LosAngeles

But no one's addressing this: Why is Overhaulin' taking them off cars that they're already on?

That was a news story from out here....dude was okay afterwards and didn't break anything (he's a dancer, which had something to do with saving himself from real harm). The driver was being a complete prick and is in the legal trouble he deserves.

If we all used that excuse, every post would be here and we wouldn't even need the other forums. With a lot of my car-based talk, if there was a more specific car forum for it, I'd take it there... But then, I'm one that wishes they would reunite The Other Guys (though it's OK that it's separated into four)...

Do you have your license yet? (no insult)

Now I understand you're the resident pre-70s car guy around here...but you can't seriously think it's safe to drive a car with no driver's side mirror. While I figure one could probably get used to it, that's not the safest thing to do. But I'm really wanting to see where Chip is finding it OK to take them off and leave them off...it's not like these are absolute show cars....with most, they're at least weekend warriors...obviously, they will be taken on public roads. How is it a lesser safety device to have something that allows one to not have to cock their head 90 degrees for a long period of time to make a lane change?

Uh, BV....you DO know it's OK to post Pontiac-related stuff in the Pontiac forum, right?

I watched two eps of Overhaulin' tonight, and cars that both began with at least driver's side mirrors (68 LeMans and 70 Nova) were finished with no mirrors on either door! I don't see any evidence that Chip's thrown in cameras or anything, and not only will you get ticketed right off the road in this state for not having outside mirrors, but it's just creepy unsafe. It's simply more confidence inspiring to have all your mirrors. Is he just throwing them on later, or what's the deal?

Of course not, but this devil's advocacy is for a reason...

I really wish I never posted this review.....

OK, now explain how that was safe?

Would you say that because you consider 80s and up cars throwaway, or because they're simply not old enough, not enough time has passed?

Figures one would throw the vinyl roof on it that quick.

Wouldn't THAT be a great competitor to the Mercury Mistress?

Wow...to live in other states. Ya got classic plates AND truck plates...not here, nope. But let's go beyond plates and deal with the public at large....with perception.

Still nothing (exteriorwise, anyway) like a 90-96 Turbo/GTP

With the exception of this look, only a Trans Am body could ever do for me after 1982. I always found non-T/A Firebirds to look stripped, basic, and really watered down (think about how thin 82-84 Camaros looked without the Z28 kit). Trans Ams looked solid, bold, and thick. That's why I used to hate when automotive journalists would recommend Firebird Formulas over Trans Ams. The Firehawk pictured was styled in a way that I couldn't tell the difference.

I know going to a compact hatch was a bit extreme (I think the name should have gone to the 6000 instead, staying on an A-body)....but really, did we all expect cars to stay that big and thirsty forever? It's like we try too hard to live in the past.

Is it 1973 because of the catalytic converters? Maybe 1977, with the beginning of the boxy styling craze (including rectangular headlights)? Is it somewhere in the 80s, with the switch to fuel injection and the death of chrome bumpers? Or is it the 90s, when all these transitions were complete and every car was officially "computerized" (with more crapola to come)? Can the cutoff year slide into more recent years? Or did one prick just say "it stops at the 50s!" and it just is what it is and will be for all time?

Remebered after I posted....it was a 74ish Chevelle 2-door on 20" wires. And last night, spotted another one that didn't have the full greenhouse, but the rear slit windows instead....weren't those called Malibus to differentiate? Or were those all simply later-cycle models?

So roosters are good eating in Pennsylvania?

But then VW also has a Polo, so basically the two go together. I always thought they should complete the trifecta of billionaire boys club sports names with a sports coupe called a Tennis (no joke). "Rabbit" is simply too cheeky, I'm glad that's gone....folks couldn't take the (quite good) car seriously.

There's another one for C&G: EVERY name got ruined in the 80s, get over it. The manufacturers wanted to use familiar names, but no one ever knows a car is going to be a flop or have a bad record until it happens. It's like Blu said, is it the car that made the names great or the other way around? We get it, folks, let it go....

This weekend's spots: -third-gen Camaro (yeah, whatever.....except for the fact that it loked nice on the 20s it sat on, even though it was primer gray) -Dodge Challenger (yes, the version you care about) -last-gen Riviera with this weird blue two-tone -Aston Martin Vanquish ...figures I would forget the last one.

Basically, here, members are conservative/ignorant/racist/intolerant when it's convenient.....not naming names or situations, just calling it like I see it.... I mean hey, calling anything from SE Asian countries "rice" is accepted, so I don't know how one can expect a higher standard on other issues... If political talk was OK here, you'd see the real deal with a lot of people.

I want everyone to sound off here, but this post is inspired by the fact that the Chevelle name will not work in this millenium. Leave it in the 60s and 70s, where it belongs.... That goes for Bel Air as well....kinda flighty for a Chevy, not to mention the fact that it screams 50s. And there should be no more Broughams or Landaus either. At Nissan, I think the Sentra name should die with this current generation...I'd switch to Pulsar, a name that's a lot racier. Out in Japan, I'd kill their trend of getting too Japanese with the names like Fuga and Tiida...I didn't see anything wrong with Laurel, Cedric, or Gloria (even though that name belongs to Prince). And finally, companies really need to dead this whole switch to every vehicle in their line starting with the same letter. Ford with F (or E for their SUVs), Pontiac with G, Buick with L, Mercury's M, all scream of trying too hard for synergy. Toyota can slide with the C, since those names date pretty far back.