Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

That's a nice car!


Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, TheCid said:

Actually, the granddaddy of them all (SUV's) was the Jeep "station wagon" of late 40's.

The Suburban goes back to the 30s.  Regardless of the first appearance of a cargo carrying vehicle, what I was talking about was the first definitive manifestation of the phenomenon that has infected our transportation universe.  You can see that in the Suburban, certainly by the 60s.  Chevrolet hit on the right design, and to my mind it hasn't been surpassed.  Other companies have tried, but nothing has ever been even as good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Sgt_Markoff said:

Bah. Back in the day, you drove one of these cars if you commonly and routinely did a full day's work in the course of your life. Working men--that's who these vehicles were made for.

I have to agree with TheCid here, Sarge.  Your romancy esprit has made you look the wrong way down the history telescope.  No doubt they provided great raw material for teen boys to play Frankenstein with in their high-school auto shops, but the Dart and it's contemporaries, like the Mustang, and even the Camaro, started out not as muscle cars, but sporty suburban get-abouts.  Power and handling weren't the focus that they became in the 70s and in their modern incarnations.  The Mustang, famously, was mostly new sheet metal on a Falcon chassis.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, TheCid said:

Wrong, wrong, wrong.  But not unexpected.  My mother and my sister both drove Dodge Darts and they were not working men.

What model year?  Back when I first hired in at GM ('71) I was driving a '64 Dart( after some jerk ran into my '65 Dodge Coronet 500 and totaled it! :angry: ).  Put that "slant 6"  through more punishment than other engines would endure.

Had the "push-button" trans and I didn't even mind the "How many quarters do you need to drive to work" jokes.  ;) 

Sepiatone  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been away for a while, but watching the forum lately as I have just joined TCM Baclkot. This thread referencing Dodge Darts is just too interesting to ignore. As a former owner of six slant six cars, three Valiants and three Darts, I can attest to the durability of these cars. They take a licking and keep on kicking. Aka the Valiant in Duel, starring Dennis Weaver. And I've owned six Chrysler minivans, my current van being the best car I've ever owned. Interesting thing here is that SUV owners ask me to haul things that wont fit in the SUV, but will fit in my van. Huh? Lower floor provides more height, fitting taller cargo. I think the Chrysler minivan is the ultimate working mans vehicle. I'll get plenty of argument from the F150 people, but I'll argue to the death. 

 
So today, I return home to the midwest with a 99 Chrysler Sebring convertible that I purchased in Florida. $3500 bucks for a low miles rust free gorgeous car. After looking at more modern cars, like Toyota Solara's, twice the price, with three times the miles, oil sludging engines, Takata airbags, and frumpy looks. Somebody please explain this to me. Is it just perception that Chrysler cars are junk. I know they built some bad cars, just like all the others, but I think the 99 Sebring convertible and my 01 Voyager LX are masterpieces. 
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, twharry42 said:

Aka the Valiant in Duel, starring Dennis Weaver.

Nothing against the Valiant, or any slant 6 vehicle, but Dennis Weaver's driving was, s the most incompetent and ineffectual since the driving of Dana Andrews in Hot Rods from Hell😉

Link to post
Share on other sites

I went to this thread with another car item in mind, and got sidetracked by the talk of Dodge Darts. What I was wondering is, in the movie, A Letter to Three Wives, Paul Douglas is driving a nice car, I think a Lincoln, but not sure. Outside Linda Darnell's house, after he drops her off, he lights a cigarette while sitting in the drivers seat. He ponders whats going on with Linda, and it looks like he throws the car's lighter out the window. Anybody catch this? I had seen The Blues Brothers long before I ever saw A Letter to Three Wives, and when I saw Douglas toss the lighter out, I immediately laughed and thought of John Belushi lighting a cigarette and chucking the lighter out of the car. Is there any connection between the two movies, or Paul and John, both big lugs?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, twharry42 said:

I went to this thread with another car item in mind, and got sidetracked by the talk of Dodge Darts. What I was wondering is, in the movie, A Letter to Three Wives, Paul Douglas is driving a nice car, I think a Lincoln, but not sure. Outside Linda Darnell's house, after he drops her off, he lights a cigarette while sitting in the drivers seat. He ponders whats going on with Linda, and it looks like he throws the car's lighter out the window. Anybody catch this? I had seen The Blues Brothers long before I ever saw A Letter to Three Wives, and when I saw Douglas toss the lighter out, I immediately laughed and thought of John Belushi lighting a cigarette and chucking the lighter out of the car. Is there any connection between the two movies, or Paul and John, both big lugs?

Well, the only other connection I can think of between Paul Douglas and John Belushi would be that in the movie Angels in the Outfield AND in the movie The Blues Brothers, both Paul and John are on..ahem.."a mission from God"!  ;) 

(...in a manner of speaking, anyway)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/4/2019 at 9:35 AM, TheCid said:

As for design, I am a big fan of cars from 1940 through the 70's, but many of them were God awful ugly, especially in the mid to late 50's. 

For me, I have to say the 80s and 90s were the worst era for cars with that terrible "box on wheels" shape. Makes me think of Mickey Rourke's comment from Sin City, where he is describing a 1980s Mercedes. - "Modern cars, they all look like electric shavers." :lol: 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/4/2019 at 11:16 PM, slaytonf said:

The Suburban goes back to the 30s.  Regardless of the first appearance of a cargo carrying vehicle, what I was talking about was the first definitive manifestation of the phenomenon that has infected our transportation universe.  You can see that in the Suburban, certainly by the 60s.  Chevrolet hit on the right design, and to my mind it hasn't been surpassed.  Other companies have tried, but nothing has ever been even as good.

While the Suburban was around for a long time, it was not a pre-SUV vehicle the way the Jeep station wagon was.  The Suburban really was a working vehicle.  Later it became fancier, more comfortable, etc. to expand to its current appeal.

On 3/5/2019 at 7:03 AM, Sepiatone said:

What model year?  Back when I first hired in at GM ('71) I was driving a '64 Dart( after some jerk ran into my '65 Dodge Coronet 500 and totaled it! :angry: ).  Put that "slant 6"  through more punishment than other engines would endure.

Had the "push-button" trans and I didn't even mind the "How many quarters do you need to drive to work" jokes.  ;) 

Sepiatone  

'65 and '67 respectively.

18 hours ago, twharry42 said:

I've been away for a while, but watching the forum lately as I have just joined TCM Baclkot. This thread referencing Dodge Darts is just too interesting to ignore. As a former owner of six slant six cars, three Valiants and three Darts, I can attest to the durability of these cars. They take a licking and keep on kicking. Aka the Valiant in Duel, starring Dennis Weaver. And I've owned six Chrysler minivans, my current van being the best car I've ever owned. Interesting thing here is that SUV owners ask me to haul things that wont fit in the SUV, but will fit in my van. Huh? Lower floor provides more height, fitting taller cargo. I think the Chrysler minivan is the ultimate working mans vehicle. I'll get plenty of argument from the F150 people, but I'll argue to the death. 

 
So today, I return home to the midwest with a 99 Chrysler Sebring convertible that I purchased in Florida. $3500 bucks for a low miles rust free gorgeous car. After looking at more modern cars, like Toyota Solara's, twice the price, with three times the miles, oil sludging engines, Takata airbags, and frumpy looks. Somebody please explain this to me. Is it just perception that Chrysler cars are junk. I know they built some bad cars, just like all the others, but I think the 99 Sebring convertible and my 01 Voyager LX are masterpieces. 

The Chrysler minivan was created for women and families, not working men.  Although it definitely fits that purpose very well.   It was built to replace the station wagon.

The Sebring has a bad reputation because it earned it.  It was usually rated as most unreliable vehicle sold in America by numerous sources.  Number one on Do Not Buy lists.  They are nice looking, but.... 

Most vehicles sold in America have Takata airbag issues.

I had a '71 Dodge Challenger and it was the second worst of the many cars I have owned, including a Fiat 124.  Worst was a Saab 900 Turbo.  Friend had a '70 Plymouth Barracuda which was worse than my Challenger.  Chrysler made a lot of crappy cars after about 1970 and continues to this day.  Although they did pull it out a couple of times - K cars for one.  But that was mostly from a sales perspective.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On March 6, 2019 at 12:46 PM, TheCid said:

While the Suburban was around for a long time, it was not a pre-SUV vehicle the way the Jeep station wagon was.  The Suburban really was a working vehicle.  Later it became fancier, more comfortable, etc. to expand to its current appeal.

What will be done to maintain a point (or avoid conceding one!).  Arguments become more discriminating, turning on ever finer distinctions, with corollary issues brought in to distract discussion from the main issue.  Leaving aside the question of why a company would name a commercial vehicle 'Suburban', as I posted, it does not matter what the antecedents are in the dim history of automobiles.  What matters is what served as the immediate vector for the current SUV epidemic.  And that is the Suburban.  Chevrolet hit on the optimal formula for the multi-use vehicle that could operate equally well in the Great Washed and Forest Service roads.  It very specifically did not have frills and comforts.  A big imposing beastie, it inspired bitter envy in your mall mates, and was tough enough to give blow for blow to byways barely worthy of the designation road.  It is its competitors that resorted to fancies, comfort and such to make up for their shortcomings in design, appealing to the snobbery in people who wanted the cachet of trail thumping without ever leaving the oil slicked surface of shopping mall parking lots.

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Truly a film which survives only on sentimental value--since it did just about everything wrong--the AMC Hornet in Roger Moore's "The Man with the Golden Gun" being yet one more example of its sundry failings.

Its further puzzling that one of the greatest live-action car stunts ever, was accomplished with this little dingus.

th?id=OIP.LK9cIyvFn6i1NksShZ8p9QHaEo%26p

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, slaytonf said:

 What matters is what served as the immediate vector for the current SUV epidemic.  And that is the Suburban.  

If that were true, GM would never have created the Chevy Blazer.  Regardless, the experts consider the Jeep station wagon as the "granddaddy" of the SUV.   Time for you to concede the point.  The Suburban of the 30's-60's was a working vehicle and marketed as a truck with an enclosed body that could carry passengers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Michael Rennie said:

I have driven the AMC Eagle shown above. Same color too. Drove the AMC Gremlin, but had to draw the line at driving John Denver's AMC Pacer.

My Granny had a Rambler Rebel.

Mechanics hated these cars.

Here is my favorite car:

nypd.jpg.7666d0493a20f0e713f9742a4ec57a3d.jpg

There was a recent episode of CBS's Blue Bloods in which while two of NYPD's finest are shown driving a little SmartCar around like this one, the cops are being laughed at and jeered by the locals. And then later after responding to a call, they return to their vehicle to see that it's been pushed over and is laying upside-down on its roof.

(...aaaah, ya gotta love dem New Yawkers, don't ya?!)

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Rennie said:

I have driven the AMC Eagle shown above. Same color too. Drove the AMC Gremlin, but had to draw the line at driving John Denver's AMC Pacer.

My Granny had a Rambler Rebel.

Mechanics hated these cars.

Here is my favorite car:

nypd.jpg.7666d0493a20f0e713f9742a4ec57a3d.jpg

Another car with a super low rating, but mostly because it is small, tight, uncomfortable, etc.  But does get fairly good gas mileage.  Not the best product of Daimler-Benz.

As for the Eagle, not something in which I was interested.  But the huge amount of space required for the 4WD system is really off-putting.

1987_AMC_Eagle_wagon_burgundy-woodgrain_

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...