Hudson

As much as I might agree with the above statement, these bills show a lack of INTELLIGENCE, not the measure of their corruptability.

#2 or #3 (depending on how you define ("still in bidness" and "long gone") could be Bugatti

It's a VW-based kitcar called the Kelmark.

Yes, there were cars that were quiet, but compare an entry-level or family car then and now and you'll see the VAST improvement in nearly every measurement. Compare that Chevette to a Sonic (the Cruze would just embarass the Chevette) and see. You can't have it both ways. Stupid drivers need to be protected from quiet cars, but having them die in less-than-modern cars is okay? You're not going to pop an airbag at parking lot speeds and ABS typically doesn't work travelling really slow either. Some of us feel that 1984 cars didn't have enough compared to what's available today. MANY modern drivers NEED these things. Traffic injury stats prove this out. The former point was caused by CAFE. The latter point was the result of demand for vehicles basically prohibited by CAFE. Today's vehicles are considerably quicker than those of 30 years ago. Actually, the need to get people to buy more reasonable vehicles is the point, not road repair. I, for one, would like to see all highway monies earmarked exclusively for travel-related costs...mass transit, road repair, etc. But the real point is to get single drivers out of large vehicle that they have no real need to be driving...like they have done in Europe. I don't want $8/gallon gas, but I also don't drive a gas guzzling truck to commute back and forth to work...as many people do.

I wouldn't call the Chrysler Thunderbolt "limited production" as much as five copies of a concept car.

Wikipedia: "On January 14, 2012, the Obama administration responded to a petition against the bill, stating that it would not support legislation with provisions that could lead to Internet censorship, squelching of innovation, or reduced Internet security, but encouraged "all sides to work together to pass sound legislation this year that provides prosecutors and rights holders new legal tools to combat online piracy originating beyond U.S. borders while staying true to the principles outlined above in this response."" "On January 15, 2011, the New York Times reported that the House SOPA bill "would not come up for a vote" until a "consensus" could be reached."

Aside from the comments above, our enlightened scientist misses many points: Horsepower of a mid-sized car in 1984 was under 150hp, 0-60 time was just under 10 seconds, cars had no modern safety equipment (airbags, ABS, traction control, etc), and they were relatively uncultured (loud, rough, etc). The switch from cars to trucks was mainly due to the public's desire for larger, heavier vehicles as car's got lighter and smaller. While the shift to SUVs did increase the weight of the average new vehicle, the addition of civilizing characteristics (safety, sound deadening, improved suspensions) contributed quite a bit as well. And the "doubling of horsepower" is directly related to improved engineering and not the shift to truck-based vehicles (which, typically didn't have much more power than their car-based counterparts). Along with our safer and more pleasant vehicles, they're much more efficient. A Ferrari 30 years ago just topped 200hp, now family cars far exceed that...and get double the gas mileage at the same time. Manufacturers are shifting toward even more efficent engines since front-drive cars can't handle more than 300hp. With V6 engines easily topping that number, cars are now coming with smaller engines putting out high power...noted by the shift toward four-cylinder engines replacing V6s in larger and larger vehicles. Most economists will agree with this. But how many politicians will vote for more taxes?

I agree. The fenders look mis-matched, and the hood isn't quite "factory" looking...even for 1910-ish.

It's way to big to be a Scripps Booth. Mercedes had a grille like that, but the fenders are so rough, it's hard to tell. And there's no Mercedes three-point star logo on the grille.

The 2.5L V6 and Ultradrive transmission problems aside, the Sebring convertible was a good car. I drove a base model Dodge Aries two-door years ago...and LOVED IT. With its 84hp and four-speed manual, vinyl bench seats, and NO accessories, that car still turned out to be one of my all-time favorites. Had the pleasure to drive a few Sebring convertibles, liked them very much. As for the styling of the 300, the new one looks far less "West Coast Customs" than the (also good looking) first-generation LX. The new one, though, looks modern and practical. I just got out of one that I had for a week and hated to give it up (aside from the 19 mpg from its 6.4L engine). Styling is definitely a personal thing, but the new 300 is elegant to more people than appalling.

It's a very nice condition 1985 Jeep CJ10. They were built from 1981 to 1986.

I was not a fan of the styling, but Nissan provided one for an article I was writing (it fit in with the theme). After driving the car across three states, I really came to like the car as a car. Still not turned on by the looks, but it drove great (especially during the awful weather) and it fit everything we needed to haul around on our adventure. If someone asked my opinion (assuming they like the looks), I could not provide a reason not to buy it.

Styling is a personal thing, but there's no denying that it's different than the Odyssey/Sienna/Grand Caravan.

Like the Wikipedia link points out, that's the V12 version of GMC's V6 engine series.

I have. Years ago I heard stories about it, even as far as a co-worker seeing it in a barn somewhere. Never had the pleasure of seeing it in person, though.

Is this one front-wheel drive?

The RX has been built in Canada for a number of years now.

The Pak-Age-Car (I know where two are) is so cool. Rear engined Lycoming four-cylinder mated to a four-speed (I believe) transaxle.

The Nissan Quest is a unique minivan. It has the utility expected in a minivan, but the styling is more Japanese and not very "American." What do you think of the van? Reading...the Pagoda...the holidays...and the Nissan Quest go together! Check out the article at http://automotivetraveler.com/jump/3706 This article features the great photography of Karl McWherter! Check it out!

The Buick 90-degree V6 was offered in GM products for a few years before being sold to Kaiser where it remained until GM bought it back in the early 1970s. And more to my point, GM (and even Buick itself) offered other engines. Bentley had one basic V8 engine architecture from 1959 through the mid-1990s.

Sidevalves of course. Return of the flathead!!!

How has Bentley "always" been a "V8 brand?" Prior to the VW purchase, Bentley had used TWO V8 engines...a Rolls-Royce engine from 1959 and a BMW engine from the late 1990s. Prior to that, they had six-cylinder and inline eight-cylinder engines (up to 8 litres). Ok... for the last half-century they have been a V8 brand... Perhaps...but not necessarily by choice. Who chooses to use only ONE engine for nearly 40 years (and its still in production)?

How has Bentley "always" been a "V8 brand?" Prior to the VW purchase, Bentley had used TWO V8 engines...a Rolls-Royce engine from 1959 and a BMW engine from the late 1990s. Prior to that, they had six-cylinder and inline eight-cylinder engines (up to 8 litres).

I see "Man," "Teenager," "Baby," and even "Dog" books from Haynes, but is the lack of a "Woman" manual a sign that their unpredictable nature prevents writing a ONE VOLUME tome on the subject?

I can't vouch for the quality of the Haynes books, but the Chilton books were excellent back in the 1990s (when I worked there). The later books (with five-digit part numbers) are written mostly by freelancers (many of which worked there when I did)...some good, some not so good. I agree with Oldsmoboi, if you want a good book splurge for the real thing.