Early vs Late

[Les Huckins <jhuckins@xxxx>]

[Moderator Note: I expect a huge number of replies to this post, since there are literally hundreds of messages in the backissues giving very logical arguments against Les' assumption that "Very late 81's and early 82's would therefore likely be best" and a buyer can judge "other things being equal" well enough to make a $18,000-$50,000 decision. Please try to keep them polite. - Mike Substelny, moderator of the week]

I'm not sure how logic can be pushed aside in favor of emotion but
obviously it is. The early '81s had many problems, they were corrected
as quickly as the factory could work out fixes. Door latches, gas
flaps, hood lines, alternators, fuel pumps, and on and on. All the
recalls and upgrades, why would anyone want to jump into that, given a
choice?

Read "Stainless Steel Illusion." We know they went crazy from the
start, made a lot of mistakes and made changes on a near day to day
basis. Then at the end they were throwing together whatever they could
to use up parts and sell cars.

Very late 81's and early 82's would therefore likely be best, other
things being equal.

There were many, many, changes that we don't know about, no complete
documentation of any sort, suspicions only.

Here are some troublesome thoughts of mine. TA bolts: both Toby who
came up with the bolts and Darryl who will be selling the bolts have
early VINs, in the 2000 to 3000 range. Each had the only stories of
near failure of the TA bolts when that thread was running...I wonder if
there was a change later.

Craig display failure: I've repaired eight units, none had the clock in
the display. Could they have changed the flex material when they got to
the clock in the display version?

Lastly, it's very much a buyers market. Many units with thousands of
dollars in upgrades and repairs for sale for the same price (or less)
than others that are pure fixer-uppers...why would anyone choose the
fixer-upper?

Where's the logic?