These people are NUTS. Who would pay that much for a non collectible car like a 77 Monte Carlo. It's pleasant enough but not at that price. They sell lots of ordinary cars from the past that are not collectible and put sky high prices on them.
Not nuts at all. It's 48 years old with 22,000 miles: about 500 miles a year. The chrome (incredibly expensive to replace) looks perfect along with the rest of the car inside and out. The paint might use a buffing out - everything else looked good.
Hagerty (Collector car insurance specialists) show values from $3,000 to $41,000 based on recent sales of what look like less-well-preserved examples. They'll write insurance for those amounts, so they think it's worth it.
Anything's worth what a willing seller will accept from a willing buyer. People have paid much more for similar cars.
| by Anonymous | reply 1 | October 17, 2024 2:40 PM |
R1- True-Something is worth what a buyer is willing to pay for it.
| by Anonymous | reply 2 | October 17, 2024 3:39 PM |
The collector market has changed. Everyday cars built in the 70s, 80s and 90s are commanding higher values as Gen X and Millennials get older.
| by Anonymous | reply 3 | October 17, 2024 3:47 PM |
My high school boyfriend had one of these, passed down from his dad.
I hid on the back floor to sneak out of the parking lot without being seen.
He broke my heart but now he's dead.
Always liked the car though.
| by Anonymous | reply 4 | October 17, 2024 3:56 PM |
R4- Are you a female or a gay boy?
If you're a gay boy I'm impressed that you had a boyfriend in high school which must have been a LONG time ago if your boyfriend was driving a 1977 Chevrolet Monte Carlo.
| by Anonymous | reply 5 | October 17, 2024 4:07 PM |
It's gorgeous and in great condition. Seems cheap as a huge object that is functional and collectible.
| by Anonymous | reply 6 | October 17, 2024 5:00 PM |
It's easy to pay 30K for an Hermès Birkin. Why not this now glamorous car?
| by Anonymous | reply 7 | October 17, 2024 5:02 PM |
R5 Have you never heard of someone driving a used car?
| by Anonymous | reply 8 | October 17, 2024 5:03 PM |
It was 1986 r5.
And yes, I'm a gay man and had a hot boyfriend at a small Catholic high school.
You sound a little bitter.
| by Anonymous | reply 9 | October 17, 2024 11:09 PM |
The Monte Carlo was always an ugly car.
| by Anonymous | reply 10 | October 18, 2024 12:13 AM |
R10- I would not call it ugly just bland perhaps.
| by Anonymous | reply 11 | October 18, 2024 12:50 AM |
No matter what the generation, it was never an attractive car to me.
| by Anonymous | reply 12 | October 18, 2024 1:11 AM |
Ugly?????
Bland?????
Are you insane? That car is stunning, especially considering that today's cars and SUVs all look they were designed by the same CAD program.
| by Anonymous | reply 13 | October 18, 2024 1:15 AM |
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion r13. We will agree to disagree.
| by Anonymous | reply 14 | October 18, 2024 1:26 AM |
[quote]The Monte Carlo was always an ugly car.
That is so not true.
While that 1977 model at top of the tread was horrid, the original 1970 version was a very attractive car. Simple lines. Modest chrome trim.
| by Anonymous | reply 15 | October 18, 2024 1:58 AM |