You'll find Mr Debt in his S class or LS just as you'll find reclusive zillionaire in his 20 year old nail, but I think it is much more often the other way around.
To a point, I agree with you. However, when I was in SoCal in the '90s I was suprised to see the number of recent college grads driving low-end BMWs/MBs while living at home with mommy and daddy.
I have been driving a 2004 Chrysler 300M this week. Nice vehicle but way too many gadgets in the vehicle. I gave one employee the opportunity to trade his 2003 Chrysler Concorde for it but was turned down.
Your reading comprehension is poor. Or I did a bad job at communicating my thoughts. Probably a combination of both.
I agree with the waiting 2-3 years into a models run, but waiting until just before they stop making a model? Or do you mean just before its remade? I bought my Mustang in its first (revamped) model year back in 1981(?) it ran perfectly until someone made a left turn in front of me (wasn't the same after that).
Yeah, it actually depends on the manufacturer. Nameplates with pristine quality rankings such as Toyota or Buick I'd be more willing to take a chance on a first or second model year. Ford or Nissan, depends on the history of the platform. Kia or Hyundai, definately not.
I think that you can get a low-end BMW for $3500 down and $399/mo. At least that is what a lot of the advertisements say. Of course, like always, the devil is in the details and that is **probably** for 30k miles for 39 months or something crazy like that.
you: Sam Walton drove around in an old pick up truck, I guess he wasn't successful.
me: you're confusing the fact that exceptions to the rule do not negate the actions of the actions of the majority. It is not a Black and White rule that 100% of wealthy people (or want to be wealthy) drive expensive cars.
you: Some people with money don't want to announce that, others without the means over extend themselves to give that impression.
me: Of course.
you: I find I don't get better treatment when I drive the Caddy over the Hyundai.
me: It just goes to show you that Caddy and especially the CTS (because it's smaller) don't get much respect these days. It could be the funky angular styling of that CTS?
Certainly what you look like, what you wear, and what you drive affect how people treat you. Get dressed in jeans and an old flannel shirt, and go to a nice restaurant or an upscale store, and notice how you get treated. Then get dressed up and you'll notice the help is much nicer. Why/ Because people who have or look like they have money get treated better. There have been many sociology studies on this topic.
you: but between two similar cars in the same class.
me: I know you were talking about a Maxima and a Hyundai with someone, but those aren't in the same class.??
Yes, but you have to have a plan with your conspicuous consumption. I'm referring to the point that people use wealth or the impression of wealth to acquire wealth. Here's some examples:
1) the woman who wants to meet and marry someone wealthy, might have to invest in some nice clothes, and go to places where the wealthy go.
2) the person who wants to do business deals may have to invest in golf lessons, a country-club memebership and a decent car to showup with at the club. If I was meeting someone to do business with and they show up with a 5 year old Civic with dings, I'm going to first question their judgment, and then question whether they just started their business having just left their burger-flippin job.
Doing these things may not make a person successful (financially), but it is an investment - which means risk. So yes people may fail and end up in debt. But if you take no risks, you're unlikely to get any rewards in life.
Appearances do matter; that's where First Impressions come from.
you: No just showing you that it is wrong to judge someones sucess by the car they drive.
me: all that proves is that you can think of exceptions to the probabilities. It is no revelation that wealthy people can live frugal lives! But I think if 2 people are standing in a bank lobby and 1 is wearing Dickies and the other an Armani suit, we'd Usually be right on who the carpenter was and who the bank president was, and who makes more money.
you: Actully many people like it, it seems to hold value and has plenty of sales. Plus get next to me at a stop light and you will respect it.
me: I think I see in the Future Vehicles section that Cadillac is making heavy mid-model changes to the styling and having to up the power of the CTS. "With the introduction of the more powerful 2006 M5, the CTS-V is 100 hp off the mark. Add in its lame interior and its vague steering and the Caddy's $50,000 price doesn't look like such a bargain."
A Mustang GT convertible would be a great success image for many of us...and most of us can't even afford the insurance costs with teenagers in family.
It'd take more than making the current DTS RWD/AWD for it to compete with the big boys. For one, it would need to completely shed it's fleet car image, which would mean it wouldn't be able to be a fleet-mobile.
I'd say the DeVille/DTS suffers less from the fleet car image than the Lincoln Town Car. I've actually seen a few of those used as taxis in Philadelphia - not much of a stretch when you consider how close it is related to the Crown Vic. They should also keep them out of or limit their use in rental fleets.
Almost EVERY late model Town Car I see around here is a livery service vehicle. They have commercial plates here, so you can spot them a mile off. Now and then you'll see a private one, but here it has to be maybe 1:10. I will agree, I see a lot more private DTS.
I just showed my 6-year old son a picture of a Tribeca and asked him what he thought of it. He didn't say much but wrinkled his nose just like he does when you tell him were having salad for supper - and he hates salad. :P
But this is not as bad as a "customized" prev-gen black Camry I saw on the road this morning - can excaust, (poorly attached) body kit, heavily tinted windows. And hubcaps...
I saw this Chevrolet Classic (yes, the most boring rental car of all time) with huge fancy rims on it. The rims themselves were probably worth about half the value of the ENTIRE CAR!
as either Chevrolet Cadavalier's or Chevrolet Crapolier's!
Name your poison, either way you get a cheap car that really rides badly and, for some funny reason, lots of people seem to have actually shelled out cash for them.
Oh come on, there has always been a huge market for cars like this. Why do you think the model T, and Beetle were so successful? It sure wasn't quality and features.
...price is the ONLY concern. True, Cavaliers are as crude as pig iron and the nameplate refers to the attitude given toward building and designing them. Timex watches are cheap and crude but they sell a lot of 'em!
who had Cavaliers back in the 80's, and I swear even THOSE models were a nicer place to ride in than the final-gen model! One of my buds had a 1985 sedan, while other had a 1989 Z-24. And yet another had a 1986-87 sedan in a nicer trim level, like an LTZ or something? I don't remember those older ones being all that bad inside, although they weren't the most reliable things in the world.
The newer one, while more reliable, just seems like a torture chamber inside. I can't even fit comfortably in the newer models, but I had no problem in those older 80's ones. Unless I've grown since college, which seems unlikely. Don't you usually quit growing by the time you're around 16-17? Or maybe my memory is just playing tricks on me?
Now, on the plus side, most people I've known who have had Cavaliers have gotten at least 100,000 miles out of them. Those who didn't merely traded them in on newer cars before they hit high mileage.
I didn't have a Cavalier but we had a Skyhawk in 1985. I did order the optional 1.8 motor instead of the 2.0. It was a great car. We traveled a lot in it and it was superb. I think I put new tires on it and then we decided to replace it for a larger car. It never made it to the dealer's used lot. It was behind the building polished and apparently sold by the next day.
People can laugh at the buyers of the J car or whatever they're called now, but they have a practical side to them just like the Civic had its small by practical useage before it grew up.
>maybe my memory is just playing tricks on me
I don't know your age but you'll find the older you get the less flexible you are. Those movements in and out of Corvettes for me are a lot harder than they were 25 years ago when acquaintances took me for a ride.
People can laugh at the buyers of the J car or whatever they're called now, but they have a practical side to them just like the Civic had its small by practical useage before it grew up.
Oh sure! Our '98 Cavalier lasted mucho miles, but by the time it hit 40k, it was showing *serious* wear on the interior. Mechanically, it never had a problem, and never left us stranded. It had the road manners of a Big Wheel, though. Newer econobox buyers like Focus or Mazda 3 customers have NO idea how good they have it. Those are luxe rides in comparison!
And yeah, I think older Cavaliers were better. A buddy of mine had a late 80s model, and it was a more substantial car.
>Oh sure! Our '98 Cavalier lasted mucho miles, but by the time it hit 40k, it was showing *serious* wear on the interior
You really need to let it out! Heh, heh.
But I do understand what you're saying. I keep thinking of our friend's 1995 Civic which ain't much to talk about. The inside isn't great; the headliner is stapled up because I've fixed it 4-5 times in 2 years. The fenders are rusting away by the back wheels. It's in the eye of the beholder. But many people say the earlier J's were better. The later ones went "plastic"?
with the earlier J-bodies is that they were designed to fill a broad range of needs, while the later models were strictly loss leader/rental cars.
For example, my buddy's 1985 Cavalier was just a basic 4-door sedan. It had a badge on the back that said either "CS" or "CL", but I don't know what that added. It had cloth seats with vinyl bolsters. The door panels were plastic slabs with fake stitching molded in. It had these rubberized bolt-on armrests. No carpeting or anything upscale-looking on the door panels, either. One thing that was kinda interesting though, is that on the dash around the gauges (it only had a speedo and fuel gauge) it had this kind of wanna-be aluminum looking plastic trim, the stuff that's all the rage nowadays.
It did have a pretty nice sound system though. Same stereo setup that was in my Grandma's '85 LeSabre, except for some reason, on the Cav it had 7 station presets where my Grandma's LeSabre only had 4. There were only 4 buttons, but if you hit two side-by-side simultaneously you could pick another station. That trick didn't work on the LeSabre, though.
Now my buddy with the '86 or so sedan, that sucker was trimmed out very nicely. Full cloth and carpeting on the door panels, nice cloth seats, little to no vinyl to be found on the inside. I think it still just had a speedo and fuel gauge, though. I think it had power windows, too.
And my buddy with the '89 Cav Z-24, now that was actually a sweet little car. I thought these coupes looked really good in the 1988-90 facelift, but they messed up the details a bit for '91-94. Anyway, it had nice cloth seats, cloth on the door panels, and had a nice dash display. It was completely different from the regular Cavs. If anything, it makes me think of a 1973-77 LeMans with a digital display inserted. Had kind of a sleek, tapered look to it whereas the regular Cav was just kind of a slab. I do remember there were some cheap interior bits, though. One of my other friends, for some reason, pushed in on one of the a/c vents on this Cav, and broke it. The guy who owned it was not pleased.
Back then the Skyhawks and Firenzas could be decked out like little limousines inside, and the Sunbirds had some pretty upscale interiors as well.
By 1991 the Skyhawk and Firenza were gone, and GM redid the interiors of the Cav and Sunbird. They made them more plasticky, and the upper trim levels didn't seem as nice. Also seems like they had this fetish for making too many different little pieces, in situations where simplicity would have done the job better. But hey, it was the 90's!
As for comfort, to me it just felt like the seats went back further in the older J-bodies than in the later models, so I had more legroom up front. And I guess this is possible. I had a '91 Civic rental car once, and fit fine up front. But the bigger '01-05 Civic feels cramped to me. The '06 seems to fit me pretty well, though.
The Skyhawk was a great car on the highway for its size. The trim inside was fine for us. I don't understand all the people with the selective memories on how poor the foreign brands were at that time in comparison. Somehow they have been deified for comparison purposes now in some discussions.
Cars is cars. They all had warts. I recall having trouble getting into our friend's 95 Civic after a colonoscopy. Whether it was the drugs (fentanyl is pretty good) or just grogginess. It was okay for room inside after you're in.
Back in high school, ca. 1994 I knew a guy who had an 86-87 Z24, the last of the old boxy kind. It seemed like a decent enough little car, and it was that medium blue that most seemed to be.
Way back when my uncle had a Firenza...it was silver, and it was quite plush. I remember it seemed to share many bits with the Ciera we had at the time...I don't know if it is a good thing for automakers when 8 year olds notice such details.
On the same note though, the Tempo GLX my mom had was also very plush - full cloth, carpeted door panels, no vinyl inside, power everything - it even had a tach!
was a GL coupe. I remember it stickered for around $11,000. It had cloth seats, but vinyl doorpanels. I think the lower part was carpeted though. It was white with dark gray two-toning on the lower body, and a gray interior.
I used to hate the thing with a passion, and that was only reinforced the one time I drove it...I swear it was about the slowest thing I've ever driven! But I guess it wasn't that bad, as it made it to around 160,000 miles before being traded in on a '91 Stanza that didn't age nearly as well.
I don't think I'd be caught dead driving it, though! Although when I found out they only got $600 in trade for it, I did think briefly that maybe I should've given them $600 for it and used it for a beater or something.
The 85 model we had was a solid medium blue, with a blue interior. It looked decent enough. This car also had the period premium wheels, which looked much better than the caps.
Dog slow though, I remember driving it in the period inbetween the Galaxie and the fintail. I would rev it up in neutral and drop it into gear at lights. Probably not good for the car! I also remember pegging the speedo on the highway, it took forever to get to 80. But it held up pretty well. It was a heavy commuter when new, then kept as a 3rd car, then as a car for kids and a cousin...my mom finally dumped it in 99 and she still got $600 for it. It had something like 190K on it by then, untouched engine and tranny. Several computer failures though. About a year ago I saw it running around where my mom lives, the guy who bought it was a mechanic and he apparently rebuilt the front end, slapped some mags on it, and uses it as a beater.
When I first met my wife in 1996, she was driving an '86 Tempo GL .. she had owned it since new. It was gold outside and tan on the inside, and fairly well loaded (tach included!). It was a stick, which I thought was odd since it was the family vehicle when she lived in WY before movign to CO.
The car had 96,000 hard miles on it, since she was divorced and couldn't afford to properly maintain it. Anyway, for the first few months we were together, she only had to drive a few minutes to work and school where the kids went, so it wasn't a big deal.
Then, she took a job where she had to drive about 15-20 miles one way, so she started taking my car ('93 Accord DX), which was WAY more reliable. I started to drive the Tempo, but since it wasn't fuel-injected, I had a hard time keeping it running.
We decided, after a few of these incidents, that a new car was in order. The Tempo got sold for $400 and we leased her a new '97 Escort LX. Haven't looked back since.
Ours was FI. I remember that engine because the valve cover gasket started leaking one day, and all kinds of smoke came off the manifold. I thought it was pretty cool, my female passenger did not. A guy I knew in high school had a lowline 85 Tempo, I am pretty sure it was a carb car. It had a very 70s red vinyl interior and was a manual. He really liked the loaded model I used.
I also now remember the car started rusting at the tops of the doors, where they kind of bend into the roof. Cars have came a long way.
I had a '90 and '94 V6 models. They were completely unspectacular and underwhelming. My 1990 was pretty reliable and lasted to 150k without any major problems.
The V-6 was a different story. I had the transmission replaced at 50k mostly at Ford's expense. The gas mileage was an anemic 24 mpg which was LESS than you would expect. I dumped the vehicle after driving it for 40k as my wife was given a company car.
The WORST part about the vehicle were the brakes. Brake jobs were frequent and fairly expensive.
The good part about owning the vehicle is that it allowed me to determine which local Ford dealer to AVOID at all costs. (g)
As I said before, ANY car (almost) beats walking OR waiting on a train platform when the temps reach -10F.
Well the Escalade has 22's. If it were designed to handle Shaq Shoes (22's) then it would handle just fine. Yeah 24's or 26's might be over the top, but they sure look nice. :shades: "bling bling"
....I sound like a broken record, but I don't think anyone would buy 20-22-24s if they knew how badly they wore (i.e., how often they need to be replaced) or how much they cost when that happens.
...there was a place set aside for tuner cars. A local hip-hop station was raffling off tickets to win spinner rims that cost $4,500 each! Had I won, I'd have sold them. If I were foolish enough to put them on my ride, I'd have been jacked at the first stoplight.
the other night on an '87-90 Caprice sedan. It was a basic model, had what used to be the '80-85 Impala interior, and was painted a bright shade of green that almost looked taxicab-ish. Except that it wasn't all beat up like a taxi that old, retired or not, would be.
I think those rims look even sillier on bigger, longer cars, because they end up making them look like Matchbox or Hotwheels toys. On a short, stubby, tall car they actually seem to work better.
There's a '75-76 Electra 4-door hardtop I see around locally that's really nice. Kind of a cross between pearly white and platinum, I guess. Tinted windows. It's pimp done just right...except for those damned 20-22" rims on it!
how did that V-6 Tempo perform when it came to acceleration? I always wondered about those. Seems like with a 140 hp 3.0 V-6 they should almost be musclecar-ish. Well, for that era.
No kidding - there actually IS a 1988 Buick Park Avenue around NE Philly with spinner wheels and painted a garish blue-violet that'll burn out the cones in your eyes if you look at it too long. I could picture those $4,500 spinners on my car. They'd be worth twenty times what the car is.
Comments
To a point, I agree with you. However, when I was in SoCal in the '90s I was suprised to see the number of recent college grads driving low-end BMWs/MBs while living at home with mommy and daddy.
Ooh, can I have it? :shades:
Sounds like you said it.
Your reading comprehension is poor. Or I did a bad job at communicating my thoughts. Probably a combination of both.
I agree with the waiting 2-3 years into a models run, but waiting until just before they stop making a model? Or do you mean just before its remade? I bought my Mustang in its first (revamped) model year back in 1981(?) it ran perfectly until someone made a left turn in front of me (wasn't the same after that).
Yeah, it actually depends on the manufacturer. Nameplates with pristine quality rankings such as Toyota or Buick I'd be more willing to take a chance on a first or second model year. Ford or Nissan, depends on the history of the platform. Kia or Hyundai, definately not.
me: you're confusing the fact that exceptions to the rule do not negate the actions of the actions of the majority. It is not a Black and White rule that 100% of wealthy people (or want to be wealthy) drive expensive cars.
you: Some people with money don't want to announce that, others without the means over extend themselves to give that impression.
me: Of course.
you: I find I don't get better treatment when I drive the Caddy over the Hyundai.
me: It just goes to show you that Caddy and especially the CTS (because it's smaller) don't get much respect these days. It could be the funky angular styling of that CTS?
Certainly what you look like, what you wear, and what you drive affect how people treat you. Get dressed in jeans and an old flannel shirt, and go to a nice restaurant or an upscale store, and notice how you get treated. Then get dressed up and you'll notice the help is much nicer. Why/ Because people who have or look like they have money get treated better. There have been many sociology studies on this topic.
you: but between two similar cars in the same class.
me: I know you were talking about a Maxima and a Hyundai with someone, but those aren't in the same class.??
No just showing you that it is wrong to judge someones sucess by the car they drive.
It just goes to show you that Caddy and especially the CTS (because it's smaller) don't get much respect these days.
Actully many people like it, it seems to hold value and has plenty of sales. Plus get next to me at a stop light and you will respect it.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
1) the woman who wants to meet and marry someone wealthy, might have to invest in some nice clothes, and go to places where the wealthy go.
2) the person who wants to do business deals may have to invest in golf lessons, a country-club memebership and a decent car to showup with at the club. If I was meeting someone to do business with and they show up with a 5 year old Civic with dings, I'm going to first question their judgment, and then question whether they just started their business having just left their burger-flippin job.
Doing these things may not make a person successful (financially), but it is an investment - which means risk. So yes people may fail and end up in debt. But if you take no risks, you're unlikely to get any rewards in life.
Appearances do matter; that's where First Impressions come from.
me: all that proves is that you can think of exceptions to the probabilities. It is no revelation that wealthy people can live frugal lives! But I think if 2 people are standing in a bank lobby and 1 is wearing Dickies and the other an Armani suit, we'd Usually be right on who the carpenter was and who the bank president was, and who makes more money.
you: Actully many people like it, it seems to hold value and has plenty of sales. Plus get next to me at a stop light and you will respect it.
me: I think I see in the Future Vehicles section that Cadillac is making heavy mid-model changes to the styling and having to up the power of the CTS. "With the introduction of the more powerful 2006 M5, the CTS-V is 100 hp off the mark. Add in its lame interior and its vague steering and the Caddy's $50,000 price doesn't look like such a bargain."
But this is not as bad as a "customized" prev-gen black Camry I saw on the road this morning - can excaust, (poorly attached) body kit, heavily tinted windows. And hubcaps...
ROFL! "Must sacrifice! $8,600!"
Sacrifice to who, exactly? The patron saint of crappy cars?
My wife had a '98 Cavalier. While reliable, it was the automotive equivalent of purgatory.
Name your poison, either way you get a cheap car that really rides badly and, for some funny reason, lots of people seem to have actually shelled out cash for them.
Didn't they get the message(s)? :confuse:
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
The newer one, while more reliable, just seems like a torture chamber inside. I can't even fit comfortably in the newer models, but I had no problem in those older 80's ones. Unless I've grown since college, which seems unlikely. Don't you usually quit growing by the time you're around 16-17? Or maybe my memory is just playing tricks on me?
Now, on the plus side, most people I've known who have had Cavaliers have gotten at least 100,000 miles out of them. Those who didn't merely traded them in on newer cars before they hit high mileage.
People can laugh at the buyers of the J car or whatever they're called now, but they have a practical side to them just like the Civic had its small by practical useage before it grew up.
>maybe my memory is just playing tricks on me
I don't know your age but you'll find the older you get the less flexible you are. Those movements in and out of Corvettes for me are a lot harder than they were 25 years ago when acquaintances took me for a ride.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Oh sure! Our '98 Cavalier lasted mucho miles, but by the time it hit 40k, it was showing *serious* wear on the interior. Mechanically, it never had a problem, and never left us stranded. It had the road manners of a Big Wheel, though. Newer econobox buyers like Focus or Mazda 3 customers have NO idea how good they have it. Those are luxe rides in comparison!
And yeah, I think older Cavaliers were better. A buddy of mine had a late 80s model, and it was a more substantial car.
You really need to let it out! Heh, heh.
But I do understand what you're saying. I keep thinking of our friend's 1995 Civic which ain't much to talk about. The inside isn't great; the headliner is stapled up because I've fixed it 4-5 times in 2 years. The fenders are rusting away by the back wheels. It's in the eye of the beholder. But many people say the earlier J's were better. The later ones went "plastic"?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
For example, my buddy's 1985 Cavalier was just a basic 4-door sedan. It had a badge on the back that said either "CS" or "CL", but I don't know what that added. It had cloth seats with vinyl bolsters. The door panels were plastic slabs with fake stitching molded in. It had these rubberized bolt-on armrests. No carpeting or anything upscale-looking on the door panels, either. One thing that was kinda interesting though, is that on the dash around the gauges (it only had a speedo and fuel gauge) it had this kind of wanna-be aluminum looking plastic trim, the stuff that's all the rage nowadays.
It did have a pretty nice sound system though. Same stereo setup that was in my Grandma's '85 LeSabre, except for some reason, on the Cav it had 7 station presets where my Grandma's LeSabre only had 4. There were only 4 buttons, but if you hit two side-by-side simultaneously you could pick another station. That trick didn't work on the LeSabre, though.
Now my buddy with the '86 or so sedan, that sucker was trimmed out very nicely. Full cloth and carpeting on the door panels, nice cloth seats, little to no vinyl to be found on the inside. I think it still just had a speedo and fuel gauge, though. I think it had power windows, too.
And my buddy with the '89 Cav Z-24, now that was actually a sweet little car. I thought these coupes looked really good in the 1988-90 facelift, but they messed up the details a bit for '91-94. Anyway, it had nice cloth seats, cloth on the door panels, and had a nice dash display. It was completely different from the regular Cavs. If anything, it makes me think of a 1973-77 LeMans with a digital display inserted. Had kind of a sleek, tapered look to it whereas the regular Cav was just kind of a slab. I do remember there were some cheap interior bits, though. One of my other friends, for some reason, pushed in on one of the a/c vents on this Cav, and broke it. The guy who owned it was not pleased.
Back then the Skyhawks and Firenzas could be decked out like little limousines inside, and the Sunbirds had some pretty upscale interiors as well.
By 1991 the Skyhawk and Firenza were gone, and GM redid the interiors of the Cav and Sunbird. They made them more plasticky, and the upper trim levels didn't seem as nice. Also seems like they had this fetish for making too many different little pieces, in situations where simplicity would have done the job better. But hey, it was the 90's!
As for comfort, to me it just felt like the seats went back further in the older J-bodies than in the later models, so I had more legroom up front. And I guess this is possible. I had a '91 Civic rental car once, and fit fine up front. But the bigger '01-05 Civic feels cramped to me. The '06 seems to fit me pretty well, though.
Cars is cars. They all had warts. I recall having trouble getting into our friend's 95 Civic after a colonoscopy. Whether it was the drugs (fentanyl is pretty good) or just grogginess. It was okay for room inside after you're in.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Way back when my uncle had a Firenza...it was silver, and it was quite plush. I remember it seemed to share many bits with the Ciera we had at the time...I don't know if it is a good thing for automakers when 8 year olds notice such details.
On the same note though, the Tempo GLX my mom had was also very plush - full cloth, carpeted door panels, no vinyl inside, power everything - it even had a tach!
I used to hate the thing with a passion, and that was only reinforced the one time I drove it...I swear it was about the slowest thing I've ever driven! But I guess it wasn't that bad, as it made it to around 160,000 miles before being traded in on a '91 Stanza that didn't age nearly as well.
I don't think I'd be caught dead driving it, though! Although when I found out they only got $600 in trade for it, I did think briefly that maybe I should've given them $600 for it and used it for a beater or something.
Dog slow though, I remember driving it in the period inbetween the Galaxie and the fintail. I would rev it up in neutral and drop it into gear at lights. Probably not good for the car! I also remember pegging the speedo on the highway, it took forever to get to 80. But it held up pretty well. It was a heavy commuter when new, then kept as a 3rd car, then as a car for kids and a cousin...my mom finally dumped it in 99 and she still got $600 for it. It had something like 190K on it by then, untouched engine and tranny. Several computer failures though. About a year ago I saw it running around where my mom lives, the guy who bought it was a mechanic and he apparently rebuilt the front end, slapped some mags on it, and uses it as a beater.
The car had 96,000 hard miles on it, since she was divorced and couldn't afford to properly maintain it. Anyway, for the first few months we were together, she only had to drive a few minutes to work and school where the kids went, so it wasn't a big deal.
Then, she took a job where she had to drive about 15-20 miles one way, so she started taking my car ('93 Accord DX), which was WAY more reliable. I started to drive the Tempo, but since it wasn't fuel-injected, I had a hard time keeping it running.
We decided, after a few of these incidents, that a new car was in order. The Tempo got sold for $400 and we leased her a new '97 Escort LX. Haven't looked back since.
I also now remember the car started rusting at the tops of the doors, where they kind of bend into the roof. Cars have came a long way.
The V-6 was a different story. I had the transmission replaced at 50k mostly at Ford's expense. The gas mileage was an anemic 24 mpg which was LESS than you would expect. I dumped the vehicle after driving it for 40k as my wife was given a company car.
The WORST part about the vehicle were the brakes. Brake jobs were frequent and fairly expensive.
The good part about owning the vehicle is that it allowed me to determine which local Ford dealer to AVOID at all costs. (g)
As I said before, ANY car (almost) beats walking OR waiting on a train platform when the temps reach -10F.
-Put some nice shoes(24'ers) on it and roll in total luxury.
Rocky
Rocky
What works on a truck might not be so hot on a car.
Rocky
I think those rims look even sillier on bigger, longer cars, because they end up making them look like Matchbox or Hotwheels toys. On a short, stubby, tall car they actually seem to work better.
There's a '75-76 Electra 4-door hardtop I see around locally that's really nice. Kind of a cross between pearly white and platinum, I guess. Tinted windows. It's pimp done just right...except for those damned 20-22" rims on it!
They'd look nice on your 88' :P
Rocky
Rocky