Mystery car pix

andys120

Who're "Mickey and Tacey?" They look like Lucy and Desi to me?

andre1969

That was the characters' names in "The Long, Long Trailer". Instead of Lucy and Ricky it was Tacey and Mickey. Or was it Nickey? I can't remember now.

bumpy

andys120

Don't be fooled by the sponsorship decals on this>

stever

Bad Autoextremist link for me. I can right-click copy and paste into the address bar and get it to open ok.

texases

...to see one of these, like I did yesterday:

lostwrench

Fred and Ethel Mertz lived on East 68th St.
The Ricardos moved into the building on August 6, 1948.

guss

2008 Hyundai Accent SE 3 door ?

texases

Nope, not a Hyundai

andre1969

I have no idea on that one, but it's kinda cool. Looks sort of like a squashed down International Travellal with a '61 Dodge front-end grafted on. I'm sure it's some kind of early 60's export model, and nothing that was ever sold in the US.

msacks

Nice post

fintail

It's some kind of Mexican or South American model...I know I saw that in one of the old 'Automobile Year' books when I was a kid.

andys120

for Bumpy to reveal the ID of the mystery Chevy truck, hop into this beauty>

karsick

Late 50's Mecr 300SL convertible.

Yummy (but I'd still prefer a true gullwing)

andre1969

That's a beautifully crafted interior, but good lord, how did big/tall/chunky people fit in sportscars back then?

fintail

I think there were less big and tall people back then...although Germans have always been pretty stout...maybe you were just outta luck if you wanted a sportscar.

Odd to see those wheels on a roadster, too.

andys120

maybe you were just outta luck if you wanted a sportscar.

I never thought of it but lots of people probably couldn't fit into sportscars, then and now. 300SLs were a lot bigger than most sportsters of the day, I think a big person would have an even harder time getting into the Gullwing version. OTOH early Corvettes had big wide seats and tall windshields so lots of people that couldn't fit comfortably into a Jag or Porsche could go that route.

Now I'm only 5'6" but I can't squeeze into a Honda S2000 or a Lotus Elise, age probably has something to do with it. When I weighed 125 (age 18) I fit very nicely into a Frog-Eye Sprite.

andys120

andre1969

I know it's a Toyota Celica, but not sure of the year. I'd guess that generation ran from around 1987-91, give or take? Deteriorated paint aside, I think that style has aged rather well.

bumpy

Our people carrier is the Brazilian-built Chevy Veraneio. Start with an early-60s C-10 chassis and add a body that looks half-truck, half '62 Impala. That body continued to the late '80s when it was replaced with something that looked like an overgrown 1st-gen Explorer.

fintail

I am sure the entrance and egress from the gullwing disqualified a lot of people too. I have never experienced it myself, but it looks like it could be awkward. Usually when a car has a removeable steering wheel, that's a clue it is pretty cramped too...made for guys under 5'10 and 180lbs maybe. I'm 6'1" and not getting any thinner with age, so I just stay away from such cars, I know I won't be comfortable.

fintail

Very close, it was made from 86-89, and it did age well. They also made a cool and now rare AWD version

karsick

Dis anyone guess the black supermini hot hatch yet?

It looks to me like a Spanish SEAT ( I believe it's called the Ibiza, basically a rebodied VW Polo)

Is that a SEAT? :confuse:

andys120

From Dazed and Confused:

karsick

Yes, it's a shame Toyota dropped the AWD AllTrac Celica, pulled out of rallying altogether, and wasted the last 8yrs in F1.

Here's a clip from (their) glory years in WRC ...
.http://youtube.com/watch?v=nrzTGfK9hkU

I got to spend a few seasons co-driving in a buddy's AllTrac rally car here locally. Very hard car to work on, but it was so absolutely reliable that we were bored to tears during service stops between stages.

karsick

Here come da Judge!! :P (aka GTO ca 1970 :confuse: ) including a factory hood-mounted tach (or is that "tack")

You guys can point out the others.

texases

"It looks to me like a Spanish SEAT ( I believe it's called the Ibiza, basically a rebodied VW Polo)"

You got it, Karsick. Odd to see it in Dallas, must have been up from Mexico on holiday.

wgrafer

OK, in front of the Judge is a red '59 Plymouth Belvedere and a white '57 Plymouth Fury. Nice!!!

andys120

You got 'em all guys. The Judge is indeed a 1970. Lots of nice iron appears in D&C.

andys120

qbrozen

well, the Charger script is right there on the C-pillar, is it not? (or is that officially a B-pillar when there is no C-pillar to speak of?)

andre1969

1969 Charger. I think it might be a Charger 500. Weren't those the models that had the more aerodynamic, flush-mounted rear window and the flatter front-end with the exposed headlights? At least I think that was the series name. It was supposed to be better suited on the Nascar circuit than the conventional Chargers with the hidden headlights and recessed grille and concave rear window with the "flying buttress" C-pillars.

ateixeira

Bummer, I knew the Ibiza right away. They sell those in Brazil.

Veraneio, too. In fact I rode in a lot of those.

They were big but rattled like crazy. Think of the old Jeep Grand Wagoneer - like that, only lower build quality.

andys120

1969 Charger. I think it might be a Charger 500. Weren't those the models that had the more aerodynamic, flush-mounted rear window and the flatter front-end with the exposed headlights? At least I think that was the series name. It was supposed to be better suited on the Nascar circuit than the conventional Chargers with the hidden headlights and recessed grille and concave rear window with the "flying buttress" C-pillars.

Exactly Andre. Here's a good illustration of the differences between the Charger 500
and the regular Charger rooflines>



As for the "Superbee" style nose, IIRC that's a whole 'nother thing, I'm unsure if that option had a special name ("Daytona"?) but IIRC it could be had with/without the
tall wing.

texases

I think Andre's talking about a regular front end (not the Superbee), but with the headlights no longer inset, for improved aero:


And that Charger's rear window change is kind of like what GM did with the Monte Carlo and Grand Prix and one point, isn't it?

andre1969

I didn't realize the Charger 500 was so rare! I just looked it up on Wikipedia, and it looks like Dodge only built 503 of them in 1969. The '68 style Charger looked tough and menacing, but I think it also ended up looking more aerodynamic than it really was. The flush grille and rear window helped somewhat, but not enough to better the Ford Torino Talledega, which I think was the car to beat back then. So Mopar went back to the drawing board and came up with the Charger Daytona, with the big wing and nose.

With the wing and the nose, the drag coefficient on them was obscenely low for the time... 0.35. That's still pretty good by today's standards! I have no idea what the coefficient would be for the typical late 60's car, but I know by the late 70's, even after paying attention to wind tunnel testing, a lot of cars were still around the 0.55 range. I think the first GM car to break the 0.40 barrier was the 1982 Firebird.

There was a Charger 500 for 1970, but by that time it was just a trim level, and didn't have the flush front-end or rear window. And for 1970, the Daytona was replaced by the Plymouth Superbird, which had a much lower base price, IIRC.

texases

Here's the Pontiac version:

andys120

And that Charger's rear window change is kind of like what GM did with the Monte Carlo and Grand Prix and one point, isn't it?

Yes, it's the same idea GM used for their Aerocoupes in the Mid-80s>



Ford did way back in the 1963-4 when it offered fastbacks on the Galaxie 500XL and Marauder>

andys120

magnette

Alfa Romeo Giulietta - this is one of the first series, 1955/59

bumpy

With the wing and the nose, the drag coefficient on them was obscenely low for the time... 0.35. That's still pretty good by today's standards!

Not really. It would be good for a truck, but any car worth its salt should be down into the 0.2x range these days.

andre1969

Oops, looks like I was off a bit. I found this link at Wikipedia that lists drag coefficients of various cars, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficients , and it has the '69 Daytona at 0.29!

It's kind of an interesting read. Some cars that look aerodynamic really aren't, yet some that don't, actually are! I'm surprised that a Viper, for example, is 0.45. Yet a Scion xB, in all its boxy glory, comes in at 0.32.

ateixeira

You also have to account for frontal area, though. So a lower, smaller car will have a lot less frontal area and could have less drag overall despite having a higher coefficient of drag.

andys120

Alfa Romeo Giulietta - this is one of the first series, 1955/59

Yep, interestingly the website I took it from mislabels it as the Giulia of the following decade. The Giulia Berlinas had a much different nose.

andys120

andys120

Need help w #16050, try this>

magnette

Jag VII / VIII / IX - I think in view of the two-tone paint and the chrome line on the wheel spat in no. 16051, it is not a VII, so VIII/IX .

hudsonthedog

I think the first GM car to break the 0.40 barrier was the 1982 Firebird.

The 1982 Firebird, in its most aerodynamic form, was very close to breaking the 0.30 barrier. Even with the advances of the past quarter century, very few new vehicles are more aerodynamic than that.

hudsonthedog

...any car worth its salt should be down into the 0.2x range these days.

And yet very few are.

andys120

Magnette, the Jag is a Mark IX.