back to factory OEM condition because quite frankly, it sucked back then.
Many people on FABO have seen my car in person and can attest to the originality the car presents.
The body panels wave at you when you walk by, not to mention the panel gaps are all over the place.
The orange peel makes an orange look smooth.
Paint runs and drips galore, weatherstripping glue smeared all over hell.
Undercoating where undercoating doesn't belong because the "new guy" on the assembly line was in the pit spraying upwards and couldn't stand the crap falling in his eyes so he would just hold the gun and spray.
If you paid a shop to "restore" your car like that back to OEM condition, it would probably be the last job the shop did.

I used to think about project cars and yeah, it would've been nice at one time. Not anymore, life happens.
If you think you are going to sell your restoration at some time down the road and "come ahead on money", it probably isn't going to happen.
Buy what you want, for what you can afford, and do what you want with it.

The issue I have is when someone tries to hold out a vehicle as "original this" or "original that" when it obviously is not, regardless of price.
 
like_A_pike said:
Jim:
Are you conducting a market analysis on this asking price to see where it should be or are you trying to convince the market that the asking price is what it should bear?
Click to expand...

actually, i'm not trying to do anything with the post i presented. the above red 69 Barracuda is very nicely restored. yes, there were "originality" mistakes on this car and some items that prompt legitimate questions - like the rear valance panel lacking exhaust cut-outs. HOWEVER, with the HOURS of time i spend looking at 67-69 Barracuda's for sale from all over the U.S., this car - in the condition it is presented in - at the price it is advertised for - BOTH the car's condition and its price are consistent with the majority of restored Barracuda's i've seen for sale over the last 3 years. if you go further back than 3 years, prices for these cars were either much lower, or in some cases, much higher - but those variations - and the more recent softening of the market for these cars - requires a much more complex economic and U.S. demographic analysis than what needs to be included here.

the bottom line is - i posted this car as a "baseline" of "car condition in relation to sales price" for others to look at and get some idea of where the current market is for these cars. that was my ENTIRE purpose here. based upon the cost of restoring these cars, i believe low $30's is the best one could hope for in spending to get a car to the level of the red example i've posted. so i believe $32k for the noted car is a "reasonable" price. if you could get the above red car (or one in similar condition) for $28k, i think that would be a GREAT deal. if you spent $38k for a car like the one above, i think that would be a BAD deal.
 
68original said:
I know this is a little off-topic from OP, but I can't resist throwing my two cents in.
Just a little color to add to the discussion about restoring a car back to OEM condition, from a guy that has one in OEM condition.
In my opinion, you will never restore back to factory OEM condition because quite frankly, it sucked back then.
Many people on FABO have seen my car in person and can attest to the originality the car presents.
The body panels wave at you when you walk by, not to mention the panel gaps are all over the place.
The orange peel makes an orange look smooth.
Paint runs and drips galore, weatherstripping glue smeared all over hell.
Undercoating where undercoating doesn't belong because the "new guy" on the assembly line was in the pit spraying upwards and couldn't stand the crap falling in his eyes so he would just hold the gun and spray.
If you paid a shop to "restore" your car like that back to OEM condition, it would probably be the last job the shop did.

I used to think about project cars and yeah, it would've been nice at one time. Not anymore, life happens.
If you think you are going to sell your restoration at some time down the road and "come ahead on money", it probably isn't going to happen.
Buy what you want, for what you can afford, and do what you want with it.

The issue I have is when someone tries to hold out a vehicle as "original this" or "original that" when it obviously is not, regardless of price.
Click to expand...


i completely agree with you that today's "restored" muscle cars - any make or model - ARE NOT representative of what these cars looked like when they rolled off the car carriers 50 years ago. i know because i "loitered" at our local Plymouth Dealer every weekend when i was in high school (1970-72) and after high school, i was a salesman at the used car lot of a local Chevy dealership where i got to see how "quality control" worked at GM versus Chrysler. there just was NO quality control for anything on the new cars back then. the cars that are being "restored" today would have been considered "custom cars" 50 years ago. look at the paint work on restored cars today. NOT A SINGLE COMPANY was mass producing cars in the 1967-1971 era with the quality of paint on the restored cars today. MAYBE you could have compared a Cadillac or a Lincoln Mark IV Continental paint job to something "common" today - but i even doubt that thought. Chrysler used acrylic enamel and GM used acrylic lacquer on their cars. neither of those paints would look anything close to the depth of shine of today's paints. i also know a little bit about this topic because i owned and ran a body shop from 1973 to 1976. when i painted my 68 Barracuda Turbine Bronze, i painted it with original old school ACRYLIC LACQUER because i wanted the car to LOOK like the cars did "back then." yes, acrylic enamel would have been OEM mopar, but PPG wanted $1000/gallon for that paint and i got A. Lacquer for $325/gallon and AE and AL "look" pretty close the same. when i take this car to local car shows, i always get asked if i'm going to have the car painted - LOL! yes, i laugh because it's always a "younger person" who asks this question. i just smile and say "No, i want the car to look the way it would have looked 50 years ago." naturally, the person i say this to never understands what i mean. so EVERYTHING "68original" above is saying about how no one actually "restores" their cars to "what they looked like" from the factory is absolutely CORRECT! here's my Turbine Bronze 68 Barracuda painted with "not very shinny" but "more original looking" acrylic lacquer.

20150830_123735 (1).jpg
 
Last edited:
jimharvard said:
i completely agree with you that today's "restored" muscle cars - any make or model - ARE NOT representative of what these cars looked like when they rolled off the car carriers 50 years ago. i know because i "loitered" at our local Plymouth Dealer every weekend when i was in high school (1970-72) and after high school, i was a salesman at the used car lot of a local Chevy dealership where i got to see how "quality control" worked at GM versus Chrysler. there just was NO quality control for anything on the new cars back then. the cars that are being "restored" today would have been considered "custom cars" 50 years ago. look at the paint work on restored cars today. NOT A SINGLE COMPANY was mass producing cars in the 1967-1971 era with the quality of paint on the restored cars today. MAYBE you could have compared a Cadillac or a Lincoln Mark IV Continental paint job to something "common" today - but i even doubt that thought. Chrysler used acrylic enamel and GM used acrylic lacquer on their cars. neither of those paints would look anything close to the depth of shine of today's paints. i also know a little bit about this topic because i owned and ran a body shop from 1973 to 1976. when i painted my 68 Barracuda Turbine Bronze, i painted it with original old school ACRYLIC LACQUER because i wanted the car to LOOK like the cars did "back then." yes, acrylic enamel would have been OEM mopar, but PPG wanted $1000/gallon for that paint and i got A. Lacquer for $325/gallon and AE and AL "look" pretty close the same. when i take this car to local car shows, i always get asked if i'm going to have the car painted - LOL! yes, i laugh because it's always a "younger person" who asks this question. i just smile and say "No, i want the car to look the way it would have looked 50 years ago." naturally, the person i say this to never understands what i mean. so EVERYTHING "68original" above is saying about how no one actually "restores" their cars to "what they looked like" from the factory is absolutely CORRECT! here's my Turbine Bronze 68 Barracuda painted with "not very shinny" but "more original looking" acrylic lacquer.

View attachment 1715677750
Click to expand...
Beautiful turbine bronze Barracuda !!....when i used to be into B bodies the topic came up quite frequently because it seemed every roadrunner i had or came across had many signs of very poor quality control. E bodies were horrible. I had a challenger and the back seat bottom only latched on one side because the latch on the other side was welded in the wrong spot and wasn't even close to the correct spot LOL
 
CORRECTION... when someone says i am in error, i try to research the point to determine who is right. i was CORRECT in saying all 68 340's should be RED. HOWEVER, according to the following source, all 69 340's were "Turquoise" 1970-71 340's were hemi orange. the following chart may be helpful to someone.

Mopar Engine Paint Color Guide 1960-1974 - MyMopar.com
 
jimharvard said:
i completely agree with you that today's "restored" muscle cars - any make or model - ARE NOT representative of what these cars looked like when they rolled off the car carriers 50 years ago. i know because i "loitered" at our local Plymouth Dealer every weekend when i was in high school (1970-72) and after high school, i was a salesman at the used car lot of a local Chevy dealership where i got to see how "quality control" worked at GM versus Chrysler. there just was NO quality control for anything on the new cars back then. the cars that are being "restored" today would have been considered "custom cars" 50 years ago. look at the paint work on restored cars today. NOT A SINGLE COMPANY was mass producing cars in the 1967-1971 era with the quality of paint on the restored cars today. MAYBE you could have compared a Cadillac or a Lincoln Mark IV Continental paint job to something "common" today - but i even doubt that thought. Chrysler used acrylic enamel and GM used acrylic lacquer on their cars. neither of those paints would look anything close to the depth of shine of today's paints. i also know a little bit about this topic because i owned and ran a body shop from 1973 to 1976. when i painted my 68 Barracuda Turbine Bronze, i painted it with original old school ACRYLIC LACQUER because i wanted the car to LOOK like the cars did "back then." yes, acrylic enamel would have been OEM mopar, but PPG wanted $1000/gallon for that paint and i got A. Lacquer for $325/gallon and AE and AL "look" pretty close the same. when i take this car to local car shows, i always get asked if i'm going to have the car painted - LOL! yes, i laugh because it's always a "younger person" who asks this question. i just smile and say "No, i want the car to look the way it would have looked 50 years ago." naturally, the person i say this to never understands what i mean. so EVERYTHING "68original" above is saying about how no one actually "restores" their cars to "what they looked like" from the factory is absolutely CORRECT! here's my Turbine Bronze 68 Barracuda painted with "not very shinny" but "more original looking" acrylic lacquer.

View attachment 1715677750
Click to expand...

There are other tricks to do that too.

You can color tint the clear coat to reduce that deep shiny effect. Seen it done on a FT6 T/A and the other sharp hobbiest would notice and complement it.
 
jimharvard said:
actually, i'm not trying to do anything with the post i presented. the above red 69 Barracuda is very nicely restored. yes, there were "originality" mistakes on this car and some items that prompt legitimate questions - like the rear valance panel lacking exhaust cut-outs. HOWEVER, with the HOURS of time i spend looking at 67-69 Barracuda's for sale from all over the U.S., this car - in the condition it is presented in - at the price it is advertised for - BOTH the car's condition and its price are consistent with the majority of restored Barracuda's i've seen for sale over the last 3 years. if you go further back than 3 years, prices for these cars were either much lower, or in some cases, much higher - but those variations - and the more recent softening of the market for these cars - requires a much more complex economic and U.S. demographic analysis than what needs to be included here.

the bottom line is - i posted this car as a "baseline" of "car condition in relation to sales price" for others to look at and get some idea of where the current market is for these cars. that was my ENTIRE purpose here. based upon the cost of restoring these cars, i believe low $30's is the best one could hope for in spending to get a car to the level of the red example i've posted. so i believe $32k for the noted car is a "reasonable" price. if you could get the above red car (or one in similar condition) for $28k, i think that would be a GREAT deal. if you spent $38k for a car like the one above, i think that would be a BAD deal.
Click to expand...

Well a bad choice in my opinion, Although a nice looking example on the surface and not to diss the owner, but! First off not a ‘Cuda.

According to your “lead in” there are so many things so wrong. I would not begin to call this a 69 resto! Even if the owner spent 50k!

Lipstick is fine. Let’s get some things straight though. Did you verify the Vin and Fender tag?

It has a plain Jane standard interior just like my 383S no biggie but don’t sugar coat it.

The revamp/resto is not as such and is a pure resto mod redo in the owners taste and yet unfinished IMO! The fenders and quarters maybe 67 and list goes on.

Revamping these 69 models to close to factory specs when done right is close to 50k in most cases, I will give you that!

But show us a real attempt at resto/revamp. As already mentioned they were only really original once!

This example posted is a slap in the face to many of us who own real 340/383 cars. It costs more in some cases to do it correctly.
 
I will comment further.

If you start with a more complete car maybe not as much $ depending on condition. The posted example is not even close and another 30k may get it there!
 
You can get pretty darn close to a factory finish using high quality single stage acrylic enamel.

...and in super sunny climates you don't have to worry about the clear burning off in 5 years.
 
YY1 said:
You can get pretty darn close to a factory finish using high quality single stage acrylic enamel.

...and in super sunny climates you don't have to worry about the clear burning off in 5 years.
Click to expand...
I agree and I use acrylic urethane as I feel it might be more durable, It an give good shine if applied right. Hit or miss with me really. A $600 gun, $2500 compressor and a booth would help!
Nothing worse than clear peeling.
 
I found an original 67 fastback 383 4 speed car that was for sale on FB . I contacted the seller and he sent pictures and a short video. It "looked" presentable and the asking price $19k which if it was "real" I considered fair. The driveline was complete down to the exhaust manifolds. I borrowed a trailer and drove 300 miles to see the car. What I found in person was a disappointment to say the least. It had been "in a barn" for almost 30 years. Was originally blue with blue interior. Now had a quickie orange paint job with all of the leftover dust and dirt painted over. The interior was a modge podge of spray painted black , old worn faded blue , or totally missing pieces. The engine barely ran, but I did drive the car down the back country road. EVERYTHING needed replaced or at least attention. I went back to talk about the car and maybe make a deal. I had originally thought I'd pay $15k but after the drive was going to offer $12 and I was hoping he wouldn't accept. I've built enough basket case cars to know it was going to take $25k on top of what I paid to make a decent car out of it. I left with my cash in hand.

On the drive home we found the red 68 and in the pictures the car looked REALLY NICE. I knew there was another road trip coming. And called the guy immediately. The next day I drove to look at it. I knew after a walk around and hearing it run I was buying that car. Asking price was $25k I was prepared to pay full price but asked "What's the bottom line?" He came back with $23k which I promptly shook his hand. I'm not sorry and I don't think I over paid. I have a really straight clean body with a nice interior, a 340 that runs excellent. I'm picky and this car has me ahead of the game already money wise. AND I get to enjoy it while fixing the little things it needs. Will the car be worth more than I have in it? Probably not BUT I could have sat in a bar pissing the money away. At least I have something to show for it!!! LOL

IMG_4311.PNG

THIS CAR GAVE NEW MEANING TO THE TERM "LIPSTICK ON A PIG"
 
Last edited:
To me the top of the mountain is the rare desirable and total perfect survivor. Few out there. Seldom changes hands. Not grandmas four door Valiant, yes it is very cool, but not worth the $ obviously. Given enough $ any car can be restored, or over restored or made into what ever.
Ah the resto mod. With its fuel injection and modern seats and improved suspension, etc etc Perfect car, dives like a new one. Only thing lackng is the true experience of the old car from back in the day. I guess if you never lived it, you don't relate to it.
 
YY1 said:
Almost nothing in the classic car hobby is worse to me than paying a premium for a pretty paint job and then having bondo crack out of it after the first seasonal temperature cycle.
Click to expand...

Those magnet stickers work great at determining if there’s bondo. Then, you can take a bondo gage and determine or estimate the thickness. Beware, a trick used by hacks is to use steel wool as a filler.
 
jimharvard said:
I saw this car on Facebook marketplace being sold out of Mentor, Ohio and wanted to post it here on FABO because I believe it is a very good example of what these cars cost to restore and what they are worth after they are done.

This 69 Cuda has exactly what most of the market is looking for in one of these cars. It was done to almost a "perfect and correct" restoration and it has a 340, a 727 automatic and a 3:55 rear gear. The owner put cragars on the car, but a "purist" could easily put the original wheels and hubcaps on this Barracuda. The car has the deluxe interior with console and headrest bucket seats. I think this car presents very well and has many desirable features. I would not want to be the one to tell this owner this little "factoid", however, he got bad advice on the motor color. 1968 Barracuda's had the 340 painted red as this guy did. In 69, all 340's were painted hemi orange. But no sane person would fault this car at all for that little "faux paw."

As to the money - the seller says he has over $50,000 in this restoration which I ABSOLUTELY believe because this car was a complete tear-down, rotisserie painted project. There are lots of new parts on this car which along with the paint and bodywork, quickly increases the restoration costs. However, the seller is listing this car for $32,500 which is right where the current market is for a car optioned like this one completely restored to almost perfect condition. It would not surprise me if this seller would take $30,000 cash if offered. Any way you look at it, you CANNOT restore these Barracuda's to the condition of this car and make money. You will ALWAYS have more money in these cars than they are worth. But would it be worth $18,000 that you knew you couldn't recover to a real "Cuda lover" to have and drive this car? I think it would.

I like to post cars and information here on FABO that might help owners and potential buyers (and someone considering a full restoration of their car) examples of what is out in the marketplace right now. I hope this post is of value to someone.

View attachment 1715676988

View attachment 1715676989

View attachment 1715676990

View attachment 1715676991

View attachment 1715676992

View attachment 1715676993

View attachment 1715676994
Click to expand...


Is this a Barracuda or a Formula S?
 
jimharvard said:
CORRECTION... when someone says i am in error, i try to research the point to determine who is right. i was CORRECT in saying all 68 340's should be RED. HOWEVER, according to the following source, all 69 340's were "Turquoise" 1970-71 340's were hemi orange. the following chart may be helpful to someone.

Mopar Engine Paint Color Guide 1960-1974 - MyMopar.com
Click to expand...

An interesting thread as I’ve learned a few details on 2nd gen Barracudas I didn’t know before.

Please confirm if your earlier statement about all ‘69 340’s being Hemi orange is incorrect.
 
meathead66 said:
Let’s not forget this 1969 Barracuda that sold for $200K. 1969 Plymouth Barracuda Mod Top | F133 | Indy 2019 | Mecum Auctions
Click to expand...

I’ve forgot it.

That car is a true outlier thin price. Should not be a base for other values. That particular car and it’s surrounding situation is absolutely unique.

since that auction a bunch of yahoo’s with 318 mod top’s have tried to hook a dummy...

that particular was in a perfect storm:
-True high level Survivor -not the BS “survivor” term thrown around. Excellent condition and details
-340 formula S
-owned by Steve Juliano and part of an auction of his cars and memorabilia that created a stir in hobby. All the wealthy collectors came out and paid top dollar. Not just for the rare parts themselves, but to have a part of his collection. It was like having something of a celebrity.

a restored 340 mod top would be tough to pull a 1/4 that price.
 
Last edited:
H22A4 said:
An interesting thread as I’ve learned a few details on 2nd gen Barracudas I didn’t know before.

Please confirm if your earlier statement about all ‘69 340’s being Hemi orange is incorrect.
Click to expand...

I thought he did in the post you quoted.

69 340’s are almost always turquoise. Unless you have hard documented proof on your particular car.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top