Sixty8panther

BTW: My disdain for full-size Unibody cars started with my friend Mike. He's in his early 50s, and he is the one who got me hooked on demolition derbys back in 2000. Anyway he used to work in Havehirill Massachusetts in the 1970s & 1980s for a coachbuilder who made short-to-medium limousines. Mike told me the biggest horror stories you could ever imagine about the poor build quality, lack of structure, crappy tolerances & lightweight, flimsy chassis on the FWD/unibody Cadillacs of the 1980s. He hated those cars with a passion. Nevermind trying to stretch them for limousine duty, his opinion was that those cars were unsafe and too soft 100% stock with not a speck of rust.

Guess which 2008 sports car will kill its own battery if left out of gear or in any gear except for Reverse? That's right unless you leave it in Reverse and if the Key fob is present the car's battery doesn't engage run-down protection. Gotta love modern cars.

Bin-Goh!

Wow... sorry to hear that. This has to be one of the saddest post on this forum. It's like one of the Duke boys making a Mopar joke durring a Hazzard episode. Kind of creepy.

Best scan EVAR!!!!\\

In any case it looks even more ASS-tastic than those horrid semi-unibody POS long-wheelbase Dodge Vans where they just weld on an extra long butt on the standard wheelbase, it's absolutely pathetic, NO excuse!

LOL @ the super-sized ass Explorer. What a waste of man-hours.

Don't forget the guest of honor:

Yeah, that guy in Conn. is a stupid ignorant retard. Too bad he's got like 20 classic cars rotting in abandoned gas station. Getting back to the whole BOF/unibody argument, those fuslage Mopars are NOTHING like the pepsi-can POS crap that the Japanese and many of the American manufacturer's are pushing on us these days. There is more structure in the left rear rocker panel of the typical 1960s unibody Chrysler than in an entire new Toyota, and quite possibly in most way too soft modern cars would flex a lot less if they were overbuilt like those old battleships. Here's three cars that would be better IMHO if they were BOF: (& by that I mean the 100% modern hydroformed style frame) 1. last gen Park Ave. 2. current DTS (even if it did stay FWD) 3. Chrysler 300C

Sigh. I wish I could make it back down there but as it stands the $45 worth of tolls me & SP paid was bad enough, nevermind the gas. Still at some point I'd love to see that '38 Dodge, and see Balthazar's "Steel Harem" :wink:

I wish. Balthazar's solution sounds fair!

Yup, semi-panel wagon.

Check Mate. Fuselage Chryslers, Future Zetas, Fox Body Mustangs, Hudsons, hell even Chrysler Airflows are examples of cool Unibodys. But that having been said there's not one BOF car that I resent for being over-built super-sturdy, rock solid & heavy, on the other hand there's plenty of cars that would be more durrable, less prone to squeaks & rattles, suspension rattle etc. if they were BOF instead of unibody! Polite answer to a logical & polite question.

I've always admired 1st gen. Supras & hardtop Celicas!

foam

Thank You!!! Huundai circa 2006:

+1

Oh and before I forget, what is that giant machine in your Sig?

Or Cadillac could have the American Bugatti/RR/Bentley if they ever built the damn SIXTEEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Balthazar: I'll poke around for you...

Name this car: Made by one manufacturer but sold by 4 One of those manufacturers no longer exists One of those manufacturers is not doing so well Turbocharged RWD

Yup, the Hollywood Movie of 1959 by the name of "It Started with a Kiss"

DAMN, that/s right, we didn't get to see the '38 Dodge.

the renderings suck, but a cheap 2+2 RWD car would be a good thing, might get GM off their A$$

I bet it will look much uglier once the black duct tape & canvas camo come off!