Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Badges

andre1969 ·

About

Username
andre1969
Joined
Visits
815
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
262
Badges
25
Posts
22,236
  • Re: Photo Radar

    I'm sure the body shops, doctors, lawyers, new car dealerships, undertakers, etc, appreciate the extra business that gets generated by those shorter yellows, too. :sick:
  • Re: Photo Radar

    You drive 25 in a 25 zone, and the cause would be the kid's ball. You drive 40, and excessive speed becomes the culprit.

    Depends. You could be driving 40 mph and be paying attention to the road ahead, and end up stopping in time. Or you could be yakking on the cell or playing with your Ipod or putting on makeup at 25 mph, and still end up causing a big mess.
  • Re: Truly safe?

    Why not save even more lives and lower the limit to 5 mph?
    The Safety Gestapo married the Nanny State and set up housekeeping in NYC.
    And yet, I remember Consumer Reports, in one of their annual auto issues, stating that "No car built today can withstand a 35 mph impact into a solid barrier. Yet, the driver stands a very good chance of walking away, unharmed."

    Guess which issue that was? April of 1984!! Back in the day when airbags were in their infancy, ABS was a plaything of the rich, and most small cars (and even a lot of bigger ones) could easily crumple like a tin can.

    Cars have come a LONG way since 1984. Death rates are down, from something like 2.57 per 100M miles traveled to 1.13 (2012, source Wikipedia). But, the roads will never be "safe" enough for many politicians and special interest groups, who stand to profit from scaremongering, increased revenue from speeding tickets, and so on.


  • Re: I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today!

    Here's the front seat, showing off that sexy Grand Prix-cribbed dashboard!


    This pic, and the pic of the back seat, were given to me by the seller back in 2005, before I purchased the car. There's a rip in the driver's seat, which that floor mat is hiding. The seating surfaces for the outboard occupants have a soft, supple feel to them, while the side bolsters, as well as the armrest and the center spot both front and rear, have a more generic, cheap-but-durable feel to them.

    They've held up pretty well in the almost 10 (damn, has it been that long already?!) years I've had the car. I keep a red towel over the bad spot on the seat. The back seat hardly ever gets used...I'd guess the last time someone was back there was in 2013, when I put it in the show in Macungie, PA. The top of the back seat is a bit sun-faded, though.

    And yeah, I agree, it really seems that GM should have come up with a nicer interior for the Malibu...something to slot in between that low-grade taxi stuff and the ritzier Classic. I've looked through other brochures of the '73-77 era, and it seems like the base Malibu's seats were always pretty low-rent. Were they so cheap that the upper part of the door panel was hard plastic, as well? I would have guessed that it would have at least been padded vinyl, just a lower quality and with less padding than the Classic.
  • Re: Project Cars--You Get to Vote on "Hold 'em or Fold 'em"

    Yes, every ad wants to trumpet MATCHING NUMBERS! like it's the be all and end all, but that only matters if it's the right numbers. Who cares if a 75 Nova has the straight 6 it was born with? Wouldn't 99 out of 100 people rather see a nice massged 350 in there?
    Yeah, most people would rather see the car hot-rodded. However, with me it would depend. If it was a mint-condition, low-mileage, lovingly maintained old lady car, I think I'd rather see it with its original 6-cyl. But, if it was something that wasn't so pristine, and had needs, I'd rather see it fixed up and preserved to however the new owner wanted it, than see it get junked or neglected.

    My main rationale is that I get tired of seeing rodded and customized cars at the shows...they all start looking the same after awhile. And suddenly, the pristine, original, old-lady car stands out from the crowd, and ends up being the unique one.

    As for that '73 Chevelle, it's probably the type of car that, if it had been my grandmother's, and she gave up driving, and it got passed down to me, I might appreciate it more. Or, if I just wanted a cheap, nice old car, and perhaps had some fond childhood memory of cars of that era, and found one at a good price.

    But, even then, I'd probably just end up holding out for a nicer example. In fact, I actually did. Back in 2001, a local park and sell lot had a '76 LeMans coupe for sale that they wanted $1200 for. It was brown with a buckskin interior, pretty basic, with crank windows and such. I think it had a/c, but can't remember for sure. It also had a little rust here and there, including some holes all the way through in the trunk floor. I was tempted, until I popped the hood, to reveal a Chevy 250-6cyl. That put the car out of my mind, completely.

    Probably a good thing, too, because that fall, I found the '79 New Yorker 5th Ave that I ended up buying, for $900. It's a much nicer car, and equipped a LOT better than that LeMans was. At that time, if I had bought the LeMans, I wouldn't have had the resources to buy the 5th Ave, as well, so I would have missed out on it. Or, sold the LeMans and bought it, I guess!

    And, a few years later, a much nicer '76 LeMans did come along, and I bought it for $3000. It's not perfect, but is in much nicer shape, much better optioned (350-4bbl, power windows/seat, tilt wheel, the upgraded Grand LeMans trim package, Rally wheels, nicer color, etc). It was $1800 more than that first LeMans, but IMO represented much more than $1800 in added value.

    And, I guess that's the problem with a lot of these old base level 70's cars. Unless you really have the urge for an underpowered stripper, you might as well just go buy a nicer one, for not much more money.