RIP, PT: Chrysler Kills the Cruiser
04:10 PM PT, Jan 14 2009
Chrysler, as is well documented, has long made its name on home-run product. When things are darkest, the company invariably comes out with a winner, one that sets the automotive world's hair on fire and brings in huge sales. The Chrysler 300, the Dodge Viper and the K Car are just a few that come to mind.
Another is was, the PT Cruiser. With a totally new design that in many ways ushered in the retro-styling craze in automotive design this decade, it took the country by storm, helping a nation forget the departure of Plymouth. Sales were brisk, dealers couldn't get enough of them, and the funky little car/truck won the 2001 North American Car of the Year award. Across the nation, people scratched their heads: What does PT stand for? (Answer: Personal Transportation. Yeah, kinda lame.)
Today, Chrysler went and put a bullet in the PT's head.
According to news reports , Chrysler will cease production this summer...
and hopes to sell the tooling used to create the vehicle, if possible. The news comes just over a year after Chrysler produced the last convertible version of the PT Cruiser.
Consistent with Chrysler's current product cadence, the PT Cruiser never got a redesign, despite a lifetime stretching nine model years. That's almost double the life of most designs on the market today. Similarly, Chrysler's 300, itself a monster hit when rolled out for the 2005 model year, is already on year five, with no signs of a reworking yet.
The news wasn't entirely unexpected -- Chrysler is in crisis, and even after receiving $4 billion in government loans, shows every sign of needing more cash. PT Cruiser sales, meanwhile, declined by 49% last year, to just 50,910 units, and that was off 2007 numbers that were themselves down 28% from the previous year. In 2001, the PT's best year, 144,717 of the vehicles sold.
Without that redesign, a big chunk of PT sales were going to fleets of late, and the plant in Toluca, Mexico, that builds them is likely to be the production site of a new small vehicle that Chrysler hopes to make.
That said, it's a sad day for a quirky vehicle, which looks mostly like a car but is classified by the federal government as a light truck (which has helped Chrysler comply with fuel economy regulations). Its dedicated followers have created legions of regional, national and international fan clubs who tuned them, chromed them and babied them to death. Heck, Tom Hanks even owed a PT Cruiser at one time, inspiring Robin Williams and Cher to follow suit.
Alas, poor PT. We knew thee well.
--Ken Bensinger
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/uptospeed/2009/01/chrysler-cruise.html
I didn't see this in my search- hope it wasn't already posted.
I remember when this thing first came out, waiting lists and all. It's amazing to think how it's existed this long with essentially no changes. (Okay, one facelift and a turbo model, but that's still next to nothing)
Quote from: Secret Chimp on January 18, 2009, 04:43:15 PM
I remember when this thing first came out, waiting lists and all. It's amazing to think how it's existed this long with essentially no changes. (Okay, one facelift and a turbo model, but that's still next to nothing)
There were also many special editions, and I'd count the 'vert as a new model too, but yeah...
While it's sad to see it go, I'm not a big fan of them anymore. They were super cool when they came out, but the cool factor faded. Especially when the HHR came out. It looks just as cool, if not cooler (SS Panel Wagon :rockon:) and drives better.
When I was reading about this on autoblog, someone posted an interesting proposition:
Why didn't the PT get a redesign using the Caliber's platform when it came out? I know the Caliber is a sorry excuse for a $18,000 car made in 2009, but its shortcomings would be considerably more forgivable wrapped in clever retro styling. Say, inspired by the Chrysler Airflow.
I think the main reason it was never updated was that nobody knew how.
How do you update a design that was intended to look old in the first place? Make it look older?
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 18, 2009, 05:32:08 PM
I think the main reason it was never updated was that nobody knew how.
How do you update a design that was intended to look old in the first place? Make it look older?
Introduce a spectacularly different niche model that is along the same lines.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 18, 2009, 05:33:06 PM
Introduce a spectacularly different niche model that is along the same lines.
"Spectacular" isn't as easy to do as you make it sound.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 18, 2009, 05:33:54 PM
"Spectacular" isn't as easy to do as you make it sound.
Chrysler had a few out-of-the-box concepts that they've never utilized. Besides, the Caliber isn't a bad platform. Just the Chrysler variants (Caliber, Compass, Avenger, Sebring and others except for the Patriot) suck.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 18, 2009, 05:36:26 PM
Chrysler had a few out-of-the-box concepts that they've never utilized. Besides, the Caliber isn't a bad platform. Just the Chrysler variants (Caliber, Compass, Avenger, Sebring and others except for the Patriot) suck.
The Patriot sucks too.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 18, 2009, 05:38:16 PM
The Patriot sucks too.
Well, less than the others. I think of it as a "proper" Jeep Cute-ute. It's decent off-road and looks like a Jeep. The Compass is a Joke.
I'm probably the only one never impressed by the PT cruiser.
I dig the looks but they had one w/ the doors open in front of the PX (2002??) and I peeked in and thought that it had NO SPACE inside for the size of the vehicle, and never thought nicely of them again.
(not to mention the whole underpowered thing yada yada...)
This news surprises me though, because aren't they still selling halfway ok?? Just based on LOOKS?
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 18, 2009, 08:54:14 PM
I'm probably the only one never impressed by the PT cruiser.
I dig the looks but they had one w/ the doors open in front of the PX (2002??) and I peeked in and thought that it had NO SPACE inside for the size of the vehicle, and never thought nicely of them again.
(not to mention the whole underpowered thing yada yada...)
This news surprises me though, because aren't they still selling halfway ok?? Just based on LOOKS?
For the size? It was neon based, and for it's size the PT was quite roomy. Have you ridden in/driven one or just "peeked in"? Besides, it wasn't underpowered, but heavy.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 18, 2009, 08:54:14 PM
I'm probably the only one never impressed by the PT cruiser.
I dig the looks but they had one w/ the doors open in front of the PX (2002??) and I peeked in and thought that it had NO SPACE inside for the size of the vehicle, and never thought nicely of them again.
(not to mention the whole underpowered thing yada yada...)
This news surprises me though, because aren't they still selling halfway ok?? Just based on LOOKS?
Based on fleet sales.
I rather liked the PT Cruiser. I almost bought a 2003 (loaded Touring, 5-speed with the groovy cue ball shifter) from a co-worker. It pretty roomy inside, and very versatile (seats folded down easily and created a nice load floor.
They are cool little cars, and sharp looking when optioned out. The one I thought about was wine red, with grey leather interior and polished 5-spoke alloys.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 18, 2009, 05:36:26 PM
Chrysler had a few out-of-the-box concepts that they've never utilized. Besides, the Caliber isn't a bad platform. Just the Chrysler variants (Caliber, Compass, Avenger, Sebring and others except for the Patriot) suck.
You just lost what little credibility you had around here.
Quote from: The Pirate on January 18, 2009, 09:13:14 PM
I rather liked the PT Cruiser. I almost bought a 2003 (loaded Touring, 5-speed with the groovy cue ball shifter) from a co-worker. It pretty roomy inside, and very versatile (seats folded down easily and created a nice load floor.
They are cool little cars, and sharp looking when optioned out. The one I thought about was wine red, with grey leather interior and polished 5-spoke alloys.
My aunt has one pretty much like that. They're an interesting looking car, but they're chick cars and don't drive that well. They're pretty good for the money, though.
Quote from: MrH on January 18, 2009, 09:15:29 PM
You just lost what little credibility you had around here.
FYI, the Caliber's platform is also used on the Lancer and Outlander.
I'm not sure this is a good move. If Chrysler got rid of all of their bad cars, they'd only sell 3 models.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 18, 2009, 09:22:20 PM
I'm not sure this is a good move. If Chrysler got rid of all of their bad cars, they'd only sell 3 models.
Huh? The PT Cruiser was one of their better models.
It makes no sense to kill the PT and keep making the Caliber.
I'm not sure that the PT is really a good car anymore.
The way I see it, Chrysler only has 3 decent products:
1.) Minivans
2.) The Ram
3.) The Viper
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 18, 2009, 09:35:03 PM
I'm not sure that the PT is really a good car anymore.
The way I see it, Chrysler only has 3 decent products:
1.) Minivans
2.) The Ram
3.) The Viper
Only two of those really make good business sense.
They sold the old Cloud Car platform to the Russians to make new Volgas. I suppose they want to do the same with this car?
I saw a comedian on late night TV who made a joke (not a verbatim quote):
"I think that the politicians should do a bailout, I'm not opposed to it, but they need to attach some strings to it. Like 'no more PT Cruisers.'" Everybody in the audience got it and laughed. We all know it's a joke now.
I rented one for two months after I crashed my Camry in '04. (Actually, the company I was interning for subsidized most of it.) I thought it was all right to drive, but the fuel economy was really crappy considering it was neither fast nor big. I hated the thing after I got a thumbs up from a 50something woman driving her own champagne colored Cruiser.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 18, 2009, 09:49:40 PM
They sold the old Cloud Car platform to the Russians to make new Volgas. I suppose they want to do the same with this car?
I bet the Chinese are making cars at least as good as mid 90's Neons by now. :huh:
Quote from: Laconian on January 18, 2009, 11:32:14 PM
I saw a comedian on late night TV who made a joke (not a verbatim quote):
"I think that the politicians should do a bailout, I'm not opposed to it, but they need to attach some strings to it. Like 'no more PT Cruisers.'" Everybody in the audience got it and laughed. We all know it's a joke now.
I rented one for two months after I crashed my Camry in '04. (Actually, the company I was interning for subsidized most of it.) I thought it was all right to drive, but the fuel economy was really crappy considering it was neither fast nor big. I hated the thing after I got a thumbs up from a 50something woman driving her own champagne colored Cruiser.
....did she have a rainbow flag on her car? :lol:
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 18, 2009, 09:36:52 PM
Only two of those really make good business sense.
Only one of them is good to drive.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 18, 2009, 11:34:01 PM
....did she have a rainbow flag on her car? :lol:
She was probably trying to go all cougar on me.
Quote from: Laconian on January 18, 2009, 11:49:32 PM
She was probably trying to go all cougar on me.
You should have taken her up on it, man...... :evildude:
My mom kinda wants a PT Cruiser. :mask:
Quote from: the Teuton on January 18, 2009, 11:51:09 PM
My mom kinda wants a PT Cruiser. :mask:
Your parents have sterling taste in cars...... :lol:
She's about 7 years late...
Quote from: dazzleman on January 18, 2009, 11:54:36 PM
Your parents have sterling taste in cars...... :lol:
She's about 7 years late...
It's practical and reliable.
...and my brother would hit me every time he'd see it.
So, realistically, we're probably looking for a Civic or Subaru in a month or two.
Speaking of passe retro cars...did anybody know that they still make the New Beetle? That's been around for a long time.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 19, 2009, 12:03:19 AM
Speaking of passe retro cars...did anybody know that they still make the New Beetle? That's been around for a long time.
I think they still make it, and it still has a tampon dispenser standard..... :lol:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 12:07:50 AM
I think they still make it, and it still has a tampon dispenser standard..... :lol:
No, but it does have a flower vase. (that's almost as bad)
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 19, 2009, 12:12:01 AM
No, but it does have a flower vase.
I know. When I took my nephew to the auto show, I was giving him shit, telling him he should get a Beetle. He said he'd have to give up his balls if he wanted to drive one. I guess that pretty much sums it up. He also came up with the crack about the tampon dispenser that I used before.
The Beetle RSi was pretty cool if you could get past the styling.
(http://checkengine.spb.ru/VolksWagen/New%20Beetle%20RSi%202000/VolksWagen-New-Beetle-RSi-1.jpg)
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 12:14:28 AM
The Beetle RSi was pretty cool if you could get past the styling.
(http://checkengine.spb.ru/VolksWagen/New%20Beetle%20RSi%202000/VolksWagen-New-Beetle-RSi-1.jpg)
That actually looks like 'The Jetsons' car in that color.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 18, 2009, 11:51:09 PM
My mom kinda wants a PT Cruiser. :mask:
Of all the dorky cars that women lust for, that's probably one of the most sensible choices out there. There's a lot of car for the money if you don't have a problem with the exterior styling or the interior quality.
It used to come with the 1.8T. I wouldn't mind that one.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 12:07:50 AM
I think they still make it, and it still has a tampon dispenser standard..... :lol:
:lol:
Quote from: 2o6 on January 18, 2009, 08:56:13 PM
For the size? It was neon based, and for it's size the PT was quite roomy. Have you ridden in/driven one or just "peeked in"? Besides, it wasn't underpowered, but heavy.
The PT shared 8 bolts with the Neon. No Neon, other than the SRT4, used the 2.4 liter engine. That was sourced from the stratus. The front suspension was from the 4 cyl minivan, and the rear suspension was unique to the PT, to get a low load floor. No internal or trim parts were Neon, either.
As for roomy, yes, it was. I carried 14 full size replacement windows for the house in the back with the hatch closed. I carried 1200lbs of bagged crushed rock and it didn't settle on the suspension one bit. I carried all the lumber for our deck project, as well as the 60 gallon stand up air compressor. I carried myself, my wife, 3 kids and all our camping gear with no problem. I had no issues with interior sizing, with more than enough shoulder room and legroom at all seating positions.
So the car is better than it gets credit for?
I've never thought the PT was a bad car; just a little weirdly styled.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 18, 2009, 09:15:57 PM
They're an interesting looking car, but they're chick cars and don't drive that well.
That's about fucking stupid. I'm so tired of wannabe macho fuckers labelling things that they don't like as "chick cars." if you need your CAR to make your testosterone for you because you're not fucking manly enough to do it yourself, get that blinged out H2 and be done with it.
As for as driveability, no, they aren't a BMW M5, but they drive pretty good, especially with the Touring edition suspension package or the GT version. My 5 speed Touring edition drove great. Comfortable for long trips (I drove from Baltimore to Orlando and back, Baltimore to Maine and back, and numerous trips to the Hartford area of CT and back (6 hours one way)). On top of that, while I knew it to be fairly nimble, I was pleasantly surprised that even with stock tires on it, it was very competitive against Minis and the like on the autocross track.
(http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/2587528b.jpg)
I lived with this little car for 5 years and 70k miles, and never once had a failure. No mechanical, electrical, or trim problems. Overall, it was probably the best car I've owned.
(http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/2007857c.jpg)
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:05:18 AM
That's about fucking stupid. I'm so tired of wannabe macho fuckers labelling things that they don't like as "chick cars." if you need your CAR to make your testosterone for you because you're not fucking manly enough to do it yourself, get that blinged out H2 and be done with it.
I see I hit a nerve there. I'm glad your experience withe car was a good one. You can't ask for more than that.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 19, 2009, 12:12:01 AM
No, but it does have a flower vase. (that's almost as bad)
The bud vase is a nod to an original Beetle accessory that is still highly sought after by VW Beetle restorers.
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/5/10876811_a485e98614.jpg)
(http://www.vwtrendsweb.com/features/0303vwt_05z+1957_Volkswagen_Beetle+Driver_Side_Interior_View.jpg)
(http://www.oldbug.com/316%20034.jpg)
(http://www.oldbug.com/316%20019.jpg)
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:10:12 AM
The bud vase is a nod to an original Beetle accessory that is still highly sought after by VW Beetle restorers.
The original Beetle was big during the "flower power" era. VW, particularly the VW bus, became known somewhat as a counterculture car. Maybe that's where the vase idea originally came from. Car marketing was more general back then, in any case, and there wasn't such a tendency to characterize cars by the demographics of the buyers. In any case, the vase back then probably had a very different connotation than it does in this overblown era.
My favorite VW from that era was the Karmann Ghia.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 10:10:07 AM
I see I hit a nerve there. I'm glad your experience withe car was a good one. You can't ask for more than that.
I hate the phrase as it relates to ALL cars. It's mostly used for convertibles, like Miatas, which is also patently offensive. It usually shows the speaker to be an ignorant POS who's opinion of cars is rendered irrelevant. I generally like reading your postings, which is why it pisses me off no end to see a respected person make such a glaringly stupid statement.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 10:11:53 AM
The original Beetle was big during the "flower power" era. VW, particularly the VW bus, became known somewhat as a counterculture car. Maybe that's where the vase idea originally came from.
My favorite VW from that era was the Karmann Ghia.
The vases were more popular in the '50s and early '60s (up to about '62-63) in those cars, and most of the cars you'll see with them are well before the late '60s "flower power" era.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:12:53 AM
I hate the phrase as it relates to ALL cars. It's mostly used for convertibles, like Miatas, which is also patently offensive. It usually shows the speaker to be an ignorant POS who's opinion of cars is rendered irrelevant. I generally like reading your postings, which is why it pisses me off no end to see a respected person make such a glaringly stupid statement.
:lol:
Now I know what button to push if I want to piss you off...... :evildude:
No doubt it was a stupid statment; I make plenty of them. That's what's great about here, as compared to my dealings at work -- I don't have to be as careful.
I was actually being a bit of a hypocrite making that statement, since I actually dislike the tendency to label every car by the demographics of its borrowers. And here I am, contributing to the problem. I guess you're right, but it was sort of a joke anyway, so try not to get too upset over it.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:14:28 AM
The vases were more popular in the '50s and early '60s (up to about '62-63) in those cars, and most of the cars you'll see with them are well before the late '60s "flower power" era.
Hah, I'm batting 1.000 today..... :devil:
Even our resident Miata owners don't seem to mind the chick stereotype and have fun joking around with it. See Hemi's signature for proof.
Miatas look like fun, reliable cars, but it must be so hard to break that stigma of it being a chick car to anyone who isn't an autocrosser.
I guess it's a lot like a station wagon like that. Neither of the two get enough respect.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 18, 2009, 09:35:03 PM
I'm not sure that the PT is really a good car anymore.
The way I see it, Chrysler only has 3 decent products:
1.) Minivans
2.) The Ram
3.) The Viper
4.) Challenger
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 10:20:18 AM
Miatas look like fun, reliable cars, but it must be so hard to break that stigma of it being a chick car to anyone who isn't an autocrosser.
I guess it's a lot like a station wagon like that. Neither of the two get enough respect.
Who cares? Up to a point, it's just not worth being bothered over what other people think. Especially over something so mundane as your choice of vehicle. :huh:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 10:15:59 AM
:lol:
Now I know what button to push if I want to piss you off...... :evildude:
All you have to say is, "I don't like *insert car here*", and you feel the wrath of Chris.
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 10:22:03 AM
Who cares? Up to a point, it's just not worth being bothered over what other people think. Especially over something so mundane as your choice of vehicle. :huh:
If you're worried about what others think of your car, then you're buying it for the wrong reasons.
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 10:18:20 AM
Even our resident Miata owners don't seem to mind the chick stereotype and have fun joking around with it. See Hemi's signature for proof.
No, they've just got tired of fighting the ignorance for so long that they just joke about it. but I can guarantee you that people that say it to their faces don't get treated with any sort of respect afterward.
I built and drove cars like this for years:
(http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/636381a.jpg)
it gets tiring, even if all you want to do is ignore the idiots. But when someone you respect says it?
You can't change the minds of non-car people. But car guys on car boards? That shit needs to stop.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:10:12 AM
The bud vase is a nod to an original Beetle accessory that is still highly sought after by VW Beetle restorers.
So the original VWs were chick cars too?
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 19, 2009, 10:23:35 AM
All you have to say is, "I don't like *insert car here*", and you feel the wrath of Chris.
Fuck you, you fucking moron. I've said time and time again that it isn't about merely disliking something. When are you going to get smart enough to figure out what it is actually about (which I've also stated time and time again?)
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:25:42 AM
No, they've just got tired of fighting the ignorance for so long that they just joke about it. but I can guarantee you that people that say it to their faces don't get treated with any sort of respect afterward.
I built and drove cars like this for years:
it gets tiring, even if all you want to do is ignore the idiots. But when someone you respect says it?
You can't change the minds of non-car people. But car guys on car boards? That shit needs to stop.
You just have to face the fact that ignorance drives most of the decisions that are made in this world, including car buying decisions. And images like the 'chick car' image are real, even if they're stupid, and they do affect sales. Very people would admit that they buy a car with their image in mind, but for most people, if they were honest, it is a factor to one degree or another.
What pisses me off more is people who constantly speculate whether somebody is gay based on the sort of car they drive. My cousin does this constantly. I feel like screaming "WHO GIVES A FUCK?" at her. I might make a joke or offhand comment in a generic way, but I'd never take that bullshit to a personal level.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:25:42 AM
No, they've just got tired of fighting the ignorance for so long that they just joke about it. but I can guarantee you that people that say it to their faces don't get treated with any sort of respect afterward.
Whether or not I treat someone with respect in real life has little if nothing to do with their opinions about cars, right or wrong.
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 10:30:58 AM
Whether or not I treat someone with respect in real life has little if nothing to do with their opinions about cars, right or wrong.
:hesaid:
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 10:22:03 AM
Who cares? Up to a point, it's just not worth being bothered over what other people think. Especially over something so mundane as your choice of vehicle. :huh:
Let's say everywhere you go people walk up to you and insult you over whatever it is, your hair, your clothes, your girlfriend, your kid, whatever. If you're stoic enough to put up with that for years AND still think that those people are intelligent, then more power to you. But I can guarantee you it won't happen. You will NOT continue to smile and say "thank you very much for your opinion" after a fairly short while, if it is an unending parade of unsolicited insulting.
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 10:30:58 AM
Whether or not I treat someone with respect in real life has little if nothing to do with their opinions about cars, right or wrong.
But in real life, how you treat them will be based on how they treat you. Cars or not. It'd be the same for any situation, especially in any subject you are interested in and have knowledge of. Here, we're on a car board. We're discussing knowledge of cars.
And do you treat 2o6 with respect about his opinions of, say, chinese cars? Don't be a fucking hypocrite.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 10:30:07 AM
You just have to face the fact that ignorance drives most of the decisions that are made in this world, including car buying decisions. And images like the 'chick car' image are real, even if they're stupid, and they do affect sales. Very people would admit that they buy a car with their image in mind, but for most people, if they were honest, it is a factor to one degree or another.
What pisses me off more is people who constantly speculate whether somebody is gay based on the sort of car they drive. My cousin does this constantly. I feel like screaming "WHO GIVES A FUCK?" at her. I might make a joke or offhand comment in a generic way, but I'd never take that bullshit to a personal level.
I bought the Swift because I wanted people to think I was a whitetrash hippie, and I bought the Volvo because I wanted people to think I was a wannabe eurotrash snob that doesn't know how to use a condom.
Quote from: NACar on January 19, 2009, 10:36:06 AM
I bought the Swift because I wanted people to think I was a whitetrash hippie, and I bought the Volvo because I wanted people to think I was a wannabe eurotrash snob that doesn't know how to use a condom.
Well, you succeeded..... :lol:
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:32:55 AM
Let's say everywhere you go people walk up to you and insult you over whatever it is, your hair, your clothes, your girlfriend, your kid, whatever. If you're stoic enough to put up with that for years AND still think that those people are intelligent, then more power to you. But I can guarantee you it won't happen. You will NOT continue to smile and say "thank you very much for your opinion" after a fairly short while, if it is an unending parade of unsolicited insulting.
Is that what you experienced, driving a PT Cruiser?
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:32:55 AM
Let's say everywhere you go people walk up to you and insult you over whatever it is, your hair, your clothes, your girlfriend, your kid, whatever. If you're stoic enough to put up with that for years AND still think that those people are intelligent, then more power to you. But I can guarantee you it won't happen. You will NOT continue to smile and say "thank you very much for your opinion" after a fairly short while, if it is an unending parade of unsolicited insulting.
Let's ask our Miata owners:
"Laconian, Chimp, Onslaught; do people insult you everywhere you go at every hour of the day for the type of car you drive?"
We'll have to wait for them to get back to us, but I can make an educated guess as to the answer...
Quote from: Byteme on January 19, 2009, 10:25:56 AM
So the original VWs were chick cars too?
lol. Just like pink and light gray were as much male colors in the era that the bud vases became popular.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:39:13 AM
lol. Just like pink and light gray were as much male colors in the era that the bud vases became popular.
In that era, there was really no such thing as a 'chick car.' Cars were marketed in a more generic way. In any case, very few women back then bought cars independently, so cars were marketed primarily to men, even if a woman was to be the main driver.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 10:37:26 AM
Is that what you experienced, driving a PT Cruiser?
On car boards, just mentioning that I owned one, there would be a flood of unsolicited insults about how much crap the car was and how much of a chick car it was and that real men wouldn't be caught dead driving one. Same if anyone mentioned owning one. Same if anyone mentioned owning a Miata. Hell, I even got it with the Fiat in person and online. And yeah, I got it a LOT driving the classic air cooled VWs and MGs.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:34:45 AM
But in real life, how you treat them will be based on how they treat you. Cars or not. It'd be the same for any situation, especially in any subject you are interested in and have knowledge of. Here, we're on a car board. We're discussing knowledge of cars.
And do you treat 2o6 with respect about his opinions of, say, chinese cars? Don't be a fucking hypocrite.
Correct me if I'm wrong; you're asking me if my respect for someone is contingent on their intelligence?
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:44:12 AM
On car boards, just mentioning that I owned one, there would be a flood of unsolicited insults about how much crap the car was and how much of a chick car it was and that real men wouldn't be caught dead driving one. Same if anyone mentioned owning one. Same if anyone mentioned owning a Miata. Hell, I even got it with the Fiat in person and online. And yeah, I got it a LOT driving the classic air cooled VWs and MGs.
If you're going to drive around in puny cars without V8's, you should work on being more stoic.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:44:12 AM
On car boards, just mentioning that I owned one, there would be a flood of unsolicited insults about how much crap the car was and how much of a chick car it was and that real men wouldn't be caught dead driving one. Same if anyone mentioned owning one. Same if anyone mentioned owning a Miata. Hell, I even got it with the Fiat in person and online. And yeah, I got it a LOT driving the classic air cooled VWs and MGs.
Well, that's stupid. As I said, I made an offhand generic comment that I didn't really mean. I never take that crap to a personal level, except as a joke, if I'm friendly enough with the person.
You can dish out crap about my car if you want..... :lol:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 10:41:10 AM
In that era, there was really no such thing as a 'chick car.' Cars were marketed in a more generic way. In any case, very few women back then bought cars independently, so cars were marketed primarily to men, even if a woman was to be the main driver.
yeah, the only real exception was the Dodge La Femme.
(http://www.dodgelafemme.com/registry/56_2.jpg)
(http://www.dodgelafemme.com/images/56back.jpg)
(http://www.dodgelafemme.com/images/56dash2.jpg)
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:48:15 AM
yeah, the only real exception was the Dodge La Femme.
Wow, that's pretty blatant. I hope you don't mind if I call that a 'chick car.' You don't own one, do you, man? :evildude:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 10:46:35 AM
Well, that's stupid. As I said, I made an offhand generic comment that I didn't really mean. I never take that crap to a personal level, except as a joke, if I'm friendly enough with the person.
You can dish out crap about my car if you want..... :lol:
See, that's just it. I never make negative comments about a person's choice in cars. Or clothes. Or houses. I might say I wouldn't do that, myself, or make comments on the quality of execution (and even then, it's a rare occurrence). I'll never be rude to start with. But I will
answer rudeness with rudeness. (I didn't used to, but I've found that online rudeness never EVER responds to calm responses. And since no matter how much you want to, you can't call customers or coworkers idiots, this is a safe venue for calling out retarded statements).
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 10:38:52 AM
Let's ask our Miata owners:
"Laconian, Chimp, Onslaught; do people insult you everywhere you go at every hour of the day for the type of car you drive?"
We'll have to wait for them to get back to us, but I can make an educated guess as to the answer...
Actually, I did drive a red NA Miata for a short period of time right before the S2000, and there was this one woman at work who would constantly make fun about it. It got old really fast, just like any other case where someone repeats the same joke over and over at the expanse of another person. I made the mistake of getting into an argument about it once, saying that it was the best thing I could find for $2,000, but according to her, I apparently would have been better off in a Geo Metro/Hyundai Excel/insert random shitbox here.
Incidentally, she has no kids and drives a Suburban :rolleyes:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 10:50:08 AM
Wow, that's pretty blatant. I hope you don't mind if I call that a 'chick car.' You don't own one, do you, man? :evildude:
It is the only car marketed AS a chick car, and it was done way before the feminist movement, so even though it was condescending, it wasn't actually rude for it's era. And I had the Custom Royal version of that car.Even if I owned one, it would not be rude to call it a chick car (but it's a valuable collector car now).
Quote from: Vinsanity on January 19, 2009, 10:56:50 AM
Actually, I did drive a red NA Miata for a short period of time right before the S2000, and there was this one woman at work who would constantly make fun about it. It got old really fast, just like any other case where someone repeats the same joke over and over at the expanse of another person. I made the mistake of getting into an argument about it once, saying that it was the best thing I could find for $2,000, but according to her, I apparently would have been better off in a Geo Metro/Hyundai Excel/insert random shitbox here.
Incidentally, she has no kids and drives a Suburban :rolleyes:
Idiot. When you're spending $2K for a car, you get what works. You don't get picky at that price, in any event.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:57:27 AM
It is the only car marketed AS a chick car, and it was done way before the feminist movement, so even though it was condescending, it wasn't actually rude for it's era. And I had the Custom Royal version of that car.Even if I owned one, it would not be rude to call it a chick car (but it's a valuable collector car now).
The lavender really gives it away. Man, I hate that color.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 10:46:35 AM
You can dish out crap about my car if you want..... :lol:
No, you really don't want me to do that. I like the car, but I could talk enough trash on it that you might never want to drive it again.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:55:18 AM
See, that's just it. I never make negative comments about a person's choice in cars. Or clothes. Or houses. I might say I wouldn't do that, myself, or make comments on the quality of execution (and even then, it's a rare occurrence). I'll never be rude to start with. But I will answer rudeness with rudeness. (I didn't used to, but I've found that online rudeness never EVER responds to calm responses. And since no matter how much you want to, you can't call customers or coworkers idiots, this is a safe venue for calling out retarded statements).
My statement would only have been rude if I'd (a) known you had a PT Cruiser, and (b) insulted you directly about it. Neither of those was the case.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 10:59:39 AM
No, you really don't want me to do that. I like the car, but I could talk enough trash on it that you might never want to drive it again.
Nah, I drive it every day, while you drove a couple around a parking lot. Whom do you think really knows more?
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 10:45:03 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong; you're asking me if my respect for someone is contingent on their intelligence?
No, your respect for someone is contingent on their ability to be respectful to start with.
Also there is a difference between merely not knowing something, and being willfully ignorant, holding tightly to an opinion based on that ignorance (instead of learning from those who have knowledge of the subject) and using that opinion to be rude and insulting towards others, and then actively making sure you remain ignorant on the subject.
Let me give you an example: Les Vipers. Do you have any respect for him (do you even know of him from C&D?). Does anyone here have respect for him?
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 09:57:01 AM
The PT shared 8 bolts with the Neon. No Neon, other than the SRT4, used the 2.4 liter engine. That was sourced from the stratus. The front suspension was from the 4 cyl minivan, and the rear suspension was unique to the PT, to get a low load floor. No internal or trim parts were Neon, either.
As for roomy, yes, it was. I carried 14 full size replacement windows for the house in the back with the hatch closed. I carried 1200lbs of bagged crushed rock and it didn't settle on the suspension one bit. I carried all the lumber for our deck project, as well as the 60 gallon stand up air compressor. I carried myself, my wife, 3 kids and all our camping gear with no problem. I had no issues with interior sizing, with more than enough shoulder room and legroom at all seating positions.
It is neon based. That's why it's called the PT (Platform Tall) Cruiser. The neon is on the PL (platform Low) platform.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:02:39 AM
No, your respect for someone is contingent on their ability to be respectful.
Also there is a difference between merely not knowing something, and being willfully ignorant, holding tightly to an opinion based on that ignorance (instead of learning from those who have knowledge of the subject) and using that opinion to be rude and insulting towards others, and then actively making sure you remain ignorant on the subject.
Let me give you an example: Les Vipers. Do you have any respect for him (do you even know of him from C&D?). Does anyone here have respect for him?
I certainly don't respect Les Vipers Rules. But I don't think he'd know a car if got run over by one. I have no idea why he even posted at a car forum.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 11:00:55 AM
Nah, I drive it every day, while you drove a couple around a parking lot. Whom do you think really knows more?
:lol:
I'm just saying...
And no, I put probably a few hundred miles on them in total. I drove more 3s and 5s than anything else.
Like I said, I could. I made an awful mistake with the CosmicSaab thread.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:57:27 AM
It is the only car marketed AS a chick car, and it was done way before the feminist movement, so even though it was condescending, it wasn't actually rude for it's era. And I had the Custom Royal version of that car.Even if I owned one, it would not be rude to call it a chick car (but it's a valuable collector car now).
Don't forget the mid 70's ladybird variant of the Firebird.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 11:04:28 AM
:lol:
I'm just saying...
And no, I put probably a few hundred miles on them in total. I drove more 3s and 5s than anything else.
Like I said, I could. I made an awful mistake with the CosmicSaab thread.
Yes, you rained on his parade when he was all excited about his new car. You know the old saying -- familiarity breeds contempt. When you're on the inside of something, you see the underside of things that outsiders don't see. But that doesn't mean that that underside is really unique. It's sort of like the person who works in a restaurant (as I did) and sees what really goes on in the kitchen. Stuff like that goes on in all restaurants, and as a customer, you're best off to remain ignorant of it, or else you'd never eat in a restaurant again. Your experience with BMW is similar.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:02:39 AM
Let me give you an example: Les Vipers. Do you have any respect for him (do you even know of him from C&D?). Does anyone here have respect for him?
Yeah, I respect his right for him to have his opinion, whether I disagree with him or not.
Quote from: Byteme on January 19, 2009, 11:07:36 AM
Yeah, I respect his right for him to have his opinion, whether I disagree with him or not.
Les Vipers Rules is a hateful prick who doesn't respect the right of anybody besides him to have an opinion. That's why I don't respect him.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 11:06:49 AM
Yes, you rained on his parade when he was all excited about his new car. You know the old saying -- familiarity breeds contempt. When you're on the inside of something, you see the underside of things that outsiders don't see. But that doesn't mean that that underside is really unique. It's sort of like the person who works in a restaurant (as I did) and sees what really goes on in the kitchen. Stuff like that goes on in all restaurants, and as a customer, you're best off to remain ignorant of it, or else you'd never eat in a restaurant again. Your experience with BMW is similar.
Indeed. How I came out of that whole situation still liking everything but the X3 and the E90 3ers is beyond me.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 11:04:07 AM
It is neon based. That's why it's called the PT (Platform Tall) Cruiser. The neon is on the PL (platform Low) platform.
There is no Neon in the platform. There was for the show car, but not for the production car. None of the neon suspension or drivetrain was retained from the show car to the production car, and so none of the hard points that made up the Neon platform made it to production.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 11:08:30 AM
Les Vipers Rules is a hateful prick who doesn't respect the right of anybody besides him to have an opinion. That's why I don't respect him.
I honestly picture an embittered physical cripple who has nothing to do but play on the internet and stir the pot when I think of LVR. He frequently makes an ass of himself, and I respect his right to do so.
Quote from: Byteme on January 19, 2009, 11:07:36 AM
Yeah, I respect his right for him to have his opinion, whether I disagree with him or not.
I forgot, Opinion has become the new knowledge. In fact, changing an opinion on the basis of learning new knowledge is undesirable.
We could save the country a lot of money by simply doing away with all sources of knowledge...
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 11:11:14 AM
Indeed. How I came out of that whole situation still liking everything but the X3 and the E90 3ers is beyond me.
Good think you didn't work at a Subaru dealer.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:16:18 AM
I forgot, Opinion has become the new knowledge. In fact, changing an opinion on the basis of learning new knowledge is undesirable.
How in the heck did you arrive at that statement from what I posted?
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:16:18 AM
I forgot, Opinion has become the new knowledge. In fact, changing an opinion on the basis of learning new knowledge is undesirable.
We could save the country a lot of money by simply doing away with all sources of knowledge...
Actually, you're on to a big problem here. While we all have the right to our opinions, we don't have the right to our own facts. Facts are facts. That has somehow been lost in our much vaunted 'information age.' It's ironic that at a time when large amounts of information are more available than ever, we have adopted the philosophy that there is no such thing are objective facts, and that nothing any crackpot could think could ever be declared to be wrong or incorrect.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 11:00:16 AM
My statement would only have been rude if I'd (a) known you had a PT Cruiser, and (b) insulted you directly about it. Neither of those was the case.
So a rude, insulting statement is only such if you know the person it's aimed at?
So, say, racist statements aren't rude, insulting, or racist if they're said by a white person at an all white gathering?
Just checking context, here. So, it's ok to make insulting statements on a public forum if you can claim ignorance of the other people that might be reading those statements...
I see.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:20:35 AM
So a rude, insulting statement is only such if you know the person it's aimed at?
So, say, racist statements aren't rude, insulting, or racist if they're said by a white person at an all white gathering?
Just checking context, here. So, it's ok to make insulting statements on a public forum if you can claim ignorance of the other people that might be reading those statements...
I see.
Calling a PT Cruiser a chick car isn't on the same level as throwing out racial insults, so let's not pretend it is. Past history also plays a role -- if a person doesn't have a history of intentionally insulting you, you shouldn't be so quick to take offense when it wasn't intentional.
You need to get over it. I have nothing more to say about this idiotic exchange. And for the record, PT Cruisers have a lot more female than male buyers, so technically they are a 'chick car.' Not that that really matters; anybody can drive whatever car they want.
Yes Chris, by and large, people take personal insults much more seriously than general insults, which I'm sure you know.
And as Dazzle pointed out, you need to consider the severity of the insult before you respond in kind.
For instance, "Miatas look feminine" doesn't deserve, "YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON, ROARRRR!!!!!"
By and large, the moderators on this board have worked very hard at running of the trolls, so these issues you're talking about with regards to other forums shouldn't be a problem.
Quote from: Byteme on January 19, 2009, 11:18:55 AM
How in the heck did you arrive at that statement from what I posted?
Because every Right comes with a Responsibility. Your Right to an opinion means a Responsibility to base that opinion on being well informed. if you're not well informed, then stating that opinion in a public place gives people the Right to call that opinion into question (the responsibility being that actual knowledge be preserved). It seems that lately, it's more important to uphold the right to state any damn fool opinion that pops into your head, than it is to uphold the right to call that opinion into question.
Good, these cars were stupid, i hate them.
They were poorly built unreliable POS's that only sold because they tricked old women into buying for the classic style and cute design.
EVERY one of them that i've ever seen is driven by women.
I have yet to see any enthusiast voluntarily get behind the wheel of one of these monstrosity.
The PT Cruiser is not a good enough car to fight over. Mediocre engine, mediocre handling, goofy styling.
The PT Turbo's engine was a pretty monstrous engine, however.
My friend Bailey just got a purple PT Cruiser. It's perfect for her daily commute.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:24:35 AM
Because every Right comes with a Responsibility. Your Right to an opinion means a Responsibility to base that opinion on being well informed. if you're not well informed, then stating that opinion in a public place gives people the Right to call that opinion into question (the responsibility being that actual knowledge be preserved). It seems that lately, it's more important to uphold the right to state any damn fool opinion that pops into your head, than it is to uphold the right to call that opinion into question.
I agree with you 100%.
Quote from: CJ on January 19, 2009, 11:27:46 AM
My friend Bailey just got a purple PT Cruiser. It's perfect for her daily commute.
:lol: :lol:
Way to pour gasoline on the fire.... :evildude:
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on January 19, 2009, 11:25:27 AM
Good, these cars were stupid, i hate them.
They were poorly built unreliable POS's that only sold because they tricked old women into buying for the classic style and cute design.
EVERY one of them that i've ever seen is driven by women.
I have yet to see any enthusiast voluntarily get behind the wheel of one of these monstrosity.
How do you like this one, ChrisV?
:evildude:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 11:24:00 AM
You need to get over it. I have nothing more to say about this idiotic exchange.
I get it, you want the right to say any stupid thing that comes into your head without being questioned.
Why do we even fucking bother coming to an automotive message board, if actual automotive knowledge isn't important to us, but saying any stupid thing we want about cars IS?
If I wanted to read moronic statements about cars, I'd just go to the C&D boards...
Quote from: CJ on January 19, 2009, 11:27:46 AM
My friend Bailey just got a purple PT Cruiser. It's perfect for her daily commute.
My friend Shannon loves her white PT Cruiser. She can't stop talking about it.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:31:18 AM
I get it, you want the right to say any stupid thing that comes into your head without being questioned.
Why do we even fucking bother coming to an automotive message board, if actual automotive knowledge isn't important to us, but saying any stupid thing we want about cars IS?
If I wanted to read moronic statements about cars, I'd just go to the C&D boards...
Now you're the one confusing facts with opinions.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:31:18 AM
I get it, you want the right to say any stupid thing that comes into your head without being questioned.
Why do we even fucking bother coming to an automotive message board, if actual automotive knowledge isn't important to us, but saying any stupid thing we want about cars IS?
If I wanted to read moronic statements about cars, I'd just go to the C&D boards...
No one is questioning your right to challenge someone's opinion. All that we ask is for you to use a little tact.
Quote from: CJ on January 19, 2009, 11:27:46 AM
My friend Bailey just got a purple PT Cruiser. It's perfect for her daily commute.
Was that the same one that Wrecked a Honda Fit?
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:31:18 AM
I get it, you want the right to say any stupid thing that comes into your head without being questioned.
Why do we even fucking bother coming to an automotive message board, if actual automotive knowledge isn't important to us, but saying any stupid thing we want about cars IS?
If I wanted to read moronic statements about cars, I'd just go to the C&D boards...
Granted, I think you're being too extreme, I can see where you're coming from. Just saying "it sucks" or any derogatory comments without any reason is just stupid without anything to back it up.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 11:31:03 AM
How do you like this one, ChrisV?
:evildude:
Because, he's doing it specifically to push buttons, not just out of near total ignorance.
Fine. If you want to be a bunch of fucking 12 year olds, go right ahead.
It just makes for a few more people who are not worth listening to when it comes to cars. Wimmer's pictures from Europe are great, but there are fewer and fewer people that seem to actually know what they are talking about when it comes to cars on here.
No wonder we're going to get the government we deserve.
Who's really acting like a 12-year-old here?
Let's review, the original comment:
"They're an interesting looking car, but they're chick cars and don't drive that well. "
I don't really agree with this, but let's look at the response:
"That's about fucking stupid. I'm so tired of wannabe macho fuckers labelling things that they don't like as "chick cars." if you need your CAR to make your testosterone for you because you're not fucking manly enough to do it yourself, get that blinged out H2 and be done with it."
Now who's supposed to be the child again?
Back when saxonyron had a minivan, I told him he needed to check his balls at the door before he got in. He's been furious with me ever since for that horrible insult. And it was really ignorant too. With such a level of ignorance, I don't know how the world even functions.
Ron doesn't have a minivan and I don't think he ever has?
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 11:40:49 AM
Back when saxonyron had a minivan, I told him he needed to check his balls at the door before he got in. He's been furious with me ever since for that horrible insult. And it was really ignorant too. With such a level of ignorance, I don't know how the world even functions.
I blame the PT Cruiser for Obama getting elected.
Quote from: TBR on January 19, 2009, 11:41:56 AM
Ron doesn't have a minivan and I don't think he ever has?
He had a Ford Windstar prior the first Expedition.
Quote from: The Pirate on January 19, 2009, 11:42:59 AM
He had a Ford Windstar prior the first Expedition.
Well that's creepy :tounge:
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:37:04 AM
Because, he's doing it specifically to push buttons, not just out of near total ignorance.
Fine. If you want to be a bunch of fucking 12 year olds, go right ahead.
It just makes for a few more people who are not worth listening to when it comes to cars. Wimmer's pictures from Europe are great, but there are fewer and fewer people that seem to actually know what they are talking about when it comes to cars on here.
No wonder we're going to get the government we deserve.
Well, people are so stuck in their set definition of what makes a car, lots of people are unwilling to try anything new with an open mind. If it doesn't fit their set defenitnon of what makes it "good" then it's a failure on in their book.
Oh no!
2o6 is trying to join Chris V in a "We like crappy cars" jerk circle!
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 11:46:24 AM
Well, people are so stuck in their set definition of what makes a car, lots of people are unwilling to try anything new with an open mind. If it doesn't fit their set defenitnon of what makes it "good" then it's a failure on in their book.
You're missing the point. People don't have a problem with his opinions; they have a problem with how he expresses them.
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 11:48:31 AM
You're missing the point. People don't have a problem with his opinions; they have a problem with how he expresses them.
I do agree that there is too much attitude in his posts, especially when you're going against the tide, so to speak, when you like something that a lot of people don't.
Wow, did this blow up.
Like it or not, there are crappyt cars in the world. There are crappy cars that people love and crappy cars that people hate, and there are good cars that people hate for no good reason.
I think the PT falls into that last category. I would buy one over a Caliber even today, even if I had to pay a little more; even if the styling is considered 'dated,' (which I don't agree with). I've never spent much seat time in one, but inb the little experience I had it didn't strike me as lacking in any serious way.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 19, 2009, 11:51:00 AM
Wow, did this blow up.
Like it or not, there are crappyt cars in the world. There are crappy cars that people love and crappy cars that people hate, and there are good cars that people hate for no good reason.
I think the PT falls into that last category. I would buy one over a Caliber even today, even if I had to pay a little more; even if the styling is considered 'dated,' (which I don't agree with). I've never spent much seat time in one, but inb the little experience I had it didn't strike me as lacking in any serious way.
I think it's a pretty good car. Now I wouldn't buy one new (they completely got rid of the 5-spd and I imagine resale value is horrendous plus there's the Mazda5 to consider), but it is a better car than the HHR and is more practical than cars like the Spectra5 and Mazda3 5-door.
Quote from: TBR on January 19, 2009, 11:52:50 AM
(they completely got rid of the 5-spd
They did? well, that sucks.
Quote from: TBR on January 19, 2009, 11:39:49 AM
Let's review, the original comment:
"They're an interesting looking car, but they're chick cars and don't drive that well. "
I don't really agree with this, but let's look at the response:
"That's about fucking stupid. I'm so tired of wannabe macho fuckers labelling things that they don't like as "chick cars." if you need your CAR to make your testosterone for you because you're not fucking manly enough to do it yourself, get that blinged out H2 and be done with it."
Now who's supposed to be the child again?
CHrisV is angry that the first poster doesn't know what he's talking about. Still, it didn't warrant that response.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 19, 2009, 11:53:33 AM
They did? well, that sucks.
As far as I can tell it isn't available with the Turbo or the NA 2.4.
They also only have the LP Turbo available now (previously a slightly detuned SRT4 engine was available).
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 11:54:46 AM
CHrisV is angry that the first poster doesn't know what he's talking about. Still, it didn't warrant that response.
Really? I don't see anything terribly out of line in that post. Compared to the cars Dazzle has experience with the PT doesn't drive that well.
Quote from: TBR on January 19, 2009, 11:56:50 AM
Really? I don't see anything terribly out of line in that post. Compared to the cars Dazzle has experience with the PT doesn't drive that well.
Well, you can't compare a Civic to a BMW..............oh wait, these days you can.
Still, ChrisV's post is out of line.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 11:35:09 AM
Was that the same one that Wrecked a Honda Fit?
She got a 2009 Fit Sport 5-speed.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 19, 2009, 11:53:33 AM
They did? well, that sucks.
Careful. Didn't you know that shifting accounts for less then 2% of your actual driving, therefore an automatic is just as much fun? Neither did I.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 19, 2009, 12:03:33 PM
Careful. Didn't you know that shifting accounts for less then 2% of your actual driving, therefore an automatic is just as much fun? Neither did I.
Was that one of ChrisV's posts? :confused:
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:29:43 AM
Fuck you, you fucking moron. I've said time and time again that it isn't about merely disliking something. When are you going to get smart enough to figure out what it is actually about (which I've also stated time and time again?)
:lol:
This response was awesome Chris. It is so level headed and mature I almost didn't believe it was you.
Quote from: TBR on January 19, 2009, 11:56:50 AM
Really? I don't see anything terribly out of line in that post. Compared to the cars Dazzle has experience with the PT doesn't drive that well.
Actually, it was the comment that it was a chick car that doesn't drive very well. I've owned and driven cars that make Dazzle's sedan feel like a wallowy pig, and I don't say the PT OR Dazzle's car drives bad. Both comments together show both a lack of knowledge of the subject AND a
desire to be insulting about it (because he took the time to type out the comment on a public forum)
If he had said something like, "too bad, but they never were my kind of car," none of this would have happened. But no one knows how to do that sort of thing anymore.
But, it's been proven time and again that what's desired here, what's accepted here, and what's covered for here is whatever baseless negative opinion that can be made.
What the hell. Instead of battling against ignorance and insulting commentary, I'll just join in and see what it's like to be part of the "hip crowd" here. I'll have to make up reasons to insult things other people might like, but that' never been a problem for many of you guys, so I should be able to do it, too.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 19, 2009, 12:04:40 PM
:lol:
This response was awesome Chris. It is so level headed and mature I almost didn't believe it was you.
There's a reason it's called "adult language."
And until you show that you can use more than one brain cell at a time, I'll reiterate: Fuck you.
(http://www.forumspile.com/BooHoo-Big_baby.jpg)
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 19, 2009, 12:03:33 PM
Careful. Didn't you know that shifting accounts for less then 2% of your actual driving, therefore an automatic is just as much fun? Neither did I.
Oh, and if you're going to quote things, then you might want to learn to quote them factually. Nice try.
Oh, and Fuck you.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 12:07:39 PM
Actually, it was the comment that it was a chick car that doesn't drive very well. I've owned and driven cars that make Dazzle's sedan feel like a wallowy pig, and I don't say the PT OR Dazzle's car drives bad. Both comments together show both a lack of knowledge of the subject AND a desire to be insulting about it (because he took the time to type out the comment on a public forum)
If he had said something like, "too bad, but they never were my kind of car," none of this would have happened. But no one knows how to do that sort of thing anymore.
But, it's been proven time and again that what's desired here, what's accepted here, and what's covered for here is whatever baseless negative opinion that can be made.
What the hell. Instead of battling against ignorance and insulting commentary, I'll just join in and see what it's like to be part of the "hip crowd" here. I'll have to make up reasons to insult things other people might like, but that' never been a problem for many of you guys, so I should be able to do it, too.
Chick Car=Opinion
Drives Well=Opinion
Why are you the only one that's allowed to have opinions?
And, the ideal thing would be for you to just leave. You bring the whole Carspin experience down a notch since we never know when you'll have a temper tantrum like a little 2 year old who doesn't get his way.
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 11:48:31 AM
You're missing the point. People don't have a problem with his opinions; they have a problem with how he expresses them.
Or is it the hypocrite in you saying it's ok to express any negative opinion you want but not ok for me to respond back in kind?
This is the crux of it. People get mad at me expressing a negative opinion, by telling me I shouldn't get mad at someone expressing a negative opinion. I find that quite amusing.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 12:18:18 PM
Or is it the hypocrite in you saying it's ok to express any negative opinion you want but not ok for me to respond back in kind?
This is the crux of it. People get mad at me expressing a negative opinion, by telling me I shouldn't get mad at someone expressing a negative opinion. I find that quite amusing.
"I don't like that, It sucks" is better than you blasting the F-word in every sentence.
Quote from: TBR on January 19, 2009, 12:13:26 PM
Chick Car=Opinion
Drives Well=Opinion
Why are you the only one that's allowed to have opinions?
Again, you're telling me that it's OK for someone to post an opinion, as long as it isn't ME posting an opinion? That's hypocritical.
And again, why is everyone EXCEPT me allowed to have a negative opinion of anything? It's quite ok for anyone to post any negative and insulting opinion, and they are supported and cheered on, but if I do it in response, all fucking hell breaks loose as to how this big bad meany isn't letting the poor innocent children have their opinion.
Quote
And, the ideal thing would be for you to just leave. You bring the whole Carspin experience down a notch since we never know when you'll have a temper tantrum like a little 2 year old who doesn't get his way.
you're right. 'cause unfounded negative opinion and insulting cars because they aren't your favorite is exactly what Carspin is all about.
Glad to see what you support.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 12:23:50 PM
Again, you're telling me that it's OK for someone to post an opinion, as long as it isn't ME posting an opinion? That's hypocritical.
And again, why is everyone EXCEPT me allowed to have a negative opinion of anything? It's quite ok for anyone to post any negative and insulting opinion, and they are supported and cheered on, but if I do it in response, all fucking hell breaks loose as to how this big bad meany isn't letting the poor innocent children have their opinion.
Because you're putting other people down of their opinions.
you're right. 'cause unfounded negative opinion and insulting cars because they aren't your favorite is exactly what Carspin is all about.
Glad to see what you support.
They don't have to like something, and you cannot force that upon them. Your high and mighty attitude that you've experienced the entire automotive world and therefore your opinion is best is quite annoying.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:24:35 AM
Because every Right comes with a Responsibility. Your Right to an opinion means a Responsibility to base that opinion on being well informed. if you're not well informed, then stating that opinion in a public place gives people the Right to call that opinion into question (the responsibility being that actual knowledge be preserved). It seems that lately, it's more important to uphold the right to state any damn fool opinion that pops into your head, than it is to uphold the right to call that opinion into question.
FWIW, there's opinion, informed opinion and there is fact. Opinions are by nature subjective and therefore subject to multiple interpertations.
No one is arguing that if you disagree with someone's opinion you have the right to question it.
That doesn't mean, however the person first stating their opinion doesn't have the right to their opinion nor does that person have any social or legal responsibility to validate their opinion. The listener, on the other hand, has the responsibility to decide if the opinion is valid or not.
And just as I would defend LVR's right, your right or anybody else's right to offer any opinion, uninformed or not, I would just as vigorously defend anyone's right to question those opinions.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 12:09:10 PM
There's a reason it's called "adult language."
And until you show that you can use more than one brain cell at a time, I'll reiterate: Fuck you.
:clap:
Keep digging your hole Chris.
FYI, I don't have to like every car. I don't have to own or work on a car to know if I like the styling of it or not. A sports car can have a fixed roof according to the FIA. Automatics are not as fun as manuals. Opinions, right or wrong, is just that...an opinion, and if it's based on bad info, then correct that info for the person to form a new opinion...don't call him names and swear at him.
Can a mod step up here and do something about him?
Everybody behave.
I had one for a rental for a time, and that it was really good for what it was - it's an econo car with a bit of retro styling pizazz. The only area that needed work was the engine; it was rough, kinda loud, and thirsty.
Someone does bring up a very good point about the retro design - how do you update it? Go even more retro? Abandon it completely?
The Mustang, Camaro and Challenger will all have this problem - each represents the pinnacle of the nameplate design (or in the case of the Challenger, the only design).
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 12:26:01 PM
Because you're putting other people down of their opinions.
I'm responding to an insult with an insult. You don't want to be insulted, don't be insulting to start with.
But Tave's right. This place will definitely rise a few notches when it's simply a circle jerk about what cars you all hate. It'll be great. You can even advertise it that way. Since negative opinions on things are so valuable to you, maybe you'll be able to attract a bunch of people like Les Vipers here...
Quote from: GoCougs on January 19, 2009, 12:33:28 PM
Someone does bring up a very good point about the retro design - how do you update it? Go even more retro? Abandon it completely?
The Mustang, Camaro and Challenger will all have this problem - each represents the pinnacle of the nameplate design (or in the case of the Challenger, the only design).
Different retro. There are lots of design cues in history that could be applied to the basic idea of a compact station wagon and called "PT Cruiser."
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 12:18:18 PM
Or is it the hypocrite in you saying it's ok to express any negative opinion you want but not ok for me to respond back in kind?
Of course not. I just suggest that you use some tact. You admitted earlier that you never speak to people like this in real life. No one has shown you the blatant disrespect you say you receive on other forums, so don't project your hostility at those people onto us.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 19, 2009, 12:29:49 PM
FYI, I don't have to like every car.
Never sad you or anyone did. What part of that are you constantly missing? Do I have to type in all caps for you to be able to read it? I only respond when people use retarded and baseless reasons to INSULT a car. Not when they merely like something else better.
QuoteI don't have to own or work on a car to know if I like the styling of it or not. A sports car can have a fixed roof according to the FIA. Automatics are not as fun as manuals. Opinions, right or wrong, is just that...an opinion, and if it's based on bad info, then correct that info for the person to form a new opinion...don't call him names and swear at him.
I've done that many times (in fact, for the first 6-7 years on the internet, that was the only way I responded) and all I get for it is your form of response: "I don't care what the facts are my minds made up. I don't care what experience anyone has, I don't need experience to form and hold tightly to an opinion."
So I no longer play nice. If you want to go out and be insulting, I respond in kind on the first try, rather on the 5th or 10th. If it makes you mad, so be it. Maybe you'll stop being insulting to start with.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 12:34:58 PM
But Tave's right. This place will definitely rise a few notches when it's simply a circle jerk about what cars you all hate.
First of all, I'm a little confused.
Second of all, most of the respondants in this thread say they LIKE the PT Cruiser, and they say that it didn't get the repect it deserved.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 12:23:50 PM
Again, you're telling me that it's OK for someone to post an opinion, as long as it isn't ME posting an opinion? That's hypocritical.
And again, why is everyone EXCEPT me allowed to have a negative opinion of anything? It's quite ok for anyone to post any negative and insulting opinion, and they are supported and cheered on, but if I do it in response, all fucking hell breaks loose as to how this big bad meany isn't letting the poor innocent children have their opinion.
That's the real problem isn't it. You want to play the big bad meany, the guy with all the information (largly opinions as well), the all knowing, all seeing vehicle expert and the rest of us are just a bunch of juveniles, awaiting your pronouncements from on high so we can ll go "ow-ah" and be amazed that any one individual could be so knowledgable. Someone else has an opinion you don't like or agree with and they are uninformed.
Sorry, but a foul mouth throwing insults doesn't really cut it. (yeah, I know I used my yearly allotment of four leter words in my posts, but not as insults thrown at another list member.)
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 11:24:35 AM
Because every Right comes with a Responsibility. Your Right to an opinion means a Responsibility to base that opinion on being well informed. if you're not well informed, then stating that opinion in a public place gives people the Right to call that opinion into question (the responsibility being that actual knowledge be preserved). It seems that lately, it's more important to uphold the right to state any damn fool opinion that pops into your head, than it is to uphold the right to call that opinion into question.
False. There is no such responsibility.
YOU want to make it such because you're desperate to come up with a high-brow reason to cut someone's opinion down.
Pushrod engines are outdated. Corvette leaf springs are antiquated legacy throwbacks. PT Cruiser is a chick's car.
Don't fight it, embrace it. It's the spice of teh Internets.
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 12:37:46 PM
Of course not. I just suggest that you use some tact. You admitted earlier that you never speak to people like this in real life. No one has shown you the blatant disrespect you say you receive on other forums, so don't project your hostility at those people onto us.
BWAHAHAHAHA. If no one here has to use tact when making comments, why should I?
Quote from: ifcar on January 19, 2009, 12:37:27 PM
Different retro. There are lots of design cues in history that could be applied to the basic idea of a compact station wagon and called "PT Cruiser."
Exactly. They could have used this:
Chrysler Akino Concept
(http://www.babez.de/chrysler/akino/newtitel.jpg)
Chrysler California Cruiser
(http://www.babez.de/chrysler/ptcalifornia/pic01.jpg)
Dodge Kahuna
(http://www.cartype.com/pics/4279/full/dodge_kahuna_a.jpg)
Chrysler Java
(http://www.autocult.com.au/img/gallery/full/TorqueOmata3038.jpg)
Quote from: Byteme on January 19, 2009, 12:43:41 PM
That's the real problem isn't it. You want to play the big bad meany, the guy with all the information (largly opinions as well), the all knowing, all seeing vehicle expert and the rest of us are just a bunch of juveniles, awaiting your pronouncements from on high so we can ll go "ow-ah" and be amazed that any one individual could be so knowledgable. Someone else has an opinion you don't like or agree with and they are uninformed.
Sorry, but a foul mouth throwing insults doesn't really cut it. (yeah, I know I used my yearly allotment of four leter words in my posts, but not as insults thrown at another list member.)
Thank you.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 12:46:00 PM
Exactly. They could have used this:
Not really, two aren't related, one is a 2-door copy. The only one that has hope is the Kahuna.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 12:44:15 PM
BWAHAHAHAHA. If no one here has to use tact when making comments, why should I?
People in this thread are continuing to be very level-headed while you hurl profanity at them. I'm sorry if you cannot see that.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 12:07:39 PM
Actually, it was the comment that it was a chick car that doesn't drive very well. I've owned and driven cars that make Dazzle's sedan feel like a wallowy pig, and I don't say the PT OR Dazzle's car drives bad. Both comments together show both a lack of knowledge of the subject AND a desire to be insulting about it (because he took the time to type out the comment on a public forum)
If he had said something like, "too bad, but they never were my kind of car," none of this would have happened. But no one knows how to do that sort of thing anymore.
But, it's been proven time and again that what's desired here, what's accepted here, and what's covered for here is whatever baseless negative opinion that can be made.
What the hell. Instead of battling against ignorance and insulting commentary, I'll just join in and see what it's like to be part of the "hip crowd" here. I'll have to make up reasons to insult things other people might like, but that' never been a problem for many of you guys, so I should be able to do it, too.
I think you need to figure out what's really bothering you. And I can tell you with great certainty, it isn't my stupid little comment about the PT Cruiser (which was not meant to be insulting to anybody, BTW).
Quote from: Byteme on January 19, 2009, 12:43:41 PM
That's the real problem isn't it. You want to play the big bad meany, the guy with all the information (largly opinions as well), the all knowing, all seeing vehicle expert and the rest of us are just a bunch of juveniles, awaiting your pronouncements from on high so we can ll go "ow-ah" and be amazed that any one individual could be so knowledgable. Someone else has an opinion you don't like or agree with and they are uninformed.
Sorry, but a foul mouth throwing insults doesn't really cut it. (yeah, I know I used my yearly allotment of four leter words in my posts, but not as insults thrown at another list member.)
I may have used the F bomb a few times in this thread, but overall, I rarely use it here.
As for the rest? Yeah. You nailed it. How insightful. In fact, I'm completely lying about my experience. I mean, why would anyone actually like cars enough to spend their lives actually TRYING to learn things about them and experience such a wide variety? No one would. Real people hate anything outside a narrow band of favorites. In fact, to have real experience would be worthless in this modern world.
No, you got it entirely. In fact, I only got on the internet to go find a few places where people say they were interested in cars JUST to tell them they were stupid. There would be no reason for me to look around the world to see if there was a community of people that actually liked cars. I would actually have to like cars a lot and have experience in a lot of different genres to want to do that, and as we've already determined, no one could actually possess those attributes.
So, as I said earlier in the thread, I'm going to join your club here and run around hating on cars with reckless abandon, and arguing with anyone who might have
more experience with any car than I (since it's been determined that not only do I not really have any experience, having experience is a bad thing. Wouldn't want to be marked down as a know it all just for mentioning you have experience). I'm hoping it'll be as fun as you all make it out to be.
I don't think chrysler would want us to fight over this.
We should be dancing and celebrating its life and not fighting over its death.
Come on, group hug. Slide on in everybody, you too chris.
"I'm going to join your club"
"I'm hoping it'll be as fun as you all make it out to be."
Welcome to the club, it's customary for the new people to bring cookies.
I like M&M cookies. :lol:
See you at the first meeting.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 12:59:52 PM
I think you need to figure out what's really bothering you. And I can tell you with great certainty, it isn't my stupid little comment about the PT Cruiser (which was not meant to be insulting to anybody, BTW).
Actually yes, it was. I'm to the tipping point on that subject, having heard it and calmly responded or ignored it tens of thousands of times in the past. It no longer gets brushed off.
Well, up to now. Now I'm going to join the club. I'm going to ignore any actual experience I may have, and just insult cars and their owners willy nilly. Apparently, it's the recommended and supported thing to do on a car forum.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on January 19, 2009, 01:07:36 PM
"I'm going to join your club"
"I'm hoping it'll be as fun as you all make it out to be."
Welcome to the club, it's customary for the new people to bring cookies.
I like M&M cookies. :)
See you at the first meeting.
My club is slowly dwindling. The "we like crappy cars" club is down to three members, NACar, Teuton and CJ.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:08:21 PM
Actually yes, it was. I'm to the tipping point on that subject, having heard it and calmly responded or ignored it tens of thousands of times in the past. It no longer gets brushed off.
Well, up to now. Now I'm going to join the club. I'm going to ignore any actual experience I may have, and just insult cars and their owners willy nilly. Apparently, it's the recommended and supported thing to do on a car forum.
You're quite the hypocrite.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on January 19, 2009, 01:07:36 PM
"I'm going to join your club"
"I'm hoping it'll be as fun as you all make it out to be."
Welcome to the club, it's customary for the new people to bring cookies.
I like M&M cookies. :lol:
See you at the first meeting.
I HATE M&M cookies. There's no reason to make them.
You're right, this IS fun!
When's the next meeting?
Fuck man, he apologized. What more do you want?
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 12:51:12 PM
People in this thread are continuing to be very level-headed while you hurl profanity at them. I'm sorry if you cannot see that.
How many people got profanity "hurled at them?"
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:08:21 PM
Actually yes, it was. I'm to the tipping point on that subject, having heard it and calmly responded or ignored it tens of thousands of times in the past. It no longer gets brushed off.
Well, up to now. Now I'm going to join the club. I'm going to ignore any actual experience I may have, and just insult cars and their owners willy nilly. Apparently, it's the recommended and supported thing to do on a car forum.
A truly open-minded person would never consider the term 'chick car' to be an insult. Why is it an insult to point out the fact that more women than men favor a particular car, and how is that insulting to any particular man who likes that car?
Lets just ban chris and get it over with.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 12:46:00 PM
Exactly. They could have used this:
Chrysler Akino Concept
(http://www.babez.de/chrysler/akino/newtitel.jpg)
Chrysler California Cruiser
(http://www.babez.de/chrysler/ptcalifornia/pic01.jpg)
Dodge Kahuna
(http://www.cartype.com/pics/4279/full/dodge_kahuna_a.jpg)
Chrysler Java
(http://www.autocult.com.au/img/gallery/full/TorqueOmata3038.jpg)
I don't see any of those as having any really large acceptance. The whole problem with retro-modern look cars is that peole really have a very narrow idea of what the archetypal "old" car looked like, and that's really what I see the PT as: as playing off of people's perception of some platonically idealized archetype of a prewar station wagon.
I like the look, and the idea in itself, its just not one of the most flexible concepts out there. There is a narrowly defined silhoutte that oce you try to modify, it tends to look awkward, or forced.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on January 19, 2009, 01:17:31 PM
Lets just ban chris and get it over with.
That's the last thing this forum needs. I have to agree with chrisV to some extent, there isn't a very diverse bunch here.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:09:44 PM
I HATE M&M cookies. There's no reason to make them.
You're right, this IS fun!
When's the next meeting?
Fuck you. I love M&M cookies. If you don't like them, you're an ass.
(http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/this-thread-sucks/8/Thread-Crap-Continues_any_longer.jpg)
Quote from: ifcar on January 19, 2009, 12:30:39 PM
Everybody behave.
Behaving is no fun. It's misbehaving that's fun.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 01:18:40 PM
That's the last thing this forum needs. I have to agree with chrisV to some extent, there isn't a very diverse bunch here.
I ate some mexican food one time, i'm pretty diverse.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on January 19, 2009, 01:19:37 PM
I ate some mexican food one time, i'm pretty diverse.
Until you use the restroom, that is.
Quote from: NACar on January 19, 2009, 01:18:45 PM
Fuck you. I love M&M cookies. If you don't like them, you're an ass.
I'm outraged. ChrisV has personally insulted every single person who likes M&Ms. I've had enough of it. Just because he didn't know I like M&Ms doesn't mean that it wasn't a vile personal insult. I don't know why that sort of thing is tolerated here.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 01:18:40 PM
That's the last thing this forum needs. I have to agree with chrisV to some extent, there isn't a very diverse bunch here.
Diversity is highly overrated.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:21:36 PM
Diversity is highly overrated.
A little contrast makes things fun.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 01:22:07 PM
A little contrast makes things fun.
I know. I'm just pushing buttons, since I just discovered I have a great talent for it. Why not go after another sacred cow? :devil:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:13:08 PM
A truly open-minded person would never consider the term 'chick car' to be an insult. Why is it an insult to point out the fact that more women than men favor a particular car, and how is that insulting to any particular man who likes that car?
That's revisionist. The term IS an insult in common usage.
Did you in fact use the term to denote a positive reason to buy or own the car? Did you use the term to indicate that you liked the car because you feel more women buy it than men?
Your second sentence has no bearing on the first.
So, what is the politically correct term for a vehicle that appeals more to female drivers?
Quote from: NACar on January 19, 2009, 01:18:45 PM
Fuck you. I love M&M cookies. If you don't like them, you're an ass.
Only chicks make/eat M&M cookies.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:20:44 PM
I'm outraged. ChrisV has personally insulted every single person who likes M&Ms. I've had enough of it. Just because he didn't know I like M&Ms doesn't mean that it wasn't a vile personal insult. I don't know what that sort of thing is tolerated here.
Now you're getting into the spirit.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:23:17 PM
That's revisionist. The term IS an insult in common usage.
Did you in fact use the term to denote a positive reason to buy or own the car? Did you use the term to indicate that you liked the car because you feel more women buy it than men?
Your second sentence has no bearing on the first.
So "chick flick" is a bad term? :rolleyes:
Sometimes things are geared for women, or are bought for women. I hardly think that because Tampax doesn't make tampons for men, Tampax is being sexist.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 01:25:43 PM
So "chick flick" is a bad term? :rolleyes:
Sometimes things are geared for women, or are bought for women. I hardly think that because Tampax doesn't make tampons for men, Tampax is being sexist.
Good point. PT Cruisers look just like tampons.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:23:17 PM
That's revisionist. The term IS an insult in common usage.
Did you in fact use the term to denote a positive reason to buy or own the car? Did you use the term to indicate that you liked the car because you feel more women buy it than men?
Your second sentence has no bearing on the first.
Clearly, you don't have enough to occupy your mind these days.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 19, 2009, 01:24:13 PM
So, what is the politically correct term for a vehicle that appeals more to female drivers?
Camry.
(oooh, this IS fun!)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3296/2515757233_84bda43d13.jpg?v=0)
(http://limofan.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/pink-pt-cruiser-limo.jpg)
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:26:49 PM
Clearly, you don't have enough to occupy your mind these days.
Yeah, I work for the government. You do the math.
And it's snowing outside and so I'm sitting in front of the computer.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 19, 2009, 01:27:32 PM
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3296/2515757233_84bda43d13.jpg?v=0)
(http://limofan.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/pink-pt-cruiser-limo.jpg)
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:28:17 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Like all cars, those are gender-neutral.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 19, 2009, 01:27:32 PM
(http://limofan.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/pink-pt-cruiser-limo.jpg)
Maybe it's the picture, but does that Limo look like it's dipping in the center?
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 01:25:43 PM
So "chick flick" is a bad term? :rolleyes:
If you're trying to insult a guy for watching one, yes.
Quote
Sometimes things are geared for women, or are bought for women. I hardly think that because Tampax doesn't make tampons for men, Tampax is being sexist.
Your statement has no bearing on the argument here. For example, Miatas were not made for, nor geared towards women, so calling them a chick car is not merely aknowledging that women like them, is it? It's like saying that the only reason someone would buy any Corvette is because they are compensating. I even got that one when I had my RX7 race car. I was actually told that the only reason to build a car like that was because I was compensating for something.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:34:26 PM
If you're trying to insult a guy for watching one, yes.
Your statement has no bearing on the argument here. For example, Miatas were not made for, nor geared towards women, so calling them a chick car is not merely aknowledging that women like them, is it? It's like saying that the only reason someone would buy any Corvette is because they are compensating. I even got that one when I had my RX7 race car. I was actually told that the only reason to build a car like that was because I was compensating for something.
I'll never listen to your opinions again after what you said about M&Ms. Did you even know that I order cake batter ice cream every week at ColdStone, with M&Ms and Nestle's cruch in it? Your attack on M&Ms cuts right to the bone, and insults me deeply. I'm going to ask the forum administration to ban you for it.
:devil:
Maybe you missed my last post, so I'll say it again:
Fuck man, he apologized. What more do you want?
Quote from: BimmerM3 on January 19, 2009, 01:38:19 PM
Maybe you missed my last post, so I'll say it again:
Fuck man, he apologized. What more do you want?
Whom are you talking to?
No reason to end the exchange. It's become a lot of fun. :lol:
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 19, 2009, 01:27:32 PM
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3296/2515757233_84bda43d13.jpg?v=0)
(http://limofan.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/pink-pt-cruiser-limo.jpg)
lol!
Of course, you found a couple pink ones, so they must ALL be chick cars! How could I have not seen that?
(http://msp288.photobucket.com/albums/ll189/Loca_Beautifull/Pink.jpg)
(http://vlsjd.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/pinkcarbutt.JPG)
(http://serendipitously.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/pinkjaguar.jpg)
(http://serendipitously.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/mustang.jpg)
I want that Saab 900 that you posted, Chris.... :ohyeah:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:40:16 PM
Whom are you talking to?
No reason to end the exchange. It's become a lot of fun. :lol:
I was talking to Chris, and I mean it as an actual question. I'm not really sure what he expects us to do to appease him.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on January 19, 2009, 01:42:41 PM
I was talking to Chris, and I mean it as an actual question. I'm not really sure what he expects us to do to appease him.
Just admit that PT Cruisers are the manly man's car of choice.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on January 19, 2009, 01:38:19 PM
Maybe you missed my last post, so I'll say it again:
Fuck man, he apologized. What more do you want?
I realize that. He essentially said "I'm sorry for getting caught." Now we're discussing why one makes statements like that to start with, and why it's acceptable to do so.
Oh, and M&M cookies.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on January 19, 2009, 01:42:41 PM
I was talking to Chris, and I mean it as an actual question. I'm not really sure what he expects us to do to appease him.
There's no reason to appease him.
:popcorn:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:36:46 PM
I'll never listen to your opinions again after what you said about M&Ms. Did you even know that I order cake batter ice cream every week at ColdStone, with M&Ms and Nestle's cruch in it? Your attack on M&Ms cuts right to the bone, and insults me deeply. I'm going to ask the forum administration to ban you for it.
:devil:
Your experience with M&Ms is not relevant. What, I can't have an opinion about M&Ms without someone who actually knows something coming along and telling me I'm wrong? YOU need to be banned for being a know-it-all.
A flesh colored E-type is definately not a woman's car. :mask:
(http://serendipitously.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/pinkjaguar.jpg)
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:45:25 PM
Your experience with M&Ms is not relevant. What, I can't have an opinion about M&Ms without someone who actually knows something coming along and telling me I'm wrong? YOU need to be banned for being a know-it-all.
NO, you're not allowed to express an opinion if there's any chance that anybody reading the public forum, including guests, might find that opinion offensive. You really need to be more sensitive to the feelings of others, instead of just running your mouth, ESPECIALLY when you can't back your opinion up with facts.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 01:29:19 PM
Maybe it's the picture, but does that Limo look like it's dipping in the center?
Almost all do, its just more noticeable on that one. There are probably people sitting in it.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 19, 2009, 01:47:13 PM
Almost all do, its just more noticeable on that one. There are probably people sitting in it.
Just proves what crappy, chick cars they are..... :devil:
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:47:42 PM
Just proves what crappy, chick cars they are..... :devil:
I was talking about limos, you heathen towelhead.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 19, 2009, 01:49:03 PM
I was talking about limos, you heathen towelhead.
:lol: :lol:
I've decided to insult limos too now. They're dumbass chick cars too. Fuck you, you fucking moron.... :devil:
Quote from: NACar on January 19, 2009, 01:43:21 PM
Just admit that PT Cruisers are the manly man's car of choice.
No, it's really simple. Stop insulting things just because they aren't your favorites. That's really all it is. I have favorites, everyone has favorites, and I sincerely hope that they aren't all the same. That would be boring. But there is this horrible propensity to be incredibly insulting and offhand about things that aren't our favorites. You guys do it to 2o6 constantly. So he likes and posts about Chinese cars. This is a car forum, no better place to post them where those of us who don't know about them can learn about them. We don't necessarily have to LIKE them or gain new favorites out of it, or even pay attention to it, but the constant insulting of him and the cars is stupid.
Have you ever seen me actually insult or denigrate a car or a person's choice in cars?
What I'm on about here is not just one or two car, but a widespread symptom of a larger issue. And it's certainly not about being upset that people like different things than I.
No, in the grand scheme of things, the attitude towards particular cars isn't important (well, maybe it is to the automakers, and the propensity to be insulting and hateful is one of the driving forces behind our current situation). But we ARE on a car forum, in a small corner of the universe, and removing hatred and ignorance on the subject is kind of what it's about here.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:03:47 PM
I may have used the F bomb a few times in this thread, but overall, I rarely use it here.
As for the rest? Yeah. You nailed it. How insightful. In fact, I'm completely lying about my experience. I mean, why would anyone actually like cars enough to spend their lives actually TRYING to learn things about them and experience such a wide variety? No one would. Real people hate anything outside a narrow band of favorites. In fact, to have real experience would be worthless in this modern world.
No, you got it entirely. In fact, I only got on the internet to go find a few places where people say they were interested in cars JUST to tell them they were stupid. There would be no reason for me to look around the world to see if there was a community of people that actually liked cars. I would actually have to like cars a lot and have experience in a lot of different genres to want to do that, and as we've already determined, no one could actually possess those attributes.
So, as I said earlier in the thread, I'm going to join your club here and run around hating on cars with reckless abandon, and arguing with anyone who might have more experience with any car than I (since it's been determined that not only do I not really have any experience, having experience is a bad thing. Wouldn't want to be marked down as a know it all just for mentioning you have experience). I'm hoping it'll be as fun as you all make it out to be.
]
Whatever floats your boat Chris. :rolleyes:
There's a difference between making a comment about a car, and insulting a person because of the cars he likes. I think you're missing that distinction.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:56:59 PM
No, it's really simple. Stop insulting things just because they aren't your favorites. That's really all it is. I have favorites, everyone has favorites, and I sincerely hope that they aren't all the same. That would be boring. But there is this horrible propensity to be incredibly insulting and offhand about things that aren't our favorites. You guys do it to 2o6 constantly. So he likes and posts about Chinese cars. This is a car forum, no better place to post them where those of us who don't know about them can learn about them. We don't necessarily have to LIKE them or gain new favorites out of it, or even pay attention to it, but the constant insulting of him and the cars is stupid.
Have you ever seen me actually insult or denigrate a car or a person's choice in cars?
What I'm on about here is not just one or two car, but a widespread symptom of a larger issue. And it's certainly not about being upset that people like different things than I.
No, in the grand scheme of things, the attitude towards particular cars isn't important (well, maybe it is to the automakers, and the propensity to be insulting and hateful is one of the driving forces behind our current situation). But we ARE on a car forum, in a small corner of the universe, and removing hatred and ignorance on the subject is kind of what it's about here.
Ha! What a lame, naked attempt at justifying demand-side demagoguery.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:47:01 PM
NO, you're not allowed to express an opinion if there's any chance that anybody reading the public forum, including guests, might find that opinion offensive. You really need to be more sensitive to the feelings of others, instead of just running your mouth, ESPECIALLY when you can't back your opinion up with facts.
Facts aren't important. It's my right to state my opinion, no matter how hateful and tactless it may be.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 02:00:01 PM
Facts aren't important. It's my right to state my opinion, no matter how hateful and tactless it may be.
That's right. And the M&M comment is actually worse than my chick car comment about PT Cruisers, since more people eat M&Ms than ever drove PT Cruisers.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:56:59 PM
No, it's really simple. Stop insulting things just because they aren't your favorites. That's really all it is. I have favorites, everyone has favorites, and I sincerely hope that they aren't all the same. That would be boring. But there is this horrible propensity to be incredibly insulting and offhand about things that aren't our favorites. You guys do it to 2o6 constantly. So he likes and posts about Chinese cars. This is a car forum, no better place to post them where those of us who don't know about them can learn about them. We don't necessarily have to LIKE them or gain new favorites out of it, or even pay attention to it, but the constant insulting of him and the cars is stupid.
Have you ever seen me actually insult or denigrate a car or a person's choice in cars?
What I'm on about here is not just one or two car, but a widespread symptom of a larger issue. And it's certainly not about being upset that people like different things than I.
No, in the grand scheme of things, the attitude towards particular cars isn't important (well, maybe it is to the automakers, and the propensity to be insulting and hateful is one of the driving forces behind our current situation). But we ARE on a car forum, in a small corner of the universe, and removing hatred and ignorance on the subject is kind of what it's about here.
This post would have been more relevant a few pages ago before the horrible screaming and cursing.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:59:44 PM
There's a difference between making a comment about a car, and insulting a person because of the cars he likes. I think you're missing that distinction.
The implication is "this _____ is stupid, and anyone who likes it is stupid for liking it, because if they were as smart as I, then they would find it stupid as well and would not like it, either."
People are doing this to each other over in the DSL thread.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 02:00:01 PM
Facts aren't important. It's my right to state my opinion, no matter how hateful and tactless it may be.
You seem to exercize your rights quite a lot around here.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 19, 2009, 02:04:20 PM
This post would have been more relevant a few pages ago before the horrible screaming and cursing.
I've posted it it dozens of times over the years. Posts like that are routinely ignored. The cursing never gets ignored.
Quote from: Byteme on January 19, 2009, 02:05:48 PM
You seem to exercize your rights quite a lot around here.
methinks you have been ignoring the call and response that dazzle and I have been having, taking up the opposite sides. I've been specifically taking up the talking points of the opposite side, as has he. That's one of them.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:56:59 PM
No, it's really simple. Stop insulting things just because they aren't your favorites. That's really all it is. I have favorites, everyone has favorites, and I sincerely hope that they aren't all the same. That would be boring. But there is this horrible propensity to be incredibly insulting and offhand about things that aren't our favorites. You guys do it to 2o6 constantly. So he likes and posts about Chinese cars. This is a car forum, no better place to post them where those of us who don't know about them can learn about them. We don't necessarily have to LIKE them or gain new favorites out of it, or even pay attention to it, but the constant insulting of him and the cars is stupid.
Have you ever seen me actually insult or denigrate a car or a person's choice in cars?
What I'm on about here is not just one or two car, but a widespread symptom of a larger issue. And it's certainly not about being upset that people like different things than I.
No, in the grand scheme of things, the attitude towards particular cars isn't important (well, maybe it is to the automakers, and the propensity to be insulting and hateful is one of the driving forces behind our current situation). But we ARE on a car forum, in a small corner of the universe, and removing hatred and ignorance on the subject is kind of what it's about here.
Yin-yang.
There can't be good cars unless there are bad cars.
If we remove hatred and ignorance, we also remove love and ignorance.
No more hating cars that you haven't owned or driven,
and no more loving cars that you haven't owned or driven.
No more enthusiasts. Let's all buy Camrys.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 02:07:59 PM
methinks you have been ignoring the call and response that dazzle and I have been having, taking up the opposite sides. I've been specifically taking up the talking points of the opposite side, as has he. That's one of them.
Regardless, I stand by my statement.
Quote from: NACar on January 19, 2009, 02:12:26 PM
Ying-yang.
There can't be good cars unless there are bad cars.
If we remove hatred and ignorance, we also remove love and ignorance.
No more hating cars that you haven't owned or driven,
and no more loving cars that you haven't owned or driven.
No more enthusiasts. Let's all buy Camrys.
Not true.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 02:17:48 PM
Not true.
What, you don't like Chinese philosophy? Well, I don't' like Chinese cars! :evildude:
Quote from: Byteme on January 19, 2009, 02:05:48 PM
You seem to exercize your rights quite a lot around here.
Quote from: Byteme on January 19, 2009, 02:12:43 PM
Regardless, I stand by my statement.
Point out where I have done so as much or more than anyone else. And point out where I have said/done anything negative that was not in response to something negative. In fact, point out where I have done so in response to EVERY negative statement. Do you see me involved in political threads here much? In boating threads? In housing threads? Photography threads? Even in the chat thread?
No, John. You are incorrect. In fact, this is pretty rare overall. In fact, the bulk of my posts are not of this nature.
Some things are worth fighting over. The PT Cruiser is definitely one of them.... :ohyeah:
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 01:56:59 PM
No, it's really simple. Stop insulting things just because they aren't your favorites. That's really all it is. I have favorites, everyone has favorites, and I sincerely hope that they aren't all the same. That would be boring. But there is this horrible propensity to be incredibly insulting and offhand about things that aren't our favorites. You guys do it to 2o6 constantly. So he likes and posts about Chinese cars. This is a car forum, no better place to post them where those of us who don't know about them can learn about them. We don't necessarily have to LIKE them or gain new favorites out of it, or even pay attention to it, but the constant insulting of him and the cars is stupid.
Have you ever seen me actually insult or denigrate a car or a person's choice in cars?
What I'm on about here is not just one or two car, but a widespread symptom of a larger issue. And it's certainly not about being upset that people like different things than I.
No, in the grand scheme of things, the attitude towards particular cars isn't important (well, maybe it is to the automakers, and the propensity to be insulting and hateful is one of the driving forces behind our current situation). But we ARE on a car forum, in a small corner of the universe, and removing hatred and ignorance on the subject is kind of what it's about here.
I like 206. Any ribbing I give him about his preferences is intended to be percievd as just good natured fun.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 19, 2009, 02:28:47 PM
I like 206. Any ribbing I give him about his preferences is intended to be percievd as just good natured fun.
Exactly. When guys are friendly with each other, they bust each other's balls. If another guy won't bust my balls, I know right away he doesn't like me. Men are not supposed to be oversensitive about ball-busting about nonserious issues. Some of the guys I know are absolutely merciless in the way they treat their very good friends.
This isn't fun anymore, somebody better get banned because of this thread and i have a pretty good idea of who it should be.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 02:28:01 PM
Some things are worth fighting over. The PT Cruiser is definitely one of them.... :ohyeah:
*sigh* it has little to do with the actual PT Cruiser. I thought I covered that.
And the bit about
QuoteI'm so tired of wannabe macho fuckers labelling things that they don't like as "chick cars." if you need your CAR to make your testosterone for you because you're not fucking manly enough to do it yourself, get that blinged out H2 and be done with it.
wasn't specifically about the PT nor did it say I'm tired of YOU saying things like this. I'm tired of it IN GENERAL, and when a fairly respected poster makes the same exact statement, it's well past time to put a stop to it.it's been rampant far too long, and lately it's been getting worse and spreading from merely idiotic macho wannabes to supposedly knowledgeable enthusiasts.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 02:39:01 PM
*sigh* it has little to do with the actual PT Cruiser. I thought I covered that.
And the bit about
wasn't specifically about the PT nor did it say I'm tired of YOU saying things like this. I'm tired of it IN GENERAL, and when a fairly respected poster makes the same exact statement, it's well past time to put a stop to it.it's been rampant far too long, and lately it's been getting worse and spreading from merely idiotic macho wannabes to supposedly knowledgeable enthusiasts.
Thanks for calling me a respected poster.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 02:44:46 PM
Thanks for calling me a respected poster.
;)
I think that was aimed at me.
I feel all tingly inside.
I missed the "failry" part, so he was talking about you dazz.
My Algebra teacher drives a PT Cruiser. She's also the cheerleader coach.
A teacher back in middle school had one. He screwed the art teacher in the classroom. One of my friends walked in on them. They married one another after their affair.
He also liked to play TFG (touchy-feely-grabby) with some of the female students. He was forced to retire.
Quote from: CJ on January 19, 2009, 03:09:50 PM
My Algebra teacher drives a PT Cruiser. She's also the cheerleader coach.
There was a guy teacher at my middle school who had a purple PT with flames on the side. I think he taught science of some sort.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 03:13:36 PM
A teacher back in middle school had one. He screwed the art teacher in the classroom. One of my friends walked in on them. They married one another after their affair.
He also liked to play TFG (touchy-feely-grabby) with some of the female students. He was forced to retire.
I can pretty much top any creepy teacher story, although the fact that your friend actually witnessed it is interesting.
http://www.sovo.com/2004/7-30/news/localnews/cobb.cfm
Highlights:
-Student-teacher relationship between a female teacher and female student
-Relationship began in middle school (student was 13 or 14)
-Teacher transferred to high school the same year as student
-Teacher plead guilty
-20 year sentence
(http://www.sovo.com/2004/7-30/news/localnews/hensley-susan-renee.jpg)
Lesbians. That's hot.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 03:27:11 PM
Lesbians. That's hot.
One of which was 13-14....
What the fuck....
Quote from: MrH on January 19, 2009, 03:31:17 PM
One of which was 13-14....
What the fuck....
Hulk smash!
Sense of humor, no?
Shit, I wasn't even going to look at this thread because I'm not a PT fan. But it was so long I wanted to see what was going on.
Just a quick look and it looks like ChrisV is one of the reasons for all the hostility's?
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 03:35:01 PM
Hulk smash!
Sense of humor, no?
I picked up on a serious tone there. I basically thought you'd be more inclined to be creepy than funny. :evildude: :lol:
Quote from: MrH on January 19, 2009, 03:42:00 PM
I picked up on a serious tone there. I basically thought you'd be more inclined to be creepy than funny. :evildude: :lol:
My bad. That one was my fault.
It isn't like women can get each other pregnant, though, so it's not terribly evil. ;)
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 03:43:02 PM
My bad. That one was my fault.
It isn't like women can get each other pregnant, though, so it's not terribly evil. ;)
Gross none the less. Necrophiliacs aren't getting anything pregnant either, but it's still gross.
Quote from: MrH on January 19, 2009, 04:07:11 PM
Gross none the less. Necrophiliacs aren't getting anything pregnant either, but it's still gross.
And up until recently, it was still completely legal in some states.
Well, considering that you can get a brand new one for less than 10k, I think they're a great deal for what they are. I don't like them but you can't really lose on the price.
Man, what happened to this thread, I saw it this morning and there's only 3 pages, now it exploded.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 01:50:53 PM
:lol: :lol:
I've decided to insult limos too now. They're dumbass chick cars too. Fuck you, you fucking moron.... :devil:
Actually I think I'm the fucking moron.
You know what Chris? Do you know how often I'm met with "Mustangs handle like pigs", "Mustangs have archaic suspension", etc? Nobody on this forum can possibly say that I have ever freaked out and started swearing at them for their uninformed opinions. I have presented evidence to the contrary, and some of them have changed their minds. Yeah it gets old sometimes, but I argue it with facts and evidence. If I lashed out at everyone on here the way you do, none of these guys would enjoy my presence the way do so obviously do.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 19, 2009, 04:53:51 PM
You know what Chris? Do you know how often I'm met with "Mustangs handle like pigs", "Mustangs have archaic suspension", etc? Nobody on this forum can possibly say that I have ever freaked out and started swearing at them for their uninformed opinions. I have presented evidence to the contrary, and some of them have changed their minds. Yeah it gets old sometimes, but I argue it with facts and evidence. If I lashed out at everyone on here the way you do, none of these guys would enjoy my presence the way do so obviously do.
Well, at least without Trep here, nobody's going to say anything is someone bashes a Camry though.
Quote from: NomisR on January 19, 2009, 05:01:54 PM
Well, at least without Trep here, nobody's going to say anything is someone bashes a Camry though.
if
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 19, 2009, 04:44:32 PM
Actually I think I'm the fucking moron.
You are..... :evildude: :lol:
Great thread. What was the topic again? PT Cruisers, Gay cars, chick cars or just claiming one is such?
It should be noted that the Mustang was originally advertised as the "secretary's car" when marketed. The "boss" (not Springsteen) got the T-Bird.
Oh, and just to prove how old I am....Mazda did a demographic study of the RX-7 back in the late seventies and found that 60% of buyers were gay or female.
Can I troll yet?
Quote from: JWC on January 19, 2009, 05:15:06 PM
Great thread. What was the topic again? PT Cruisers, Gay cars, chick cars or just claiming one is such?
It should be noted that the Mustang was originally advertised as the "secretary's car" when marketed. The "boss" (not Springsteen) got the T-Bird.
Oh, and just to prove how old I am....Mazda did a demographic study of the RX-7 back in the late seventies and found that 60% of buyers were gay or female.
Well, mostly chicks buys Mustangs so that holds true..
And no wonder the Rotary engines were blowing up, the chicks weren't checking the oil level causing them to die prematurely!
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 05:11:34 PM
You are..... :evildude: :lol:
Ballbustin' is what friends do.......right? Are you my friend? If not, then that was just downright offensive.
Quote from: JWC on January 19, 2009, 05:15:06 PM
Oh, and just to prove how old I am....Mazda did a demographic study of the RX-7 back in the late seventies and found that 60% of buyers were gay or female.
That's interesting. I'd never have guessed that.
Quote from: JWC on January 19, 2009, 05:15:06 PM
Great thread. What was the topic again? PT Cruisers, Gay cars, chick cars or just claiming one is such?
It should be noted that the Mustang was originally advertised as the "secretary's car" when marketed. The "boss" (not Springsteen) got the T-Bird.
Oh, and just to prove how old I am....Mazda did a demographic study of the RX-7 back in the late seventies and found that 60% of buyers were gay or female.
LOL - to this day my dad calls the Mustang exactly that, and says exactly that that was how it was marketed.
He opted for his first new car a '66 Galaxy GT390 as a result!
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 05:18:41 PM
That's interesting. I'd never have guessed that.
I actually liked the RX7 back then...and when I read that bit of information...suffered quite an identity crisis.
Quote from: JWC on January 19, 2009, 05:31:52 PM
I actually liked the RX7 back then...and when I read that bit of information...suffered quite an identity crisis.
Well, only the FDs turned really hardcore, the previous gens were a bit softer and more suited for general consumption.
I have a PT cruiser. :ohyeah:
I must be a chick. :confused:
But I like women. :wub:
Oh hell, I'm a lesbian. :frown:
Quote from: GoCougs on January 19, 2009, 05:23:51 PM
LOL - to this day my dad calls the Mustang exactly that, and says exactly that that was how it was marketed.
He opted for his first new car a '66 Galaxy GT390 as a result!
Another thing I never knew about the Mustang.
My grandfather had a 1965 Galaxy, and my family inherited it when he died in 1972. He kept it really well, but my parents were terrible at maintaining cars, so it went downhill pretty quickly after we got it.
Quote from: JWC on January 19, 2009, 05:15:06 PM
Oh, and just to prove how old I am....Mazda did a demographic study of the RX-7 back in the late seventies and found that 60% of buyers were gay or female.
Great, I love that car and drive what I drive. Why do I like girls? I'm so confused
Quote from: Onslaught on January 19, 2009, 05:39:11 PM
Great, I love that car and drive what I drive. Why do I like girls? I'm so confused
You're a lesbian trapped in a man's body..
This thread is priceless.
On another note, there's a yellow Beetle two blocks away with a matching daisy in the vase.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 05:43:30 PM
This thread is priceless.
On another note, there's a yellow Beetle two blocks away with a matching daisy in the vase.
What chick cars those Beetles are...... ;)
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 05:47:43 PM
What chick cars those Beetles are...... ;)
Well the new one just flat out is.
Quote from: dazzleman on January 19, 2009, 05:47:43 PM
What chick cars those Beetles are...... ;)
Well, for srs, they are...
...I blame J. Mays. I liked the T-Bird, but he has no idea how to do anything that isn't cute, cuddly, and completely derivative.
Going back to my teens and twenties, here are other cars that we considered "chick" cars:
MG Midget
Triumph Spitfire
Fiat X-19
Maverick
Celica ST
Fiero
Quote from: JWC on January 19, 2009, 05:55:02 PM
Going back to my teens and twenties, here are other cars that we considered "chick" cars:
Fiero
No, that's a gay person car. Every gay guy in town had one when I was a kid.
Quote from: Onslaught on January 19, 2009, 05:56:10 PM
No, that's a gay person car. Every gay guy in town had one when I was a kid.
God-dammit Onslaught...I had one of those.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 19, 2009, 04:53:51 PM
Nobody on this forum can possibly say that I have ever freaked out and started swearing at them for their uninformed opinions.
Well, let them start talking about kids :mask:
This thread developed into something amusing, I tell ya... Keep it up, boys :popcorn:
:lol:
Quote from: Onslaught on January 19, 2009, 05:56:10 PM
No, that's a gay person car. Every gay guy in town had one when I was a kid.
Gay guys and chicks.
Well, I've had my share of "gay" or "chick" cars.
Fiero
Celica St
VW Cabrio
VW Rabbit (forgot about those)
I yearn for the VW cabrio tragically.
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 06:01:29 PM
I yearn for the VW cabrio tragically.
It was actually a fun car.
One thing I did find out about driving "chick" cars....is that they tend to draw "chicks". I never had a girl walk over to my 1969 Mustang at a gas station, but when I replaced it with a 1973 Celica, girls were always coming over to see the "cute" car....and giving me their phone numbers.
This whole thread is for chicks. Peace out, gals.
Quote from: JWC on January 19, 2009, 05:15:06 PM
Oh, and just to prove how old I am....Mazda did a demographic study of the RX-7 back in the late seventies and found that 60% of buyers were gay or female.
lol, my mom wanted one of those first-gen RX-7's, but my birth precluded that possibility :(
she really likes the design and styling of the RX-8, but not enough to put up with the road noise and stiff ride :mask:
Quote from: JWC on January 19, 2009, 06:00:14 PM
Well, I've had my share of "gay" or "chick" cars.
Fiero
Celica St
VW Cabrio
VW Rabbit (forgot about those)
7 years prior to owning my NA Miata, I almost bought one of those old 80's Rabbit Cabrios. Hey, like I said earlier, for $2,000, you take what you can get.
Quote from: JWC on January 19, 2009, 05:56:46 PM
God-dammit Onslaught...I had one of those.
Homo
Perhaps my Miata and your old Fiero could get together one night?
And don't feel bad. I had a purple car one time.
Purple's not gay. Purple's for muthafuckin KINGS!
Quote from: Onslaught on January 19, 2009, 06:09:53 PM
Homo
Perhaps my Miata and your old Fiero could get together one night?
And don't feel bad. I had a purple car one time.
Sorry, I'm extremely conservative...I believe that it is immoral for different species to "breed".
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 06:24:23 PM
Purple's not gay. Purple's for muthafuckin KINGS!
GAY KINGS!
Quote from: Tave on January 19, 2009, 06:24:23 PM
Purple's not gay. Purple's for muthafuckin KINGS!
And pimps
Quote from: L. ed foote on January 19, 2009, 07:20:30 PM
And pimps
Cool. I like Pimp the most. I did do some stuff in the back of that car with hoes
Forgive me for interrupting this lovefest, but I'd like to speak up in defence of the PT Cruiser.
Let's not forget that back around 2001-02 the PT Cruiser was, in many circles, considered cooler than a polar bear's balls! For the first time in decades flame paint jobs, woody appliqu?s, Continental kits, whitewalls and chrome accents suddenly became fashionable again. The PT Cruiser was the only "modern" car that could pull off any of these looks without looking like a complete dog's dinner. Sure, it was a pastiche of retro design cues, but that was the whole point. The fact that the PT Cruiser didn't take itself too seriously was part of the charm.
Look past the unique styling and you'll see the PT Cruiser still had a lot going for it. Here was a practical five-passenger compact that combined a roomy cabin with hatchback versatility. The removable shelf in the cargo area was a clever way of increasing usable carrying capacity. Flip the rear seats down and you had a cavernous van-like space that made conventional sedans seem almost useless. By all accounts, the PT Cruiser was a decent handler for this type of car. Likewise, I've never heard anyone complain about the performance, either. Reliability seems just as good as anything else out there, too. Yes, there are areas where Chrysler could have done a better job in terms of refinement, but it was at least as good in most areas (and in some areas, even better) as most of it's competitors. Also consider the PT Cruiser was one of Chrysler's few export success stories. If the car was really as bad as some people make it out to be, it would never have enjoyed the success it did.
It's a pity Chrysler is letting this car die without a replacement. There are so many different directions Chrysler could have taken this car into. How about a 1934 Airflow inspired shape with a sliding roof panel similar to the one designed by Brooks Stevens for the 1963 Studebaker Wagonaire? Or an extended-length seven-passenger variant similar in concept to the Dodge Journey? Or a chopped and channeled resto-rod in the same vein as the 1949 Mercury Coup??
The thing I liked most about the PT Cruiser was that it was a car that didn't try to be like everything else. In an age when all carmakers are trying to out-bland each other by offering nothing but look-alike grey porridge, the PT Cruiser stood out as an individual car for those with individual tastes. Love it or loathe it, you couldn't ignore it.
R.I.P. Chrysler PT Cruiser, 2001-2009.
Cheers,
Madman of the People
You can label anything as gay or chick. Take dogs for example...those liittle rat Terriers, chick/gay. Poodles...need I really say more?
Labs, Shepards...real men dogs. Bloodhounds, rebel with a dog....in the James Dean sense...not the red neck sense. Man owns a bloodhound, doesn't give a crap what anyone thinks. Having a bloodhound is like owning a classic car.
Now the spaniels...they are a little more difficult to label.
The Springer Spaniel is strictly a chick dog. High strung, temperamental, and bounces off walls for no apparent reason.
A Cocker Spaniel..thats definetly a gay man's dog. The name assures this. The importance of the Cocker Spaniel to a gay man is apparent when a gay man's friend calls and asks..."Bwuce, what 'cha doin'"...the dog owner can answer with a giggle, saying "playing with my cocker."
Or. say the dog owner is watching TV with the dog next to him on the sofa, he can say..."petting my cocker".
Or if giving a bath..."soaping my cocker."
Say those lines in your best "gay" impression voice and you'll understand.
There is a Spaniel for the real man though...that is the Boykin Spaniel. Like the Cocker Spaniel, it is in the name. Boykin is really close in sound to "boinkin", which as many of you know means having sex. So, boinkin means fucking. So, we have Boykin> boinkin> fucking. So when someone asks a Boykin owner what kind of dog it is, he can say...boinkin....which translates to fucking. The correct answer then is what a real man would say...It's a fuckin' spaniel. Hey Bob, were ya goin'...."out to throw the frisbee with my fuckin' spaniel.....asshole.
(http://www.oldwoodies.com/img/world/forester_woody.jpg)
:rockon:
[/troll]
Quote from: Madman on January 19, 2009, 09:08:41 PM
Flip the rear seats down and you had a cavernous van-like space that made conventional sedans seem almost useless.
The PT was a pretty good car in its day, but let's not exaggerate. Remove the rear seats and you have more space than the average compact wagon, but less than half the volume of many vans.
Any decent wagon will dwarf the practicality of a sedan, too.
Quote from: GoCougs on January 19, 2009, 05:23:51 PM
LOL - to this day my dad calls the Mustang exactly that, and says exactly that that was how it was marketed.
He opted for his first new car a '66 Galaxy GT390 as a result!
The Mustang was marketed to be just about any kind of car a buyer would want; from a secretary's car to a road racer and GT car. One simply had to check the right boxes on the order sheet.
Never heard of a Galaxie GT 390. The Galaxie came as an LTD, the Galaxie 500XL, the Galaxie 500 7 Litre, Galaxie 500, Custom 500 in a bunch of different body styles. I think there was a Fairlane GT with a 390 engine.
Truth be known today one might consider just about all cars as "chick" cars since women make the majority of new car buying decisions, at least in the US.
Even the cars bought by guys are influenced by girls.
Most people buying NEW cars are a little older, and usually married/ in a serious relationship.
Trust me, they ask the girl what she thinks...
Quote from: ifcar on January 20, 2009, 06:35:48 AM
The PT was a pretty good car in its day, but let's not exaggerate. Remove the rear seats and you have more space than the average compact wagon, but less than half the volume of many vans.
Any decent wagon will dwarf the practicality of a sedan, too.
+1
Not to mention that even though it might not be "underpowered" it was "heavy".
According to the 1st couple pages of the thread anyway. :rolleyes:
Quote from: the Teuton on January 19, 2009, 09:14:02 PM
(http://www.oldwoodies.com/img/world/forester_woody.jpg)
:rockon:
[/troll]
If i just had some money and guts...
I spose I should just suck up any potential resale value and go nuts..
Although I really wanted to paint every panel of my original Wagon (79 4wd, tan, I drove it 1992-1994) with a different Rush Album cover...
Quote from: Byteme on January 20, 2009, 07:00:50 AM
The Mustang was marketed to be just about any kind of car a buyer would want; from a secretary's car to a road racer and GT car. One simply had to check the right boxes on the order sheet.
Never heard of a Galaxie GT 390. The Galaxie came as an LTD, the Galaxie 500XL, the Galaxie 500 7 Litre, Galaxie 500, Custom 500 in a bunch of different body styles. I think there was a Fairlane GT with a 390 engine.
Truth be known today one might consider just about all cars as "chick" cars since women make the majority of new car buying decisions, at least in the US.
Are you calling my dad a liar?
Quote from: GoCougs on January 20, 2009, 10:38:22 AM
Are you calling my dad a liar?
I think he did.
:mask:
Quote from: GoCougs on January 20, 2009, 10:54:09 AM
He's in for it now.
Go all ChrisV on his ass. :rockon:
Quote from: GoCougs on January 20, 2009, 10:38:22 AM
Are you calling my dad a liar?
Read it anyway you want. I'm simply stating I'm not aware of a Galaxie model called the GT 390.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 20, 2009, 10:36:34 AM
If i just had some money and guts...
I spose I should just suck up any potential resale value and go nuts..
Although I really wanted to paint every panel of my original Wagon (79 4wd, tan, I drove it 1992-1994) with a different Rush Album cover...
You owned a GL wagon?
You are my hero.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 20, 2009, 10:55:06 AM
Go all ChrisV on his ass. :rockon:
Oh, I'm a nice guy. Byteme/John and I have long ago worked things out, and for this subject, I've done my duty.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 20, 2009, 11:48:25 AM
You owned a GL wagon?
You are my hero.
lol
Credit for Something at last.
Mine was pretty close to this one. No roofrack or fancy lettering on the side though, and it was "dirty brown".
It was a true FWD car that, when you pushed the lever under the dash down, became true 4WD- "Do not engage 4WD on dry pavement or drivetrain damage can result" or something like that. Nothing like being able to do donuts forwards AND backwards.
AND a BIG GREEN LIGHT on the dash came on that said, "4WD". That was the "buckle up" light to my friends..
Oh and the spare tire was right next to the carberator.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/1975_Subaru_DL.jpg)
So I took my son to his clarinet lesson (yeah yeah, he's only in 4th grade, we're working up to saxophone) and there was a PT cruiser in the driveway (instructor's family rented one.)
And I saw THREE Cruisers on the mile drive home.
So I looked up the cruiser's "utility value" and compared it with my reference, my Subaru:
1997 Subaru Legacy L Wagon
overall length (mm): 4,671,
overall width (mm): 1,715,
overall height (mm): 1,450,
ground clearance (mm): 155,
wheelbase (mm): 2,629
137 HP @ 5,400 rpm
curb weight (kg) 1,390
Fuel economy EPA highway (l/100km): 7.8 (30.1mpg)
2002 PT Cruiser
overall length (mm): 4,288,
overall width (mm): 1,704,
overall height (mm): 1,600,
ground clearance (mm): 152,
wheelbase (mm): 2,616
150 HP @ 5,500 rpm
curb weight (kg) 1,409
Fuel economy EPA highway (l/100km): 8.1 (29.0mpg)
1997 Subaru Legacy L Wagon
rear seat up; to lower window (liters): 1,019,
rear seat down (liters): 2,067,
all seats in place (liters): 1,019
all seats removed (liters): 2,067
2002 PT Cruiser
all seats in place (liters): 538
all seats removed (liters): 1,818
1997 Subaru Legacy L Wagon
front headroom (mm): 1,003,
rear headroom (mm): 986,
front leg room (mm): 1,100,
rear leg room (mm): 884,
front shoulder room (mm): 1,374,
rear shoulder room (mm): 1,361
2002 PT Cruiser
front headroom (mm): 1,026,
rear headroom (mm): 1,006,
front hip room (mm): 1,372,
rear hip room (mm): 1,189,
front leg room (mm): 1,031,
rear leg room (mm): 1,036,
front shoulder room (mm): 1,387,
rear shoulder room (mm): 1,369
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2002/chrysler/pt_cruiser/specifications/index.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Had to search more for performance:
http://www.jdmuniverse.com/forums/stocktimes.html
PT Cruiser 0-60mph in 10.9sec, 1/4 mile in 18.2
Legacy L 0-60mph in 10.9sec, 1/4 mile in 17.7
Overall:
Cars are close to the same gas mileage, weight, and performance.
The Subie is about .4m longer, and .15m shorter (vertically.)
PT Cruiser has plenty more legroom in back, but loses out BIGTIME on storage space.
Of course the PT Cruiser sold TONS of models because of the great exterior, which managed to last a LONG time..
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on January 19, 2009, 02:36:13 PM
This isn't fun anymore, somebody better get banned because of this thread and i have a pretty good idea of who it should be.
I say NAcar.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 19, 2009, 10:48:15 AM
yeah, the only real exception was the Dodge La Femme.
(http://www.dodgelafemme.com/registry/56_2.jpg)
(http://www.dodgelafemme.com/images/56back.jpg)
(http://www.dodgelafemme.com/images/56dash2.jpg)
That's brilliant! I want one.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 20, 2009, 06:57:16 PM
So I took my son to his clarinet lesson (yeah yeah, he's only in 4th grade, we're working up to saxophone) and there was a PT cruiser in the driveway (instructor's family rented one.)
And I saw THREE Cruisers on the mile drive home.
So I looked up the cruiser's "utility value" and compared it with my reference, my Subaru:
1997 Subaru Legacy L Wagon
overall length (mm): 4,671,
overall width (mm): 1,715,
overall height (mm): 1,450,
ground clearance (mm): 155,
wheelbase (mm): 2,629
137 HP @ 5,400 rpm
curb weight (kg) 1,390
Fuel economy EPA highway (l/100km): 7.8 (30.1mpg)
2002 PT Cruiser
overall length (mm): 4,288,
overall width (mm): 1,704,
overall height (mm): 1,600,
ground clearance (mm): 152,
wheelbase (mm): 2,616
150 HP @ 5,500 rpm
curb weight (kg) 1,409
Fuel economy EPA highway (l/100km): 8.1 (29.0mpg)
1997 Subaru Legacy L Wagon
rear seat up; to lower window (liters): 1,019,
rear seat down (liters): 2,067,
all seats in place (liters): 1,019
all seats removed (liters): 2,067
2002 PT Cruiser
all seats in place (liters): 538
all seats removed (liters): 1,818
1997 Subaru Legacy L Wagon
front headroom (mm): 1,003,
rear headroom (mm): 986,
front leg room (mm): 1,100,
rear leg room (mm): 884,
front shoulder room (mm): 1,374,
rear shoulder room (mm): 1,361
2002 PT Cruiser
front headroom (mm): 1,026,
rear headroom (mm): 1,006,
front hip room (mm): 1,372,
rear hip room (mm): 1,189,
front leg room (mm): 1,031,
rear leg room (mm): 1,036,
front shoulder room (mm): 1,387,
rear shoulder room (mm): 1,369
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2002/chrysler/pt_cruiser/specifications/index.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Had to search more for performance:
http://www.jdmuniverse.com/forums/stocktimes.html
PT Cruiser 0-60mph in 10.9sec, 1/4 mile in 18.2
Legacy L 0-60mph in 10.9sec, 1/4 mile in 17.7
Overall:
Cars are close to the same gas mileage, weight, and performance.
The Subie is about .4m longer, and .15m shorter (vertically.)
PT Cruiser has plenty more legroom in back, but loses out BIGTIME on storage space.
Of course the PT Cruiser sold TONS of models because of the great exterior, which managed to last a LONG time..
Ok, I'm going to be serious, here, for a moment. Before we bought our PT, we looked at a lot of cars. In fact, we spent quite a bit of time at the International Auto Show sitting in a lot of different cars to get a feel for useability and ergonomics. My wife originally wanted an Outback Sport (the impreza wagon), but when we looked at it, the rear seat ingress/egress was horrid. Very easy to hit your head on the roof line due to the sedan shaped rear doors and low roofline. Since we had to consider rear seat passengers (primarily her parents, who are in their 80s) that ingress/egress was paramount. It also cost a bit more than the PT. We also looked at the Legacy, which I liked (but she didn't. And neither one of us liked the more expensive Forester). Being basically a sedan based station wagon, it had the same issues with rear seat ingress/egress: low and hard to get in/out of for taller or older people.
The PT may have only slightly higher headroom listed, but that's measured from the seat cushion, and doen't include the fact that the seats were higher off the floor, making it so you didn't have to drop down into the seat, instead, you simply slid in. And the rear doors were tall all the way to the rear making it very easy to get in while
barely ducking your head. Since you sat more vertical on the taller seats, you actually had more useable legroom in the rear with the front seats in normal driving position. It turned out to be very easy to get her folks in and out of the rear when we were taking them places.
Speaking of rear seats, the PT also has a little trick that the Legacy doesn't. A flick of a lever and one or both rear seats come completely out, leaving a low,
flat load floor (due to the specifically designed rear suspension that allows for a low floor). This makes for a huge rear carrying area, on par with much larger SUVs. While the Legacy may be listed as having more volume, a long skinny tube can have more volume than a short, squat box, but the box will carry more real world things than the long skinny tube can. This is how I was able to carry the stack of 14 36x64 Pella replacement windows in the back with the hatch closed. The Legacy (and normal sedan based wagons) simply couldn't do that, because, even though it might have more LENGTH creating more volume, it wouldn't have had the internal height to do so. Same with carrying lumber and the stand up compressor with one rear seat folded forward, while still having room for my wife and myself in front, and my stepson in the remaining rear seat. The utility value of that trick was utilized quite a bit during our 5 years of ownership. If I wanted to carry a small stack of 8 foot lumber, I could fold a rear seat flat, use the adjustible cargo tray in the rear to make a flat surface behind that seat, and fold the front seat forward flat to creat a flat load floor from the rear hatch to the dashboard! I carried the entire load of 8 foot cedar railing for our deck home in this manner with the hatch closed!
The only thing it couldn't carry that I wanted it to was a 4x8 sheet of plywood, as diagonally it was an inch too small.
(http://www.ptcruizer.com/ptpix/back.jpg)
That still has the rear seats in it. Without them, the space opens up even more. It may not be quite as wide in spots as the Legacy (but it doesn't have rear strut encroachment) but it's as long and it's taller.
Considering the Legacy is a midsizer and the PT is a compact wagon, that's not bad.
As for the accelleration times you listed, two things. First, the test numbers listed are usually from a fully loaded Limited, as that was the one that most magazines tested. That meant equipped with the automatic, which was over 2 seconds slower to 60 than the manual trans version before break in.
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2004-chrysler-pt-cruiser-1.htm
"Base manual-transmission wagon did 8.9 sec 0-60 mph; automatics are significantly slower."
Second, the PT, like a lot of modern cars, starts with a default ECU program that learns as you drive it, and also limits power delivery during the first 3000 miles (sort of an enforced break in period). The jump in hp at the 3000 mile point may not be huge, but it's noticeable, especially if it's not going through a slushbox. My PT was noticeably quicker to 60 after break in than it was when we got it. But you have to drive it kind of briskly in that first 3000 miles in order to get that jump in power (the ECU reads your driving needs and adjusts the fuel and spark map accordingly. Liek I said, this is a trick that a lot of modern cars have, and often we use it to reprogram musclecars: you disconnect the battery for a bit and make sure the car's chassis drains all residual current, then reconnect the battery and drive the car hard. The ECU resets to a default mode and learns it's new fuel and spark mapping).
Yeah, it hasn't changed much in the 8 years it's been around, but it was exactly the kind of small, practical vehicle we were trying to get people out of instead of SUVs, and it had a unique style that stood out in a sea of conservative cars AND people seemed to like it (unlike the Aztek. Even in the supposedly poor sales year last year for PTs, it still sold more than the BEST year of Aztek sales (and probably close to all years of Aztek sales combined)). Too bad Chrysler couldn't have paid more attention to it and kept it relevant for a new generation of buyers.
I'm not trying to bash it. I'm just saying it's not the crazy vehicle from the Gods some think.
The Cruiser can totaly be credited with opening up the "crossover" market- for the seating reason you mention, which would be nice. My wife would probably pick one over my subie if she were the primary driver. She likes the upright view and higher seat, unlike the low-car seating and view.
I am very very perplexed why Chrysler didn't work to keep the Cruiser THE Crossover to have. It's like they birthed a cash cow and just let it go walk around in traffic on the interstate. Gonna get hit sooner or later...
BTW I'm comparing the Cruiser to what I think is one of the best cars out there, so that's kudos right there, instead of comparing it to some beater or whatever..
They should have made a hybrid PT. Soo many people would've bought them, as I woudn't imagine it to be any more expensive than a hybrid Camry (might have even undercut the Prius). Would've made a good taxi, too.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 21, 2009, 09:40:01 AM
The Cruiser can totaly be credited with opening up the "crossover" market
Not really. I'd think of the crossover as something that at least pretends to be an SUV by offering AWD. It's the precursor to a few other stylized small wagons, like the Matrix/Vibe, HHR, or current xB, but it's pretty much irrelevant to the bigger-market crossover classes.
Quote from: Vinsanity on January 21, 2009, 12:43:29 PM
They should have made a hybrid PT. Soo many people would've bought them, as I woudn't imagine it to be any more expensive than a hybrid Camry (might have even undercut the Prius). Would've made a good taxi, too.
If they could have somehow gotten the technology together and then given it a restyle (maybe a hybrid-only restyle, so everyone can know how green the owners are), that would have worked well. Certainly better than the Durango/Aspen hybrids, and on a product that at least at one point appealed to many consumers who wouldn't ordinarily buy Chrysler.
That's IF Chrysler could have pulled off a good hybrid quickly enough. A big if.
Quote from: ifcar on January 21, 2009, 01:00:27 PM
If they could have somehow gotten the technology together and then given it a restyle (maybe a hybrid-only restyle, so everyone can know how green the owners are), that would have worked well. Certainly better than the Durango/Aspen hybrids, and on a product that at least at one point appealed to many consumers who wouldn't ordinarily buy Chrysler.
That's IF Chrysler could have pulled off a good hybrid quickly enough. A big if.
Somehow, I see it extremely fitting that a PT Hybrid look exactly like a modern-day reincarnation of this car:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/98/ChryslerAirflowStreamliner34.jpg)
Quote from: ifcar on January 21, 2009, 12:56:03 PM
Not really. I'd think of the crossover as something that at least pretends to be an SUV by offering AWD. It's the precursor to a few other stylized small wagons, like the Matrix/Vibe, HHR, or current xB, but it's pretty much irrelevant to the bigger-market crossover classes.
When I say "Crossover" I mean all the "mini-minivans with swinging doors".
The PT Cruiser was the first taller "in between Station Wagon and SUV" vehicle out there.
(Which to me is what "crossovers" are.)
The tallness and seating worked, and opened up a whole generation of engineers trying to figure out how to emulate (to a small degree.)
Quote from: Vinsanity on January 21, 2009, 01:05:12 PM
Somehow, I see it extremely fitting that a PT Hybrid look exactly like a modern-day reincarnation of this car:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/98/ChryslerAirflowStreamliner34.jpg)
No that would be the Caliber.
(At least the high beltline and small windows.. )
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 21, 2009, 06:14:23 PM
When I say "Crossover" I mean all the "mini-minivans with swinging doors".
The PT Cruiser was the first taller "in between Station Wagon and SUV" vehicle out there.
(Which to me is what "crossovers" are.)
The tallness and seating worked, and opened up a whole generation of engineers trying to figure out how to emulate (to a small degree.)
1996 RAV4? 1997 CR-V?
Quote from: ifcar on January 21, 2009, 06:22:44 PM
1996 RAV4? 1997 CR-V?
Those are just small SUVs, designed to at least look like they have 4x4 offroad intentions and "ruggedness" in a small package. The PT definitely had no offroad pretensions.
A better set of examples would be the Nissan Axxess and the Mitsubishi Expo, which were real direct predecessors to the PT Cruiser, but without the attention grabbing style:
Mini-minivans or tall small wagons, the early ones didn't have sliding doors like "true" minivans:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/%2792-%2794_Mitsubishi_Expo_4-Door.JPG/800px-%2792-%2794_Mitsubishi_Expo_4-Door.JPG)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a6/Mitsubishi_Space_Wagon.JPG/800px-Mitsubishi_Space_Wagon.JPG)
Even the Civic Wagovan could be considered a direct predecessor, due to it's tall height in a small package.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1b/Honda_Civic_Shuttle_1984_Utrecht.jpg/800px-Honda_Civic_Shuttle_1984_Utrecht.jpg)
But I daresay that being too conservative is what kept the predecessors from being anywhere near as popular or as long lived as the PT.
The crossovers of today, too, have off-road pretensions.
Ok so the PT Cruiser wasn't the first crossover.
It was the first AMERICAN Crossover though, dangit!!
And are 2009 crossovers built on car frames or truck frames?
If you say Car then I say it is NOT an offroader.
Unless it's a subie. :-)
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 21, 2009, 07:00:04 PM
Ok so the PT Cruiser wasn't the first crossover.
It was the first AMERICAN Crossover though, dangit!!
And are 2009 crossovers built on car frames or truck frames?
If you say Car then I say it is NOT an offroader.
Unless it's a subie. :-)
Wrong. Ford started building crossovers in 1908.
Quote from: ifcar on January 21, 2009, 06:54:27 PM
The crossovers of today, too, have off-road pretensions.
No, none of them have the 4x4 look (like the tailgate mounted spare tire, molded in "push bars, plastic offroad flares or cladding, etc). Modern crossovers are still, like the Venza, station wagons with height. The Flex doesn't try to be an offroader, the Pacifica never tried to look like or even be marketed as an offroader, the Edge never tried to be or was marketed as an offroader, the Murano and FX series never were, either. the Rav-4 and CR-V have had offroad in their advertising and DNA from day one.
(http://www.autoworld.com/news/Toyota/RAV4SoftTop.jpg)
(http://jcwinnie.biz/wordpress/imageSnag/rav4ev_waterfall.jpg)
(http://www.niot.net/niot_570/toyota%20rav4%20niot.net%201%20(1).jpg)
(http://www.bestpricerentacar.ca/admin/car_images/car46fadd66e89fb-CRV.jpg)
(http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040709/040709_crv_hmed_10a.hmedium.jpg)
(http://www.handa-accessories.com/crv/02crvrear.jpg)
(http://www.boondoxmotorsports.com/HondaCRV.jpg)
You'll never (at least I haven't found it in the last 15 minutes of googling) see an FX or Edge or Venza or Pacifica with an exterior spare or pushbar, or black plastic flares and offroad advertising. Mini SUVs are mini SUVs. Crossovers are not mini SUVs.
You don't see many exterior spares on car or truck-based SUVs because they force the back hatch to swing out instead of open upwards. At the moment, I'm only thinking of the Hummer and Wrangler among trucks, yet also the RAV4 and Cayenne among cars. Black plastic, same thing -- largely gone from today's vehicles.
And I don't think it was the PT Cruiser that caused that change.
The point was that the mini SUVs that YOU brought up (the early CRVs and RAV 4s) were not crossovers and instead were small offroad aimed vehicles, and as such, were not ancestors of the PT. The PT was a small tall wagon, along the likes of the Expo, Axxess, and Civic Wagovan. The cars that got the moniker of "crossover" were larger variations on THAT vehicle form, not the CRV and RAV4 form. CRVs and RAV4s are STILL not "crossovers," even though they have lost the cladding and exterior spare.
The CR-V and RAV4 were very much designed as on-road vehicles. They had some off-road ability, but the point of basing them on cars instead of trucks was for their on-road comfort and driving dynamics. That was the cross -- the look, high seating position, and some of the ability of a truck crossed with the on-road driving dynamics of a car.
If they wanted the CR-V and RAV4 to be "offroad aimed", wouldn't they have made them trucks instead of cars?
*sigh* you're being intentionally obtuse. Crossovers are not advertised as offoaders. The CRV and RAV4 were, specifically to be SUVs.
In fact, the term "crossover" was coined specifically for certain intermediate/full size tall station wagons with ZERO offroad advertising, pretensions, or claims.
Oh wait, it was you who think that every vehicle is a competitor for every OTHER vehicle....
Somehow I think Honda thinks it's an SUV:
(http://www.who-sells-it.com/images/catalogs/644/227/ct/cr-v_brochure_0004.jpg)
Toyota thinks the RAV4 is an SUV also:
(http://www.who-sells-it.com/images/catalogs/643/13094/ct/2008-rav4-000004.jpg)
http://www.1000islandstoyota.com/newsite/pages/rav4.html
"The available 269 horsepower V6 engine makes it one of the most powerful SUV's in its class."
And even in 2008, it had an exterior mounted spare.
Quote from: NACar on January 21, 2009, 07:07:26 PM
Wrong. Ford started building crossovers in 1908.
No v-engine or ecu. ;-)
To me Crossovers are trying to capture the utility of a MINIVAN but not appear to be a Minivan.
Sure some of them have awd, but so did the Caravan.
They are NOT SUVs, but are built for people that want a taller vehicle than a regular wagon (CAR,) but don't want a Minivan. So the crossovers are built to APPEAR closer to an SUV than a Minivan. Why?? Which has sold better the last 5-8yrs??
They want this type of vehicle for reasons that Chris already spelled out very well, on pg11.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 21, 2009, 07:52:56 PM
*sigh* you're being intentionally obtuse. Crossovers are not advertised as offoaders. The CRV and RAV4 were, specifically to be SUVs.
In fact, the term "crossover" was coined specifically for certain intermediate/full size tall station wagons with ZERO offroad advertising, pretensions, or claims.
Oh wait, it was you who think that every vehicle is a competitor for every OTHER vehicle....
Somehow I think Honda thinks it's an SUV:
Toyota thinks the RAV4 is an SUV also:
"The available 269 horsepower V6 engine makes it one of the most powerful SUV's in its class."
And even in 2008, it had an exterior mounted spare.
If you're specifically talking about midsize crossovers instead of compact ones of the PT Cruiser's size, it would be difficult to argue (I'd think) that the Lexus RX300 wasn't the first.
But on the original topic, the RAV4 and CR-V were advertised as SUVs because that's all there was that they could compete against. They wanted to market the image of the truck-based SUV, but they certainly weren't trying to sell to people who wanted off-road vehicles. They had outside-mounted spare tires because that's what the sort of vehicle they competed against had, not because an outside-mounted spare tire makes them any more of a truck.
Quote from: ifcar on January 21, 2009, 08:06:00 PM
If you're specifically talking about midsize crossovers instead of compact ones of the PT Cruiser's size, it would be difficult to argue (I'd think) that the Lexus RX300 wasn't the first.
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=110
They said it was a midsize SUV..
Said the PT Cruiser was a small car.
Nevermind- the Pacifica is a "midsize SUV". So that site is worthless for classifications..
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 21, 2009, 08:23:56 PM
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=110
They said it was a midsize SUV..
Said the PT Cruiser was a small car.
Nevermind- the Pacifica is a "midsize SUV". So that site is worthless for classifications..
They just go by weight, and don't use the term "crossover."
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 21, 2009, 07:55:05 PM
No v-engine or ecu. ;-)
I don't understand what that has to do with anything.
Quote from: NACar on January 21, 2009, 09:23:00 PM
I don't understand what that has to do with anything.
Vehicles as old as that were not "crossovers"- they were just vehicles. I was just being silly..
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 21, 2009, 09:45:41 PM
Vehicles as old as that were not "crossovers"- they were just vehicles. I was just being silly..
Why can't all vehicles just be vehicles? I don't like arbitrary labels that exist purely for marketing. Hey, look at my new Cargo and Recreational Activity Personnel Vehicle. My CRAPV is a completely different type of vehicle than your CUV because it is one inch taller and has bigger fender flares.
Quote from: NACar on January 21, 2009, 09:53:14 PM
Why can't all vehicles just be vehicles? I don't like arbitrary labels that exist purely for marketing. Hey, look at my new Cargo and Recreational Activity Personnel Vehicle. My CRAPV is a completely different type of vehicle than your CUV because it is one inch taller and has bigger fender flares.
YES!!
But my Small Multipurpose Utility Transport has better gas mileage. In fact, the SMUT is the ultimate in utility.
My Sport Luxury Utility Trucklet (SLUT) has a far better blend of car-like handling and truck-like versatility, with a dash of luxury accoutrements for good measure.
Touche.
My Big Impractical Truck-like Car-based Hatchback is more stylish however.
(http://www.redlineblog.com/autos/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/bmw-x6-action-f3q-1.jpg)
Sure, if pug fugly is a style...
Quote from: 93JC on January 22, 2009, 09:06:29 AM
Sure, if pug fugly is a style...
read the acronyms, not the statements, Crackhead... :-)
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 22, 2009, 09:39:06 AM
read the acronyms, not the statements, Crackhead... :-)
:thumbsup: