HWR MKII Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 (edited) i didnt mean to insite a debate on quality. any classic car around nowadays is far from stock with all the remanufactured parts out there or replication patrs that have the faults designed out of them most of the older restored cars are as reliable as any new cars these days in MOST not all respects. the true quality of a car comes in how you treat it. how many guys say they think a certain car is crap because they had one and the motor blew on it . what that person didnt tell you is that he was using the car for a reason it was not designed for(street racing) most cars are made for long distance course racing not quarter mile,piston ring friction causing,bearing scraping street racing. if they are designed for racing or performance at all. the 1980s aside(bad years for all auto manufacturers) alot of american cars were well made. this being an automotive thread i thought it was open to automotive anything but since i said the nono A word. i just didnt see anything besides the Viper for american cars. sure the chryslers and pontiacs are on there but chrysler is now part of daimler/benz and chevrolet is now part of ferrari. Edited January 16, 2005 by HWR MKII
yellowlightman Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 this being an automotive thread i thought it was open to automotive anything but since i said the nono A word. i just didnt see anything besides the Viper for american cars. sure the chryslers and pontiacs are on there but chrysler is now part of daimler/benz and chevrolet is now part of ferrari. Don't get so defensive, we weren't sitting around here bashing American cars. There are a number of members on Macross World who are big American car guys, it's just that no one has posted any stuff like that in this thread yet. If it bothers you so much that the only discussion is centered around Japanese and european cars, then post something about American muscle cars.... don't just complain about it. Er, and Chevrolet is not part of Ferrari. Chevrolet is part of GM, which owns a large part of FIAT, which in turn owns Ferrari.
HWR MKII Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 (edited) Er, and Chevrolet is not part of Ferrari. Chevrolet is part of GM, which owns a large part of FIAT, which in turn owns Ferrarii understood that i was just mentioning fewer car company names. I also apologise if i sounded defensive. Its just normal to get bashed on in a thread about cars when you mention american classics when said thread thus far has been dominated by foreign car subjects. Even i like foreign cars my favorite being the Austrailian made 1974 Ford Falcon. The name is american but the car is 100% Aussie. Its not mine but i will be getting one like it soon. Im also going to invest in the body kit to get it looking like that. Edited January 16, 2005 by HWR MKII
areaseven Posted January 16, 2005 Author Posted January 16, 2005 The '80s was not exactly a bad era for American cars. American Muscle made a small return in the form of the Buick Grand National and the Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS.
HWR MKII Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 The only real SS cars in my opinion were the ones with the 396 CID motors in them. Nowadays they just slap the SS label on anything with a 350 CID motor. 396 is what made the first SS cars.
Seven Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 Er, and Chevrolet is not part of Ferrari. Chevrolet is part of GM, which owns a large part of FIAT, which in turn owns Ferrarii understood that i was just mentioning fewer car company names. I also apologise if i sounded defensive. Its just normal to get bashed on in a thread about cars when you mention american classics when said thread thus far has been dominated by foreign car subjects. Even i like foreign cars my favorite being the Austrailian made 1974 Ford Falcon. The name is american but the car is 100% Aussie. Its not mine but i will be getting one like it soon. Im also going to invest in the body kit to get it looking like that. Goddamn, isn't that the Road Warrior's car?
Zentrandude Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 Er, and Chevrolet is not part of Ferrari. Chevrolet is part of GM, which owns a large part of FIAT, which in turn owns Ferrarii understood that i was just mentioning fewer car company names. I also apologise if i sounded defensive. Its just normal to get bashed on in a thread about cars when you mention american classics when said thread thus far has been dominated by foreign car subjects. Even i like foreign cars my favorite being the Austrailian made 1974 Ford Falcon. The name is american but the car is 100% Aussie. Its not mine but i will be getting one like it soon. Im also going to invest in the body kit to get it looking like that. isnt that the road warrior's car?
HWR MKII Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 Why yes, yes it is. I guess that ends alot of peoples confusion to what car was used to make it. 1974 ford falcon. www.madmaxcars.com sells them at least they sell the baseline coupe but they do make special orders so you can order one made to look like the movie car. As a side note the actual movie car is over here in england.
MSW Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 The 80's were a huge improvement over the 1970's...by 73 compression ratios had dropped...we got the cat convertors in 75...we switch from high octain leaded fuel to low octain unleaded, switched from bias-ply to radials...and for a while after that not even big blocks were makeing much over 200hp...by 1982 the little 5.0 stang was doing that with far less weight to hull around then the big boats of the 70's. A stock 305cid 86 Montie Carlo SS can outperform a stock 76 T/A (last year for the 455 engine)...yeah, the 80's wern't great, but the 70's largely sucked worse
HWR MKII Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 the monte weighed a little less than the T/A and was also designed as a sprinter"fast over short distances" the T/A though once it was in high gear on the highway look out. i also understand where your coming from about the monte. im just saying back in the day when the SS was powered by a 396(chevelle,camaro,and others) those cars were unbeatable. technology has given the edge to newer cars but apply that same technology to the same T/A and your looking for trouble. performance also isnt dictated by CID alone its also the gear ratios in your transmission and rear end that help. all the cubic inches and horsepower in the world do you no good if you cant get it to the road.
Hikuro Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 I'm checkin to see if any of my friends are wanting to go with me to the Autoshow, afterall its free VIP passes and everything....but I'm gonna make a bundle from selling off these accessory parts, satilite radio, brush grill guards, kick plates, spoilers, the works...I need t find my charger so I have enough power to take some pictures.
bhop Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 (edited) I have much personal experience with American cars, coming from a "ford vs. chevy" part of the country (grew up in NC). My family on my mom's side are all ford guys, my dad's side are all chevy guys. My dad's always owned American, as well as most of my relatives. I do like old-skool muscle cars. The first car I ever drove was my dad's '66 GTO. I was only 14 at the time too.. heh. they have a certain solid feel to them and the smell of them is pretty distinctive. Maybe it's all the steel and lack of plastics? I dunno.. But as far as modern cars go, i'd never buy an American car. All the ones i've been in, even the Vette, all look and feel cheaply made. They seem to fall apart after a couple years no matter how much care you give it. Not to mention, most American cars are pretty ugly. Edited January 16, 2005 by bhop
HWR MKII Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 I have that same feeling in newer cars as well. They feel "flimsy" somehow. there is also too much plastic in them. I know these cars are designed with crumple zones and such but the car shouldnt dent as you lean against is(99 mitsu mirage). the thing dented in and i wasnt even putting all my weight on it. Right now i own a 79 camaro(needs work) but i drove it from utah to florida in 5 days with no problems. ive had it for over 3 years and have had no problems with it. only paid 1,000 for her.
Seven Posted January 16, 2005 Posted January 16, 2005 Why yes, yes it is. I guess that ends alot of peoples confusion to what car was used to make it. 1974 ford falcon. www.madmaxcars.com sells them at least they sell the baseline coupe but they do make special orders so you can order one made to look like the movie car. As a side note the actual movie car is over here in england. That is one burly man's man car. I'm a big fan of anything that goes fast and that supercharger makes me drool. Most of the time I'm into Japanese imports, European stuff (TVR, BMW, big big Porsche fan) and anything Italian. I'm not so much into American muscle cars, but I'm not stupid enough to think a Honda Civic Type R is a better method for going fast than a F-body. My weekend driver is a 93 twin turbo RX7 with a few mods. I'd love to drop in a nice single turbo setup like a T04S, but in CA, it's damn tough to keep the po-po off your ass. I'm already having enough trouble with them sweating me and I'm probably the most conservative driver in an FD around these parts, and definitely don't look like the riceboy stereotype with the backwards cap and boomin system. I'm just giddy for the new daily driver I'll be picking up at the end of the month. Finally decided to go luxury and get a new BMW 5 series.
MSW Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 the monte weighed a little less than the T/A and was also designed as a sprinter"fast over short distances" the T/A though once it was in high gear on the highway look out. i also understand where your coming from about the monte. im just saying back in the day when the SS was powered by a 396(chevelle,camaro,and others) those cars were unbeatable. technology has given the edge to newer cars but apply that same technology to the same T/A and your looking for trouble. performance also isnt dictated by CID alone its also the gear ratios in your transmission and rear end that help. all the cubic inches and horsepower in the world do you no good if you cant get it to the road. Whoa! hold on now, I wasn't trying to start an argument or anything...just laying out the way I see things. For about a decade I was an auto mechanic here in Illinois...part of the time at a local little private shop, the rest at a Pontiac dealership...I'm a big fan of the second generation TA, at one point I had 3 of them when building up my ride...and I've owned 5 of them so far...I'm no "god of knowledge" but I do know the cars quite well, even thier shortcomeings... this is a old worn out pic of my old ride...a modified 1977 SE T/A, muncie 4-speed, thirty over 455 cid ponco with 10:1 pistons. Edelbrock aluminum heads and torker 2 intake, roller cam and rockers, headers and 3" exaust...and seen here with a 850 double pumper (later replaced with a pro-jection unit hidden under the stock shaker scoop) a 8.75" 4:11 gear 10-bolt posi...welded in boxed subframe connectors and heavy duity 6 leaf springs with traction bars (ain't air shocks holding her up) N50-15s on 15 x 12 out back, G60-15s on 15 X 9 in front...converted to 12" rotors up front with nylon bushings all around, and she still has both f+r sway bars...ran mid to high 11's on 99 octane, and still could handle curves...I did everything except the paint and recorverd seats...by far not the quickest, fastest, or most noteworthy T/A out there...be she was mine
bhop Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 "Trans-Am.. what's Yo Pleasure!" (that's a movie quote... heh, heh)
Phyrox Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 Ahh, I do love the T/As...although I am partial to the early 2nd Gen myself (obviously).
MSW Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 Ahh, I do love the T/As...although I am partial to the early 2nd Gen myself (obviously). yeah, I'm also partial to the 70.5 through 73s myself (no offence but I drool over blue 72's w/white stripe )...but they wern't produced in the volume that the later years were, and they are especialy rare around here...so "beggers can't be choosers" and I built the car seen above (IMHO 77 and 78 were the second best looking versions of the 2ed gen bird)...I pretty much stopped haveing an intrest in newer birds once Pontiac quit produceing motors for them (not that there is anything wrong with Chevy, to me Pontiac performance should be pontiac basied ) and I have no real intrest in 3rd + 4th gen cars ... I did have a 88 305cid 5-speed Formula for a while as a daily driver, not bad...just not the same....course if I win the lottery, I'd have a different 2ed gen car for every day of the week
Hikuro Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 I just remembered, aren't the new Shelbey's body's suppose to be aluminum?
Panzer Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 car thread, sweet! I just bought a 2000 Audi A4 1.8T Quattro tiptronic. Fedex'd my ECU to Neuspeed today for a 1.0 bar chip and getting a 710N valve, Beru plugs and snub mount put in on Friday. cars gonna rule Now all I want is xenons and a tip chip. any other Audi guys around here?
Hikuro Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 I'm pure Nissan....been like a poster child since birth...the only other car my families ever owned was an old Mercedes, now its Nissan Nissan Nissan.... Dad's got an 05 SE Frontier, I got an 03 1.8 GXE Sentra, and moms got a 2002 2.5S Altima with some custom stuff on it since it was gonna go to a friend of the dealership owner but we bought it instead. The 05 Frontiers are sweet, they're built in the same platform as the Armada and Titans, its also got just about as much horse power as the Titan...and titan was ranked as the number 1 full size for 04, it'll even out do a dodge hemi. The new frontiers are now upgraded to Midsize and present alot of impressive new features like Hill Decent and UP Hill Accent. Basically its a fail safe espically for manual drivers...the truck when up hill wont move for a few seconds giving you enough time to give the truck enough power. The down hill will help you progress safely down a large slope at I think less than 20Mph....I gotta look at the books again Our lil current economy sports car is the 05 Sentra SpecV and they're fairly nice with a six speed transmission 2.5 liter engine. But more impressive are the 05 350Z's as now we got the life guard yellow color We're also getting new 05 Xterra's though not built on the same platform as the Frontiers and Pathfinders....it still looks very nice. Than sometime in the next year or so a new sports model will appear called the Azeal. It'll have a similar body style look from the 350Z but is suppose to be affordable to the average class. About 15-20 G's, its called "Entry level Sports" model...but we're just guessing here in Parts. There isn't alot of information released on it yet....
HWR MKII Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 WOW! Thats alot of plastic. better not drive too near any hummers or the pressure wave off the front may blow you around. i still dont trust newer cars. Too light and cost too much for what you get. Even the new SMART roadster is going for 18000 dollars over here. and its barely bigger than an old 70s mini cooper.
Hikuro Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 You'd be surprised how well nissan actually does during its saftey tests compared to 5-10 years ago....I got rear ended in an 04 quest back in July and the guy who rammed me at about 20-25 with his Toyota Tacoma practically had his whole front end smashed in....I had no frame damage and there was only about 2 good sized dents on the bumper skin....and a bit of a stiff neck but the bumper too ALL of that impact
HWR MKII Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 Safety tech aside though it used to be the 18000 price tag was for the "badass" car on the market no matter the manufacturer. now though a companys baseline car with no options is 18000 and the car itself isnt even worth it. We are paying more for name than product. i thought things were supposed to get less expensive the longer said thing was around and the more common it became. Look at DVD players. in 1997 when they first became available they were 500 to 1000 dollars for a baseline one and now i can get a dual region,DTS capable HD output one for 40 bucks. you think internal combustion engines and the mechanics behing your run of the mill car have been aroung over 100 years so what are we really paying for. Waht makes that HUMMER worth 100,000 dollars, or that NISSAN so expensive. its all in a name. Sorry for going on a tangent everyone just tired of seeing the price keep going up on things that arent that great.
MSW Posted January 17, 2005 Posted January 17, 2005 Safety tech aside though it used to be the 18000 price tag was for the "badass" car on the market no matter the manufacturer. now though a companys baseline car with no options is 18000 and the car itself isnt even worth it. We are paying more for name than product. i thought things were supposed to get less expensive the longer said thing was around and the more common it became. Look at DVD players. in 1997 when they first became available they were 500 to 1000 dollars for a baseline one and now i can get a dual region,DTS capable HD output one for 40 bucks. you think internal combustion engines and the mechanics behing your run of the mill car have been aroung over 100 years so what are we really paying for. Waht makes that HUMMER worth 100,000 dollars, or that NISSAN so expensive. its all in a name. Sorry for going on a tangent everyone just tired of seeing the price keep going up on things that arent that great. a modern average car (not even performance one) is an all out super exotic race car compared to even race cars of the 1910 and 20s Yeah the internal combustion engine has been around for a long time...but follow the history of its mass production...even into the 1950's engine bearings were not the two piece shells we now enjoy...and even though overhead cam engines were around in race cars back in the 1930's, it took a whole lot of newfangled manufacture engineering to get production up to snuff inorder to make them. Then too modern cars have more onboard computer power then even the NASA Apollo spacecraft...not even the innovative old mechanical fuel injection systems of lore could hang with our modern counterparts... But here is something to think about...because of all the advances modern cars enjoy, they require a more involved labor intensive manufactureing process...multiply that by the fact that assembly line workers now earn $20+ dollars an hour (when they only made $2 or so back in the 60's and into the 70's)..multiply that by all the engineering and R&D that goes into each car model...multiply that by the managers and executives whom oversee the entire process...add in the costly expenses of advertiseing on print, radio, TV, the net...add in the cost for manufacture line tooling, facility, and documentation for those whom will ultimately be called upon to repair said cars.. hell, modern radials have more traction and last longer then the raceing slicks of the 50's...and even the lowly Yugo had front disk breaks, compared to even the 60's very common drum breaks all around... blah, a gallon of milk was like 30 cents back in the 70's...its now ten times that much...That isn't because of namebranding.
Beltane70 Posted January 18, 2005 Posted January 18, 2005 blah, a gallon of milk was like 30 cents back in the 70's...its now ten times that much...That isn't because of namebranding. I totally agree. Cars, just like anything else have gone up in price through the years. MSW said things quite well. Just look at houses, for example. The house that I grew up in cost my parents $18,000 when it was built in 1971. In 1979, we had an addition put on for the same amount of money. In 1997, our house was sold for around $150,000. I'm pure Nissan....been like a poster child since birth...the only other car my families ever owned was an old Mercedes, now its Nissan Nissan Nissan.... Well, I see Hikuro and I have something in common! I've been a Nissam owner for all but the first 4 years that I was driving. Granted, I've only owned 2 Sentras (a 1992 E, and a 1996 GXE, both with manual transmissions) over the last 12 years, I've growm to love Nissan cars. Like most other Nissan fans, I too hope to be able to own a Skyline GT-R.....
Panzer Posted January 18, 2005 Posted January 18, 2005 Than sometime in the next year or so a new sports model will appear called the Azeal. I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.. seriously, that car looks like a Honda Element on crack. I love Infiniti's, had a J30 for several years, but Nissan's a different story. I hate the 350Z and the new Maxima. talk about killing a family tree of previously sweet looking cars.. Only thing new that Nissan is coming out with that caught my eye is the Nismo Frontiers. about time nissan put Nismo in the spotlight like Toyota did with TRD like, um, 15 years ago.. and the Sentra SpecV GT-R thing... oh buddy do I feel sorry for you dude.. sorry to hear your stuck with one of those buwahaha the new limited edition Skyline GT-R is the baddest car evar though. its my fave car ever I think. not a nissan fan but I LOVE skylines to death.
Opus Posted January 18, 2005 Posted January 18, 2005 I have to agree, that 350 is butt,ass ugly. The perportions are exactly opposite of the 240Z. The front is short and the rear is long. It's freaky looking. I love the early Zs (my first car was a '77 280Z that I'd still be driving if hurricane Isabel hadn't smushed it with a tree:( ) but the line really went into the crapper with the ZX and beyond.
yellowlightman Posted January 18, 2005 Posted January 18, 2005 Than sometime in the next year or so a new sports model will appear called the Azeal. I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.. seriously, that car looks like a Honda Element on crack. Er, what? That car looks nothing like the Element. If anything, it looks like Nissan took the look of the Scion tC and threw on a bunch of Nissan-isms (the grill, ugly dashboard) and it looks like the stole the parking brake out of a Alfa Romeo Milano (a what!?). I just left a job working at a Nissan dealership, and while they're not bad cars to work on and are generally pretty damn reliable, they're pretty boring. Not as boring as Toyota, but still. I think right now Mazda is the only Japanese company that isn't boring as hell. As for the Z lineage being ruined by the the 350Z, it hasn't The Z lineage has been ruined by the 280Z and above. The 240Z was a cheap, reliable performance car that showed the world the Japanese could make a decent sports car. But later models got heavy, ugly and just ridiculous. Personally I don't mind the looks of the 350Z too much (performance isn' horrible, either) but the interior ergonomics suck. I will admit to liking the Sentra Spec V though. It's a good deal for what you get (LSD in a car like that is pretty impressive), and I wouldn't mind having one for a daily driver. Just a shame it's FWD,as it kind of kills the sporty nature of the car for me.
Golden Arms Posted January 18, 2005 Posted January 18, 2005 I kinda like the new Nissan 350Z. I would newer buy one (rather buy a Cobra) but I don't think its butt ugly. Does anyone know why they made the eclipse a FWD car? I've always wondered about that. I heard that Dodge has been doing really well. Their Charger was well recieved.
areaseven Posted January 18, 2005 Author Posted January 18, 2005 (edited) I heard that Dodge has been doing really well. Their Charger was well recieved. Now who said that? All I see is a Chrysler 300C that got whacked with an ugly stick. Edited July 26, 2005 by areaseven
Seven Posted January 18, 2005 Posted January 18, 2005 (edited) I heard that Dodge has been doing really well. Their Charger was well recieved. Now who said that? All I see is a Chrysler 300C that got whacked with an ugly stick. From that angle and with that color, it looks awful cartoony, like it popped right out of Roger Rabbit. Edited January 18, 2005 by Seven
Hurricane29 Posted January 18, 2005 Posted January 18, 2005 (edited) I don't like the looks of the new charger. Charger Edited January 18, 2005 by Hurricane29
Recommended Posts