Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
BTDT,
Chip
Chip
WOODIES: -- oh, my lack of clarity--- I meant that the doors aren't framed in wood all the way around in that Packard, near as I can tell. next time I see one I'll look closer at it.
Just did and according to the specs, sure enough the Yaris comes out ahead 42.2" of front seat legroom versus 41.5 for the 5-series. Still, I have trouble believing that. 42.2" is what my Intrepid is rated at, and I have a heckuvalot more stretch out room for my legs in the Trep. And yet, I find the Trep to be a bit tight. My '79 New Yorker is rated at 42.3", yet it feels like there's a lot more legroom up front than my Intrepid. I seriously doubt if most people would be able to feel .1" difference.
I wonder how they measure legroom on cars with power seats? Back in the day, it was easy to just put a seat all the way back, and then measure the distance from the base of the backrest over the front edge of the cushion and down to the gas pedal. But with the myriad of up/down/tilt adjustments they have these days, there are some cars where I can get the seat into such an obscene angle that I can barely reach the pedals!
One thing I've noticed with Benzes versus BMW's, is that the Benzes seem to be designed to have a more useable back seat. For instance, I fit fine, both front and rear, in a C-class sedan, which actually surprised me for such a small car. But with the 3-series, while it's fine up front, the back seat becomes non-existent once I get the front to where it fits me. A similar thing happens with the next size up. The E-class just feels roomier to me than the 5-series, both front and rear. However, the 5 seems much improved over the older models.
Now with the S-class versus the 7-series, it's hard to tell. They both seem huge in the back, with the standard-length models feeling about as good as an early 80's Electra, or maybe Lemko's Brougham, while those stretched models probably out-do the old Fleetwood Sixty Specials!
MB has had only the LWB S-class in the North American market since the 2000 model year with the exception of the oddball S350 which I have seen only once and I think might have been only offered for MY 2006, I think that car was 5" shorter than a S430/500....but back in the day when it had both each year, those LWB cars were noticeably larger inside. My W126 was not particularly roomy in the back, especially given how big the car looks. BMW still offers a SWB 7er, which I understand is not the best performer at resale.
But then with a larger car like an Aura or Malibu, which actually has a recessed area for your knees, it just doesn't line up with me. My knees are too high for the recessed area. And the seats are just big enough that I can't just splay my legs.
My knees just barely touch the seatbacks in my '79 New Yorkers, but at least they're padded, so it doesn't bother me. I hate it when some cars put hard plastic on the seatbacks. My buddy's '04 Crown Vic is like that. I've also seen some car where they'd put an ashtray in the seatback, right where your knee would go. I think that was mainly a GM fetish, though.
I remember a car with an ashtray in the seatback...maybe it was our old Ciera. Sounds familiar somehow.
ALso got stopped behind 2 3'ers. An early 325 (90ish? Late 80s?) next to a last generation model. The newer one absolutely dwarfed the old one from the rear. Much taller, higher decklid, wider, etc. Amazing the difference.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
A lot of cars from that time had lots of headroom, no thought to aero stying - my pet theory for one reason SUVs were so popular...the lower the roofs went on cars, the more popular SUVs became. It's one reason we'll be looking at a Highlander-type vehicle...
Oddly though, I have more headroom issues with modern vehicles than I did with older ones. Main problem is the way newer vehicles curve in on the sides, and with those thick roof pillars, and now even moreso with those side airbags.
It also seems like you sit closer to the outer edge on modern vehicles, which is only going to amplify that problem. I find myself having to lean inward when I drive my uncle's '03 Corolla. The Yaris and Fit are pretty bad in this regard, too. But it's not just smaller vehicles.
I've also found some pretty big vehicles where I have to slouch down to keep from hitting the ceiling or rear window in back. For instance, GM's W-bodies. Oddly, even the '96 Caprice was like this!
I think the best vehicle I ever had with regards to headroom was my '89 Gran Fury, which dates back to the 1976 Volare. I think, with domestic makes at least, that was what signaled the return back to shorter, taller, more space-efficient cars. The 1977 GM B-bodies actually tend to get credit for that, although Volares and Aspens did have more headroom, in the sedan models, at least. The sedans also had fairly big door openings for the time, which made entry/exit pretty easy. That's one improvement I've noticed with many modern cars, the bigger door openings. For instance, while I might find my uncle's '03 Corolla to be horribly cramped behind the wheel, and I have to lean inward while driving, it's actually a very easy car to get in and out of. The door openings themselves are probably larger than those on many older full-sized cars!
Dart and Valiant sedans always had good headroom too, although I remember Shifty once say that he bumped his head in a Dart. The hardtops were more low slung, though, and the Duster/Demon/Sport variants even more so.
Exactly - that's what I was trying to say. I was talking about the recent (but now declining) popularity of SUVs. I also find the inward tilt of the windows a problem - the last Taurus was bad on this. I like the new xB because of the good headroom, partly resulting from the near-vertical doors/windows.
That's one thing I always found a bit odd about some of those overblown cars of the 70's. Even though the inward tilt of the windows got downright obscene on some of them, it just didn't bother me the way it does with newer cars. I guess it could be that the cars were so wide, even with that tilt, it kept the sides away from my head.
I remember the 1986-era Taurus as being the first car I ever sat in where I had to lean inward in the back seat in order to fit. But then the '96+ design took it to a new extreme!
I know, I'm only a database of ONE, but I never owned worse cars than my three Saab turbos. Loved 'em but god almighty, they never quit breaking. Low miles, high miles, coupe, convertible, stick, automatic---it didn't seem to matter.
No wonder the company is in the ditch, like Jaguar.
"It's awfully nice to have pretty and fun
But now and then I'd like it to run"
I only know of three cars that dealers have bought back, and two of them were SAAB 900 convertibles :sick:
(the other was a mid-90s Range Rover)
Didnt' they make the absolute BOTTOM of the various reliability lists published every year?
But, I also saw the new E35 cross over. Basically a G35 wagon. Much more headroom, and seemed to be roomier overall for the upper body. Really liked that, more than I thought I would.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
a 1997 A6 3.2Q. Actually a very attractive car. Just hope they can find parts for it!
I am just not brave enough to shake hands on paying my money for an 11 year old Audi. Don't know the owner, because I really want to know how much they paid for it!
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Hmm, I'll have to try that out - I had the same problem in the G35, and the back seat was a joke! Did you try out the back seat of the E35?
Also, re the '96 Audi - my neighbor has one, seems like it's been reliable...maybe he's been lucky :confuse:
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I wouldn't say it was cheap to maintain cuz parts are dear and Quattro drive goes thru tires every 20K but I might buy an A3 before too long.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Yep, Audi parts are very expensive. If you got out of a '98 Avant without your hair on fire you were damn lucky IMO.
Seems kind of ripply...maybe the material
Nice fake
Interesting in its own way, but the seller is kinda proud
Probably not many better ones out there
Rare
Maybe Andre or Lemko would want it
Land yacht
Stutz -- nice, I like it.
Edsel -- rare but who cares?
Fiat 1100-- cute as a puppy but unless I can crawl underneath and look for tin worms, no way I'd bid on it. Love to have it though.
74 Electra -- looks pretty clean. Bid is fair so far. Bet you could squeeze a good 8 mpg out of it, too.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Mercedes-Benz-E-Class-Diesel-1997-Mercedes-Benz-E- 300D-SILVER-DIESEL-only-49K-MI_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6335QQihZ022QQitemZ350- 024121223QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW
I very rarely see this body style in the diesel version, and when I see an example it's usually got high mileage on it.
Love that Fiat 1100, it embodies Italian style.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Not too long after, on another gray, rainy day, I'm heading south into town on I-71. I come up on a '67 or '68 full-size Chevy two door, in what I think of as a post sedan. It has a set of duals poking out from underneath a slighty rusty bumper, the body in really good shape, the paint looking very weathered, almost matte in appearance. It's got a little rumble to it, but not much. The car looks to be your plain-Jane stripper, with basically no chrome trim, etc., and is being driven by a woman in her mid-60's. As I pass by, though, I take a good look at the fender and see a 427 emblem there- not a shiny new one from a repro catalog, but one that looks like it's about 40 yrs. old. Original? I don't know, but if I was a betting man.....
Still, that looks like a nice one. Nice color and interior, and I like those rally wheels on it.
Some people bought these as 'future collectables', so some will be in real good shape, and there is a market, just not a high-$$ one...
However, didn't these have something like 260HP?
You can get an Accord or an Altima that has more HP than that now. Of course, those are FWD while the Impala is RWD.
How about a Charger with the 3.5L V6? Heck, the Hemi has something like 340HP now.
Just my .02 on the subject.
You can get an Accord or an Altima that has more HP than that now. Of course, those are FWD while the Impala is RWD.
How about a Charger with the 3.5L V6? Heck, the Hemi has something like 340HP now.
Yeah, they had 260 hp, 330 ft-lb of torque. 0-60 came up in the low 7 second range. I think the current FWD Impala, with the 5.3 V-8, can actually clock in at something like 5.7 seconds, and the Charger/300C/Magnum with the 340 hp Hemi are around that mark, as well.
Even something like a 4-cyl Altima is good for 0-60 in around 7.7 seconds these days. I think the 3.5 Charger/300 is good for 7.5-8 seconds, depending on who you want to believe.
Still, for that era, 1994-96, the Impala SS was quick, especially for something that size. Supposedly the LT-1 Roadmasters, Fleetwoods, and station wagons are almost as fast and handle just as well. I think something like a Fleetwood would be cool, in kind of a wolf in sheep's clothing sort of way. Sure, a lot of cars would still beat it, but most people wouldn't expect something that big, with its padded vinyl roof, to be as fast as it is!
Also saw an Austin Cambridge A60 this week, tatty, but running.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
If you like deco
Back when a limo meant something
Big Italian cars...
80s time warp
Another real limo
Pricey project, given what it seems to need
Early hardtop, too many bids given the inaccurate details
I guess they were trying
Nash-Healeys can be worth some big bucks
Lancia asking price is silly.
Old Limos are a hard sell but that Packard is very handsome. Back when "Packard" meant something. I find its formality more convincing than the Cadillac.
1958---the year that "over the top" didn't refer to World War I
50 Olds -- I loved that sentence "completely restored except it wasn't taken off the frame"....well then it's not completely restored, is it? IS IT!????
83 Olds --- GEEZ, I think the high bid is already way beyond value.
'84 buick Regal --- does anyone really care?
Nowadays, I think a 4-cyl Altima is quicker than that, and I wouldn't be surprised if a 4-cyl Camry or Accord is, as well.
I sort of like that '84 Regal sedan, although I learned to fear that rendition of the 231 V-6 because of an '82 Cutlass Supreme I had. Still, I guess if you change the oil regularly, and maybe change out the nylon/mesh timing gear for a real metal one, it could go a long time.
GM was also kinda funny about transmissions back then. This one just has a 3-speed with no overdrive, but it could actually be the sturdier THM350C, rather than that lightweight THM200C. I've heard that GM would often put the lightweight tranny with the V-8 models, because it would help out slightly with fuel economy. However, the V-6 models were already passable, so they left them with the beefier tranny.
This one also has those danged stationary rear door windows that I always gripe about. Interestingly though, the little flip out vent windows are power operated on this one. Sort of a nice touch, although I'd rather have a roll-down window.
That Peugeot is really neat. I tend to think of Peugeots as beat-up, soot-covered, grimy hulks left for dead along the highway, so it's really cool to see that there's another side to them. Or, at least, there once was another side to them.
I like that '58 Eldorado, too. When compared to a regular '58 Caddy, Imperial, or especially a Lincoln, I think it looks downright restrained and tasteful!
The Gran Fury wasn't added to the R-body lineup until 1980. Basically, it IS a Newport, just with the inner parts of the grille blacked out. And the taillights are from a St. Regis, just with the white/gray trim removed. It might have had its own seat pattern, but I doubt it. Dashboard would have been identical as well. However, the Newport used black plastic where the St. Regis and New Yorker used fake woodgrain. I'm not sure what the Gran Fury would have used.