[TerryAT]

I know what Im thinking. What do you think? Im not interested in this but seen the ad and had to take a look.
https://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/pts/6943441054.html

 

[Steve R]

He did include a picture of the speedometer as “proof”. I won’t believe any low mileage claim unless there is documentation in the form of receipts or a detailed log book. Too many sellers are making BS claims in order to drive up the price. I’d bet 116,000 miles, it doesn't look bad, but I don’t think it’s clean enough to believe it at face value. He’s a flipper, he’s only interested in pocketing a profit.

Steve R

 

[JWagner]

If it has the original factory issue tires then I would believe it for sure. Those tires were good for maybe 20,000 miles.

 

[TerryAT]

Just looking at all the gunk around the transmission and crud around the suspension parts, to me, looks like its 116k miles. Something was removed from the front underside as well.Maybe a splash guard. You can see that in the pictures. Why would that be removed and not replaced if the miles are so low.

Like mentioned , its someone looking to try to fool another buyer.

 

[Dean]

There is no way to tell how many miles are on a vehicle by looking at pictures of it on the WWW.

Could have been driven on dirt roads, could have been driver hard, could have had the odometer set back, could have over 100,000 miles.
Who knows what all?

 

[Steve R]

There is no way to tell how many miles are on a vehicle by looking at pictures of it on the WWW.

Could have been driven on dirt roads, could have been driver hard, could have had the odometer set back, could have over 100,000 miles.
Who knows what all?

It’s the sellers job to back up their claim. If they want to price it as a low mileage car, they need to prove it.

If it was some random guy at a cruise or show, I’d listen, and wouldn’t argue or ask for proof. In that environment, who cares, but when money is involved, that’s a different story.

Steve R

 

[Pioneer4x4]

I'm thinking it isn't the miles on that car that matters, but the 5 decades that it had been baking/freezing in the elements that seem to be an issue. Cool car for the money, but based on some trim and the steering wheel alone, there might be a lot of ugly parts that ruins the fun of it.

 

[nashville beth]

I would only pay for the condition of the car and how little rust there is.

I paid a lot for a rust-free convertible. I couldn't care less what the mileage was.

 

[Pete 67]

My 73 Nova SS has 21,000 original miles (Dad bought it new) & looks pretty similar to that underneath. These cars were built 50 years ago & driven on north east roads in the winters. They were used as drivers, not show cars...even the ones that were garaged most of the time will show their age.

 

[temp2c]

The odometer numbers are crooked... I could be wrong but that car looks like it has a lot of miles on it.. Are the pedals worn?

 

[TerryAT]

Normally I dont reply to ads that I dont want, but the ad caught my interest as well as probably others, with the 16k mile claim. So I basically asked why the underneath is pretty greasy,weathered looking , and said that the odometer probably rolled over.
His reply was "Have all records form original dealer
It is original
Have a good day"
I guess thats the proof!! LOL.
Just how does a dealer have proof to actual miles? The only records they have are from when someone bought the car there was most likely for warranty work, which would naturally show low miles. After that they go anywhere for service, or even neglect service.

 

[bry66]

I've never thought that the underside is a good indicator of miles driven. Take two identical cars both driven 16k miles. One has been parked in a barn or in a garage, and the other has sat outdoors, perhaps parked on gravel or grass. Think they're both going to look the same underneath?

Just by glancing at the pics I don't see anything that makes me immediately doubt the stated mileage. Look and how intact the interior looks. If the odometer had rolled over and that's a 116k mile car, I'd expect a lot more wear and tear on that interior.

 

[ZEN357]

He did include a picture of the speedometer as “proof”. I won’t believe any low mileage claim unless there is documentation in the form of receipts or a detailed log book. Too many sellers are making BS claims in order to drive up the price. I’d bet 116,000 miles, it doesn't look bad, but I don’t think it’s clean enough to believe it at face value. He’s a flipper, he’s only interested in pocketing a profit.

Steve R

I agree I don't think it's clean enough to only have had 16,000 miles on it even if it sat for years, unless it sat somewhere that was full of moisture.

 

[71350SS]

Doesn't Pa require some kind of yearly safety check at a State approved service station ? paperwork from that would show proof of mileage.

 

[Pioneer4x4]

Doesn't Pa require some kind of yearly safety check at a State approved service station ? paperwork from that would show proof of mileage.

Yes, but if it was parked for 30 years there won't be any, and if it had Antique plates, there wouldn't be any. It would have been eligible in 1993 for those, and a lot can happen since then.
I just saw the steering wheel center and cringed, wondering what other parts looked like. Still, a very cool car, for not a lot of money.

 

[71350SS]

I was thinking the seller might have some of the inspection receipts with the cars service records & paperwork.I saw that S/W center cap too and was waiting to see how long it would take for someone to mention it.It didn't take too long at all.

 

[TerryAT]

I've never thought that the underside is a good indicator of miles driven. Take two identical cars both driven 16k miles. One has been parked in a barn or in a garage, and the other has sat outdoors, perhaps parked on gravel or grass. Think they're both going to look the same underneath?

.

Im talking from a grease/dirt build up point of view. Not necessarily rust. I save pictures from the ad to my computer. Then I can zoom in and see a lot. There is tranny fluid with crud all over the place. Even the oil filter looks greasy and dented. The front springs are loaded with grease/dirt mixture . Or, it is was a leaky p.o.s. from day one. And if there is dealer receipts, leaks would of been fixed. A car never would have that kind of buildup in that short of time driven.

 

[SS427Rick]

It looks like a well maintained 116,000 mile car. Not 16,000 miles.

 

[Shane 69 Hugger]

Well we know in 79 it only had 8,xxx.

Since the owners were old, died etc...it could VERY EASILY have 16,000.

The horn button has wrinkled...whoopee.

The dash, spotless, crackless.

Look at the seats. Not one fray, indent, tear, rip...those are NOT 116k seats.

As for the underside, the car is from 66. 53 years ago.

It could have very easily had a busy 2, 3, 4 year period where it was racking up miles...hence road dirt.

Original shocks? Brakes.

The mileage odometer doesnt look out of sorts to me, the trip odometer is out of sorts but that would have looped multiple times in 16k.

Dont forget, the car could have been owned by someone on a farm in the 70's, dirt road, oil used to keep the dust down etc.

I've had cars with only 100k and the carpet was torn, body joints rusted, seat torn, pedals worn, etc...

That doesnt even have any finger wear on the knobs etc

 

[pnugene]

It could very well be as-claimed, the frame is rock solid. The driver heel pad and what's visible of the e-brake pedal don't show any wear. Interior looks too good to be a plus 100k car. The car is a land yacht and wouldn't have any appeal to me unless one would want to rob the V8 and T400 out of it.