What Years

dolluper

Captain
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
3,903
When it comes to cars or trucks which years do you like or think are the best
 

kenimpzoom

Rear Admiral
Joined
Jul 13, 2002
Messages
4,807
Re: What Years

Ya just can't beat the looks and power of the cars from mid 60s to mid 70s.<br /><br />Many popular cars these days copy that look (a.k.a. Mustang and Dodge Magnum).<br /><br />Ken
 

dolluper

Captain
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
3,903
Re: What Years

Hay Ken if your keeping that Lasalle orginal I have an old motors book that covers alot of the oldies .I can help you out with spec's if you don't have one already
 

JB

Honorary Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Mar 25, 2001
Messages
45,907
Re: What Years

American cars of the 60s and 70s were pretty, powerful, thirsty pieces of junk. I think American builders of those days spelled quality starting with K. . .. They handled like overloaded barges, got 7mpg and wouldn't last 100K without major work. Today you can buy many "small economy" cars that out accellerate, outhandle and outrun even the legendary (and mythical) HemiCudas. . . and deliver 30+mpg.<br /><br />Current models, from anywhere, are the best quality cars ever built. Well maybe some exceptions for Deusenbergs, Rolls, and the like.
 

snapperbait

Vice Admiral
Joined
Aug 20, 2002
Messages
5,754
Re: What Years

JB.. Your assesment of todays quality may have merrit, but plastic has absolutely no style .... :D :p
 

Terry H

Lieutenant Commander
Joined
Sep 25, 2001
Messages
1,862
Re: What Years

Up to and including 1961 cars. And only a few of the early '60's cars even have, how you say, any class at all. The only reason I say is because I saw yesterday a '61 El Camino that was really looking sharp. Also saw a really sharp '59 Impala that coulda been right off the showroom...Chief ;)
 

RPJS

Lieutenant Commander
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
1,572
Re: What Years

My love is my '92 4 Ltr Daimler Sovereign. Power, leather, Walnut & lots of Chrome
 

craze1cars

Lieutenant Commander
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
1,822
Re: What Years

This is an American's perspective on this:<br /><br />As a muscle car restorer/modifier, I can say that until about the past 2 years, I mostly loved the late 60's during the wonderful American race for HP and cubic inches. And I'm still liking them VERY much for their style and their "head-turner" ability. Yet I voted for the 2000's on this poll. Because, my friends, many don't seem to recognize that the TRUE muscle car/horsepower battle era is RIGHT NOW, and it's not just here in America this time, it's worldwide.<br /><br />Even if we look past the new Mustang, GTO, Magnum/300/Charger series, Corvette and other such obvious performance cars that are based in some minute way from those of the past, you start realizing that the likes of Cadillac and Mercedes are putting out cars floating around the 500hp mark with handling and luxury second-to-none. Then you see some of the AMAZING machines that BMW is putting out....man...if your BMW is more than 3 years old, you're missing out on some SERIOUS upgrades they've recently integrated. Even BENTLEY has entered a new car into Zero to 60 in under 5 seconds class. And now SUV's and full sized trucks...400+ HP AND cornering ability. And the whole "tuner" thing is a bit foreign to me, but definitely has it's merit in terms of go-kart like handling and power-to-weight ratio that history has never before seen...300+ factory hp out of a 4 banger!, who'da thunk it?!<br /><br />And to those who think these cars aren't tunable and are mostly tinker-proof, you're VERY wrong...I know of a LOT of todays kids who are taking their 300 factory hp 4 bangers and cranking them up to 500 or more and turning 10 to 11 second 1/4 miles on them, limited only by traction on their FWD screamers. It takes different methods to build HP with today's technology, but if you put as much effort into learning it as many do complaining about "those durn computer controls and fuel injection...can't do nothing with 'em!" that just means you're old (as am I.) I've found it's not as complex as most people make it out to be.<br /><br />Whether you want to spend $20K, $50K, $75K, or $200K on a new car, you can get some AMAZING performance, reliability, handling, and even a certain degree of economy. Wait till they're 2 or 3 years old and price cuts in half or better.<br /><br />This is the last blast, the beginning of the end, for the internal combustion engine....enjoy it while it's here, everyone! But don't get too discouraged as more electric, hybrid, and/or fuel cells become the norm. Many of these technologies will have the ability to produce performance that will absolutely destroy even today's new high perforamance steel.<br /><br />I used to think I was blessed to be a high-schooler back in the mid 60's when anyone could go buy a wild screamer for reasonable change and gas was cheap, and all that stuff you hear everyone say all the time. Well...we're living there again (yes...$2 to $2.50 per gallon is STILL cheap gas, and $20 to $30K for a car IS cheaper than they were in the 60's, contrary to what many will think...do the math and compare with inflation and you'll see what I mean,) and it seems most people don't even realize it and are missing out, and 30 to 40 years from now people will look back on this era of automotive history as an amazing and fun time, the beginning of an incredible and AFFORDABLE horsepower and handling race, much like many take nostalgic looks at the 60's today.<br /><br />Off my soapbox for the moment...until next time, CARS ARE NOT MUSEUM PIECES. DRIVE 'EM. And, most importantly...SMOKE 'EM TILL THEY MELT!!!
 

notinbig

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
Apr 26, 2003
Messages
384
Re: What Years

I am in total agreement. I worked for a guy that had over 30 Ferrari's dating from the late 30's to the recent Enzo. They are amazing cars. However there are 10,000 dollar Honda Civics thats can out corner, beat 0-60, and eat in the quarter mile.<br /><br />God bless NOS
 

dolluper

Captain
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
3,903
Re: What Years

You can trick computers by tapping in exhaust manifold[both on dual] and change pariameters on the fly or chip it Some amazing numbers even out of heavy old diesels [turning 13's] without the use of the bottle The bottle takes the fun out It's more like tunning yourself by tricking the computer I love it, those detunned boxes the manufacters are putting in are not letting the engine reach even close to it's potential
 

Homerr

Commander
Joined
Mar 4, 2002
Messages
2,294
Re: What Years

50's and 60's.<br /><br />Pure un-adulterated power!<br /><br />They'll never make them like that again :( <br /><br /><br />H.
 

JB

Honorary Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Mar 25, 2001
Messages
45,907
Re: What Years

I sure hope so, Homerr. :)
 

achris

More fish than mountain goat
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
27,468
Re: What Years

Originally posted by SoulWinner:<br /> 1992-1997 Toyota Land Cruisers!
and what's wrong with the 100 series? Especially if it's got a nice bowtie under the hood! :D
 

TilliamWe

Banned
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
6,579
Re: What Years

Originally posted by KenImpZoom:<br /> Ya just can't beat the looks and power of the cars from mid 60s to mid 70s.<br /><br />Many popular cars these days copy that look (a.k.a. Mustang and Dodge Magnum).<br /><br />Ken
Looks I'll give ya.<br /><br /> But power? Not only can you beat them, "modern" cars have been more powerful since the 80's. Oh, and the power windows, locks, A/C, tilt & cruise actually work!<br /><br />Sorry, as I had to tell my Dad in 1988, "These are the good old days of American Muscle Cars". He finally believed me when when we hit 140mph in a stock 88 Mustang GT on the Interstate, and neither of us was scared!
 

ZmOz

Captain
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
3,949
Re: What Years

Since I have three vehicles from the 60s and 70s...I'm going to have to say I like those years best. Nothing makes me happier than burning obscene amounts of gas in a big old peice of american iron while pissing off the neighbors with the noise. :D
 

Wingnutt

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
Jul 16, 2003
Messages
255
Re: What Years

For what my opinion is worth, I have to agree with the newer vehicles being far superior. My relivant experience is with Mustangs, so I will explain my choice with the following.<br /><br />I used to own a 67 GT350H Shelby mustang for a number of years, and no it wasn’t what the legend of the GT350 has grown into. However it WAS a fast and fairly reliable car, but even with radial tires and Blistien shocks, the only fast way through a corner was to slide it, not drive it through. Power was great for the little 289, but fuel consumption was dismal at best. The ride was very harsh, and everything that was bolted or screwed together squeaked and rattled when the car was pushed hard.<br /><br />I drove a new 05 GT last Saturday, and there is no comparison between the two. What the new GT lacks raw power and exhause note, it makes up for with lots of low and mid-range torque, agile handling (for it’s rear drive, front engine configuration), smooth ride and something that’s hard to measure, fun as hail to drive. It didn’t seem to matter if I was smoking the tires, banging gears and scaring old ladies, or tearing through the twisties; or just cruising down the highway; the car remained balanced with the potential to accept more abuse. Even at the edge of control, the car was very predictable and comfortable to drive fast.<br /><br />Although the new GT will never have the soul of the original, it has its heart. The new Mustang is a much better vehicle in terms of overall performance, fuel economy, emissions, and comfort. And I would hope so; automotive technology has come a LONG way in the forty years that the Mustang has been around. In the sixty’s, a rip snorting big block Mustang wasn’t exactly a cheap vehicle; Today’s Shelby isn’t either, but the GT is one hail of a value for $26k that the dealers are asking for it. IMHO, for the money, you would be very hard pressed to find that kind of performance in any other vehicle. <br /><br />Here's another relivant experience, my bro-in-law purchased a new '03 BMW M3, and let me tell you, that thing made a Mustang feel like a $10k econo box. I simply couldn't believe that an inline six can redline at 7500 RPM! That engine is so smooth and balanced that you really couldn't tell by the feel how fast it was turning. He wound it out one night on the (DC) beltway (with me in it) and I saw 150 mph on the speedo and we were still in 5th gear.<br /><br /><br />I read about the new machines that the manufactures are coming out with, and wish I could afford them.<br /><br />This leads me to my next thought. I have to disagree with the percentage of an individual's income that a new car costs. The primary reason behind my disagreement is the wages that are paid today. Because of the paradine (sp?) shift that occured in the early ninetys, unlimited immigration and insatiable corporate greed, wages (adjusted for inflation) are actually lower per individual today. <br /><br />I will use myself as an example. Even with two degrees, and over ten years of experience in my profession, I am making less and having to work longer to make less. I am making about 75% of what I used to in '92, and unless I mave to a major city, this will continue.
 

tylerin

Commander
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
2,368
Re: What Years

I'll take 2005/6. You can barely hear the radio in half of those heaps mentioned above. :p :D
 

achris

More fish than mountain goat
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
27,468
Re: What Years

Now my turn :D <br /><br />I agree completely with the aforementioned opinions about cars being better today. However, 4WDs are a completely different kettle of fish. I had a 1987 (60 series) Landcruiser, which I sold and replaced with a 1999 (100 series) vehicle about 3 years ago.<br /><br />As a straight 4WD the 60 eats the 100 for breakfast and spits out the bits. The driveline is heaps stronger on the 60, the suspension is better set up from the factory and with the diesel engine it looks at water crossings and laughs! The 100 is more a road car with an extra (smaller) front diff. It's got coil springs, great for suburb and highway use, but rubbish in the real 4WD territory. I did one water crossing with the 100 and the headlights filled with water! I have a friend who took a brand new, out of the showroom, 100 series on one of our infamous tracks, the Canning Stock Route (about 1500km of vehicle tortouring corrogations) and broke all 4 coil springs. This from 4WD of the year! Paints a pretty sad story of the one that weren't 4WD of the year, ah.<br /><br />As for fuel comsumption. I replaced the 'new technology' 4.2 litre in-line OHC 6 cylinder Toyota diesel engine with a 6.5 litre OHV V8 GM and have improved my economy by about 25% No fancy electrics on this puppy. Just good solid engineering. Not sure when the GM was designed, but I know it isn't 'new technology'.<br /><br />Chris...........
 
Top