Sixty8panther

.... and thus comparing it to a riced out piece of $hit Japanese turd-can is damn-near unforgivable!

ok. what the heck are you driving at? show me a '71 Challenger that can handle like a C6-Z06 around the ring? The point is, just because the '69 Camaro does not handle like a 2010 Camaro, or Challenger... does not mean it sucks at handeling. It was a new car in the fall of 1968, back then it was a GREAT handeling car! Let'ss put a STOCK '69 Camaro Z/28 against the best BMW made in 1969 around the ring... I bet YOU I know which one will win!

XP has said it all right there.... without dropping thirteen F***-bombs for frustration like I would have. And yes, I agree... the fact that Harley Davidsons & plasti-clad crotch rockets are littering the roads more than ever now is someting of an oxymoron since hardtops are unsafe!? Stupid is as stupid DOES. I think we NEED hardtops, to help people, regular Americans fall in love with the automobile again! Even a four door hardtop should not be out of the question when the majority of the forum, myself included, were ALL for that Chrysler 300 ragtop concept going into production, ultra-limited as it may have been.... There's a conversion company making DTS convertibles as e speak. And as far as all this "weather sealing inadeqacy" blah-blah, BLAH.... ONCE AGAIN! For the love of god, read thi8s and THINK about the words instead of just chewing over the given consonants & vowels and then saying something silly/irrelevant AGAIN: ALL your arguments are slightyl-valid and APPLY X10 to convertibles. Every single convertible car, be it an exotic Ferrari costing $250,000 or more, or an as tested MSRP $24,500 Mazda Miata, has those same issues.... have you never read an article about a convertible roadtest where they mention the "car wash test" or "thunderstorm test"??? And guess what? People who buy those convertible cars, those "leaky, noisy, ragtop deathtraps" LOVE them to death.... becasue they are enthusiasts, not soccer moms who only care about the number of cupholders & the color of their vehicle. {takes breath, blood pressure starts to lower...}

Yes indeed, that gen. was 1968 to 1970.... Not sure wht happened there besides, posibly, lack of sleep. And as far as '69 Camaros DF: ever heard of Trans Am racing? Ummm... yeah, '69 Camaros weather stock or upfitted for Trans Am were formidable cars suspension/handeling wise. That's quite an ignorant generalization, esp. with the parallel comparison with a "RICER CIVIC". If you're going to make fun of a '60s cars handeling, make it the Toyotas of that era, which, despite ther diminutive size, had their @$$es handed to them on the racetracks by BMW & later Datsun.... Honda made not much besides motorcycles.

Oh, and I keep meaning to mention, a '69-'71 Charger is one of the nicest, cleanest & sleekest muscle cars ever made, and not one, NOT-A-ONE should ever be destroyed to make some cool footage, esp. not post-1989... that's what CGI is for! Even "Dukes of Hazzard" does not make up for the loss of one of these magnificent Mopars.... maybe, just MAYBE I'll give the classic movie "Bullitt" props enouogh that the directors destroying one Charger for it was justifiable. Esp. since it was barelly a used car when the movie was filmed.

Why is veel betta than sqair? Remember the Superbowl ads with the cromagnon man who invents the wheel, so that beer may be carried more efficiently & using less effort? "wheel suck!"

Newbiewar: I really am quite ASTONISHED that you have managed to avoid learning what a hardtop is while belonging to this forum for as long as you have... Even I will admit that I go WAY out of my way to give a "routine" public service announcement on here about the virtues of owning/driving a hardtop. As in (pillarless, fixed) hardtop Check my personal theads, there's several on the topic. the latest one is the one regarding my wife's Mercedes: Here's a link, I sold the '77 Caddy and bought this MB 500SEC for her 2 weeks ago: http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...=24772&st=0 and I will, asa(realistically)p post a "Hardtop 101" thread...

Reg: it's a lumberjack-transport pod designed to carry more payload in it than the GVWR of your Torn-500-ass, it is allowed to have B/C/D pillars, and barn doors amongst other things... :wink:

the 229 (chvy-block) 3.8 liter V6 WAS a factory motor for the Malibu, but way to miss the point entirely. Times DO change, yes... but not everyone is satisfied with an upright, stuffy 4-dr. sedan with framed doors, a "peppy" 4-cylinder motor and an automatic trans.... this is an ETHUSIAST's forum, no...? Why else would you come here several times a week or day to discuss cars? I've got higher standars and expectations than many here but I am willing to be realistic. And so I say again, I'll gladdly pay the extra $1000, $1500 or whatever it takes to give me a hardtop, although it should not cost that much of a premium since the ragtop's side windows, regulators, extra body/frame reinforcement etc. are 75% of what is required for the "conversion". Give us the option GM, for once (in the past 30 years) don;t pu$$y out on a concept-to-production car.

True. :wink: I'm not a simpleton like Homer Simpson. And for the record both the McLaren & Bugatti are relative pieces of garbage next to a coachbuilt '30s car... esp. a V16 Cadillac or a DOHC, supercharged Dusenberg dual cowl pheaton!* * two windshields, still no B-pillars!!!

You had me up until the part about camaros and chevelles. I agree it was a very dumb way to wreck a Charger & the less cool Challenger, but I think a dime-a dozen, ugly & over-rated Mustang, IF anything, should have been used. For every ONE '67-'69 Camaro there are about 3 Mustangs. And a high percentage of the '64.5-'69 Stangs were throwaway $h!boxes with I-6 motors & granny-mounted automatic trans., crappy rear ends etc... That idea had crossed my mind, the door frames looked quite factory... weird. For a split sec. I thought maybe that was the reason, that whole entire scene, esp. the acting, and as a matter of fact 99% of the movie sucked so damn much it will take many years of well done car-movies to undo the damage that was inflicted to my cerebral cortex.

The Fiero still can not replicate (w/out an outrageous bank roll) the two modern Exotics I'd love to own: McLaren F1 & Bugatti Veyron.

eh... I'm sick to death of Fieros getting hacked up to make "mee-tu" Exotic pseudo-clones. My buddy's professor had a small part time start-up business making INCREDIBLY acurate Ferrari F40 clones with Fieros.. even those failed to impress me too much. (keep in mind I'm going back to 1994-ish)

Prius (and its $6000 battery pack): _OWNeD!

The ugly-assed Challenger was a post, (weird huh!?) and the Charger while pillarless, was all tacky & had the hardtop greenhouse's lines ruined by a big, ugly, flat black rollcage... (I know it's a functional item but presantation is everything)

THESE UNSAFE DEATH-TRAPS MUST BE MADE ILLEGAL ASAP!!! - Corvette targa & convertible - XLR retractible hardtop - G6 retractable hardtop - Sky/Solstice And that is just GM.... How DARE those selfish corporations that deem human life to be expendable, what wiht not only a blatant lack of a permenant, fixed B-pillar-ness but also a complete lack of a steel, fixed, welded roof and glued in rear side glass* Thank God we live in a country where the masses allolw the government to decide what is appropriate and safe. * helps to aid exit a burning wreck in a post-accident fuel/electrical fire! Nothing makes for eaesier egress than a big permenant pane of laminated glass or a tempered glass that is glued around all edges w/ a 3" wide rubber-RTV style matterial. [disgusted, sarcasm] If it ever comes to that I'd rather be DEAD!

I personally have posted at LEAST a dozen threads on the topic in my 3.67 years here on this forum. Supposedly, according to MANY here I beat the topic to death, it's not that I have higher standards it's that I'm unrealistic and dilusional. God forbid we think outside of the C.Y. 2008 Corporate Box, although even that's a cop-out as Mercedes, and a few other luxury/exotic car manufactureres still make 2-door hardtops to this day. And before one more moron says "the Camaro would cost $47,000 just like the MB CLK if it had a hardtop bodystyle" I'd like to remind you to politely STFU since the B-pillared E-class that the CLK is based on does NOT show a considerable savings over the CLK, all equipt. being the same! Put that in your pipe, go sit in your B-pillared modern tylenol-box with wheels and smoke it!

I'm with MightyMouse!!!! BAN all convertibles immediately. And any and ALL ragtops, or any car without a B-pillar & steel roof over the passanger's heads should be deemed obsolete and unregisterable!!! As a matter of fact even sunroofs and moonroofs should be made illegal! Let's just cut to the chase and issue everyone a goverment approved Yaris 4dr. for $20,000 or at a $7,000 premium upgrade price give the Camry option. MM: I can not beleive YOU would advocate such filth as the extinction of the hardtop. I guess we'll be yanking that built up V8 in your "fire engine red" 2-door sedan with frameless doors, CLEARLY you have to admit that a car with high horsepower/weight ratio is unsafe due to oversteer and the inherant temptation to blatantly defy the national 55-MPH speed limit. You can have either an iron-duke or the 229-ci V6 that your car was designed for.

Fixed... And I agree... the TL does NOT belong in that comparison. Same as a Cobalt SS would not belong in a comparison between the BMW 328i and Mercedes C240.

There's nothing wrong with the old school Euro-Monza... The styling was a bit :blah: but it was much more appealing than those Mazdas & Mitshubishis

Iraq has noting to do with this... it's negligible. Like I've said a MILLION times.... You CAN NOT OUTSOURCE YOUR G.D.P.!!!! How many times I got into masice arguments with my college professors and in the end they could not answer my question to full satisfaction: Are we all going to deliver pizza, work at the car wash & bag groceries? Cause that is the "service economy" reality....

It's both. But as far as my 500SEC vs. a POrsche 944, the MB is far easier to find cheap parts for. The same basic motor was used in the SL500 & 500SEL, the suspension and most major components not related to its hardtop-coupe body can also be sourced from the 420SEL, 500SEL & 560SEL... as well as, obviously, the 380SEC & 560SEC. THe 944 is the 944... not exactly easy to find parts availability wise... not like any major component interchanges witht he 911 or 928.

Batman Dark Night: A+ I went into the theater thinking "yeah, like THIS can ever live up to the hype?!" ...but it did! One of the best movies I've ever had the pleasure to get sucked into. ---- Double Penetration XXIV (just kidding!) Death Proof: C- I saw Planet Terror a couple months back, and it was enjoyable... the fake but entertaining scratchy film quality, B-rated acting/cinomatography & special effects worked together well... I was told that Death Proof sucked, but I like Kurt Russell... well... Escape from N.Y. era Kurt anyway... and with all those "merrican muscle cars in it I took a chance ad bought the DVD the other day. Except for a few cool scenes: (F*** yeah to the '70 Nova ripping a POS Honda Civic appart like a wet cardboard box) this movie sucked.... even the cars were weak, flat-black Nova aside. I'm SICK TO DEATH of movies with '70 Challengers & '70 Chargers. Whaty a freekin cliche. If it was not for the Honda vs. Chevy sceene and hot chicks this movie would get a solid F. Seriously. The acting was PAINFULLY crappy. Hey Tarantino: how 'bout a '70 Chevelle, or '66 GTO, or '69 Olds 442... honestly how many movies have to feature the '69-'71 Charger? Dukes of Hazzard everything, Bullitt, Blade, Cannaball Run, Spy Hard, Grand Theft Auto (the movie from 77) Fast & Furious, Christene, the Mexican, Gone in 60 Sec. (original, 74), the French Connection, and now this useless garbage movie... As far as the '70 Chellenger it's an uglier, goofy-rippoff of the '67-'69 F-bodys, more so Camaro than Firebird, and even the original movie it was featured in in 'frigerator white sucked. WTF is the point of "Vanishing Point" anyway? It sucks as a movie and it sucks even more as a CAR movie. See dude on drugs, see dude on drugs drive fast ugly Mopar in a half heartedly conceived plot, see idiot on drugs commit suicide for reasons that I still, years later fail to understand. I guess the lesson is don't get all hopped up on cocaine PCP & then drive a muscle car like you stole it?! Thanks I knew better than that when I was 17 y.o. ----- Soooo.... how 'bout you guys? Thoughts? Differance of opinion?

Agreed, but you of all people Balthy I woud think would respect a manufacturere going against the grain... putting WILD designs into production and taking risks, rather than staying safe & mild.

I've been thinking a LOT about that red Suburban.... 350-tbi powered, 2wd, stripped & 4-speed on the floor.