The MW Automotive Thread

[yellowlightman]

...

Those who still disagree the Mini isn't "cool," I'd recommend you check out The Italian Job (the original).

Absolutely!

Just turn it off 2 min before the end. You don't want to see the end.

Hah, exactly. The end was... I dunno, just left you with that "WTF?" feeling. Regardless, the chase sequences are amazing and right up there with the Bullitt chase scene in terms of cinematic beauty.

[Lightning]

guess the mortals are happy with their tiny engines....

[Phyrox]

guess the mortals are happy with their tiny engines....

Different strokes for different folks.

I will admit to having had a good time whipping around on back roads in my dad's old Z (Z31)...

But I will say that I will probably always have an old muscle car (or kin) as my daily driver. Once you go that route...it is really hard to imagine giving it up. Even my friends, who were mostly into contemporary cars, were awed and impressed by my old chevelle (to the point that a muscle car is now on his "to buy" list). That feel...there is something addictive about it. I have driven my friend's 50th anniversary 'vette, and sure it is fast, but something felt missing. It was so antisceptic, NOTHING like my 454. It may be faster (top speed certainly, acceleration...I'm not sure), but it doesn't feel anywhere near as fast, or fun, or brutal.

I see the merits of these little-engined wonders that are so popular. I really do, but for my part I have to side with Lightning 06...Give me torque, and lots of it, wrapped up in a massive, inefficient v8, please.

[yellowlightman]

I see the merits of these little-engined wonders that are so popular. I really do, but for my part I have to side with Lightning 06...Give me torque, and lots of it, wrapped up in a massive, inefficient v8, please.

I think V8s are awesome as are muscle cars, but I'd have a hard time driving one for a daily or even as a "fun" car. The problem is that with all that old charmand fun comes wrapped up with old technology. As impressive as those big boats can be in a straight line, you really start to feel the age of the muscle cars when you start to turn the wheel. The sluggish handling and poor suspension, I enjoy whipping my cars around corners too much to drive one of those as a daily.

Engine wise though, I don't view either smaller or bigger motos as "better." Older V8s have torque, simplicity and cheap aftermarket parts. Smaller engines have top end fun (as we rotary guys say "redline a day keeps the caron lock away"), fuel efficiency and weight. Different trade offs, just depends on what you're looking for.

[reddsun1]

I think V8s are awesome as are muscle cars, but I'd have a hard time driving one for a daily or even as a "fun" car. The problem is that with all that old charmand fun comes wrapped up with old technology. As impressive as those big boats can be in a straight line, you really start to feel the age of the muscle cars when you start to turn the wheel. The sluggish handling and poor suspension, I enjoy whipping my cars around corners too much to drive one of those as a daily.

Engine wise though, I don't view either smaller or bigger motos as "better." Older V8s have torque, simplicity and cheap aftermarket parts. Smaller engines have top end fun (as we rotary guys say "redline a day keeps the caron lock away"), fuel efficiency and weight. Different trade offs, just depends on what you're looking for.

Au, contraire--but you can "have your cake and eat it too," so to speak. I'm a big fan of old muscle cars myself; thanks to the "pro-touring" movement that's caught on in the past few years, it's become much more acceptable to combine newer drivetrains, suspensions, etc. with classic cars. There's a whole industry cropped up around upgrading parts for old cars; you can have a "boat" with plenty of grunt, that handles as well as--or better than--many newer cars. I've personally seen a '67 Chevelle lap newer, turbo 911 Porshes at Lime Rock Park, CT at vintage races (that car caused quite a stir that w'end; was dropped about 3" all way 'round, had a modded suspensoin--I think the guy who built it was an engineering student or something). Although, the g-machine thing can be taken too far--this whole thing with putting SUV-sized "dubs" on old cars is just plain tacky. Anything bigger than 18" on a 30+ year old car just doesn't work. It's like the automotive equivalent of gold plates on all your front teeth, or liesure suits or something; it doesn't flow with the design, and just demonstrates shi--y taste. But that's just my 2 bits.

Edited February 11, 2005 by reddsun1

[reddsun1]

Under the hood of that souped up charger; quite a modern piece of hardware...

http://popularhotrodding.com/features/0503phr_char_01_z.jpg

And this one looks like it'd ride as comfortably as any new Honda or Toyota, with style in spades...

http://popularhotrodding.com/features/0307...57Chevy01_z.jpg

http://popularhotrodding.com/features/0307...57Chevy05_z.jpg

[reddsun1]

And as a tip of the hat to that which has come before...you gotta have mad respect for the cats who drove--and still do drive--these cars. Hearkening from a time when engine building technology/knowledge was still leaps and bounds ahead of aerodynamic, tire or safety technology. These things are basically like scaled-up go-karts...with a 700HP Chev crammed in it. I once asked a racer what it's like driving a Can-Am car compared to other racecars; he said "...you don't so much drive 'em, like you would a modern race car. It's like a shotgun--you just point the nose and shoot..." You gotta have BALLS to drive one of these things.

[reddsun1]

Another beauty from the past. Arguably some of the most beautiful cars of that era (or today), the Lolas can, on the banked ovals of Daytona, can actually reach HIGHER top speeds than the new prototype racers. While they may have to slow way down for the corners due to their lack of downforce from modern aero spoilers and such, they also lack the accompanying drag...damn fast cars.

[Lightning]

guess the mortals are happy with their tiny engines....

Different strokes for different folks.

I will admit to having had a good time whipping around on back roads in my dad's old Z (Z31)...

But I will say that I will probably always have an old muscle car (or kin) as my daily driver. Once you go that route...it is really hard to imagine giving it up. Even my friends, who were mostly into contemporary cars, were awed and impressed by my old chevelle (to the point that a muscle car is now on his "to buy" list). That feel...there is something addictive about it. I have driven my friend's 50th anniversary 'vette, and sure it is fast, but something felt missing. It was so antisceptic, NOTHING like my 454. It may be faster (top speed certainly, acceleration...I'm not sure), but it doesn't feel anywhere near as fast, or fun, or brutal.

I see the merits of these little-engined wonders that are so popular. I really do, but for my part I have to side with Lightning 06...Give me torque, and lots of it, wrapped up in a massive, inefficient v8, please.

a semi-convert! at last we can have these people and their imports appreciate V8's!

[Phyrox]

We seem to have at least a few muscle-car drivers on MW, but I don't know who owns what...so what do we (or have we) driven as far as muscle cars/pony cars (for those that draw a distinction) go?

Criteria:

-None of this, "my brothers friend had, or my dad has" this is all about what YOU own(ed). i.e. your name is on the title.

-Must be from 1964 - 1974

-Please no partisan stabs at Ford, or GM, or Mopar...they are all good (even if secretary special 289 'stang drivers think they are infinitely cooler than they are)

Personally, I had a 1970 SS454 (LS5) Chevelle, now I have a 1970 RAIII Firebird Trans Am.

(i don't think my '69 eldorado counts as muscle...so i won't count that).

[yellowlightman]

Au, contraire--but you can "have your cake and eat it too," so to speak. I'm a big fan of old muscle cars myself; thanks to the "pro-touring" movement that's caught on in the past few years, it's become much more acceptable to combine newer drivetrains, suspensions, etc. with classic cars. There's a whole industry cropped up around upgrading parts for old cars; you can have a "boat" with plenty of grunt, that handles as well as--or better than--many newer cars. I've personally seen a '67 Chevelle lap newer, turbo 911 Porshes at Lime Rock Park, CT at vintage races (that car caused quite a stir that w'end; was dropped about 3" all way 'round, had a modded suspensoin--I think the guy who built it was an engineering student or something).

I'm sure muscle cars with transplanted suspensions handle considerably better than they originally did, but they're still not going to handle better than the newer cars designed from the drawing board to use those suspension set ups. Larger, heavier cars simply aren't going to handle as well as smaller, nimbler cars with modern suspension.

As for the "I've seen X beat Y" evidence, so much is dependent on driver skill it's really not a good basis for comparison. My friend's 94 325is with coilovers sitting a few inches off the ground passed Vipers, Z06s and Porsche GT2s at the last track event he went do. Does that mean his 20 year old 325 is a better car or handles better? No.

[peter]

guess the mortals are happy with their tiny engines....

Different strokes for different folks.

I will admit to having had a good time whipping around on back roads in my dad's old Z (Z31)...

But I will say that I will probably always have an old muscle car (or kin) as my daily driver. Once you go that route...it is really hard to imagine giving it up. Even my friends, who were mostly into contemporary cars, were awed and impressed by my old chevelle (to the point that a muscle car is now on his "to buy" list). That feel...there is something addictive about it. I have driven my friend's 50th anniversary 'vette, and sure it is fast, but something felt missing. It was so antisceptic, NOTHING like my 454. It may be faster (top speed certainly, acceleration...I'm not sure), but it doesn't feel anywhere near as fast, or fun, or brutal.

I see the merits of these little-engined wonders that are so popular. I really do, but for my part I have to side with Lightning 06...Give me torque, and lots of it, wrapped up in a massive, inefficient v8, please.

a semi-convert! at last we can have these people and their imports appreciate V8's!

Why convert when you can like both?

[Lightning]

guess the mortals are happy with their tiny engines....

Different strokes for different folks.

I will admit to having had a good time whipping around on back roads in my dad's old Z (Z31)...

But I will say that I will probably always have an old muscle car (or kin) as my daily driver. Once you go that route...it is really hard to imagine giving it up. Even my friends, who were mostly into contemporary cars, were awed and impressed by my old chevelle (to the point that a muscle car is now on his "to buy" list). That feel...there is something addictive about it. I have driven my friend's 50th anniversary 'vette, and sure it is fast, but something felt missing. It was so antisceptic, NOTHING like my 454. It may be faster (top speed certainly, acceleration...I'm not sure), but it doesn't feel anywhere near as fast, or fun, or brutal.

I see the merits of these little-engined wonders that are so popular. I really do, but for my part I have to side with Lightning 06...Give me torque, and lots of it, wrapped up in a massive, inefficient v8, please.

a semi-convert! at last we can have these people and their imports appreciate V8's!

Why convert when you can like both?

that's why I said "Semi-convert"......

anyways, as of the "Have you owned a musclecar?" question, no, I have not owned one, but as of the Smog Era (1975-1981), I consider it one step below a musclecar, the car I currently own that is. And since I can get picky about this, the musclecar era could have really lasted from 1955-1974, or from 1962-1974, depending on how you go about it.

The first Chrysler 300 was made in 1955, and was availiable to the common man. The second "musclecar" was availiable in 1962, the Plymouth Belvedere and the Dodge Dart 330, both availiable with 413 Max Wedge engines. However, their styling wasn't up to par with everybody else, even though they were making land-yachts with style. It just wasnt until Pontiac made the GTO in 1964 that the public really took notice.

anybody have a favorite "Smog-era" car?

[areaseven]

From Car and Driver magazine:

Chrysler Firepower!

For its next trick, Chrysler shows us a snake wearing a tuxedo.

BY AARON ROBINSON

PHOTOGRAPHY BY BILL DELANEY

February 2005

When times are tough, automakers tend to act like Presidents. They don't invade small, defenseless countries, but they have been known to pull an irrational stunt to divert attention away from bad news.

Market share is off? Let's buy an Italian company that rhymes with fettuccine. Quality is on the rocks? Time to revolutionize the sales chain with factory-owned dealerships. Shareholders in revolt? Please give a hand for our new platinum-plated supercar.

 

The Chrysler ME Four-Twelve, the mid-engine carbon-fiber queen of last year's auto-show circuit, was a diversion extraordinaire. DaimlerChrysler's management wants the plebeian Chrysler brand to ascend the market-crawl right up the pant leg of Lexus and find an artery. Difficult, especially when you're offering kickbacks to buyers to drive home Concordes and Pacificas.

A desperate year ago, throwing a Hail Mary bomb at the $500,000 line seemed to Chrysler chief operating officer Wolfgang Bernhard like a good way to move the team forward. With four turbos, 12 cylinders, 850 horsepower, and about two inches separating butts from bitumen, the ME Four-Twelve was a school-boy doodle in 3-D meant to purge memories of chrome-festooned Fifth Avenues. If the predicted price of a half-mil didn't move Chrysler upscale, well, perhaps nothing would. That was then.

Now, with Bernhard swept out of the company and the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum hooking a U-ey on both the sales and self-assurance of the company, the pressure to do something silly is easing. Having gauged the line for $500,000 Chryslers to be remarkably short, the company is now considering more modest proposals for a flagship sportster.

Allow us to introduce you to the Chrysler Firepower!—that's what the company calls it, and the name includes that disturbing exclamation point—a shapely and eminently more rational concept crumpet that will be spinning before the flashbulbs of the 2005 North American International Auto Show in Detroit by the time you read this. Painted the color of arcing electricity, the two-seat concept's stretched skin hides mostly off-the-shelf parts, including a stock Dodge Viper chassis, a stock 425-hp, 6.1-liter Hemi from the new Chrysler 300C SRT-8 [see preview], and a stock DaimlerChrysler five-speed automatic built in Kokomo, Indiana. Even the tires—concept cars typically wear hand-cut treads mimicking cheetah paws or the like—are stock Michelin Pilot Sports direct from the Tire Rack. A dealer window sticker ending in a number between $50,000 and $60,000 wouldn't look terribly out of place.

Our first inspection of the Firepower! is accompanied not by flashbulbs but by the whiz of grinders and crackling of arc welders in the considerably less glitzy confines of the Metalcrafters workshop in Fountain Valley, California. Metalcrafters is the Pentagon basement of the auto industry, the place where designer sketches and million-megabyte computer models are milled, hammered, and vacuum-formed into auto-show stars. Everything except the tires, engine, and donor production parts is fabricated on site, including the carbon-fiber body panels, leather-trimmed interior pieces, aluminum wheels, and glass. Partitions divide the building into key-code locked cells—employees call them "build bays"—so visiting executives of one client can't peek at what competitors are creating.

Bring your American Express card. Engineer Nevill Ooms, Metalcrafters' engineering liaison with the car companies, says even a straightforward concept car such as the Firepower! takes more than 20,000 man-hours to build and costs somewhere between $1.2 million and $3.2 million, depending on the ratio of fabricated parts to production parts. Some of the line items: A paint job runs about $40,000, a single wheel machined from billet aluminum costs $6000. Head- and taillights are usually machined from solid chunks of aluminum and acrylic. Client diddling and last-minute changes—longtime customer Chrysler is one of the better ones at avoiding these, says Ooms—only drive up the price.

Ooms shows us to build bay No. 15, where the Firepower! rests on a piece of industrial carpet surrounded by air tools and workbenches. It looks like a shark swimming through a Sears Craftsman commercial. First impressions are the same as with a Viper: It's low and wide with some kind of serious motor shoving the cockpit to the back. Then you start noticing the details—the aluminum-trimmed hood strakes and fender vents, a strip of polished aluminum that runs along the rocker panels, jeweled LED headlamps, and a Chrysler cross-hatch grille flanked by spear-shaped LED driving lights.

This isn't a blue-jean bad boy's toy like the Viper. It's dressed up, a tailored tuxedo accented by solid silver cufflinks and a TAG Heuer. In the rear, where twin tailpipes exit through a carbon-fiber diffuser and below a glass hatch, some influence from other fantasy rides creeps in. There's a taste of Aston Martin DB9 in the side-glass shape, slope of the roofline, and wraparound taillights. There's a hint of Bentley Continental—and, Chrysler would prefer us to point out, ME Four-Twelve—in the rear haunches with their double-radius wheel arches.

Large doors spill back onto the fenders and down into the rocker panels. Release them Viper-style with a pushbutton electric solenoid. A heady, new-Ferrari smell of leather rushes out. Mmmm! No floating holograms or brushed koala pelts in this concept cockpit. It's all fairly normal, with a three-gauge binnacle under a creamy-leather hood and a center stack bracketed by leather-trimmed hand grips and painted in piano-black lacquer. The acres of buffed aluminum (even the column stalks are billet) are the only real bits of pure Hollywood onboard; those and the fake digital numbers in the center air ducts, a novel and fairly practical idea for displaying temperature settings.

Sun rays splash in through a tinted glass roof, deeply inset between the roof arches to give passengers a few extra inches of precious headroom. If the Firepower! ever makes it to production, don't be surprised to see those arches rise to meet safety standards. Over-the-shoulder visibility around the expansive rear pillars may also improve—at least we hope.

It's November back in wind-blown Detroit, where Thomas Tremont, vice-president of advance product design strategy, explains the game plan behind the Firepower!:

"This year we wanted to take the [sports car] theme and bring it down to earth a little bit. The question was, What can we do with a GT, and oh, by the way, what can we do with the Viper chassis and this motor?"

As with the ME Four-Twelve, only the broadest of outlines was handed to Chrysler's young team of future-product designers, who set upon their sketch pads with a fury. The drawings converged in a part of DaimlerChrysler's Auburn Hills headquarters that designers call "Area 51" after the government's super-secret Nevada test site. In the end it was Brian Nielander, head doodler on the ME Four-Twelve, who again produced the winning exterior concept.

"The idea is an Aston for the common man. Something that's a little more attainable," he says. Compared with the "hard geometry" of the ME Four-Twelve, "this is a little more of a blend of the organic, a little more refined and subtle."

Nielander claims he was less obsessed with the Aston Martin than with the Corvette, likely the car's closest competitor should it be approved. Hence, everything was kept realistic. Nielander even put a forward-swept cell-phone/GPS mast on the roof integrated with the government-mandated high-mounted stop light. Some of the aerodynamic work done on the ME Four-Twelve was put to use on the Firepower!—especially in the rear quarters, where sharp corners proved better for "snapping the wind around."

The interior hard points—the steering column, the seat mounts, the pedal placement, and the extra-wide center tunnel—are basically the same as the Viper's. True, the cockpit has "a lot of bling," admits interior designer Greg Howell, "but it's very feasible. Just look at the Audi TT and the Mini Cooper."

Chrysler is itching to do something big. If they build it, the ME Four-Twelve could be huge—a huge mistake. The Firepower! shows what time out for a little rational thinking can produce. We are certainly distracted.

CHRYSLER FIREPOWER!

Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 3-door coupe

Estimated base price: $50,000

Engine type: pushrod 16-valve V-8, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injection

Displacement: 370 cu in, 6059cc

Power (SAE net): 425 bhp @ 6200 rpm

Torque (SAE net): 420 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transmission: 5-speed automatic with manumatic shifting

Wheelbase: 98.8 in

Length/width/height: 172.6/73.2/47.7 in

Curb weight: 3400 lb

C/D-estimated performance:

Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec

Standing 1/4-mile: 12.8 sec @ 112 mph

Projected fuel economy (C/D est):

EPA city driving: 14 mpg

EPA highway driving: 19 mpg

[Phyrox]

And since I can get picky about this, the musclecar era could have really lasted from 1955-1974, or from 1962-1974, depending on how you go about it.

The first Chrysler 300 was made in 1955, and was availiable to the common man. The second "musclecar" was availiable in 1962, the Plymouth Belvedere and the Dodge Dart 330, both availiable with 413 Max Wedge engines. However, their styling wasn't up to par with everybody else, even though they were making land-yachts with style. It just wasnt until Pontiac made the GTO in 1964 that the public really took notice.

anybody have a favorite "Smog-era" car?

Well, I understand that there are several different definitions of the musclecar era, to my eyes it starts in '64 (GTO) and ends in '74 (last "muscle" trans am). Sure there have been good cars since, but the continuous era was over...and most companies were out of the game by '74 anyway.

hmmm, favorite "smog-era" car...that is a good question. Most of them were as ugly as sin, but if forced, I would choose the late 70's era corvette. It may be one of the weakest 'vettes, but in my opinion it was the best looking.

[yellowlightman]

Good lord, that Chrysler is hideous. Looks like a bastard child of the gorgeous Aston Martin DB9 and the rather grotesque Z4.

[EXO]

It think without that hideous grill the car looks ok. That's just Chrysler trying to appeal to 2 types of customers... luxury car and sportscar nut. I wouldn't get a Chrysler anyway, even if they got the look right.

Edited February 13, 2005 by >EXO<

[peter]

The smog-era may be over, but the horsepower war is alive and well. You know the world is going to hell when four-door family sedans have more horse power than your sports car. Don't BMW and Benz both respectively have their flagship V12s pushing over 500 hp, quarter-mile in 12 seconds?

Back in the early 90's, late 80's (when I started getting into cars), your car was something if it had 280-320 hp. That was the standard for a fast car, not necessarily an exotic, but fast.

Now, if you don't have 500 hp stock, you're nothing. About 4-5 years ago, I raced against my friend's 400hp M5 (BMW's 4-door family "sports" sedan) and after 220 km/hr , I had my ass handed to me. And now the new one's got 500hp.

It really hit home that there will always be something newer, and faster out there.

[Lightning]

My favorite Smog-era car is the one I drive daily, a '77 Chrysler LeBaron, the first of the M-body chassis that later spawned the Gran Fury, the Fifth Avenue (buying one of those tomarrow to use for a race car), and the later version of the Diplomat..

One of the things that people tend not to realize is the untapped potential of the cop-ish cars, if you kill the body roll, It'll corner with the best of them, and you can fit ANY engine into these things, I kid you not. For example, I had a friend measure out a 426 Hemi, and we measured my engine bay, and the SOB WILL FIT!! however, as I dont have the $10k+ for it, I will find me a 360 to stick in it instead. However the ultimate sleeper if someone had the money or the want, is the Lincoln Mark VII (those boxy ones), you can fit anything you want in it, any suspension will work with it, and nobody would suspect it!

[Phyrox]

jeez, that Chrysler is hard on the eyes. I much prefer their crossfire.

And a '77 LeBaron? sleeper potential or no...that is a hideous thing.

no offence of course, everyone's aethetic taste is different...

[Commander McBride]

I forgot to mention, I got some new stuff for my car. I probably should have spent some cash on trying to make it not look like crap, but instead I spent my money on some mods people can't even see!

Nismo GT 2-way LSD!

Exedy Stage 1 clutch!

[areaseven]

Since this is the Automotive Thread, I might as well post NASCAR and Auto Racing news here.

The 2005 Daytona 500 will air this Sunday on FOX. After a grueling week in qualifying, here's the starting lineup:

1 88 Dale Jarrett Ford UPS

2 48 Jimmie Johnson Chevrolet Lowe's

3 15 Michael Waltrip Chevrolet NAPA Auto Parts

4 20 Tony Stewart Chevrolet The Home Depot

5 8 Dale Earnhardt Jr. Chevrolet Budweiser

6 31 Jeff Burton Chevrolet Cingular Wireless

7 23 Mike Skinner Dodge Bill Davis Racing

8 37 Kevin Lepage Dodge Carter's Royal Dispos-all

9 12 Ryan Newman Dodge ALLTEL

10 1 Martin Truex Jr. Chevrolet Bass Pro Shops

11 21 Ricky Rudd Ford Motorcraft

12 10 Scott Riggs Chevrolet Valvoline

13 97 Kurt Busch Ford Sharpie/IRWIN Industrial Tools

14 17 Matt Kenseth Ford DeWalt Power Tools

15 24 Jeff Gordon Chevrolet DuPont

16 22 Scott Wimmer Dodge Caterpillar

17 42 Jamie McMurray Dodge Texaco/Havoline

18 40 Sterling Marlin Dodge Coors Light

19 5 Kyle Busch Chevrolet Kellogg's

20 18 Bobby Labonte Chevrolet Interstate Batteries

21 00 Kenny Wallace Chevrolet Aaron's

22 32 Bobby Hamilton Jr. Chevrolet Tide

23 16 Greg Biffle Ford National Guard

24 19 Jeremy Mayfield Dodge Dodge Dealers/UAW

25 77 Travis Kvapil Dodge Kodak/Jasper Engines

26 43 Jeff Green Dodge Cheerios

27 99 Carl Edwards Ford Office Depot

28 25 Brian Vickers Chevrolet GMAC

29 41 Casey Mears Dodge Target

30 29 Kevin Harvick Chevrolet GM Goodwrench

31 49 Ken Schrader Dodge Schwan's Home Service

32 6 Mark Martin Ford Viagra

33 45 Kyle Petty Dodge Georgia-Pacific/Brawny

34 01 Joe Nemechek Chevrolet U.S. Army

35 0 Mike Bliss Chevrolet NetZero Best Buy

36 2 Rusty Wallace Dodge Miller Lite

37 9 Kasey Kahne Dodge Dodge Dealers/UAW

38 07 Dave Blaney Chevrolet Jack Daniel's

39 38 Elliott Sadler Ford M&M's

40 11 Jason Leffler Chevrolet FedEx Express

41 36 Boris Said Chevrolet CENTRIX Financial

42 14 John Andretti Ford VB/APlus at Sunoco

43 4 Mike Wallace Chevrolet Lucas Oil Products

And here's some other news:

Coca-Cola 'Anime' Commercial on Daytona 500 (2005-02-17 17:58:35)

During this weekend's Daytona 500 Coca-Cola will air a 60-second ad, entitled "Fantastic Four," featuring animated super-hero versions of Nascar racers Tony Stewart, Kyle Petty, Bobby Labonte and Kevin Harvick. The ad is the first ever Nascar-themed, anime-style ad and the only animated ad in CoCa-Cola's "Make it Real" campaign. The ad will also be shown in 10,000 movie theaters across the USA and a shorter, 30-second version will be aired during Nascar broadcasts all season. Source: Jayski

[Agent ONE]

[areaseven]

Behold the new face of Subaru...

[Lightning]

.......different, i kinda like it...

[areaseven]

.......different, i kinda like it...

I thought you didn't like cars with "tiny little engines."

[yellowlightman]

Behold the new face of Subaru...

Looks very european, maybe Subaru is getting tired of getting pounded by Citroen in the WRC.

[Lightning]

.......different, i kinda like it...

I thought you didn't like cars with "tiny little engines."

there's a couple I'll respect and/or like. after all, the next gas crisis is fixing to hit in a couple years, I have to have a backup plan....

[Commander McBride]

The new Subarus are designed by a European guy. Same guy who styled for Renault or something.

Personally, I don't like it. Subarus have always had a sort of engineered look, rather than a designed one, form following function. This car looks too contrary to that.

[yellowlightman]

The new Subarus are designed by a European guy. Same guy who styled for Renault or something.

Ahhh, that explains it.

It's not attractive, but then again... no Subaru's really are. You don't buy Subaru's for looks.

[areaseven]

If you missed the Daytona 500, you didn't miss anything. As a matter of fact, I'll call it "The Nextel Cup Series of Unfortunate Events." One of which is the Coke commercial reported earlier. Here's a lowdown of the commercial:

The "anime" commercial features NASCAR drivers Tony Stewart, Kyle Petty, Bobby Labonte and Kevin Harvick. As our heroes are doing their everyday hobbies (Stewart doing some ocean antics, Petty riding a motorcycle, Labonte flying a stealth fighter, and Harvick riding a bull in a stampede), they receive a message on their watches (a la Gatchaman). And so, they head to the superspeedway and get on their cars. Stewart throws cans of Coke to the others before the race.

Adrenaline. Coca-Cola. Real.

While the commercial copies a lot of camera angles from Production I.G's works (namely Blood: The Last Vampire and the anime segment of Kill Bill vol. 1), it suffers from bland character design and completely flat character animation. Imagine Nike's "LeBron James: Chamber of Fear" commercials beaten with an ugly stick. That's exactly what you get in this Coke commercial.

On the bright side, it's better than that piss-poor Benihana "anime" commercial.

[myk]

We seem to have at least a few muscle-car drivers on MW, but I don't know who owns what...so what do we (or have we) driven as far as muscle cars/pony cars (for those that draw a distinction) go?

Only ones I've ever driven are the ones I own, my '69 Charger/440, '97 Z28 Camaro 'vert and '98 Mustang GT, although whiny muscle car purists would insist that the two pony cars don't count...

Owning 3 maintenance and gas hungry muscle cars is getting kinda' old. I'm actually considering selling all three and getting a newer car that could replace all 3 of them, at least in performance...What do you guys think, an '02 or newer Cobra or something?

Edited February 21, 2005 by myk

[wm cheng]

I'm liking this... it looks like the Civic Si is returning to its former glory

(200hp 16valve DOHC!)

http://www.edmunds.com/news/autoshow/artic...08/page014.html

http://www.hondanews.com/CatID2001?mid=200...037548&mime=asc

[Viceland]

Behold the new face of Subaru...

Damn it!! I hate it when car people screw around with a good thing, they had it perfect with the previous model, this new one looks like an Alfa Romeo wannabe on sedatives... I was so happy with the Impreza when they finally canned those Dodge Neon headlights, they had it perfect then, why go and screw it up again???

[peter]

Behold the new face of Subaru...

Damn it!! I hate it when car people screw around with a good thing, they had it perfect with the previous model, this new one looks like an Alfa Romeo wannabe on sedatives... I was so happy with the Impreza when they finally canned those Dodge Neon headlights, they had it perfect then, why go and screw it up again???

I've seen that magazine. They always print pictures of cars and what they think they will look like, not what manufactures have actually released. About 3 or 4 years ago, they printed pictures of the all-new 3.5 litre V8 2003 NSX, and here it is 2005 and it still looks the same as in 2002.