Sixty8panther

I say if we're going to bring back inline motors of more than 6 cylinders it should be an Inline-9, just to out-do a V8 on paper. All joking aside I6 > V6. Always!A modern inline8 would be great.

If it wasn't so damn expensive I'd totally get that!

FoG: I agree 100%, I know what Oldsmoboi is saying but even those theories have a margin of error of 95-250%... This is the analogy I use: These retards running around yelling "The Sky is Falling!" are doing the scientific equivalent of observing a major highway from 5:00am to 9:00am and based on that 4 hour chunk of time predicting: 1. By noon the traffic will be 3 times the total capacity of the highway, in keeping, of course, with the trend they saw from 5:00-9:00am. 2. Next Sunday there will be the same amount of traffic, if not more! LoL

Hey,you're back.

Going through my C:drive I picked out a few photos of the '62 Special that I owned Feb. of last year. I've regretted selling it but at the time I could NOT say no to getting the Banana Boat back... now I'm really hoping to pick up that red '61, it's more car anyway.

That's a song I could see myself listening to in the old Banana Boat on its factory 8-track...

Just like that King of the Hill episode.... WTF is the point of a toilet that used 40% less water when the damn thing needs to be flushed 3 times!?

I disagree. And as far as "no replacement for displacement", (I agree) why did you buy a 3800 powered Camaro? You need to drop a Caddy 8.2 liter 500 in that Cobalt! AGAIN: in a world where the government would have us all drive Civic EX sedans, I'd rather have a baby-V8 thab none at all! And by your logic (V6 vs. V8), I guess GM needs to make a 700 cubic inch ONE cylinder Corvette ZR1! The annalogy was to illustrate that a 3.0 liter V8 is STILL a V8, but a V6, no matter how BIG is still NOT a V8 and therefore lacking in the image & smoothness dept.

Dude, you know what... a junkyard will give me $200 for it, pre or POST demolition derby... you match that and the RoadmOnster is YOURS!* * Pick up / delivery responsibility of buyer. Or, for say... $400 I'll throw in the radiator it needs, but you are mandated to keep the ghetto heater core. (at least for the ride home!) http://flickr.com/photos/9220365@N06/3292814175/

To use a phrase that is beaten to death on here: _EPIC FAIL!

WHY? Mazda had a 1.8 liter V6, by that logic a 2.4 liter V8 is production worthy. Ferraris of the 1940-60s had V-12 with displacement lower in CuIn/Liters than a modern Honda Civic's 4-cylinder! The first few Ferrari V-12 was a 1.5 liter IIRC. Also: What would you rather own... a 3.0 liter V8 or a 3.6 liter V6? Displacement will go down more & more in comming years IMHO, but there's no reason why we have to be all stuck driving four cylinders. The only 4-banger I'll ever aspire to own will be a Brass Era Cadillac.

Look at that old Buick. I'll be honest, I think the '63 LeSabre's nose is downright ugly.... like a lot of early '60s Fords, but compared to all those Civics & a Rav4 it is a ray of sunshine! Here's what I saw just a few min. ago on my lunchbreak: http://flickr.com/photos/9220365@N06/3309602902/

If I buy it, I can say I FINALLY owned a car with REAL, honest-to-goodness BUICK PORTHOLES.... although speaking of the Roadmonster that car has several SPEED-holes. Oh, and as far as Julie... like I said, she's getting her car 1st, and it will almost certainly be a 5 or 7 series BMW, prob. slant-hemi-6 powered but I haven't ruled out the 530i yet... I'm fascinated by that baby-V8.

Yes, it's almost the spittin' image of my 1962 Special that I owned for a short while (even by my standards) last February. But, the 1961 had a much nicer "surfboard side" fender, due to the chrome strip that highlighted this particular styling feature. The car I'd like to buy is very close to the one in the Ad I posted, including color... The black roof with red pillars is gross combo but it can easily be repainted all white or red for a monotone look. The CLEAN look of ACTION. WMJ: If you want to save the Roadmonster I'll send you some pics. of the Epic Redneckification that car went through in the hands of the previous owner and in my hands this past winter... Like I said it REALLY is the perfect candicate for a demolition derby. But IF you want to save it, bring a replacement radiator, sign a waiver saying you realize you just bought a deathtrap, and you can buy it for $300. As far as the B-59 the new-new plan is to MAYBE, hopefully, finally get the motor together this upcoming April. Time will tell. [hope springs eternal]

Dilbert is good stuff. But... "Dying planet." Anyone hear about Al Gore's erroneous claims of climate-change related natrual disasters the other day and how he was found AGAIN to be pulling "facts" from a dark place in his rear?

Damn....

Oh, and before I forget, now that I'm done with all those topics... I agree, an SRX, esp. CPO would be a great choice in V6 or V8 variants. As far as Satty's coment: "who trakes SUVs off road anyway?" Poeple who do NOT drive Toyota Priuses for starters.... I've never owned an SUV that did not GET muddy in the summer & did not kick up snow over its roof in the winter. I guess that makes me a redneck and a mullett-head too now, right. Puh-leeeaze. This is why I don't even post in some topics any more and stay away from so many threads. But I'm the bitch, right?

DF: One of my two "rants" was a response to your comment. Nos: I never called the new Ram a bad product. It's certainly a vehicle that demonstrates what modern vehicles COULD be if we make an effort. Longtooth: You took the bait...

Most on here know I'd be ALL for this idea. As far as most of what Balthazar said I agree but have this to say to the objection of Chevy motors being used in a Cadillac... I'd say make this MINI-V8 even smaller, say about the size (displacement wise) of the BMW 3.0 from the 1990s, then, give Cadillac V12 & V16 variants exclusivelly. On a side note, I NEED to own an airworthy Bf109/Me109 before I die.

As soon as we finally get a car for Julie with our tax refund & I sell the Suburban I am SO getting that '61 Buick I've been obsessing over. Here's a great ad from the fall of 1960 that explaines EXACTLY how I feel about these cars: http://www.legendarygmmagazine.com/free/buick/61buickspe.php "The Special Size Buick Special: the Best of both Worlds." In other words: great MPGs without having to settle for a common "econobox". Notice the ad in question sits next to an ad for the 1959 Buicks... it's meant to be.

Yeah... anyone entertaining a Jeep Patriot or Compass but refusing to take a look at a Grand Vitara is NOT looking at the facts or figures. Half of tjhe $hit today that people call SUVs or Trucks are nothing more than cars with tall greenhouses & oversized tires.

I agree about Nuclear reactor... it's nothing like some skyscraper.... if the Twin Towers are a '84 Plymouth Voyager than a nuclear power plant cooling tower is a 1944 Panther Tank... and I'm not talking about the 540 horsepower discrepancy of the Minivan either. ---- That being said who knows if the towers REALLY fell due to jet fuel alone. Well yes of course. IF/when we had a better way to fuel cars or a better method of propelling a car down the road with little to no loss of performance/utility/flexibility we'd already be there and I'd be cheering on the effort. Now as far as MY ideal scenario for mass PRIVATE transportation the movie Gatica is a perfect solution. (BTW, this is slightly off topic but it is a FACT that any movie who's opening sceene features sex & the overhead shot of a '71 Riviera's rear glass is going to be AWESOME!!!) I'd convert my B-59 to run on Ben Franklin's discovery in a millisecond if it were practical & did not cost too much $ both upfront and in the day-to-day usage.

Longtooth: What is your point in relationship to this thread? I think it's funny how many on this forum think I've got no standards cause I drive 30, 40 & 50 year old cars, but it's quite the opposite IMO. My Mercedes was a millionare's daily driver, the guy who had a Testarossa or a Countach for a summer car but also needed a "family-friendly" car, at least a 2+2 for the days he wanted to go on a roadtrip with his wife & two kids or perhaps it was for the guy who thought that a it was worth paying twice what a 1984 Cadillac Eldorado cost just to avoid the hassle of the idiotic "8-6-4" motor and annoyance of FWD. A new FWD, ill-proportioned & to my eyes ugly Civic, Fusion, Corolla, Avenger or what have you, NEW or used will never be anything impressive and will never have the feel of a 2 ton car that was made to last half a million kilometers before needing a complete rebuild. I'll just stop right there and say: Many of you Gomer Piles WISH you had ZERO car payments in an era where 90% of people's jobs are not safe & the econimic climate looks about as healthy as a crackwhore. :wink: Okay.... that's 100% true. However a Suzuki Grand Vitara can certainly "OUT-JEEP" a Vue and Equinox. That's not even a close race/hill-climb.

Back about a decade ago, when I JUST got into the car business and started working at my FIRST job as a Chevrolet salesman, we had a Used Toyota Paseo. It was, BY FAR, the biggest piece of $hit on the lot. I mean it was SO bad, it made the Kia Sephia & first gen. Neon with three times the milage that we had, look & feel like they were S-class Mercedes by comparison. The Paseo was a great example of Toyota already going donwhill after their smoewhat decent bang/$ in the 1970s & 1980s. After a few experiences in that Paseo I would honestly rather have a Razor Scooter than drive another. FYI: it only had like 60,000 miles on the clock.

I'd go with the Grand Vitara if I HAD to buy a modern Cute-Ute. RWD + REAL 4x4 (only one left with true 4-wheel drive) & the motor is placed as god intended, north-south, not sideways.