U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-10-2010, 01:22 AM
 
Location: Atlanta,GA
2,671 posts, read 5,408,911 times
Reputation: 1165

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
Back to what I said before. It's a matter of choice. Why not have large cars (or SUVs/trucks) available to those who want them? Even if they don't sell much.
While, I have no problems with what you say, but we all know what dictates sales. Demand. Without demand, or enough demand, there won't be a market for them. I'm all for niche markets. I'm all for a small group, any group to get whatever product they want, being made. But we all know bean counters don't see it that way. What will sell, is what they'll build.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
There are quite a few people that want Lincoln and Cadillac to make real full-sized cars again (although the Town Car is full-sized). It's highly unlikely that a large amount of Lincolns and Cadillacs are going to sell globally anyway. There can be both... modest size Cadillacs and Lincolns (like the ones being built today) and big ones, too.
What I said above applies to this as well. It's about what consumers want. If tomorrow, gas went down to 89 cents/gallon, and there was demand for these big cars, don't you think GM, Ford, and Chrysler would be in design studios working on them? I even think Toyota, Honda and others would join in.

We're living in different times. People are scaling down, and I strongly doubt people are going to want to spend $100 to fill up their tank every 3-4 days. People are spending more time on highways, in traffic. They want comfort, great MPGs, and style more than size. Families are smaller nowadays. Things are changing. The days of Ford Country Squire wagons are done. To some sad, but a reality.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
For some, gas prices don't affect them. Because they do not drive their cars more than 4,000 or 5,000 miles per year.
That's such a small segment of the population. I know a few people who do that, but where, you ask? In cities like NY, Boston and Chicago where public transport systems are top notch. You'd have to have most of this country using public transportation/trains/light rail etc, in order for the average American to put a measly 4-5k miles per year. Most people rely on their cars day in day out in this country.

I can count on one hand how many people I know that put such low amount of miles per year, and they're all in the northeast where they take the train to work everyday. Everywhere else in America is so car dependent, that owning something that gives the MPGs these 70s cars gave, would be a financial burden.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
I see more old cars in stock condition than those which have the add-ons you mentioned.
Well, speaking for myself. I'm in the South, where they become cars only pimps in the 70s would drive. Loud colors, spinning wheels/hubcaps. I have to admit, I've seen a few, very few, tasteful examples (some stock, back to factory, restored spec). I respect their passion for their cars. It's a hobby. I support positive hobbies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
Thanks for the compliment.
You would agree that it is a good thing that classic, big cars appeal to some who are under 30 years old? I was out driving my triple black '69 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham (19 feet long) in my area. Made a right turn and there were two kids on bicycles on the corner. About 10-12 years old. One of them said, "Nice car." I can't tell you how many times I've heard that! The same thing happened (in the same car) when I was driving by a Middle School. Two kids walking by and I heard one of them say to the other "Cadillac." Now you see, it's people like them who will keep traditional, big American cars alive. My 17-year-old Niece has said to me that not only would she like to drive one or all of my cars, but that should would someday like to own a classic car. Definitely a good thing. The old (big) cars which some people refer to as "dinosaurs," "boats," "barges," etc are a part of Americana. I doubt we will ever see cars with the styling or true comfort of 1960s cars. And that, truly, is sad.
Yes, people of all ages will appreciate classics. I appreciate older 60s American muscle cars, as well as cars built in the 40s. Nothing is limited to age, race or sex when it comes to cars, and it's a good thing.

Who knows? My sons may end up liking these types of cars when they reach the age to buy, restore and drive cars. I may not like these types of cars, but would still encourage them with their hobbies. The same way, you have young kids these days who love import cars, and their parents wouldn't be caught dead in one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
I definitely (as would many others) like to see the return of a car like a '79 Lincoln Town Car... all 233" of it.
My Avalon is as big as I would want a car for me at this point. It's plenty roomy. Just try to sit in one. Just give it a try. I think it's one of the roomiest cars on the market today. I stand at 6ft4, and I can say it's very comfy for everyday, traffic driving, and long trips. It's my monday to friday car. On weekends, when I can, I take my other cars out (cars which require more input and feedback from me).

I can recall as a kid, my dad's friend having the same Lincoln you mention. That thing was a living room on wheels. I was a kid, what did I know?
Just remembering how small I was in that thing is enough for me..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-10-2010, 03:15 AM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
22,151 posts, read 26,606,075 times
Reputation: 6441
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterNY View Post
While, I have no problems with what you say, but we all know what dictates sales. Demand. Without demand, or enough demand, there won't be a market for them. I'm all for niche markets. I'm all for a small group, any group to get whatever product they want, being made. But we all know bean counters don't see it that way. What will sell, is what they'll build.

What I said above applies to this as well. It's about what consumers want. If tomorrow, gas went down to 89 cents/gallon, and there was demand for these big cars, don't you think GM, Ford, and Chrysler would be in design studios working on them? I even think Toyota, Honda and others would join in.
But what is wrong with having a choice? If someone wants and can afford the fuel for a large car, why not have it available? I'm not sure that GM, Ford and Chrysler would make big cars if gas goes down to .89 cents/gallon. If they did, they would still probably have a blob-shape to it, not like the smooth lines of '60s cars.

Also, there is not much demand for a new 19-foot Rolls-Royce, but they are built, anyway. Why not have a new 19-foot Cadillac for those who want one? After all, Cadillac once made only about 800-1,000 limousines each year. The were limited-production cars which never sold well, but they built them, anyway. Why? Because in the '60s, there were choices in cars. Another example: The 1968 Cadillac had a choice of 21 exterior colors and an amazing 147 upholstery combinations. Which brings up another point. You say times have changed. Well when it comes to choices such as above, they have changed for the worse. I have seen brochures for cars like the Acura TL. A 2008 Acura TL had a choice of exactly 3 interior colors: black, grey and beige! No blue, white, red, green, burgundy, etc. You did get a choice of 9 exterior colors (whoopee!).

Quote:
We're living in different times. People are scaling down, and I strongly doubt people are going to want to spend $100 to fill up their tank every 3-4 days. People are spending more time on highways, in traffic. They want comfort, great MPGs, and style more than size. Families are smaller nowadays. Things are changing. The days of Ford Country Squire wagons are done. To some sad, but a reality.
But cars like my Lincoln get about the same fuel mileage as quite a few SUVs (not always just he bigger SUVs, too) and trucks. (Mine gets 18-25 mpg.) These days, big does not automatically mean gas guzzling.

Quote:
That's such a small segment of the population. I know a few people who do that, but where, you ask? In cities like NY, Boston and Chicago where public transport systems are top notch. You'd have to have most of this country using public transportation/trains/light rail etc, in order for the average American to put a measly 4-5k miles per year. Most people rely on their cars day in day out in this country.

I can count on one hand how many people I know that put such low amount of miles per year, and they're all in the northeast where they take the train to work everyday. Everywhere else in America is so car dependent, that owning something that gives the MPGs these 70s cars gave, would be a financial burden.
There are many retired people who don't drive much. There are many people who work from home. And there are many people who live close to where they work. I worked at a place for 16 years which was only 4.5 miles away. The car I used as a daily driver? My '76 Cadillac Fleetwood 75 Limousine! Can't think of a classier way to drive to work!

Quote:
Well, speaking for myself. I'm in the South, where they become cars only pimps in the 70s would drive. Loud colors, spinning wheels/hubcaps. I have to admit, I've seen a few, very few, tasteful examples (some stock, back to factory, restored spec). I respect their passion for their cars. It's a hobby. I support positive hobbies.
Fortunately, the huge majority of Lincoln Town Cars (and Cadillacs) I see are in original condition. I have seen a few of the ones you speak of, usually at cars shows. But on the street, 90% are stock. Of course, it does depend on where you live.

Quote:
My Avalon is as big as I would want a car for me at this point. It's plenty roomy. Just try to sit in one. Just give it a try. I think it's one of the roomiest cars on the market today. I stand at 6ft4, and I can say it's very comfy for everyday, traffic driving, and long trips. It's my monday to friday car. On weekends, when I can, I take my other cars out (cars which require more input and feedback from me).

I can recall as a kid, my dad's friend having the same Lincoln you mention. That thing was a living room on wheels. I was a kid, what did I know?
Just remembering how small I was in that thing is enough for me..
You have made a good point. Your Avalon seems big to you, however, nothing compares with a full-sized, '60/'70s American luxury car. With their thick, soft, plush seats and over 5 feet of shoulder and hip room, they are overflowing with room! When was the last time you have rode in or drove a '60s or '70s full-size American car? Just curious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2010, 03:38 AM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
22,151 posts, read 26,606,075 times
Reputation: 6441
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterNY View Post
Yes, people of all ages will appreciate classics. I appreciate older 60s American muscle cars, as well as cars built in the 40s. Nothing is limited to age, race or sex when it comes to cars, and it's a good thing.

Who knows? My sons may end up liking these types of cars when they reach the age to buy, restore and drive cars. I may not like these types of cars, but would still encourage them with their hobbies. The same way, you have young kids these days who love import cars, and their parents wouldn't be caught dead in one.
Looking back, and if you read your earlier posts, will you agree that you were being overly harsh?

I mean, really, here are some of your quotes:
"As I said, these things need to be in the ocean, used as artificial reefs."

"Barges"

"Oversized vehicles."

"Not for the average Joe (thank goodness)."

"Real drivers don't drive couches."

"Parking lot space hogging jokes."

"Behemoths."

"Glad they're gone."

"The behemoth ['73/'74 Chrysler] was a waste of time, money and resources."

"A complete failure."

"That thing belongs in the water or, better yet, at the bottom of the sea for artificial reef purposes."

As I said, overly harsh. You would probably be surprised at how some of those big '60s/'70s cars drove and even handled. Motor Trend (April, 1969) tested a '69 Chrysler Imperial (229.7" long or 19.14 feet and 4,980 lbs) and was so impressed with the handling they said, "Even on the road course at Orange County Raceway, the Imperial was edifying when it came to handling. In fact, it handles better than some cars half its size. It goes into corners as hard as you care to push it and drifts effortlessly with only minor understeer. And, the Imperial is more than five inches longer than in 1968."

I will also say this: I would definitely rather own a '73/'74 Chrysler (or a similar large car) than something like a 1960s VW Beetle (36-horsepower) which would struggle to top 30 mph going up a uphill road!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 09:15 PM
 
Location: Atlanta,GA
2,671 posts, read 5,408,911 times
Reputation: 1165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
But what is wrong with having a choice? If someone wants and can afford the fuel for a large car, why not have it available? I'm not sure that GM, Ford and Chrysler would make big cars if gas goes down to .89 cents/gallon. If they did, they would still probably have a blob-shape to it, not like the smooth lines of '60s cars.
Well maybe they wouldn't sell as well these days. People are looking for variety, and imports are more important in American culture than they were in the 50s and 60s.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
Also, there is not much demand for a new 19-foot Rolls-Royce, but they are built, anyway. Why not have a new 19-foot Cadillac for those who want one? After all, Cadillac once made only about 800-1,000 limousines each year. The were limited-production cars which never sold well, but they built them, anyway. Why? Because in the '60s, there were choices in cars. Another example: The 1968 Cadillac had a choice of 21 exterior colors and an amazing 147 upholstery combinations. Which brings up another point. You say times have changed. Well when it comes to choices such as above, they have changed for the worse. I have seen brochures for cars like the Acura TL. A 2008 Acura TL had a choice of exactly 3 interior colors: black, grey and beige! No blue, white, red, green, burgundy, etc. You did get a choice of 9 exterior colors (whoopee!).

You're right. There's not as much variety, but who really misses burgundy interiors these days? It's about demand. People seem to only care for black, grey, and beige. I guess the companies did their research. It's nothing the automotive aftermarket can't take care of.

About Rolls Royce, you're also right, but it's a niche market. When you can sell each car for $250k+, you can and should get what you want. The price of a Rolls Royce/Bentley is more than I plan to spend on my next house.

While, I'm curious about a Cadillac building a $100k car, I doubt many people would bite. Designing, testing, and actually building a car that may sell maybe 5000 units (being optimistic) may not be too lucrative for GM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
But cars like my Lincoln get about the same fuel mileage as quite a few SUVs (not always just he bigger SUVs, too) and trucks. (Mine gets 18-25 mpg.) These days, big does not automatically mean gas guzzling.
True.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
There are many retired people who don't drive much. There are many people who work from home. And there are many people who live close to where they work. I worked at a place for 16 years which was only 4.5 miles away. The car I used as a daily driver? My '76 Cadillac Fleetwood 75 Limousine! Can't think of a classier way to drive to work!
True again. To a certain extent, I'm one of these people. I travel a lot (Flying mostly) for my consulting business, work from home. You have a point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
You have made a good point. Your Avalon seems big to you, however, nothing compares with a full-sized, '60/'70s American luxury car. With their thick, soft, plush seats and over 5 feet of shoulder and hip room, they are overflowing with room! When was the last time you have rode in or drove a '60s or '70s full-size American car? Just curious.

It's all about perspectives. The Avalon is as big as I can go. 60s/70s are still too big for my liking, and I styling is not my cup of tea. Although I prefer 60s American designs over 70s designs (on average).

It's been a while. I was in my friend's Cadillac Seville STS a week ago. Smooth ride, he actually still wants to sell it to me. He thinks I'll take good care of it, since all my cars are so well maintained.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 09:17 PM
 
Location: Atlanta,GA
2,671 posts, read 5,408,911 times
Reputation: 1165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
Looking back, and if you read your earlier posts, will you agree that you were being overly harsh?

I mean, really, here are some of your quotes:
"As I said, these things need to be in the ocean, used as artificial reefs."

"Barges"

"Oversized vehicles."

"Not for the average Joe (thank goodness)."

"Real drivers don't drive couches."

"Parking lot space hogging jokes."

"Behemoths."

"Glad they're gone."

"The behemoth ['73/'74 Chrysler] was a waste of time, money and resources."

"A complete failure."

"That thing belongs in the water or, better yet, at the bottom of the sea for artificial reef purposes."

As I said, overly harsh. You would probably be surprised at how some of those big '60s/'70s cars drove and even handled. Motor Trend (April, 1969) tested a '69 Chrysler Imperial (229.7" long or 19.14 feet and 4,980 lbs) and was so impressed with the handling they said, "Even on the road course at Orange County Raceway, the Imperial was edifying when it came to handling. In fact, it handles better than some cars half its size. It goes into corners as hard as you care to push it and drifts effortlessly with only minor understeer. And, the Imperial is more than five inches longer than in 1968."

I will also say this: I would definitely rather own a '73/'74 Chrysler (or a similar large car) than something like a 1960s VW Beetle (36-horsepower) which would struggle to top 30 mph going up a uphill road!

A tad bit, but still, I chuckled (the way you put things)...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
22,151 posts, read 26,606,075 times
Reputation: 6441
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterNY View Post
Well maybe they wouldn't sell as well these days. People are looking for variety, and imports are more important in American culture than they were in the 50s and 60s.
In many instances, there is not much variety today. Want a vinyl roof? Forget it! Whitewall tires? What are those? Fender skirts? Chrome bumpers? N/A (not available). Most old cars had a good choice of engines. Look at a 1969 Chevrolet Caprice, for example. You could order a 250-6 cyl, a 350-2 or 4-bbl V-8, a 396, and two 454s (335 and 390 hp). And with numerous axle ratios... 2.73, 3.07, 3.36, 3.73, 4.11, 4.33, 4.56.

Quote:
You're right. There's not as much variety, but who really misses burgundy interiors these days? It's about demand. People seem to only care for black, grey, and beige. I guess the companies did their research. It's nothing the automotive aftermarket can't take care of.
I would definitely want a burgundy interior instead of a bland grey or tan interior. I was considering buying a 1978 Lincoln Town Car 4-door sedan with a nice burgundy exterior and interior. Kind of sorry I passed it up (too many cars).

Quote:
About Rolls Royce, you're also right, but it's a niche market. When you can sell each car for $250k+, you can and should get what you want. The price of a Rolls Royce/Bentley is more than I plan to spend on my next house.

While, I'm curious about a Cadillac building a $100k car, I doubt many people would bite. Designing, testing, and actually building a car that may sell maybe 5000 units (being optimistic) may not be too lucrative for GM.
No, not many people would bite, but some would. It would give Cadillac some of the glamor and exclusiveness that it had in spades in earlier years. The Cadillac limousine sold for well over twice the cost of the average car. For example, the average price of a 1966 car was around $3,500 and a 1966 Cadillac Fleetwood 75 Limousine sold for $9,500.

Quote:
True again. To a certain extent, I'm one of these people. I travel a lot (Flying mostly) for my consulting business, work from home. You have a point.
Yes, I am glad that I never had a job which involved a long commute. No job I ever had was more than 7 or 8 miles away and most were 4-5 miles.

Quote:
It's all about perspectives. The Avalon is as big as I can go. 60s/70s are still too big for my liking, and I styling is not my cup of tea. Although I prefer 60s American designs over 70s designs (on average).
Interesting. I once owned a '66 Dodge Dart GT V-8. At 196.3" (16.35 feet), it was the smallest car I would own. So the smallest car I would own would be the biggest you would own! I have driven large cars now for quite a while. They are ridiculously easy to drive. Driving a big car does not make me nervous at all.
As for styling, that is a matter of opinion. IMO, even the plainest 1960s car had loads more styling than 90% of new cars.


Quote:
It's been a while. I was in my friend's Cadillac Seville STS a week ago. Smooth ride, he actually still wants to sell it to me. He thinks I'll take good care of it, since all my cars are so well maintained.
Are you going to buy it? Or, still deciding?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2010, 10:42 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
22,151 posts, read 26,606,075 times
Reputation: 6441
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterNY View Post
A tad bit, but still, I chuckled (the way you put things)...
Well, at least you admit to a tad. If that was a "tad" I don't want to see what "excessive" would be!
If I made the same kind of comments (using less-than-pleasant descriptions) about some European or Japanese cars, the flaming directed toward me would still be going on!

Fortunately, many people realize that the old "barges," or "boats" or whatever some people want to call them had certain traits which most new cars can't compete with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top