2o6 (or ChrisV, if he wants to play) will post a picture of a car that you guys generally think is "crap" and you have to find at least two items good about it! No negatives! :loopy:
That actually sounds kinda fun.
Good!
First car:
Geo Metro Convertible
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3296/2508890127_01c87c1cb0.jpg)
2o6, since I often can't see pictures posted, can you also name the car when you post a new one?
1. Probably the least expensive convertible ever made.
2. There is no way the car itself can distract me whilst staring at the stripper driving it.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 28, 2009, 09:49:17 PM
2o6, since I often can't see pictures posted, can you also name the car when you post a new one?
Fixed.
What a dinky piece of shit. I would never own a pussy car like that.
On the other hand, it is the cheapest ticket to open top motoring. It is also very fuel efficient, lightweight, nimble, easy to park, and chicks dig it.
Quote from: NACar on January 28, 2009, 09:51:37 PM
What a dinky piece of shit. I would never own a pussy car like that.
:confused:
1: Fun Barbados/Island type rental car.
2: Would make a lovely planter.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 28, 2009, 09:52:13 PM
:confused:
Oh, sorry...
1. The greatest car ever built
2. It won fourteen and a half SCCA national TSD rally championships
Quote from: NACar on January 28, 2009, 09:54:18 PM
Oh, sorry...
1. The greatest car ever built
2. It won fourteen and a half SCCA national TSD rally championships
Much better. I want only positive from you.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 28, 2009, 09:54:59 PM
Much better. I want only positive from you.
WATS THE NEXT CAR, DINGBAT
1) It's not really an American car.
2) We were the only people lucky enough to get the Metro convertible.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 28, 2009, 09:56:31 PM
1) It's not really an American car.
2) We were the only people lucky enough to get the Metro convertible.
Not positive enough. :nono:
Only smiles, please!
Quote from: NACar on January 28, 2009, 09:55:59 PM
WATS THE NEXT CAR, DINGBAT
In time, honey.
Fine, if you're a Lambo owner, there's a genuinely good chance you'd love drag racing a Metro cabrio.
New Car:
Chevrolet Lumina APV
(http://www.usaraud.ee/ajuvant/chevy/lumina_apv_1993.jpg)
1. You can swap in a supercharged 3800 V6
2. It's not a Metro convertible
1. It's got a raked windscreen so you can pretend it's an NSX until you try to turn left.
2. The front seat reclines way back so you can beat your kids while driving.
1. It can be a bang-bus.
2. It will probably run a lot longer and go further on a transmission than an equivalent Dodge or Ford product.
1. spoiler/luggage rack combo
2. fine EURO handling in a seven-passenger package
Quote from: 2o6 on January 28, 2009, 10:03:20 PM
New Car:
Chevrolet Lumina APV
(http://www.usaraud.ee/ajuvant/chevy/lumina_apv_1993.jpg)
1: You can spread out a full sized newspaper on the dashboard and still have a place toput your coffee ( I know this)
2: With the right paint job, you can call it "shuttlecraft five" and impress all your geek buddies at the trakkie convention.
1. At the time it was futuristic.
2. It wasn't as dorky as the then popular Caravan.
A few for the Geo cuz I'm bored:
1. they make great "art cars"
2. it will fit in anything remotely resembling a parking spot
Quote from: 2o6 on January 28, 2009, 10:03:20 PM
New Car:
Chevrolet Lumina APV
(http://www.usaraud.ee/ajuvant/chevy/lumina_apv_1993.jpg)
Leonard Nimoy endorsed it (well, the Oldsmobile, but still)
The body panels will never rust.
Take off the wipers and it makes a great slide for the kids.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 28, 2009, 11:05:44 PM
Take off the wipers and it makes a great slide for the kids.
Or a bike ramp....
1. Hella cargo room.
2. Awesome spaceship style.
Had way less recalls and issues than its evolution, the Venture.
I always kinda liked that car when I was young. I remember seeing a few here, only it was called a Trans Sport...
Citroen Ami 6
(http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/citroen-ami.jpg)
1. It's a Citroen. Citroens are awesome. Full stop.
2. It has a reverse-angle rear window, and only marvellous cars have those (Ford Anglia, 1958-60 Lincoln Continental Mark III/IV/V, Mercury Monterey etc.).
Citroen Ami: (Love that car)
1. The "Breezeway" style reverse c-piller is awesome and unique
2. It's 2CV based so it's easy to fix.
1. It'll scare small children and elderly pedestrians out of your way.
2. Gives you a great excuse to wear that beret and striped shirt.
3. Terrific platform for a Hayabusa swap. Make the local ricerboys cry.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 28, 2009, 09:56:31 PM
2) We were the only people lucky enough to get the Metro convertible.
:nono:
1) It looks better than the Aurora Safety Car
2) The people who made it most likely had crepes on their lunch break
Quote from: 93JC on January 29, 2009, 08:18:33 AM
:nono:
I meant North Americans in general. You guys had the Firefly, though.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 29, 2009, 05:51:27 AM
Citroen Ami 6
(http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/citroen-ami.jpg)
1. The front end looks like the Ultimate Warrior's face
2. It was only sold in Europe.
Quote from: the Teuton on January 29, 2009, 08:19:45 AM
I meant North Americans in general. You guys had the Firefly, though.
We had the Geo Metro as well.
Quote from: Payman on January 29, 2009, 07:44:19 AM
1. It'll scare small children and elderly pedestrians out of your way.
Crap you took my first answer. :lol:
1. It's as unique as you can get, you will never see another one when you drive it around town.
2. It has a stylish wheel vent/indent behind the front wheels. Only the coolest cars have those.
Chevy APV- the V stands for vacuum, as in it makes a great tool to clean up dead leaves. Also, in the snow, your kids can ride sleds down its nose.
Admit it, if they made a Z34 Lumina APV, you'd consider getting it.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 29, 2009, 05:51:27 AM
Citroen Ami 6
(http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/citroen-ami.jpg)
Two biggest virtues?
1. It's not in my driveway.
2. I'll have to get back to you on #2.
:lol:
Ahhh, negatives aren't virtues. ;)
Well, that's the best I've got for that car. :lol:
Quote from: the Teuton on January 29, 2009, 10:57:29 AM
Admit it, if they made a Z34 Lumina APV, you'd consider getting it.
Lumina APV Euro with the Roof Luggage package?
Quote from: 2o6 on January 28, 2009, 10:03:20 PM
Chevrolet Lumina APV
1. Better than most of its competitors in almost every quantifiable way, particularly the Dodge Caravan/Plymouth Voyager sales leaders. Bigger and more powerful than those two, but similar fuel economy. You could also get seven bucket seats vs. the two buckets and two benches in most minivans of the time, making it very versatile. Need to carry six people, but need a little more cargo room? Take out only
one of the back seats.
2. Not as miserable to drive as one might think; you get used to the big, long nose. It was radically raked at the time, but compared to most modern minivans it's not particularly long and awkward.
(and just so we're clear I'm not a total Lumina APV homer, it handled like a boat, had shitty brakes, and many of the interior bits weren't put together well)
Quote from: the Teuton on January 29, 2009, 08:19:45 AM
I meant North Americans in general. You guys had the Firefly, though.
We got the second-gen Chevrolet Turbo Sprint and Pontiac Turbo Firefly too. :praise:
My sister-in-law learned to drive in one of those anteater vans her mom had when she was 16. I felt bad for her.
Citroen Ami 6:
1. It's got ridiculous ground clearance and suspension articulation IIRC
2. Really easy to work on.
Quote from: omicron on January 29, 2009, 06:38:28 AM
1. It's a Citroen. Citroens are awesome. Full stop.
2. It has a reverse-angle rear window, and only marvellous cars have those (Ford Anglia, 1958-60 Lincoln Continental Mark III/IV/V, Mercury Monterey etc.).
I'm right here with you. Citroens, especially older Citroens, are fantastic to look at.
Chris is more militant in his acceptance of mediocre cars.
"I HAD A CAVALIER Z24 WITH 3 WHEELS, AND IT MADE FOR SOME OF THE MOST EXCITING DRIVES IN MY LIFE DAMN IT!!!!"
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on January 29, 2009, 03:49:53 AM
I always kinda liked that car when I was young. I remember seeing a few here, only it was called a Trans Sport...
It was here too. The same vehicle was sold as the Pontiac Trans Sport, the Chevy Lumina APV, and the Oldsmobile Silhoutte. (Am I missing one?)
Quote from: ChrisV on January 29, 2009, 05:51:27 AM
Citroen Ami 6
(http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/citroen-ami.jpg)
1.You'll never run into the problem of getting into the wrong car by mistake at your local mall parking lot.
2.Park one at a car show, and you'll get more double takes than that dude with the 1000 HP Camaro.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 29, 2009, 03:01:05 PM
It was here too. The same vehicle was sold as the Pontiac Trans Sport, the Chevy Lumina APV, and the Oldsmobile Silhoutte. (Am I missing one?)
The Buick Terrorizer. It didn't sell very well.
Quote from: sandertheshark on January 28, 2009, 10:10:45 PM
2. The front seat reclines way back so you can beat your kids while driving.
lmfao!
Quote from: ChrisV on January 29, 2009, 05:51:27 AM
Citroen Ami 6
(http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/citroen-ami.jpg)
1. It will frighten away small children.
2. Provides many hilarious moments watching your passengers trying to get out.
Oldsmobile Alero Coup?
(http://www.autowire.net/alero1.jpg)
1. It had a decently powered 4 banger (2.2L) and a 5-speed. The 3.4L V6 had some get up and go, even though it was coupled to an automatic.
2. It was the best looking of the GM N-body cars. It was decent looking in general. Compared with Grand Am and Malibu, it was pretty stylish.
1. One of the best Oldsmobile, or even GM, cars in a long time when it came out
2. Wasn't it one of the most reliable cars from those years?
1. It took the decent proportions of the Grand Am and removed the tacky cladding.
2. It could be had with an MT shift, and the 2.2 ecotec in later models is reliable and fuel efficient.
Quote from: hotrodalex on January 29, 2009, 05:48:23 PM
1. One of the best Oldsmobile, or even GM, cars in a long time when it came out
2. Wasn't it one of the most reliable cars from those years?
1.False (Aurora for starters, and if you'd ever driven one, you'd disagree)
2.I don't know.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 29, 2009, 06:02:34 PM
1.False (Aurora for starters, and if you'd ever driven one, you'd disagree)
2.I don't know.
I wasn't including the Aurora since they came out around the same time, didn't they?
1) The car felt like a quality piece of engineering.
2) It made right almost everything that was wrong with the Grand Am.
1. Good lookin', especially for the time of blobs.
2. Fog lights.
:huh:
Quote from: hotrodalex on January 29, 2009, 05:48:23 PM
1. One of the best Oldsmobile, or even GM, cars in a long time when it came out
2. Wasn't it one of the most reliable cars from those years?
For question #2, it depends on what you got. The 2.4L "Twin Cam" four cylinder offered from 1999-2001(?) was not the most reliable piece, and the 3.4L V6 was prone to eating intake manifold gaskets, which, if not caught soon enough would result in engine death.
The electical stuff (ABS sensors) and some mechanical stuff (wheel bearings) weren't great either.
The later models with the 2.2L engine were better.
Our van has a 3400 with the manifold gasket problem. It has been diagnosed, but somehow the engine still works just fine. I don't get it.
After 2000 or 2001, the manifold gasket problem was completely fixed on the 3400, but there have been people trying to get the 1997-2000 3400 engine on a class action lawsuit for years now. If it ever were to go through, GM would pretty much be done for.
And my family would be an engine richer.
Quote from: NACar on January 29, 2009, 05:21:17 PM
Oldsmobile Alero Coup?
(http://www.autowire.net/alero1.jpg)
1. Better looking than at least 70% of all GM coupes that came out that year.
2. My brother has one. Or an Aurora - I can't remember which.
My Avis reasons:
1. It's better than the Chevrolet Classic
2. It's better than the Chevrolet Cavalier
Daewoo Lanos
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/2000-Daewoo-Lanos-00813021990001.jpg)
c'mon guise, u can do it
1) Classic Italian designer
2) Serviced by Chevy dealerships
1. I can enter it in a demolition derby without any second thoughts
2. It doesn't have hubcaps!
1. Hugely cheap to buy on the used market.
2. You can probably still get parts for it from GM, I think.
1. It's hilarious to watch a German-speaker attempt to pronounce "Daewoo."
2. Many parts are flammable.
1. GM Parts!
2. Styling wasn't ugly.
1. Small and light.
2. Cheap as shit (coincidence?).
(http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/citroen-ami.jpg)
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 29, 2009, 09:09:59 AM
1. The front end looks like the Ultimate Warrior's face
2. It was only sold in Europe.
The Citroen Ami-6 was sold in the US. Citroen imported it from 1963 to 1967, although some were supposedly imported prior to that. Below is a photo of a US-spec Ami-6 with round sealed-beam headlamps.
(http://www.citroenet.org.uk/foreign/usa/images/ami-6-f.jpg)
US Market Ami 6s were fitted with four round, sealed beam headlights since Federal regulations prohibited the fitting of the rectangular lights fitted in other markets.
Beneath the twin lights, round indicator (turn) lights were fitted and these were protected from parking nudges by full width bumper over-riders specific to the American market.
At the rear, four round red lights (tail, brake and turn) were fitted, together with heavy duty nudge bars.
A different boot (trunk) lock was fitted. European models featured the number plate light within the lock housing but on US models, vertical licence plate lights were fitted.
(http://www.citroenet.org.uk/foreign/usa/images/ami6-headlights.jpg)
.
(http://www.citroenet.org.uk/foreign/usa/images/ami6-rear.jpg)
Marketing was directed at women in the USA:
(http://www.citroenet.org.uk/foreign/usa/images/us-ami6-03.jpg)
.
(http://www.citroenet.org.uk/foreign/usa/images/us-ami6-02.jpg)
US-spec MPH speedometer.
(http://images.forum-auto.com/mesimages/402920/Citroen%20ami%206%20us%201.jpg)
Cheers,
Madman of the People
Ami:
(http://images.forum-auto.com/mesimages/402920/Citroen%20ami%206%20us%201.jpg)
1. Each button on the Ami's dash calls up a different character from Sesame Street.
(http://www.citroenet.org.uk/foreign/usa/images/ami-6-f.jpg)
2. (http://a4.vox.com/6a00c2251fa3b8549d00c2251fca6cf219-120pi)
Quote from: Laconian on January 29, 2009, 11:41:03 PM
Ami:
(http://images.forum-auto.com/mesimages/402920/Citroen%20ami%206%20us%201.jpg)
1. Each button on the Ami's dash calls up a different character from Sesame Street.
(http://www.citroenet.org.uk/foreign/usa/images/ami-6-f.jpg)
2. (http://a4.vox.com/6a00c2251fa3b8549d00c2251fca6cf219-120pi)
Hahahahha. Best post on here in awhile.
Quote from: Raza on January 29, 2009, 12:49:50 PM
I'm right here with you. Citroens, especially older Citroens, are fantastic to look at.
The SM is exquisite:
(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/12/2007/05/sm1.jpg)
(http://www.classic2.dds.nl/foto%20France/Citroen/Citro%209.jpg)
Quote from: omicron on January 31, 2009, 08:25:13 AM
The SM is exquisite:
(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/12/2007/05/sm1.jpg)
(http://www.classic2.dds.nl/foto%20France/Citroen/Citro%209.jpg)
Do want. :wub:
Is that one of those ones that can run on three wheels just fine?
Quote from: the Teuton on January 31, 2009, 11:21:00 AM
Is that one of those ones that can run on three wheels just fine?
Any car with Hydropnumatic suspension should be able to do it just fine. The DS and GS do it easier.
Quote from: Laconian on January 29, 2009, 11:41:03 PM
Ami:
(http://images.forum-auto.com/mesimages/402920/Citroen%20ami%206%20us%201.jpg)
1. Each button on the Ami's dash calls up a different character from Sesame Street.
(http://www.citroenet.org.uk/foreign/usa/images/ami-6-f.jpg)
2. (http://a4.vox.com/6a00c2251fa3b8549d00c2251fca6cf219-120pi)
ROFL!!! Ohhhh man that hurt...
2002 - 2006 Toyota Camry
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/2003-Toyota-Camry-03812081990004.jpg)
1. Reliable.
2. Good for my grandmother.
1. V6 sounds pretty sweet with Flowmasters
2. Resale value is great as long as you don't put Flowmasters on it
Quote from: NACar on February 01, 2009, 02:24:42 PM
1. V6 sounds pretty sweet with Flowmasters
now you have me morbidly curious...
Quote from: Vinsanity on February 01, 2009, 03:28:56 PM
now you have me morbidly curious...
Frightening prospect.... however most 60 degree V6s w/equal length headers will sound halfway decent
Quote from: Vinsanity on February 01, 2009, 03:28:56 PM
now you have me morbidly curious...
It's the same engine in the Lotus Evora.......and a few other fast cars.
---------------
1. Spacious.
2. Extremely soft suspension makes it easy to "arab drift".
1. Good highway cruiser, enough power w/V6.
2. Painless to own - will work for years with basic maintenance/repairs.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 01, 2009, 02:15:41 PM
2002 - 2006 Toyota Camry
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/2003-Toyota-Camry-03812081990004.jpg)
1. Perfect stealth car. Will cruise all day at 80-90 MPH and never so much as raise an eyebrow
2. All the reasons everybody else buys these things hold true: good resale, relaible.
1. Everyone will consider you "sensible"
2. They're pretty large on the inside.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 01, 2009, 02:15:41 PM
2002 - 2006 Toyota Camry
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/2003-Toyota-Camry-03812081990004.jpg)
Junkyard parts are plentiful.
It's easy to blend in with all the other camry's in the Walmart parking lot.
You know, I was noticing something. Most of the comments on these cars tend to be at best backhanded compliments. Thinly veiled put downs of the cars instead of real positive thoughts.
Do I make backhanded compliments about cars?
What I think 206 was trying to do was to get people to think about actual positive attributes that would make people want to own them, not things like "it's not sitting in my driveway."
Quote from: ChrisV on February 02, 2009, 07:07:35 AM
You know, I was noticing something. Most of the comments on these cars tend to be at best backhanded compliments. Thinly veiled put downs of the cars instead of real positive thoughts.
Do I make backhanded compliments about cars?
What I think 206 was trying to do was to get people to think about actual positive attributes that would make people want to own them, not things like "it's not sitting in my driveway."
You referring to my comments?
Do you make backhanded comments about cars? Not really, when you throw insults you are pretty up front about it. ;)
The first Fiat Spider I rebuilt came largely from junk yard (salvage yard if you prefer) parts. If one plans on keeping a car for a long time on the cheap it is definately a good thing to have a model of car that is highly represented in junk yards. I was fortunate that there were several imports only yards in my area in the early 80's
Blend in, in the parking lot? Sometimes that's a good thing too.
Do I throw insults about cars?
Quote from: ChrisV on February 02, 2009, 07:26:17 AM
Do I throw insults about cars?
Do I care? ;)
Lighten up, it's just a small internet car forum. :lol:
Quote from: Byteme on February 02, 2009, 07:34:19 AM
Do I care? ;)
Lighten up, it's just a small internet car forum. :lol:
If it's that unimportant to you, then why don't you leave?
I've always wondered why people who don't give a shit about cars take the time to post on car forums. I like WWII fighter planes, but I don't care enough about them to post on forums for them.
Quote from: ChrisV on February 02, 2009, 08:01:15 AM
If it's that unimportant to you, then why don't you leave?
Who said it was unimportant? Not me. This is entertainment, pure and simple. You tend to treat it as something much more meaningful. What is unimporntant to me is whether you throw insults at cars.
I've always wondered why people who don't give a shit about cars take the time to post on car forums.
No, you are probably actually wondering why people who don't think like you think they ought to think bother to post here.
Quote from: ChrisV on February 02, 2009, 07:07:35 AM
You know, I was noticing something. Most of the comments on these cars tend to be at best backhanded compliments. Thinly veiled put downs of the cars instead of real positive thoughts.
Do I make backhanded compliments about cars?
What I think 206 was trying to do was to get people to think about actual positive attributes that would make people want to own them, not things like "it's not sitting in my driveway."
It's supposed to be humorous. If they were all sincere, then it'd be boring.
Quote from: NACar on January 29, 2009, 05:21:17 PM
Oldsmobile Alero Coup?
(http://www.autowire.net/alero1.jpg)
1. We had the sedan and we loved every minute of our ownership...until we tried to put a car seat in it.
2. Fun to drive
Quote from: 2o6 on February 01, 2009, 02:15:41 PM
2002 - 2006 Toyota Camry
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/2003-Toyota-Camry-03812081990004.jpg)
ok I'm really gonna try this time...
1. it's a poor man's Lexus!
2. rimz + lowering springs + custom paint job = surprisingly bitchin' ride :mrcool: oh, and a pair of Flowmasters.
happy now, Mr. V? :tounge:
:lol:
This thread delivers.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 01, 2009, 02:15:41 PM
2002 - 2006 Toyota Camry
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/2003-Toyota-Camry-03812081990004.jpg)
1. It's the automotive equivalent of a big heaping bowl of vanilla ice cream.
2. It will never unexpectedly conk out on your commute. Probably.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 01, 2009, 02:15:41 PM
2002 - 2006 Toyota Camry
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/2003-Toyota-Camry-03812081990004.jpg)
1. Very easy to work on.
2. Not as ugly as the current Camry.
3. Will last a long time.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 01, 2009, 02:15:41 PM
2002 - 2006 Toyota Camry
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/2003-Toyota-Camry-03812081990004.jpg)
It's sort of handsome, in a mundane way. No really, I think they are decently styled, and they look good in SE guise.
It's a very comfortable car for a 700 mile interstate slog.
I can't support that car with any positivity. I have my reasons.
New car time.
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/chevrolet-citation-3.jpg)
Not the X-11. :lol:
1. Sweet vertical radio.
2. Awesome name. Citation.
Uh...............I'm having a hard time coming up with two reasons........
1. The Iron Duke was ultra reliable
2. There aren't many left.
1. Pretty sweet aerodynamic styling
2. Amazing! Futuristic front wheel drive system!
Quote from: 2o6 on February 04, 2009, 10:35:16 PM
Uh...............I'm having a hard time coming up with two reasons........
1. The Iron Duke was ultra reliable
2. There aren't many left.
That was the idea. :lol:
Quote from: Psilos on February 04, 2009, 10:30:22 PM
New car time.
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/chevrolet-citation-3.jpg)
Not the X-11. :lol:
1. Sweet vertical radio.
2. Awesome name. Citation.
lol! I had one. An '81 2.8 V6 automatic, gold over brown two tone. Not the most attractive of cars, due to being beat up and slightly rusty. Very utilitarian, and could carry quite a bit for a small car with the large hatch. And when I finally got rid of it, it had 323k miles on it. Started up every time, never left me stranded. Yeah, some things were broken, but it ALWAYS got me where I needed to go.
You can see it in this picture behind the bike I had just painted:
(http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/459104a.jpg)
Quote from: Psilos on February 04, 2009, 10:30:22 PM
New car time.
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/chevrolet-citation-3.jpg)
Great vision outward, no real blind spots.
Decent interior room.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 29, 2009, 05:51:27 AM
Citroen Ami 6
(http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/citroen-ami.jpg)
1) Quirky styling makes me smile every time I see it. :praise:
2) Tall greenhouse will, likely, more easily accommodate some of us who are taller and a bit on the creaky side. :praise:
Quote from: ChrisV on February 05, 2009, 05:54:21 AM
lol! I had one. An '81 2.8 V6 automatic, gold over brown two tone. Not the most attractive of cars, due to being beat up and slightly rusty. Very utilitarian, and could carry quite a bit for a small car with the large hatch. And when I finally got rid of it, it had 323k miles on it. Started up every time, never left me stranded. Yeah, some things were broken, but it ALWAYS got me where I needed to go.
You can see it in this picture behind the bike I had just painted:
(http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/459104a.jpg)
Is that the V8 RX7 in the background?
We had a Citation coupe V6 auto when I was a kid. It was a good car. Fairly reliable and such. Much better than the next car we got, an '88 Taurus that ended up leaking exhaust into the cabin.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 29, 2009, 05:51:27 AM
Citroen Ami 6
(http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/citroen-ami.jpg)
1. Ride quality.
2. Ride quality.
3. Ride quality.
Few small cars of this era rode quite like a Citroen. Plus, these things were indestructible: simple, effective suspension, and simple, effective air-cooled engine.
They made almost 2 million, and it was for a while France's best-selling car.
Flaminio Bertoni designed this, and the 2CV. Neither car is particularly pretty, but both are anthropomorphic in the same vein that has again become popular with the work of, say, Chris Bangle. Forget eyes and a mouth - actual
eyebrows are in evidence on the Ami (as on the current 5er).
Challengingly charismatic, yes - but a little charisma can go a long way toward making a cheap car stand out. I'd drive one... :thumbsup:
EDIT: and these things were the basis for a series of Wankel prototypes. Citroen + rotary engines... mmmmm...
(Geo Metro convertible)Quote from: sandertheshark on January 28, 2009, 09:50:21 PM
1. Probably the least expensive convertible ever made.
Not sure about
ever made - but the 1990-91 Yugo Cabrio, replete with electric folding top, was the most affordable convertible sold in America (roughly $8,000, IIRC).
Quote from: Psilos on February 04, 2009, 10:30:22 PM
New car time.
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/chevrolet-citation-3.jpg)
1. The X-body platform was 20 years ahead of its time, when everything became Xtreme
2. Attractive greenhouse shape
Quote from: Psilos on February 06, 2009, 01:17:15 AM
Is that the V8 RX7 in the background?
Yup. Right next to my neighbor's Corvair convertible.
Let's throw this gem into the mix:
(http://www.mustangssale.com/rcimages/mustanglarge2.jpg)
1. you could probably build one exclusively using parts found at any given salvage yard. and it might actually be kinda easy.
2. it's mighty shiny :lol:
1. It's the only Mustang that's not overpriced
2. There's nothing wrong with it that an engine swap and a fuel cell wouldn't fix
Quote from: Payman on February 06, 2009, 03:06:12 PM
Let's throw this gem into the mix:
(http://www.mustangssale.com/rcimages/mustanglarge2.jpg)
1: Front end setup had to have done something right: its still the platform of choice for many hotrodders.
2: Its light, compact, and easily accepts almost any V8 detroit ever made short of a Hemi.
Beyond that, I unashamedly, and unabashedly love those cars. sure, it well, lacked a little in technical department, but no car (arguably besides the Burt reynolds Trans Ams) typified an era more adroitly.
Quote from: Payman on February 06, 2009, 03:06:12 PM
Let's throw this gem into the mix:
(http://www.mustangssale.com/rcimages/mustanglarge2.jpg)
better pic:
(http://www.mustangii.net/images/ontheroad/cobraii_from_calendar.jpg)
I'd love that with the 500+ hp 460cid I built for the Fox Mustang. Or that same engine in this (a pchop I did a while ago):
(http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/3205531d.jpg)
Quote from: ChrisV on February 06, 2009, 05:22:49 PM
better pic:
(http://www.mustangii.net/images/ontheroad/cobraii_from_calendar.jpg)
I'd love that with the 500+ hp 460cid I built for the Fox Mustang. Or that same engine in this (a pchop I did a while ago):
(http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/3205531d.jpg)
Looks much better with the gold BBS wheels. And that convertible is sweet!
4 good things about that Stang is that it's a supercharger & some black wheels away from being the Mad Max Interceptor
American style... in a post apocalyptic world gripped by overbearing EPA regulations and super left wing enviro-psychos...
One car fighting for the good of automotive enjoyment. Crushing the beige Camry Hybrid force one burnout at a time
1. Potential.
2. It's got a certain appeal, like the above-mentioned Burt Reynolds Trans Am.
Quote from: CaMIRO on February 06, 2009, 05:27:44 AM
(Geo Metro convertible)
Not sure about ever made - but the 1990-91 Yugo Cabrio, replete with electric folding top, was the most affordable convertible sold in America (roughly $8,000, IIRC).
Hey, you're back!
Quote from: Payman on February 06, 2009, 03:06:12 PM
Let's throw this gem into the mix:
(http://www.mustangssale.com/rcimages/mustanglarge2.jpg)
1. It's tremendous gaudy '70s kitsch - spoilers, stripes, lurid paint combinations, bulges, decals and so on.
2. Looks fast even whilst parked in the Woolworths carpark.
Okay, let's try this one
(http://www.imcdb.org/images/008/591.jpg)
1979 Coupe Deville
^^ Makes a terrific demolition derby car (I know this from experience).
Smooth interstate cruiser.
Easy to fit a 572 crate engine in.
It has whitewalls, yo!
Awesome car
Pimpadillac.
Seriously, what's so hard about this one?
Quote from: the Teuton on February 07, 2009, 08:04:26 PM
Awesome car
Pimpadillac.
Seriously, what's so hard about this one?
I was hoping for more of those "backhanded compliments"...
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 07, 2009, 08:05:59 PM
I was hoping for more of those "backhanded compliments"...
My drug dealer drives one and he's pretty cool?
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 07, 2009, 08:05:59 PM
I was hoping for more of those "backhanded compliments"...
1. Oooh, it had diesel power.
2. Smooth ride. Fingertip power steering. Excellent highway cruiser. 'Phaeton' package available.
It's fun to drive a car that just sways instead of turning in.
Caddy was available with the awesome V8-6-4-0 engine
A HUGE f*ck you to the weak minded Prius whipping mob
Available in Mexican Food Doo Doo brown
6000 lb car that has power steering strong enough to be driven by an infant
If you turn it hard enough the hubcaps will fall off. Doesn't matter if you just drove it off the lot brand new.
Not much you can fault it for
I <3 the D-body Cadillacs! :wub:
1. It's badass enough to make you look like a mobster/gangster/pimp
2. It's low-key enough to pick your boss up from the airport in and not raise objection from the parents of the girl you're trying to court
3. It harkens back to much more pleasant era of decandence before the pansy-ass "caring sharing" 1990's essentially ruined my teenage-hood
4. Can be repaired using parts from old Chevys
5. Engine swap options are limitless
6. Much classier than an Escalade
7. Perfect ride for when a Mercedes S-class is too "me too"
8.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on February 07, 2009, 11:32:37 PM
A HUGE f*ck you to the weak minded Prius whipping mob
That's all the reason you need, really :rockon:
1. Perfect platform for a lowrider.
2. It's a hog! No matter how banged up or rusted it gets,the Caddy crowd will treat it with more respect than any BMW or Benz.
3. It still had the stand up (although it's missing on the pictured car)Caddy wreath!
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 07, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
Okay, let's try this one
(http://www.imcdb.org/images/008/591.jpg)
1979 Coupe Deville
Goodfellas?
New Car:
1988-1993 Dodge Dynasty
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/1990-93-Dodge-Dynasty-92103381990316.jpg)
1. Uh, ammnh........uh.......
2. N/A
Quote from: 2o6 on February 08, 2009, 03:55:14 PM
1. Uh, ammnh........uh.......
2. N/A
This is your thread, and you chose the car. :rolleyes:
Quote from: 2o6 on February 08, 2009, 03:54:16 PM
New Car:
1988-1993 Dodge Dynasty
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/1990-93-Dodge-Dynasty-92103381990316.jpg)
1: Cadillac Cimarron levels of luxury without the obvious badge engineering.
2: Perhaps the best example of early '80s downsixing by an American firm.
1. It'll get you from point A to point B.
2. I haven't seen one in a few years.
3. It's got it's most fitting adjective right in its name, so you don't have to waste brain power thinking about how to describe it.
DyNASTY.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 08, 2009, 03:54:16 PM
New Car:
1988-1993 Dodge Dynasty
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/1990-93-Dodge-Dynasty-92103381990316.jpg)
1. It's got that "Gramma bought it new and never changed the oil, but she did smoke a pack-a-day in it even if she was only going down the block, and now it's yours because she died of cancer" appeal.
2. You can make one out of three cardboard boxes and a lawnmower.
The turbo 2.2 or 2.5's a bolt in, as are the upgrades suspension bits, and nobody'll suspect it.
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/256392
Needs to lose the scoops on that one...
1) It convinced my parents never to buy a Chrysler again.
2) The reading lights in the back were actually kinda cool.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 07, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
Okay, let's try this one
(http://www.imcdb.org/images/008/591.jpg)
1979 Coupe Deville
1. Everything
2. See point 1
Quote from: ChrisV on February 08, 2009, 05:44:02 PM
The turbo 2.2 or 2.5's a bolt in, as are the upgrades suspension bits, and nobody'll suspect it.
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/256392
Needs to lose the scoops on that one...
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST MAN
The car BLOWS!!!!
1. In a way, from what I can imagine, it is the Lexus ES to the Dodge Spirit being the Toyota Camry.
2. At highway speeds, the vacuum created in the space behind the rear window was strong enough to make water boil at room temperature
Dynasty:
IIRC, it came 4th in the MT COTY voting. Ignore the fact only 4 cars were nominated (1989).
It was the last new car that people put whitewalls on.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on February 09, 2009, 11:18:10 AM
The car BLOWS!!!!
1. In a way, from what I can imagine, it is the Lexus ES to the Dodge Spirit being the Toyota Camry.
Actually, this would be more like what the Avalon was in comparison to the Dodge Spirit. The Lexus ES version would be the Chrysler Imperial :tounge:
Quote from: Payman on February 09, 2009, 11:29:00 AM
It was the last new car that people put whitewalls on.
I think you can still get whitewalls on the Mercury Grand Marquis :mask:
ok I'll stop now.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 08, 2009, 03:54:16 PM
New Car:
1988-1993 Dodge Dynasty
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/1990-93-Dodge-Dynasty-92103381990316.jpg)
1. Everything was square except the wheels/tires on that car. The gauge panel was square. Boxy styling FTW.
2. Creamy ride. Decent power for the time. Good highway car.
3. Seem to be pretty safe in car crashes, as I've had two friends write Dynastys off and walk away with nary a scratch.
The seats in the Dynasty were about the softest foam I've ever sat on in a car. They had no support to them at all.
Ours was also a Chrysler 3.3 car (not a Mitsu 2.5), and I believe it had a Chrysler tranny, too. We replaced the transmission twice during our ownership of that thing.
Quote from: the Teuton on February 09, 2009, 12:57:27 PM
The seats in the Dynasty were about the softest foam I've ever sat on in a car. They had no support to them at all.
Ours was also a Chrysler 3.3 car (not a Mitsu 2.5), and I believe it had a Chrysler tranny, too. We replaced the transmission twice during our ownership of that thing.
It was a Chrysler 2.5L 4-banger offered in the base car. The Mitsu engine was the 3.0L V6.
I think the 4-banger was mated to the 3-spd automatic, which was more reliable.
The 3.3L had the 4-spd auto. Since it was the initial few years of the Ultradrive, the failure rate was higher.
But I'm just being picky about details.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on February 09, 2009, 11:18:10 AM
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST MAN
The car BLOWS!!!!
1. In a way, from what I can imagine, it is the Lexus ES to the Dodge Spirit being the Toyota Camry.
2. At highway speeds, the vacuum created in the space behind the rear window was strong enough to make water boil at room temperature
It's rather unique, no doubt about that.
(http://www.edmunds.com/pictures/VEHICLE/2001/Kia/100001387/2001.kia.sephia.6145-396x249.jpg)
2001 Kia Sephia.
What a piece of shit.
It's more mundane than the most mundane Camry ever made.
1. It's curvatious styling was actually moderately attractive.
2. It's red.
Like a Camry, but w/eccentricities that add nothing, and not the reliability
That said,
1. It's Swedish
2. It's cheap
Quote from: sportyaccordy on February 15, 2009, 10:06:56 AM
Like a Camry, but w/eccentricities that add nothing, and not the reliability
That said,
1. It's Swedish
2. It's cheap
You're looking at the wrong car...........
1. Good on gas
2. Easy to park
This is too easy...
2o6, make your sig smaller.
Quote from: the Teuton on February 15, 2009, 02:40:01 PM
2o6, make your sig smaller.
I'ts no bigger than many, here. In fact, it's pretty tiny.
Quote from: ChrisV on February 15, 2009, 02:48:04 PM
I'ts no bigger than many, here. In fact, it's pretty tiny.
Are we looking at the same thing?
While it doesn't seem to be that much too big 400px by 266px isn't tiny for a sig.
Quote from: TBR on February 15, 2009, 02:52:47 PM
Are we looking at the same thing?
While it doesn't seem to be that much too big 400px by 266px isn't tiny for a sig.
I'm looking at his SAAB pic. It's smaller than Vinsanity's, and not much off of Call-911s OR mine.
Jesus, doesn't anyone have anything larger than a 640x480 resolution 14 inch monitor yet?
Speakinf of sigs, Chris, don't you live closer to the Pacific than the Atlantic anyways?
Quote from: the Teuton on February 15, 2009, 02:40:01 PM
2o6, make your sig smaller.
The fuck? The Saab 900? That's a normal size. Un-bunch thine panties.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 15, 2009, 03:26:14 PM
Speakinf of sigs, Chris, don't you live closer to the Pacific than the Atlantic anyways?
I thought he lived in Maryland...
Quote from: Psilos on February 15, 2009, 03:35:25 PM
I thought he lived in Maryland...
Oh, in that case I'm wrong. I thought he lived in Oregon.
I think he used to live in Seattle... :huh:
Quote from: ChrisV on February 15, 2009, 03:23:52 PM
I'm looking at his SAAB pic. It's smaller than Vinsanity's, and not much off of Call-911s OR mine.
Jesus, doesn't anyone have anything larger than a 640x480 resolution 14 inch monitor yet?
Yours is less than half the height of his.
No, it's not. It's more like 3/4 or even more as large. Not that is matters, his is fine.
However, yours is almost as big as his.
Quote from: Psilos on February 15, 2009, 04:05:01 PM
No, it's not. It's more like 3/4 or even more as large. Not that is matters, his is fine.
However, yours is almost as big as his.
I was remembering wrong, but nonetheless I was more right than you:
124/213=58%
And mine:
175/213=82%
Like I said, it doesn't really bother me but it is taller than most.
Quote from: TBR on February 15, 2009, 04:09:12 PM
I was remembering wrong, but nonetheless I was more right than you:
124/213=58%
And mine:
175/213=82%
Like I said, it doesn't really bother me but it is taller than most.
The image in my sig is 161 px tall...
161/213 = 75%
Then there's the rest of the sig, with the words and such.
And that Saab pic is 25kb, while TBR's Audi pic is 56 kb and my "short" sig pic is 63 kb. So as far as actual page weight and loading times, his Saab pic is one of the smallest pics in a sig.
The main point is, unless it's as large as one of the main pics in a post, and it's not, and negatively affects a dial-up connection, which it's less likely to do than most of our sig pics, then it should be left alone.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 15, 2009, 03:26:14 PM
Speakinf of sigs, Chris, don't you live closer to the Pacific than the Atlantic anyways?
Used to live in Seattle, until '99, when I moved to Baltimore.
Quote from: ChrisV on February 16, 2009, 08:27:23 AM
And that Saab pic is 25kb, while TBR's Audi pic is 56 kb and my "short" sig pic is 63 kb. So as far as actual page weight and loading times, his Saab pic is one of the smallest pics in a sig.
The main point is, unless it's as large as one of the main pics in a post, and it's not, and negatively affects a dial-up connection, which it's less likely to do than most of our sig pics, then it should be left alone.
Exactly. I'd say we owned them. :ohyeah:
:lol:
1997-2000 Ford Escort.
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/1997-2003-Ford-Escort-ZX2-98113311990401.jpg)
1. Fast
2. Fun
Again, I would have no second thoughts about driving the crap out of it or rallyx-ing it, even brand new.
For numero dos, um, cheap transportation.
Reliable
Practical
Economical
You know what, for being an American Corolla in almost every sense of the word, I really liked that model Escort.
Quote from: the Teuton on February 25, 2009, 11:55:36 PM
Reliable
Practical
Economical
You know what, for being an American Corolla in almost every sense of the word, I really liked that model Escort.
Same, it was a good car. I'd have bought one over a Cavalier easily. It's built on the Mazda B platform, same basics as my car.
And I rather like the ZX2 version of that car. I dated a girl that had one, and it was pretty fun to drive.
I drove an Escort hatch before my bro bought his Taurus, and I must say it was a fun car.
The Escort for its day was never a shitty car.
Not the generation, but most particularly this car.
:Fine Teuton. You win.:
:lol:
2o6, you're a fucking piece of shit.
And to be honest with the exception that the car understeers like hell if you don't go into the corner right and the fact it has only 110 hp, the car rocked for its time and it's a decent all-weather economy car now.
PS There is no reason to post a picture of my car specifically right now in this thread. I will drive to [insert town here] and put a brown paper bag filled with crap on your front doorstep unless you take that picture down. I'm coming home next week, so don't think I won't. I have a roundabout idea of where you live. Don't try me.
EDITed because he took the picture down, but I still think it's funny enough to leave up. :lol:
I didn't tell you that Imprezas were outlawed; just my Impreza.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 25, 2009, 07:18:37 PM
1997-2000 Ford Escort.
Under rated.
Under appreciated.
We had a 1997 Escort Wagon that was versatile, volume wise it carried almost as much as the Escape. Plenty big enough for our needs.
Delivered 30+MPG gas mileage per tank.
Never needed a repair, except for tires and routine maintenance.
Kind of wish I would have kept it and thrown a couple of grand into wheels and tires, maybe some better shocks and struts, some paintless dent removal, some interior upgrades and some engine tweaks. It would have made a heck of a nice little pocket rocket.
Ok, new car.
Toyota Tercel
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/1995-98-Toyota-Tercel-97812071990102.jpg)
2o6, you confuse me.
See my edits.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 26, 2009, 07:34:34 AM
Ok, new car.
Toyota Tercel
My sister owned one, referred to it as the "turdcel".
Cheap to buy
Economical
Harder to kill than a cockroach.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 26, 2009, 07:34:34 AM
Toyota Tercel
1. It was alot cooler than the lame-ass Echo
2. It's still cooler than the cheapo Yaris
My sister had a Tercel
It felt so 3rd worldly. The thing weighed maybe 2000# with me in it. If it had a turbo it would be a fucking hoot and a half.
Plus they're dirt cheap and probably simple as hell to work on. One of these with a motor:
(http://www.comparestoreprices.co.uk/images/unbranded/c/unbranded-cozy-coupe-ii-car-little-tikes.jpg)
I would get one just to do a silly as build. Throw in a Camry V6 & turbo it, let the motor rip the front end to pieces on the dyno.
Tercel?
1. They're little cars that drive like little trucks
2. FAST
Nice 206 :lol:
2000-2005 Chevy Impala
(http://www.web2carz.com/images/nctd/00chevyimpala.jpg)
1. big
2. cheap
I always loved those Impalas. My driver's ed. car was an Impala.
3) Reliable
4) Great highway cars
5) Available with supercharged 3.8L V6 (2004?-2005? SS ) Easy to modify and get serious power out of using smaller pulleys/supporting modifications.
6) Fairly stout cars (they were used for police work) and could pull off 30mpg on the highway.
Impala?
1. It's not a minivan
2. It's still a pile
Quote from: Vinsanity on March 05, 2009, 04:30:48 PM
2000-2005 Chevy Impala
(http://www.web2carz.com/images/nctd/00chevyimpala.jpg)
1. My mother had one
2. It was red.
2000-2007 Ford Taurus
(http://www.isp.state.id.us/news_releases/images/05_ford_taurus_500.jpg)
1. Even cheaper than the Impala
2. What's not to love about something that got jammed in a cloning machine for 7 years?
1. My brother has one.
2. It rides very well.
3. It's huge as hell.
4. It will never die if it's maintained properly.
5. It averaged 31 mpg from Ohio to NY.
1) Can live through a horrific traffic accident and not come out any uglier.
2) Does not have a grille designed by Gillette or Schick like most current Fords.
1. Won't draw ahy unwanted attention from law enforcement
2. At least it not a Camry
1. The multifunction switch is easy to remove and test
2. The wiper motor is easy to remove and test
Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera
(http://www.cargurus.com/images/2008/06/12/17/06/pic-51612.jpeg)
My family had one. There's not one good thing I can say about that vehicle.
Quote from: 2o6 on April 28, 2009, 09:05:46 AM
Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera
1. Possibility of defunct marque elevating Olds to somewhat collectible status
2. Rarity of Cutlass Cieras (at least in north east) helps bolster point 1
3. Made having a floor mounted shifter + tachometer a luxury item
4. Low shoulder line
Quote from: 2o6 on April 28, 2009, 09:05:46 AM
Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera
(http://www.cargurus.com/images/2008/06/12/17/06/pic-51612.jpeg)
- Is sufficiently chintzy with its chrome trim, wire wheels and formal roofline for me to indulge in some
trunk body-stuffing whimsical, uniquely American boulevard motoring.
- Would probably be the only one of its kind in Australia.
Quote from: 2o6 on April 28, 2009, 09:05:46 AM
Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera
(http://www.cargurus.com/images/2008/06/12/17/06/pic-51612.jpeg)
Fake wire wheels never need spoke adjustments.
Gas filler on drivers side makes for easy fueling.
They certainly are cushy highway cars. We took a vacation to Boston and Cooperstown, NY in ours when my brothers and I were little. I would just never have one EVER again.
1. several year back, I almost bought one in mint condition off a friend's mom for $1200; you can't buy a mint condition anything else for $1200.
2. you can fix shit on it with duct tape and it'll work just as well as bringing it to a certified technician.
I was atually looking at the wagon version of those as a unique project car, to build an AWD turbo wagon. You can pick them up in decent condition for like $400...
(http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/3302305a.jpg)
Quote from: ChrisV on April 28, 2009, 11:07:26 AM
I was atually looking at the wagon version of those as a unique project car, to build an AWD turbo wagon. You can pick them up in decent condition for like $400...
(http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/3302305a.jpg)
Ecotec?
We had a wagon with wood paneling. It was embarrassing.
Quote from: the Teuton on April 28, 2009, 12:28:47 PM
We had a wagon with wood paneling. It was embarrassing.
We had a bright yellow (that somehow morphed into green at dusk) mid-'70s Chrysler Galant, with a homemade roof-rack, faded bumper stickers and tow-bar covered by an old tennis ball.
(http://i43.tinypic.com/156vhud.jpg)
That was embarrassing, too.
We had one almost exactly like this one; red velour interior too.
Buick Electra Estate
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/ElectraEstate.jpg)
Quote from: 2o6 on April 28, 2009, 12:23:46 PM
Ecotec?
No. twin turbo 4.3 V6. Basically, a Syclone/Typhoon drivetrain.
Quote from: the Teuton on April 28, 2009, 12:28:47 PM
We had a wagon with wood paneling. It was embarrassing.
My folks have one of these, that they've had for about 15 years. maroon with the red intoerior and woodgrain. Reliable, comfy, slow.
(http://www.oniva.com/upload/104/buick_1981_century_wagons__pc.jpg)
Before that they had one of these:
(http://clunkbucket.com/wp-content/uploads/1973_pinto_squire.jpg)
with a modded 2.3 and 5 speed trans.
But I still want a woody wagon, either a real wood one or one of the '60s fake wood ones...
(http://image.streetrodderweb.com/f/11781380/0811sr_02_z+1963_ford_falcon_wagon+.jpg)
(http://www.remarkablecars.com/for-sale/data/3630/large/0428-1962-ford-country-squire-2.jpg)
(http://memimage.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/2690/3301/31724150001_large.jpg)
I want every single one of those woody wagons, Mr. V.
Quote from: 2o6 on April 28, 2009, 09:05:46 AM
Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera
(http://www.cargurus.com/images/2008/06/12/17/06/pic-51612.jpeg)
1. My grandfather had a '84 and it ran like a champ! :praise:
2. Ours had a luggage rack (a mid 80s must) on the trunk! :rockon:
I don't think the Flex looks bad either.
(http://image.trucktrend.com/f/crossovers/sounds-kinda-dirty-the-ford-flex-woody/10487636+cr1+re0+ar1/2009-ford-flex-woody-side-view.jpg)
Quote from: ChrisV on April 28, 2009, 01:10:58 PM
But I still want a woody wagon, either a real wood one or one of the '60s fake wood ones...
(http://image.streetrodderweb.com/f/11781380/0811sr_02_z+1963_ford_falcon_wagon+.jpg)
(http://www.remarkablecars.com/for-sale/data/3630/large/0428-1962-ford-country-squire-2.jpg)
Sweetness :ohyeah:
Quote from: 2o6 on April 28, 2009, 03:39:19 PM
I don't think the Flex looks bad either.
(http://image.trucktrend.com/f/crossovers/sounds-kinda-dirty-the-ford-flex-woody/10487636+cr1+re0+ar1/2009-ford-flex-woody-side-view.jpg)
ew.
but I always thought more realistic wood trim (like on car interiors instead of the tacky vinyl shit) that sat flush with the body work might be kind of cool.
I love the Flex, but I dislike modern woodies.
Acura Vigor. Not necessarily bad, but very forgettable.
(http://www.carforums.net/reviews/makes/pictures/acura12.jpg)
Quote from: 2o6 on April 29, 2009, 07:03:44 AM
Acura Vigor. Not necessarily bad, but very forgettable.
(http://www.carforums.net/reviews/makes/pictures/acura12.jpg)
1. Strange longitudinal engine configuration brings hope for possible RWD conversion
2. 5 cylinders without Swedish eccentricity + German reliability
3. Decent looking
4. Worst comes to worst the interior swaps over to my Accord. Black leather is nice
1) Good-looking, if not a little bland
2) Reliable from what I understand.
1. I remember them being pretty well-built for their day
2. Didn't they come available with a stick shift? That can be kinda fun
3. Doors without the window frame are cool
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 29, 2009, 08:01:32 AM
1. Strange longitudinal engine configuration brings hope for possible RWD conversion
What is up with the early 90's Acuras and their longitudal motors? When I looked at an old Legend a few years back, it fooled me into thinking it was RWD :rage:
Quote from: 2o6 on April 28, 2009, 09:05:46 AM
Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera
(http://www.cargurus.com/images/2008/06/12/17/06/pic-51612.jpeg)
3. you can spend more on rimz than on the car and it'll be worth every penny
(http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/4773/nascarolds.jpg) (http://img211.imageshack.us/my.php?image=nascarolds.jpg)
Quote from: Vinsanity on April 29, 2009, 11:22:05 AM
What is up with the early 90's Acuras and their longitudal motors? When I looked at an old Legend a few years back, it fooled me into thinking it was RWD :rage:
My Passat was longitudinal as well.
Quote from: Raza on April 29, 2009, 10:29:05 PM
My Passat was longitudinal as well.
So are most FWD Audis, the Chrysler LH cars and a bunch of old Renaults.
Cheers,
Madman of the People
Quote from: Madman on April 29, 2009, 10:40:04 PM
So are most FWD Audis, the Chrysler LH cars and a bunch of old Renaults.
Cheers,
Madman of the People
And every Subaru ever sold in North America, FWD ones included.
I feel like I'm almost tooting my own horn...
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/1995_Q45.jpg)
Infiniti Q45
1. engine sounds awesome
2. have proven to be pretty durable (albeit pricey to repair)
3. probably the best used car buy you can find
Dodge Shadow/Plymouth Sundance
(http://www.edmunds.com/pictures/VEHICLE/1991/Plymouth/4851/1991.plymouth.sundance.8924-396x249.jpg)
Holy thread resurrection, Batman! :huh:
Cheers,
Madman of the People
I have had a Sundance, and I bet ChrisV or 2o6 have not.
Quote from: NACar on November 26, 2009, 05:48:10 PM
I have had a Sundance, and I bet ChrisV or 2o6 have not.
Chris had four. He raced two (one on road, the other rally), turned one into a boat and the other into a plane.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=17371.msg1211073#msg1211073 date=1259284975
Chris had four. He raced two (one on road, the other rally), turned one into a boat and the other into a plane.
Oh. My bad
LOL, I can almost imagine the 1940's-era black-and-white newsreel featuring Chris Vetters and his "Flying Shadow" in the vein of Charles Lindberg's Spirit of St. Louis and whatever famous plane Amelia Earhart was flying.
Quote from: Vinsanity on April 29, 2009, 11:22:05 AM
What is up with the early 90's Acuras and their longitudal motors? When I looked at an old Legend a few years back, it fooled me into thinking it was RWD :rage:
I really don't know. It was like Honda was gonna make the cars RWD, but decided not to at the last minute. If the Vigor/Legend had been RWD... wow....
Quote from: sportyaccordy on November 26, 2009, 06:52:42 PM
If the Vigor/Legend had been RWD...
...I would probably have an assortment of 1990's Legend coupes in various stages of disrepair (parts car, project car, etc.) sitting around :mask:
Quote from: 2o6 on November 26, 2009, 05:15:45 PM
Dodge Shadow/Plymouth Sundance
(http://www.edmunds.com/pictures/VEHICLE/1991/Plymouth/4851/1991.plymouth.sundance.8924-396x249.jpg)
1. Chrysler turbocharged 2.5 liter engine optional. See: http://www.turbominivan.com/ for details how to turn one into a 12 second car.
2. My grandmother had one and I was supposed to get it from her for my first car, but that never happened.
Quote from: 3.0L V6 on November 26, 2009, 09:02:00 PM
1. Chrysler turbocharged 2.5 liter engine optional. See: http://www.turbominivan.com/ for details how to turn one into a 12 second car.
2. My grandmother had one and I was supposed to get it from her for my first car, but that never happened.
I had one with a...3.0L V6 :lol:
Quote from: Vinsanity on May 01, 2009, 04:32:53 PM
I feel like I'm almost tooting my own horn...
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/1995_Q45.jpg)
Infiniti Q45
1. engine sounds awesome
2. have proven to be pretty durable (albeit pricey to repair)
3. probably the best used car buy you can find
1. It's an excellent example of a luxury car that can be purchased for a decent price today used.
2. Quick for the era.
3. I wanted one for a bit.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 26, 2009, 05:15:45 PM
Dodge Shadow/Plymouth Sundance
(http://www.edmunds.com/pictures/VEHICLE/1991/Plymouth/4851/1991.plymouth.sundance.8924-396x249.jpg)
1. Strangely attractive 5-door liftback with sedan proportions
2. The chassis name is EEK.
3. 3.0L V6 made me want one as a kid.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 26, 2009, 09:35:55 PM
3. 3.0L V6 made me want one as a kid.
You must've been a strange kid...but I guess we already knew that ;)
4. I remember it being advertised as "the cheapest convertible in America"
Quote from: Vinsanity on November 26, 2009, 10:04:06 PM
You must've been a strange kid...but I guess we already knew that ;)
4. I remember it being advertised as "the cheapest convertible in America"
When I was little I wanted every car on sale to have a V6 option.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 26, 2009, 10:10:34 PM
When I was little I wanted every car on sale to have a V6 option.
well I'm sure that's not too different than some people wanting every car on sale to be available with a stickshift
GM equipping compact/midsize sedans with standard V6es was their way of saying "our four bangers suckkkkk". The allure of the cheap late 80's V6 evaporated as soon as I drove my friend's Celebrity V6 EURO.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 26, 2009, 09:35:55 PM
1. Strangely attractive 5-door liftback with sedan proportions
2. The chassis name is EEK.
3. 3.0L V6 made me want one as a kid.
(http://www.imissmytvshow.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/front_eek_ani2.gif)
Quote from: 2o6 on November 26, 2009, 05:15:45 PM
Dodge Shadow/Plymouth Sundance
(http://www.edmunds.com/pictures/VEHICLE/1991/Plymouth/4851/1991.plymouth.sundance.8924-396x249.jpg)
1. Incredibly cheap + light + of a small footprint
2. Available with some truly big (but awful) motors- V6, turbo 4. Good luck turning
3. Incredibly rare in the Northeast (I haven't seen one in years)
(http://www.dodgeautosinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Dodge-Caliber-3.jpg)
Dodge Caliber
Quote from: 2o6 on November 11, 2010, 08:13:23 AM
(http://www.dodgeautosinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Dodge-Caliber-3.jpg)
Dodge Caliber
no.
Quote from: Submariner on November 11, 2010, 09:08:24 AM
no.
I agree.
That car has the strangest/dumbest doors to work on I've ever seen. The window regulator, door latch and every part that makes up the door is attached to the interior trim panel. You have to take everything off in one big lump. It's the most overcomplicated door I've ever seen.
And the car is a POS.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 26, 2009, 09:35:55 PM
<Plymouth Sundance>
2. The chassis name is EEK.
No, it's
P.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 11, 2010, 08:13:23 AM
(http://www.dodgeautosinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Dodge-Caliber-3.jpg)
Dodge Caliber
1. SRT-4. Anything with 260hp + standard shift can be some kind of fun.
2. It's cheap.
It's a pretty dour car to drive. It wouldn't be so bad if the flaws didn't lash out at you so loudly.
1. I actually like the way it's styled. Looks handsome.
2. Pretty versatile, due to the hatchback and all sorts of gimmicks that Chrysler put into the car to hide it's flaws.
Why didn't this thread get deleted in the forum restructuring? I vote we abolish this thread. Be rid of it.
Quote from: giant_mtb on November 11, 2010, 12:45:29 PM
Why didn't this thread get deleted in the forum restructuring? I vote we abolish this thread. Be rid of it.
Why?
Because it was a long-forgotten thread that did not need reviving! :rage:
Quote from: giant_mtb on November 11, 2010, 12:45:29 PM
Why didn't this thread get deleted in the forum restructuring? I vote we abolish this thread. Be rid of it.
It's actually not a bad idea for a thread. I vote we abolish you from this thread.
Doooooooooo it!
Quote from: giant_mtb on November 11, 2010, 12:45:29 PM
Why didn't this thread get deleted in the forum restructuring? I vote we abolish this thread. Be rid of it.
It's actually not a bad idea for a thread. I vote we abolish you from this thread.
I heard you the first time. ;)
Failure. My bad.
Fret not!
Quote from: giant_mtb on November 11, 2010, 12:53:21 PM
Because it was a long-forgotten thread that did not need reviving! :rage:
This thread is awesome, actually.
94+ Mitsubishi Galants. USDM spec.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on November 11, 2010, 02:22:16 PM
This thread is awesome, actually.
94+ Mitsubishi Galants. USDM spec.
Could make it look awesome.
(http://blog.carlist.my/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/cardom.jpg)
1. Looks like a Camry, but then you look twice and it's not.
2. Didn't that car come with a voice-command type thing?
Quote from: 68_427 on November 11, 2010, 02:48:55 PM
Could make it look awesome.
(http://blog.carlist.my/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/cardom.jpg)
That Galant doesn't qualify, it was sold before 94.
I'm thinking of these beauties/beasts:
(http://autodata.ibsrv.net/images/?IMG=U4MIGEE1.jpg)
(http://www.speedwheels.com/imagesc/mitsubishi-galant-1999_8233.jpg)
(http://www.speedwheels.com/imagesc/mitsubishi-galant-2004_4611.jpg)
1. With the present generation, you could go to a Mitsu dealership, with messed-to-hell credit, buy one, make no payments and default after a year and get a free year of car ownership. Then again, that could apply to any Mitsubishi of the era.
2. If you have lots of time and money, you could import one of the twin-turbo V6s from Japan and drop it in, making yourself a homemade VR-4, but not with the the present generation.
3. Present generation: You need an underachieving mid-size sedan and the Sebring/Avenger just don't do it for you.
The Japanese VR-4 Galants are actually quite excellent
(http://memimage.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/1534/2981/28833990005_large.jpg)
(http://tunerzine.com/articles/360/2.jpg)
(http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j4/ibrahim_bimo/salon2.jpg)
However Mitsu had to minimize all losses on the inevitable loan defaults by stripping these cars down to their essence
1. Actually handles very decently.
2. Dirt cheap, and nowhere near as much of a penalty box as the Chrysler cars.
You forgot a third bullet point: which platform is it built on?!??!
The 2.0L twin turbo V6... DROOL
Quote from: Laconian on November 11, 2010, 06:55:20 PM
You forgot a third bullet point: which platform is it built on?!??!
Shared with the Eclipse and Endevour: Mitsubishi PS.
Also, you can get a nifty new Ralliart Galant for pretty cheap. No manual, though.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 11, 2010, 07:05:23 PM
Shared with the Eclipse and Endevour: Mitsubishi PS.
Also, you can get a nifty new Ralliart Galant for pretty cheap. No manual, though.
You just google search all this information. There's no way in hell you know all these platform names off the top of your head, but don't understand some basic things about how cars work.
Quote from: MrH on November 11, 2010, 07:20:14 PM
You just google search all this information. There's no way in hell you know all these platform names off the top of your head, but don't understand some basic things about how cars work.
Yeah, I did. I don't know why he gets all excited over it, half the time I just google it, unless it's something ubiquitous (VW A platform, one of the GM platforms, EUCD.......ect ect).
(http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/reviews/top10/05.cars.worst.residual.value/05.chevrolet.aveo.500.jpg)
Chevrolet Aveo (Pre-facelift)
1. An American Revolution.
2. Debuted in a Michael Bay-directed commercial, the first to not feature flaming meteors going through buildings.
3. See #1.
Pre-facelift?
1) The car runs generally.
2) It's a cheap way to haul four people.
1. Makes the cutest little door lock alarm chirp.
2. Dirt cheap to buy used.
1. May be confused for an early Prius.
2. Apparently, it's worthy of replacing a 4Runner.
Aveo....
1. More convenient than walking
2. Weatherproof
3. Was ChrisV's chassis of choice in his 2007 BTCC win
(http://www.seriouswheels.com/pics-jkl/Jaguar-X-Type-Sport-1280x960.jpg)
Jaguar X-type. In comparison to the competition, it was rather lacking and expensive.
1. AWD + V6 + Standard shift
2. Sporty and somewhat elegant looks
1. Looks really really nice
2. V6 + AWD
3. Interior looks really nice and the wood was sexy.
1. Looks like a Jag.
2. Is a Jag.
X-Type was never really my bag (I find AWD to be overrated outside of snow heavy areas), but it's always been a pretty good car.
1. Sounds good
2. Looks decent
3. Is a Jag (gussied up Ford, which is not a bad thing)
The X-Type was the best Contour I've ever driven. Mind you, I've not gotten to drive the SVT variety yet.
Quote from: the Teuton on November 14, 2010, 05:32:19 PM
The X-Type was the best Contour I've ever driven. Mind you, I've not gotten to drive the SVT variety yet.
X-Type =/= Contour
Super gravedig, but
Dodge Aries K
(http://media.motortopia.com/files/22107/vehicle/4b11ab629ff46/DSC09445.jpg)
Quote from: 2o6 on June 04, 2012, 09:58:41 PM
Super gravedig, but
Dodge Aries K
(http://media.motortopia.com/files/22107/vehicle/4b11ab629ff46/DSC09445.jpg)
Great if you live in a van down by the river.
1. It seats six!
2. I used to get these and Cutlass Cieras confused.
Quote from: Rockraven on June 04, 2012, 10:01:23 PM
Great if you live in a van down by the river.
Two positives. :nono:
Quote from: Rockraven on June 04, 2012, 10:01:23 PM
Great if you live in a van down by the river.
It would be better to drive the van.
Quote from: 2o6 on June 04, 2012, 09:58:41 PM
Super gravedig, but
Dodge Aries K
(http://media.motortopia.com/files/22107/vehicle/4b11ab629ff46/DSC09445.jpg)
That van has some chrome trim in the rear which is pretty Sporty and has a V6 which keeps the weight down and minimizes torque converter crawl.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nAj2KzJoK8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nAj2KzJoK8)
1. The '88 Dodge Aries beat the '87 Hyundai Pony 3 out of 4 times in comparison road tests
2. Over 85% of Aries owners have a fixed address
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 04, 2012, 10:45:39 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nAj2KzJoK8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nAj2KzJoK8)
1. The '88 Dodge Aries beat the '87 Hyundai Pony 3 out of 4 times in comparison road tests
2. Over 85% of Aries owners have a fixed address
:wtf:
I can say two legit things.
1. This car (along w/all the K-Cars) brought Chrysler back from the brink.
2. This car was instrumental in turning Americans onto small FWD cars.
Bonus: I don't think it was any better or worse to drive than any of its Japanese competitors. Plus the big 2.6 Mitsu lump in it was the first 4 pot with twin balance shafts (though I am sure it needed it).
I wouldn't buy one, but it's a pretty important car w/a lot of history. Gotta respect that. That was kind of an easy one.
I am not sure if we did this one.
(http://images.thecarconnection.com/lrg/2012-mitsubishi-galant_100368857_l.jpg)
1. It's not a terrible looking car.
2. No credit, no problem!
3. You could tell your dumbass friends that you drive the Evo of family sedans?
1. It's cheaper to buy than Camry and friends.
2. Automatic only? I guess that's good for some people.
1. Keeps the lights on at the Normal, Illinois factory and give the workers there something to do.
2. Your local Mitsubishi dealer will be thrilled so see somebody walking in the door. Now where's my local Mitsubishi dealer, again?
Quote from: 2o6 on June 04, 2012, 09:58:41 PM
Super gravedig, but
Dodge Aries K
(http://media.motortopia.com/files/22107/vehicle/4b11ab629ff46/DSC09445.jpg)
Polish license plate. They love that stuff over there as it's a LUXURY CAR compared to their Polski Fiats and FSO's! :lol:
(http://i774.photobucket.com/albums/yy22/Legacyguy/042.jpg)
STI muffler is +30hp at the wheels.
High ground clearance for your weekend rallying on the surface streets in Michigan.
That car isn't really bad.
The sable duotone is so literal and cliche.
Still don't understand what is so funny about that.
It lives on as a meme. It justifies its own existence.
Quote from: S204STi on June 05, 2012, 02:00:40 PM
STI muffler is +30hp at the wheels.
High ground clearance for your weekend rallying on the surface streets in Michigan.
Damn I gotta get me one of them mufflers.
Outbacks are solid cars, what gives?
(http://carpicsprices.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2012-Nissan-Versa-Rear-View.jpg)
Rear seat is absolutely HUGE.
It's really cheap to buy.
Man, I totally forgot about this thread! Sander posted in it?
It'll get you to point B faster than walking will. It's cheap for a new car (but you'd be an idiot to buy one).
Quote from: sportyaccordy on June 05, 2012, 03:01:27 PM
(http://carpicsprices.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2012-Nissan-Versa-Rear-View.jpg)
And people called The Aztek ugly.........
Small rims = better ride quality
Seeing those things on the street almost makes me gag. Who approved this design?
Quote from: 2o6 on June 06, 2012, 07:49:44 AM
Seeing those things on the street almost makes me gag. Who approved this design?
Says the man who drives an equally awkwardly proportioned small hatch turned sedan. :lol:
I don't agree.
I think the Yaris sedan is one of the better looking B-segment sedans. Nowhere near as bad as the Versa. Or Fiesta sedan.
But the Yaris sedan is actually a totally different design and shares no body panels with the hatch.
Quote from: 2o6 on June 06, 2012, 08:02:06 AM
I think the Yaris sedan is one of the better looking B-segment sedans.
Oxymoron. :lol:
Quote from: 2o6 on June 06, 2012, 08:02:06 AM
I don't agree.
I think the Yaris sedan is one of the better looking B-segment sedans. Nowhere near as bad as the Versa. Or Fiesta sedan.
But the Yaris sedan is actually a totally different design and shares no body panels with the hatch.
Oh man, the Fiesta sedan is awful. Worse than the Versa.
Quote from: MrH on June 06, 2012, 08:07:42 AM
Oxymoron. :lol:
Kia Rio.
Quote from: Raza on June 06, 2012, 08:10:48 AM
Oh man, the Fiesta sedan is awful. Worse than the Versa.
I tend to agree. The hatchback is such a good looking car, but the sedan looks totally wrong.
Accent :praise:
The Versa is the cheapest car in America. It costs the same price as a Kia Sephia did in 2001, or $14,300 in 2012 dollars. The Versa is also less than $1,000 more than a 1987 Yugo in inflation-adjusted dollars.
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 06, 2012, 10:44:27 AM
The Versa is the cheapest car in America. It costs the same price as a Kia Sephia did in 2001, or $14,300 in 2012 dollars. The Versa is also less than $1,000 more than a 1987 Yugo in inflation-adjusted dollars.
Yeah, but A/C is a $7000 option.
I would buy a new Tata Nano.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on June 06, 2012, 11:11:04 AM
Yeah, but A/C is a $7000 option.
I would buy a new Tata Nano.
My office is as long as a city block. I would buy one just to drive to the pantry.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on June 06, 2012, 12:55:39 PM
My office is as long as a city block. I would buy one just to drive to the pantry.
but u can just ride ur bike.
Quote from: 2o6 on June 06, 2012, 08:02:06 AM
I don't agree.
I think the Yaris sedan is one of the better looking B-segment sedans. Nowhere near as bad as the Versa. Or Fiesta sedan.
But the Yaris sedan is actually a totally different design and shares no body panels with the hatch.
Nope, Yaris sedan is clearly an afterthought, and looks like it. They screwed up the proportions fairly well.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on June 06, 2012, 12:55:39 PM
My office is as long as a city block. I would buy one just to drive to the pantry.
(http://www.topgear.com/uk/assets/cms/3d0ffeb4-b5d2-4373-939a-e9146384bade/Large%20Image.jpg?p=090211_11:05)
Quote from: S204STi on June 06, 2012, 04:20:54 PM
Nope, Yaris sedan is clearly an afterthought, and looks like it. They screwed up the proportions fairly well.
The Sedan and Hatch share no body panels at all....the sedan is a ground up different design. In most markets it's not even related (in terms of marketing) to the Yaris hatchback.
I think it looks better than most other B-segment sedans, but it's not exactly a strong looker. It looks OK.
Anyways, next car.
Daihatsu Charade (Yes, this car was sold in the US)
(http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/03/CCSM-76-001-800.jpg)
Reminds me of the third world.
Excellent rear wheel opening design.
3 cylinders = save big $$$ not having to buy that pesky 4th spark plug
Daihatsu is a fun name to pronounce
I admire the design; it's almost like they only slapped a box onto the rear end of the hatchback.
(http://www.evalbum.com/img/1972/1972a.jpg)
I wouldn't be suprised if the rear glass from the hatch fits directly onto the sedan.
I think it has fully independent suspension on all four corners.
Daihatsu just left the UK market so potentially a future classic here
(http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/2/3265/3021/20661510007_large.jpg)
1. I won't lie, I dig how they look. I'd go so far as to say they're one of the classiest/most elegant mainstream designs of that era.
2. Cheaper than an Acura Legend and Nissan Maxima, more upscale than a Chevy Caprice and Impala.
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 24, 2012, 09:29:32 PM
(http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/2/3265/3021/20661510007_large.jpg)
1. I won't lie, I dig how they look. I'd go so far as to say they're one of the classiest/most elegant mainstream designs of that era.
2. Cheaper than an Acura Legend and Nissan Maxima, more upscale than a Chevy Caprice and Impala.
3. Look like a wannabe gangster :mask:
1. Surprisingly adept at high speed highway blasts
2. Last of the pillarless Japanese sedans.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on June 25, 2012, 08:07:27 AM
1. Surprisingly adept at high speed highway blasts
Hah. The
only time I've seen my dad hit triple digits was in the Diamante. The only other time I even heard of him going 100+ was back in the late-80's/early-90's in the old 420SEL.
1. Much cheaper to buy used than other Japanese kin (Accord and similar)
2. Good looking, except for the facelift near its death
(http://www.uneedapart.com/images/mitsubishi-diamante-parts.jpg)
Quote from: 2o6 on June 25, 2012, 11:00:00 AM
1. Much cheaper to buy used than other Japanese kin (Accord and similar)
2. Good looking, except for the facelift near its death
(http://www.uneedapart.com/images/mitsubishi-diamante-parts.jpg)
Mitsubishi stuck a similar looking nose on the 2002 Galant. It didn't look good on that car, either.