Cool Cars
 

this car gives me wood:

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/images/6453-1_copy.jpg
it even gives jinx wood, and she's a girl

a review

http://www.cardesignnews.com/news/20...veyron022s.jpg
One day..

r32: MMMMMMmmmaybe.

If next year they have a quattro version with turbo or supercharging.

Sometimes they do that.

Steppenwolf

http://www.psychoform.com/htmlgallery/steppenwolf.jpg

SSR

Some day....some day

Let me tell you, there isn't much I wouldn't do for that truck.

*sigh*

I am easily pleased and would actually be thrilled by the thought of having a working 1994 Eagle Talon again ... I'm not one for these new-fangled automobiles with their safety features and GPS implants ...

Corvette Z06... I'd give my left nut for one of these. It beats out the Viper in every category except for speed, and in that category it's only fractionally slower.

Ferrari makes great shingles.

The last Oldsmobile rolls off the assembly line this week...an Alero. I really wanted one of these when they first came out...still do. :(

http://ciberbosque.org/images/sycamore/alero.jpg

Alero? C'mon Syc, you're suffering from low expectations.;)

I like 'em...they're sharp cars. Olds really had a great lineup over the past 5 years...no one bought 'em though.

GM's fault. You could get a Buick for the same money, with more preceived prestige.:(

Ah, those Mini Coopers are sweet...

However, if we are talking dream cars...

Build Your Own Porsche

Porsche Boxter S
http://cc.porsche.com/pva/mimes/pva/...ata/986320.jpg

Sycamore stole my car, dammit.

The first car I drooled over as a kid was a Jaguar SS100. It may not be the best by today's standards, but damn is it cool.:
http://www.autogallery.org.ru/k/j/39...Prismacars.jpg

1969 Camaro Z28 RS

http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...-camaro-1a.jpg

Mini's are bad ass , but they HAVE to have te right paint job,

I know a guy that has a kitcar version of one of those. Fun to ride in. I'm still more a bike person I'm looking at buying one of these but it's hard to justify when I probably won't be here for all that long:

http://www.italiamoto.co.uk/bike%20i...monster-s4.jpg
S4 or an 800, maybe a 1000 if I was feeling really badass. New boots, nice leathers...awwwwyea. They're nice low bites, perfect for me, I love the riding position, seats are a little hard I'll admit.

I remember when this car came out the double-page ad said:

"Lord Vader, your car is ready."

I've wanted one ever since.

http://www.vorshlag.com/pictures/fai...xterior004.jpg

I always thought that a black Lambourghini Countache would be Lord Vader's Staff Car.

Even Lord Vader, fears General Motors.:worried:

http://www-5.chrysler.com/vehicle_im...ONVERTIBLE.jpg
220 hp, 245 lbsft torque in this little thing?!

hey, bruce....wanna race?!

or maybe take a test drive?....no pressure........did I mention 220hp?

we have the brilliant blue in stock........

I've already got the horsepower and the color. I was looking at the convertibles this morning, I don't like them.:p

i dont think you have the horse power. this is a new dohc high out put motor. i think yours has 190....

i think....

No hemi?

215, the high output came first. Actually the '03 motor tested out at more but Chrysler advertised 215. The low pressure motor came later. You've been shaking down the banks for kickback pens too long.:p

wow, you're right, i have.

There was a time when i would have known that. I still try to keep abreast of what's what with the cars, but my time is not my own, and product knowledge is of cursory value to me at best. The salesmen made it seem like this HO turbo was new. I had a turbo limited at the time, and they told me that the one coming had more horses.....i hope this blue one is still here by the time my jeep sells,....and that they let me take it....it looks like a freaking hoot to drive. the GT has better sneakers on it, and the suspension is sport tuned. I liked the one i had, so i bet that GT is a blast.

Yes it is. Torque steer is an issue, but traction control will keep you out of too much trouble, if you’re not paying attention. Turn that off and you better be on top of it. :eek3:

I took my car in for service yesterday and they snapped off a wheel stud. The service manager came to me, with hat in hand, telling me they couldn’t fix it until Monday for a multitude of reasons, so they gave me a ’99 Breeze with 45k on it. I told him, “Hey, shit happens, call me when it’s ready.” I’m now in solid with the service manager.:D

but my time is not my own,

Clearly not! It belongs to the Cellar!

The PT's a hemi, UT. It's just a 146 CI hemi instead of a 348.:D
Actually the 220hp and 245ft/lbs from 146ci, is more impressive than 340hp and 390ft/lbs from 348ci.

Of course the 5.7 liter has several times the sphincter tightening power, but that's what my '57 in for.;)

so i drove the aforementioned blue gt cruiser convertible....

i expected better off the line torque, but first gear is a bit thin, and it doesnt really get moving until you get to 30 mph or so. then it goes right to 60 in a flash. the main complaint i had was that as i was not wearing sunglasses, i had several bits of debris get in my eyes. the wind was extreme. i drive my wrangler topless all the time and do not have that issue. i may be too tall for the car. i didnt get a chance to corner it aggressively as it was just a run out for wawa coffee, and i didnt want to spil it.

it looks really cool, but i was dissapointed overall with the driving experience.

:(

No farvergnugen?

dunno....i'd have had to take it around some corners and see if it bent. light torque steer, but as i said, it does not pull really hard right off the line like the jetta did....or ut's GTI

oh, and it was an automatic transmission :(

If I floor mine from a stop it seems to bog a bit, but a half throttle start to 8 or 10 mph, then floor it, it explodes. The motor has to be fully warmed up, though. Probably for the electronics to let everything work. That's why I have a blower instead of a turbo on the Chevy. Gotta remember too, the PT weighs as much as the Chevy, at 3400 lbs + me.
I think the wind buffeting is due to the shape of the car. The wagon, with the window down, is pretty turbulent.
That Breeze they loaned me, would literally leap of the line, and then collapse with a wheeze at 15mph. :haha:

BTW, I an oil & filter change, tires rotated, 2 new wiper blades(not refills, whole blades), 2 wheel studs & lug nuts, and a new wheel & mount and balance, for $58.:)

guilt can be a wonderful thing, no?

i would expect that the tech that snapped your studs did the job for free.

They told me they were going to have a flat rate guy that doesn't work Saturdays, do it. That was one of the problems on Saturday, the flat rate guy had the tools locked up.
I think I've figured out who's fault it was. I had to replace that tire since the last rotation. I think the Goodyear dealer at Namens(sp?) Road, did it.
That's why I try to build a relationship with the dealer's service department.

US-made cars tend to have very low power outputs for their size - why is that?

My (2003 model) 3 litre ford engine gives me only 220bhp, which means I'm getting less hp than half the other people in the office who drive BMWs, Hondas and Scooby's. There's one guy in the office drives an Impreza type P.. 277bhp from a 2L engine. And better fuel economy than me..

So c'mon, all you 'merkins... explain the fascination with big engines and low power output for a confused brit?

Kev (delurking for the second time this decade)

Our resident grouch and engineering fanatic tw would tell you that it's evidence of the US car companies being unable to compete correctly. He measures everything in hp per liter. We should restart this debate now that there's an actual cars forum and more car people around.

'Cause we're smarter.:p
America is a big place and has room for big cars. Big cars mean more weight and bigger engine compartments. So if you have the room, the cheapest way to make the torque necessary to move that weight, especially with the more and more popular automatic transmissions and power robbing accessories, is a large displacement engine. Oh, we had engines that made one hp per cubic inch(16.4cc), back in the 50’s, but they didn’t have the longevity the average motorist wanted.
In the early 70’s Detroit was hit with a double whammy, oil embargo and emissions regulations. Over the last 30 years they have evolved to lighter cars with smaller engines that are 99% cleaner. Electronics have played the biggest role in this evolution. My car has more computing power than most mainframes had 30 years ago. It also cost more. There are many, many European cars that have lots of power but won’t pass American safety and emission laws.
I’ll let TW tell you how our cars would be more efficient if the MBAs had built a supercollider and Bush hadn’t lied to help his oil business buddies.
;)

HP/liter is, when it comes down to it, a meaningless measurement. It correlates to some interesting things but it's not all that interesting in itself. HP/lb is a far more interesting measurement, for instance. HP/$ is also to the point.

Large displacement engines tend to develop their power at low RPMs, which has advantages for hauling large weights (such as the big cars those engines are in), and for noise. It also has some positive impact on "drivability", though in an automatic that's more a matter of transmission design and in a manual it's a matter of drivers not wanting to wind the engine up. Thing is, though, if you drive a small-displacement engine up in its powerband, you tend to eat fuel just like a large displacement engine...

I dunno, I have a 750cc engine that makes <>85 hp and I just SMOKED my friends' HD 1200cc Sportster. Had a fight with the 750 Nighthawk though. I put it down as his ride was new and mine is 23 years old. But my mileage is better than his!

I measured it at 42 mpg on the way down, I haven't yet done the calculation for the return trip but I expect it will be similar. Perhaps a tad better due to the cooler (and denser) air and less traffic, thus fewer stops.

Brian

Harleys are piles of crap, a ducati 999R can turn out 139 HP @ 9750 rpm, that's peformance. Hell, the Ducati MonsterDark620 I'm picking up soon is about 60 HP @ 9500 rpm and that's bottom of the range. Sure that'll get smoked by some of the jap bikes but they don't look as cool =) When I'm ready I'll step up to a 749 and enjoy some serious peformance.

No Jag, Harleys aren't a pile of crap. Actually they have their quality control issues pretty well under control, especially with Jap electrics/electronics. Overpriced? Very.
You have to keep in mind that not everyone measures the worth of a motorcycle by how fast it will accelerate. Harleys are about going slow, looking cool (profiling), and waving to the girls. You see, Harley riders don't have to go fast because there's nothing that scares them into running away......except maybe soap & water.
The difference between a Hoover and a Harley? The position of the dirt bag. :haha:

Meh, I'll stick to my guns :P ;)
I'm sure they're someone's idea of style and maybe these days they have resolved some of the quality issues that plagued them for so long but christ, every time I see one it's some poor sod going though a severe midlife crisis, my first urge is to laugh, they look so silly sitting on these huge, slow inefficient machines trying to look the part with open-face helmets and harley leathers.

yeah, nothing at all like the weeinies in full leather racing gear on their ducatis and zusuckis, right?

I don't wear full leathers and it's a pretty good idea when it's easy to hit 200 on the highway, it's part of basic protection (that plus back/elbow/knee armour). Oh and I think a zusuckis is a vegetable.

suzuki.

the point was that a poser is a poser is a poser.

Think about why people ride harleys, think about why people ride peformance bikes. I ride the the enjoyment of it and most of the guys I know do as well, hell, none of the serios bikes even have pillions, there's a good reason for that. Sure there are plenty that side bikes other than harleys for the looks but I've never met anyone that rides a harley for the peformance. For me, ducatis are damn stylish but fundamnetally they have kickass peformance and excellent engineering.

I hear what you're saying, jag, but to some people, fun is tooling along back roads at 30mph enjoying the wind in their hair, and looking at the scenery. It was always my favorite thing to do when I had my bike. I am uncomfortable on a crotch rocket. Too much leaning forward. I prefer the reclined seating position, and i just LOVE the sound the hog makes wehn you goose the throttle at low rpm....in a tunnel BLAAAT!

I'll concede there are some I think you'd have to admit, harleys (or the far more common almost identical ripoffs) are most often ridden by serious bikies or the more chronic mid-life-crisis set.

As for leathers, i buy good stuff and good armour 'coz sooner or later I'm going to have an accident and it probably won't be very pretty, at least if I'm wearing a fair amount of protective gear I might be able to avoid spending the left of my life in a wheelchair or a year in traction.

I could have taken it home last night, but it didn't have the legs to go that far on one tank of gas.

And I go through the Lehigh Tunnel too. I hate that at night. The lights are too bright and wipe out my night vision. Grrr

Brian

You seem to exclude anyone that isn't trying to get from point A to point B at max speed/min altitude, as a serious biker. I'd say a guy that rides almost every day, in all kinds of weather, even in winter, is a serious biker. I had a roommate in college that bought a BMW R69US, and rode it every day year 'round, in Massachusetts, except during snow storms. He'd be back at it as soon as the roads were plowed, he never broke the speed limit and put a lot of time on the road. I'd call him a serious biker. I know some(few) Harley riders that are the same way. Granted there are many more that only go out on nice Sundays, 6 times a year. They are not serious.
What's a pillion?

pillion is the sucker that gets to sit behind you. On racing bikes they usually don't exist and if they do, it's going to be an uncomfortable ride.

You're right bruce, this became a very narrow debate very quickly, lets face it - the majority of riders would be in the category, I don't think many use harleys for that though.

Absolutely.:beer:

this one is kind of neat