This may have been covered already, and if so please delete this post.

In the April 2005 Hemmings Muscle Machines the 65 SS 396/375, coupe and convertible, are lower valued when compared to the other years. I though that these were very rare and should demand a premium. Why are the BB 65 Chevelles valued at these lower levels?

I posted about this same article when it first came out. Look at the value for 1970 LS-6 convertible Chevelles. Not even close to reality... Max was $70K...

I also saw the 65 Z-16 numbers you mention... They actually have a low, med and high price for the one and only, mysterious 65 Z-16 convertible. Not sure how they came up with that one. graemlins/clonk.gif

Makes me question their whole price guide...

Hmmm. How much is something worth to you(in dollars and cents, assuming you want to sell it) Probably as much as some one will give you for it. What if Nobody is currently making you an offer? Then it isn't worth anything? Well, that's not very useful. How about a better estimate? Maybe the selling price of the last one that sold? Haven't been any sold lately? Hmmm. Hard to put a "value" on it. I think this would be an "inefficient market", few buyers and few sellers, in the economists language (or something like that; its been 40 years or so since Econ 1A).

My $0.02

What do hemmings price these cars at?

Those prices in the current issue of Hemmings Muscle Machines are more like a guide line.
It's reasonably helpful for more of the "common" muscle cars that exchange hands more often rather then rare cars such as the Z16 or LS6 convertible.
I wouldn't overthink it.

Yeah, I saw a lot of questionable values in there...

I was also disappointed that for Chevrolet they only had SS (or Z/28) cars... Interestingly enough that smae issue had the article on the base Impala with the L72... Some other brand cars had additional, non-sport models listed, just because of engine options...

I think they also had values for the 1966 Chevelle L78 with the rare automatic trans (1-of-zero!)...


HMM has alot of problems though...

I recall they had a recent article listing BB engines and HP ratings (I think it was HMM)... I was laughing because they neglected to show the 406 Ford engine, yet it was talked about in the preceding paragraph...

Then there are the damn feature cars and write-ups... They talk about the specific maladies of the particular cars they drive (such as the steering or shifter being vague, etc)... I don't care what that "particular" car felt like, let me know what they "originally" felt like, or in general feel like now...If some owner has neglected his car, don't waste the space...

And then there is the quality (or lack of) of some of the feature cars... I specifically recall the article that has a red Buick (Stage one?) versus a Ford?... I remember looking at that Buick and thinking "P.O.S."... The bumper looked bent, etc... I am sure they can find a better example... Most cars look pretty good though...

And then there's the damn "1970-1972 El Camino SS Buyers Guide." What a waste of space... Sure the El Caminos are nice, but they just had an article on the "1970-1972 Chevelle SS Buyers Guide" There's not enough difference to warrant another article so soon after the first... Not much new info...

Oops, Sorry, didn't mean to hijack your post...

I still like the magazine, but it seems to have gone downhill quickly...

If you know anything about '65 Chevelles and have read their article on '64/'65 Chevelles (identification, pros/cons, values) that came out about a year ago you'd know in a heartbeat they don't have a clue. That article alone had so many factual errors it was a joke. I've never subscribed due to that one article alone. A few errors I can understand, but an obviously blatant disregard for any kind of accruacy or even simple fact checking is inexcusable. Any more recent issues I've seen were rife with similar errors.

Their choice of feature cars is abysmal. You'd think a magazine so well connected to the hobby would have the ability to find better examples.

Now if we could just get Musclecar Enthusiast to stop presenting modified cars we might have a good musclecar magazine to read...

Originally posted by Rich-L79:
Their choice of feature cars is abysmal. You'd think a magazine so well connected to the hobby would have the ability to find better examples.

..thats why my 70 SS454 will be in the next issue smile.gif
actually,just in the "weekend warriors" section.

T'would be nice if they'd do a feature article on a car such as yours.... Some of their feature cars are poor representations of the breed and they often appear to not even be aware that that is the case.

I didn't mean to rain on your parade, it's always a gas to see your own car in a magazine!

HMM faces the same problems that most specialty niche magazines do - to make the business economics of a smaller circulation magazine work they have almost no real staff.

I do applaud HMM's efforts to cover non mainstream muscle era cars, along with material on the legends. I mean let's face it, there can only be so many publications chasing the same thing. To stick out and differentiate they have to take some chances.

Price guides are always an iffy thing anyway - you have to ask about the people seeking out magazine based price guides. Chances are that it will mainly be the rookies really paying attention to a magazine based price guide.

I will remain completely baffled about the run up in "value" of mass produced cars with interchangeable parts. My feeling is that at some point the wild speculative climb in prices will extinguish the market. What I'm thinking is that when the value gets too high it tends to turn cars into museum pieces, gazed upon but not driven. At that point I would expect the intrinsic value will cause the collector market to start showing some vapor. Only time will tell.

Nearly all media has some misinformation. HMM's mistakes pale against some of what I have seen written about American muscle cars in European magazines.

Thomas

Thomas,good viewpoint.
Rich,no problem..you didn't rain on my parade smile.gif
I actually would have liked to have seen my car in a full feature,but I'll be happy with the Weekend Warrior section.
I'm sure they'd love test driving my car smile.gif

While there are quite a few discrepancies from time to time,I think its a pretty decent car mag.
After reading HR and CC for over 20 years,HMM is refreshing.
It gets a little old looking at all the past issues of MCR I have stashed.

also, they listed the '67 Chevelle SS 396 with the 375 horsepower with the automatic. I think the auto was never offered with the 375 HP until '69. I also noticed the Z-16 prices, and the convertible. weird