I've often found a lot of people discussing new vs. old when it comes to cars. And as a Buick guy ('71 Riv) Here's what I gpt: Stockt he Riv is a Tank, sure it's built well, but it's original warrenty was only 1 year or 10 000 miles, compare that with today. I get 15 mpg compare that to today. Now the Ride is a lot smoother than most current mid market cars out there and it's interior is on par with a lot of cars for me. But it comes down to this. Do you like big cars? And do you like the deep rumble of a large motor? OIr do you prefer the tight space of a small "race" car? For me, it's simple as that.
Thats not really true. The reason there are so many upgrades available for old school cars is because the original parts suck!! with the exception of a few parts of course. for example- intakes and clyinder heads. to make an easy comparsion, 69Z, with double hump heads. Although they were the best at the tme, any aftermarket head will outflow it. 93 LT1- AFR is the only company I know of that makes aftermarket LT1 heads. Why you ask??? Because the stocks have been proven to support 450++ horse. un touched, along with the intake too. You can re-gear any front driver, but it is costly. Header(s) can be added, along with an aftermarket exhaust, re-curve the computer, timing, Injector swaps, cold air, underdrive pulleys, fiberglass body peices to reduce weight, You can do just as much to a new car, maybe even more.:Smarty:
Re: Re: Nowadays,what do you think are the ugliest cars? I had an interesting experience last week while in a work-related training. The trainer had stated he grew up in Kenosha, WI- that registered with me since I'm a muslecar lover and have admired various models that the AMC Corp produced there while in existence. During a break, I struck up a conversation with him on Kenosha and it's AMC relation. Come to find out that he grew up there as a child while his Dad worked for AMC in design and development. He went on to say that his Dad had a heavy hand in design of the Marlin, Gremlin, Matador, and Pacer. Personally, I might be inclined to list the Matador and rear end styling of the Marlin to this list. The Gremlin and Pacer I like. My favs from them were the AMX and Javelins they made and love those cars minus their cheesy and cheap looking interiors. Sidenote on the Pacer was that the passenger door was longer than the driver's side for the 2 door for back seat access for passengers. Back to the list, I wholeheartedly agree that these are butt ugly!!: Avalanche, Element, Matrix, Vibe. How about the newer Mitsibishi SUV's too? I'm also inclined to put that boxy, outer space looking, boxy van that Toyota made on here too back in the mid 80's.
Every car has advantages and disadvantages. One of them on a new car is the body. They suck. My grandpa ran into a parked 1976 oldsmobile delta and that thing creamed his 01 taurus. New cars may have a lot of stuff do do with them, but in my opinion, they suck when it comes to wrecks and stuff. All it did to the oldsmobile was put a dent in the bumper. Easy fix. As for the taurus, about 1,200 dollars will do. All it did to the taurus was put some dents in it and ruined a few things. I love old cars. New ones, it takes me a while to think about it. this is what i think about the new ones:moonu: :moonu: :moonu: :moonu: Im done with this thread:laugh: My work is complete.
I am an old car person to the core, but in an accident I would much rather be in a new car than an old car. They crumple as they are designed to do so the impact is absorbed by them, not you. The old cars didn't crumple so they looked not so bad after the accident, but they had to scrape the occupants off the dash, windshield and steering column. If I had a choice of hitting a brick wall head on in a 2004 Park ave or a 58 Limited, give me the 2004 anyday. This might not be a popular outlook, but factual.
I have a comment to make, if you choose the 2004 park avenue, you might not make it out alive due for the fact of the airbags and quality of the front. And if you hit a brick wall head on with any car, dont expect to come out without a scratch. plus, not only do new cars have bad quality, but one ding in it will cost you some money you wouldnt expect, i know the truth about new cars and little dings Im not even gonna go there. It would be a waste of time to explain all the disadvantages of newer cars and there bad reputations. In my opinion, new cars have disadvantages with more than one thing. Like i said, its wasting my time thinking about it all.
umm, Air bags are very good at saving lives. It actually distributes the force of the impact mor evenly on your body so your seat belts don't cut you in half, or the steering wheel. And the frames are purposely designed to crumble. which is a good thing, since it absorbs alot of the force from the brick wall. yeah it might be a pain in the rear to fix in simple fender benders, but it really makes life better when in a bad accident. Thanks to the "poor quality of the front end, and air bags," it is know possible to walk away from alot of bad accidents. Personally, I love my buick, But I'd rather it absorb most of the shock in a terible accident, rather than me. Which sadly enough, it is not designed to do at all ou:
I cant disagree with you this time. Airbags have killed people and lots of injuries have been issued, but air-bags have saved more than it has killed. You can't argue with technology, nor with what you said. But don't get me wrong, I love my buick as well as other buicks and older cars. Now-days, technology does everything possible for automobile safety. And that's good. -Cody
Parts and labor are high on the newer cars when you have a frontend collision, but bust up the front of a 71 GS! Try finding that grill and see what it costs. Been there. Parts are getting scarce for these old cars, but you can pick up parts at any dealer for the new cars or maybe some jap reproductions. I do agree that airbags are a benifit. Ask my mother who was hit hard in her 96 Riviera by a car traveling over 50 MPH. No broken bones. Just a scratch and some bruises. The car was trash afterwards, but it did its job. I found her another one just like it and she still has it. Pretty safe car if you ask me.
Im glad she was not hurt....and that's what new cars are really good for.....safety. Safety always comes first. And yeah the parts for some of these old cars are getting rare and more expensive, but as long as the cars themselves are around.......so will the parts.
I dont like ricers. New japanese cars, then they take big fart can mufflers, body kits, and a bird perch for a spoiler and think they look good, and think they are fast... Yet, they are the slowest ugliest POS on the street....
I have to disagree, my '72 Cutlass saved my life when I was rearended on the highway in August. I was traveling 55 MPH(just got on and merged into the slow lane), a moron in a Mustang was traveling at 100+ weaving through traffic and nailed me, spun me around, hit the front of the car, and came to rest against the rear of my car. The trunk was about a foot shorter, but I didn't have a scratch. The Mustang's occupants all went to the hospital, my car was driven over 40 miles home. The kicker was that a cop was coming up to pull the guy over for speeding and careless drivingou: I wondered how they got there in 30 seconds...
I hadn't seen that Forester STi yet... that is pretty ugly and I'm a subaru fan. They should've just stuck with the regular Forester Turbo body...
height of all that is ugly... new Chrysler 300. Is it an old Mercedes? Is it a ram front end on a sedan? Just what the heck is it, anyway? Too bad they wasted a 5.7 rwd drivetrain on that!
