mwpayne

There's an 85 SE 10 minutes from me for sale. Paint (brown) all but gone, hand size rust spot on hood, I pulled driver side bin, fist size rust (deep) there as well. Rear hatch damp, no rust. Drain holes are clogged (ignorant owner!). Engine runs well, 188K on it, I saw no oil leaks. He's asking $1800 (yeah right) but will take offer. Oh yes, interior very good shape, gray, drivers seat worn out in usual place. Original radio, no mods that I can see.
Would you guys just walk away, or offer something? If so, what? Thanks as always!!

Manntis

If I had a straight body on another car I'd consider offering something, then swapping the parts over OR carefully cataloguing the rust and guesstimating cost to weld in new metal. If either of those options made it worthwhile, I'd buy it. If both made it too pricey/labour intensive I'd walk away and weep for yet another SE lost to the red cancer

mwpayne

Thanks Manntis, but what would you offer?
I'm thinking about taking it to a body guy I trust & get an estimate, and go from there.
Body seems straight, no dents.

Strider

It really depends on how bad the rust is....if it is repairable or not and if it is on any structural members or not. The hood isn't that bad of a deal, but under the bin is BAD.

I'd offer something like $1000. If not taken, then walk.

I really need to find an SE for sale in my area. Average yearly rainfall here is less than 7 inches, and they don't use salt on the roads in winter....

Wankelguy

No salt in Richland, just radioactive fallout, so the Mazdas feel right at home.

I wouldn't offer more than a 188K motor is worth, which ain't very damn much in my book, maybe 500 bucks.
Once these cars have rust problems, they become an incessant money-pit. Better to buy a rust-free car with no motor at all, I think. Just my opinion. -Mike

82transam

iTrader: (18)

I agree. I would take an engineless car wiht a good body over a running rust bucket. It all depends on that bin rust, if its fixable then maybe $1000. Its all up to you though.

mwpayne

Thanks all...I'll probably offer no more than $500, but keep the opinions comin'!

Project84

I would offer $700-$900. The hood can be replaced, and I have a project I'm working on that I know could benefit from a car like this.

85RX7GS

iTrader: (1)

I'd probably offer around $1000. Then again, I REALLY wouldn't want to go through the hassle of repairing all the rust again, so if it's really bad, I'd look for another one.

Strider

Opinion is right! No fallout here. Fallout occurs from testing nuclear bombs. No bomb tests were ever conducted in the Pacific Northwest.

There is vast quantities of radioactive waste here though, all created from processing and machining uranium and plutonium for manufacturing bombs. Consider that the cost and legacy of the cold war. (Nuclear power produces very little waste in comparison, and all the waste that has been generated by the operation and construction of my plant is contained within our Radwaste building and processed.)

That being said, all of the waste has recently been transfered out of all single shelled tanks, and they are ahead of the cleanup schedule. They are about to start construction of the vitrification plant, where the waste will all be solidified and turned into glass, which itself will be encapsulated in lead, steel, and concrete, to be permanently stored at Yucca Mountain. Incidentally, Yucca Mountain IS ALREADY contaminated, because THAT is where they tested bombs.

Since I work in safety analysis for fuel design engineering, a lot of people have asked me what I fear, what would happen if a terrorist were to attack. What I fear is one of two things. 1) an attack on one of the dams, and the resulting flood. and 2) the incinerator down at Umatilla Oregon for disposing chemical weapons. Now THAT place is scary!

Sorry if I'm pissy, but I firmly believe in nuclear power, and not just because I work at a plant. There is no other safe and proven source of energy capable of meeting our needs. Coal fired plants actually release far more radiation in a single year of operation than a nuclear power plant will throughout its entire life cycle, including fuel fabrication and disposal. Don't believe me? Did you know that in all coal there is trace amounts of uranium? When the coal is burned, where does that uranium go? Burning coal was once a method considered for producing uranium. Not to mention all the arsenic and other heavy metals. The entire Puget Sound is polluted with arsenic from the Asarco plant that used to operate at Point Defiance in Tacoma.

We produce nearly 1200 MEGA Watts of electricity, all on a single shaft, 24 X 7, for 22-23 months out of every two years. We do this without producing any appreciable waste, and zero emmissions. The waste we do produce is all contained within our Radwaste building, and is mostly in the form of maintenence equipment, used solvents, used clothing and packaging materials.

Trust me, I could go on and on....come on, someone argue the point...make my day

Manntis

What about wave powered generators? Or oceanic thermal differential generators?

*Edit: industrial strength radiation proof flame suite on*

Strider

My company was looking to start a wave generator project up near the Canuck border on the Sound, but it might get scrubbed due to the Bonniville Power Admin cutting costs and projects.

But in answer to your question, its a matter of SCALE. Check out this link: Energy Norwest's Ocean Wave generator project

Its a 1 megawatt demonstration unit costing $2 million. Commercial plants are expected to be 100 megawatts. We produce 1200 megawatts, and only occupy a space of around 3 square miles in the middle of the desert. (actually, the plant occupies far less area, but we have a 1.2 mile radius that constitutes our exclusion area boundary.)

Those technologies are kind of cool, but they don't produce enough, not without using a lot of space and resources. Like wind generation. My company's wind generation facility uses over 2000 acres of land, with these unsightly 200 ft. tall turbines, only to produce 48 megawatts, and only when the wind is blowing.

Actually, the lowest cost and highest effeciency power generation is from the dams. But that area is completely tapped out. The future for that is to replace the current turbines with higher effeciency, fish friendly units. Its hard to compete with gravity as a power source.

Manntis

Dams I understand, having grown up in BC . I mean, the power company is called BC Hydro for a reason *L*

MIKE-P-28

iTrader: (1)

This thread went from buying a old SE to a explanation of nuclear power.. LOL

I live about 10 miles from Indiana/Michigan power plant, they burn coal, but the plant was designed to switch to nuclear, it even has the type of stacks associated with nuclear plants

I had a buddy come visit me and he drove by there and said didnt know you have a nuke plant next door LOL

Wankelguy

Boy, people in Richland SURE seem to be a bit touchy when an outsider makes a little joke about radioactive contamination. I KNOW there is no "fallout" in Richland, it was a corollary to the fact that Mazdas are made in Hiroshima, get it? By the way, I really like the way you edited my quote to make it seem as if my saying "just my opinion" was in relation to my little joke, instead of about the rusty car in question. Bravo!

I still wouldn't offer more than the motor might be worth.
-Mike

Strider

The bomb made at Hanford was the plutonium one dropped on Nagasaki. The uranium bomb dropped on Hiroshima came from Oak Ridge, TN.

Imagine growing up in a fairly small community where nearly everyone knows everyone else....in this community there are more phDs and engineers per capita than anywhere else in the country, the best and the brightest. The people who worked here thought it was their patriotic duty. My father was one of those people.

Now imagine thirty years of lies and falsehood propigated by the national media and such organizations like Greenpeace. Some of this the A.E.C. and D.O.E. brought upon itself because of its need to maintain secrecy (and yes, there was the threat of KGB espionage).

Now, anytime one of these scientists spoke out to attempt to correct a mistatement by the press or one of these organizations they were shouted down, called idiots, called reactonary, anything to discredit them. My father would always say one of two things: "People don't want to get confused with the facts," and "Don't argue with fools, lest you become one yourself."

Some of those peacenics may have had a point. (How many bombs do we really need to ensure our security?) The tragedy is that nuclear power has always been associated with nuclear bombs. That makes about as much sense to me as associating gas stations with napalm. Yet that is how the media potrays it. We get movies like "The China Syndrom" and lately "Atomic Twister" where they potray these facilities as if they are giant bombs waiting to go off at the slightest mistep, and as if the operators are completely untrained idiots.

I can go on for hours about the redundant safety features of nuclear power, we call it defense in depth. The site of the worst comercial nuclear event in U.S. history, Three Mile Island, has been proven that it did not cause nor increase the risk of cancer. While the human performance failed, the designed safety features kept the event completely contained. Were the same to happen in the petroleum industry, natural gas industry, or coal industry, then people would have been killed. Witness the Asarco refinery explosion in Bellingham, or the natural gas pipeline that exploded and killed people, or Mullholand's dam that killed thousands in California when it broke and flooded.

So yeah, I get a bit touchy. I'm working at a plant of a design that is capable of safely producing enough power for all our needs with zero pollution released, yet people are scared of it out of ignorance and unfounded media bias.

WackyRotary

That stuff is given off in a number of processes including thermoplastic mold injection. I know because I deal with this were I work. Poorly vented production floor, luckily I don't have to be in it all day thankfully. Sorry for the full time press operators though. HC's are also given off in different levels with different resins. I stay clear of a material called thermosite, its supposively emits a lot more then most materials I'm told when heated. It smells new though, like a new car! SNIFFF!!!! Thats what you are smelling in a new car! All that HC's and other chemicals reacting in the air from the plastic molding process. AHhhhhhhh.

Now we were talking about a SE? ha?

mwpayne

Uh, if anybody actually CARES, I drove this car today, all I can say is WOW (my first SE experience), yep, the rust is there, but if you don't mind doing some body work, that engine is still good enough to give me a pucker factor of 9.5! Here's the sale thread if interested.
https://www.rx7club.com/forum/showth...hreadid=131859 They'll listen to best offers.

Now, back to, uh, hmm, what are you guys talking about? Sorry for the interruption.

mwpayne

Hey, Strider, I live 15 miles from Oak Ridge, I'm with ya dude!