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)
 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:14 AM
 
Location: Pikesville, MD
5,229 posts, read 11,484,624 times
Reputation: 4846

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offsetdude View Post
Vehicles are point A to point B items, nothing more. Big hard cars and little limp willies seems to go together.
Now, I wouldn't go there. Only people with sexual insecurities think others do things because they have sexual insecurities.

Custom cars are rolling artwork. Some of us like creating that artwork. I've done so for decades. Some of us love the feel of fast cars, be it on a track or on a twisty backroad. I've been doing that for decades, too. For many of us automotive enthusiasts, cars are VASTLY mor ethan point A to point B items, and feel that anyone who thinks they are can go f*** off in the appliances forum and leave the car forum alone.

Cars can be like clothes, expressing your mood and personality, and changing them can both indicate a change in mood/personality and create that change in mood.

Let me give you an example. I owned all three of these at the same time:







I owned these three at the same time:







I can change my mood and outlook on the world just by jumping in a different car. I can also change how the world percieves me, if I feel liek it at the moment.

Right now I own an extended cab diesel dually, a customized hot rod BMW 7 series, a 1963 Mercury Comet convertible, and a custom painted MGB sports car. As a car enthusiast, I'm getting just a bit tired of smal minded people thinking that the only reason a guy would like/drive/play with cars like these is due to having to compensate. Aaaand.... it's not about being defensive, it's about being tired of hearing that insulting, small minded crap for decades from idiots. It's like hearing a 5 year old repeat the same exact joke for the 500th time that week: it's gotten damned annoying and you feel like bringing back corporal punishment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:15 AM
 
9,322 posts, read 11,246,447 times
Reputation: 5964
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailordave View Post
i knew the yugo would fail when i saw the first one roll off the ship and wouldn't start.
lol !
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:17 AM
 
9,322 posts, read 11,246,447 times
Reputation: 5964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merc63 View Post
My first race car was a Pinto that I also daily drove. 5 years and nothing wrong with it. THis was it with my sister in it, getting ready for an autocross event:



Kind of like these Pintos:













(Yes, that one has a V8, too)



That one runs 10 second quarter miles with a turbo 4 cyl.

And Yugos? My buddy's autocross Yugo (since they are merely Fiat 128s under teh skin, it's easy to find hop up parts for them)







As I said, there's no car I'd be embarassed to drive (that's not filthy inside and out, or filled with vomit and puke). I've driven some rough stuff over the years. I mean, I drove this around a bit:
The one thing that stood out was the gas tanks exploding on the Pinto from rear end collisions......



But glad you had fun with what you have done with yours....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Pikesville, MD
5,229 posts, read 11,484,624 times
Reputation: 4846
Quote:
Originally Posted by meet4 View Post
Any other no-no list screams "compensating", "low self-esteem" or "I am not gay, please believe me".


Quote:
Originally Posted by sailordave View Post
So you're knocking us for having personal taste and standards?
No, I'm knocking you for being ignorant and closed minded. Racist bigots have personal taste and standards, too. Doesn't mean I have to say "that's nice." But hey, why are you proud of being closed minded? Hmm?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:25 AM
 
Location: Pikesville, MD
5,229 posts, read 11,484,624 times
Reputation: 4846
Quote:
Originally Posted by WannaliveinGreenville View Post
The one thing that stood out was the gas tanks exploding on the Pinto from rear end collisions......

Sorry, but the Exploding Pinto is basically a myth. In a summer 1991 Rutgers Law Review article Gary Schwartz demolishes "the myth of the Pinto case." Actual deaths in Pinto fires have come in at a known 27, not the expected thousand or more.

More startling, Schwartz shows that everyone's received ideas about the fabled "smoking gun" memo are false (the one supposedly dealing with how it was cheaper to save money on a small part and pay off later lawsuits... and immortalized in the movie "Fight Club"). The actual memo did not pertain to Pintos, or even Ford products, but to American cars in general; it dealt with rollovers, not rear-end collisions; it did not contemplate the matter of tort liability at all, let alone accept it as cheaper than a design change; it assigned a value to human life because federal regulators, for whose eyes it was meant, themselves employed that concept in their deliberations; and the value it used was one that they, the regulators, had set forth in documents.

In retrospect, Schwartz writes, the Pinto's safety record appears to have been very typical of its time and class. In over 10 years of production, and 20 years that followed, with over 2 million Pintos produced, no more people died in fires from Pintos as died in fires from Maximas...

The supposed design flaw of the Pinto, according to Byron Bloch, was that in a heavy enough rear end accident, the front of the gas tank could come in contact with a bolt on the differential, rupturing it, and allowing fuel to spill out, with the potential for a fire. it is, however, extremely hard for the gas tank to come in contact with any bolts that might be abole to accomplish this, unless the car is hit from behind at over 50 mph. And as was shown in the autopsy for the intital accident in '78 that started this controversy, teh occupants died from teh impact, not from teh fire (caused by an inattentive driver in a chevy van driving onto the shoulder and hitting their parked, but running Pinto from behind at over 50 mph).

In June 1978, at the height of the Ford Pinto outcry, ABC's 20/20 reported "startling new developments": evidence that full-size Fords, not just the subcompact Pinto, could explode when hit from behind. The show's visual highlight was dramatic. Newly aired film from tests done at UCLA in 1967 by researchers under contract with the automaker showed a Ford sedan being rear-ended at 55 mph and bursting into a fireball.

"ABC News has analyzed a great many of Ford's secret rear-end crash tests," confided correspondent Sylvia Chase. And they showed that if you owned a Ford--not just a Pinto, but many other models--what happened to the car in the film could happen to you. The tone was unrelentingly damning, and by the show's end popular anchorman Hugh Downs felt constrained to add his own personal confession. "You know, I've advertised Ford products a few years back, Sylvia, and at the time, of course, I didn't know and I don't think that anybody else did that this kind of ruckus was going to unfold." You got the idea that he would certainly think twice before repeating a mistake like that.

If ABC really analyzed those UCLA test reports, it had every reason to know why the Ford in the crash film burst into flame: there was an incendiary device under it. The UCLA testers explained their methods in a 1968 report published by the Society of Automotive Engineers, fully ten years before the 20/20 episode. As they explained, one of their goals was to study how a crash fire affected the passenger compartment of a car, and to do that they needed a crash fire. But crash fires occur very seldom; in fact, the testers had tried to produce a fire in an earlier test run without an igniter but had failed. Hence their use of the incendiary device (which they clearly and fully described in their write-up) in the only test run that produced a fire.

Now, if people actually read everything rather than rely on sound bites to get information from... You really have to take a close look at ANY series of lawsuits brought on by trial lawyer associations that stand to gain huge settlements from the lawsuits. Follow the money!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:31 AM
 
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
14,095 posts, read 22,967,124 times
Reputation: 7957
[quote=Merc63;18169230]



No, I'm knocking you for being ignorant and closed minded. Racist bigots have personal taste and standards, too. Doesn't mean I have to say "that's nice." But hey, why are you proud of being closed minded? Hmm?[/
Wow, what a leap of what passes for logic in your little mind. Clothes are also a tool, one made for warmth and modesty. Aren't there clothes you'd b ashamed to be seen in? For some car guys, it's the same thing. It's not about being a racist or close minded and for you to insinuate as much only shows your ignorance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 08:45 AM
 
9,322 posts, read 11,246,447 times
Reputation: 5964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merc63 View Post
Sorry, but the Exploding Pinto is basically a myth. In a summer 1991 Rutgers Law Review article Gary Schwartz demolishes "the myth of the Pinto case." Actual deaths in Pinto fires have come in at a known 27, not the expected thousand or more.

More startling, Schwartz shows that everyone's received ideas about the fabled "smoking gun" memo are false (the one supposedly dealing with how it was cheaper to save money on a small part and pay off later lawsuits... and immortalized in the movie "Fight Club"). The actual memo did not pertain to Pintos, or even Ford products, but to American cars in general; it dealt with rollovers, not rear-end collisions; it did not contemplate the matter of tort liability at all, let alone accept it as cheaper than a design change; it assigned a value to human life because federal regulators, for whose eyes it was meant, themselves employed that concept in their deliberations; and the value it used was one that they, the regulators, had set forth in documents.

In retrospect, Schwartz writes, the Pinto's safety record appears to have been very typical of its time and class. In over 10 years of production, and 20 years that followed, with over 2 million Pintos produced, no more people died in fires from Pintos as died in fires from Maximas...

The supposed design flaw of the Pinto, according to Byron Bloch, was that in a heavy enough rear end accident, the front of the gas tank could come in contact with a bolt on the differential, rupturing it, and allowing fuel to spill out, with the potential for a fire. it is, however, extremely hard for the gas tank to come in contact with any bolts that might be abole to accomplish this, unless the car is hit from behind at over 50 mph. And as was shown in the autopsy for the intital accident in '78 that started this controversy, teh occupants died from teh impact, not from teh fire (caused by an inattentive driver in a chevy van driving onto the shoulder and hitting their parked, but running Pinto from behind at over 50 mph).

In June 1978, at the height of the Ford Pinto outcry, ABC's 20/20 reported "startling new developments": evidence that full-size Fords, not just the subcompact Pinto, could explode when hit from behind. The show's visual highlight was dramatic. Newly aired film from tests done at UCLA in 1967 by researchers under contract with the automaker showed a Ford sedan being rear-ended at 55 mph and bursting into a fireball.

"ABC News has analyzed a great many of Ford's secret rear-end crash tests," confided correspondent Sylvia Chase. And they showed that if you owned a Ford--not just a Pinto, but many other models--what happened to the car in the film could happen to you. The tone was unrelentingly damning, and by the show's end popular anchorman Hugh Downs felt constrained to add his own personal confession. "You know, I've advertised Ford products a few years back, Sylvia, and at the time, of course, I didn't know and I don't think that anybody else did that this kind of ruckus was going to unfold." You got the idea that he would certainly think twice before repeating a mistake like that.

If ABC really analyzed those UCLA test reports, it had every reason to know why the Ford in the crash film burst into flame: there was an incendiary device under it. The UCLA testers explained their methods in a 1968 report published by the Society of Automotive Engineers, fully ten years before the 20/20 episode. As they explained, one of their goals was to study how a crash fire affected the passenger compartment of a car, and to do that they needed a crash fire. But crash fires occur very seldom; in fact, the testers had tried to produce a fire in an earlier test run without an igniter but had failed. Hence their use of the incendiary device (which they clearly and fully described in their write-up) in the only test run that produced a fire.

Now, if people actually read everything rather than rely on sound bites to get information from... You really have to take a close look at ANY series of lawsuits brought on by trial lawyer associations that stand to gain huge settlements from the lawsuits. Follow the money!

Like this Pinto ?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saX25ZLJkTM
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 11:22 AM
 
Location: Texas
42,203 posts, read 49,753,916 times
Reputation: 66975
[quote=sailordave;18169382]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merc63 View Post




No, I'm knocking you for being ignorant and closed minded. Racist bigots have personal taste and standards, too. Doesn't mean I have to say "that's nice." But hey, why are you proud of being closed minded? Hmm?[/
Wow, what a leap of what passes for logic in your little mind. Clothes are also a tool, one made for warmth and modesty. Aren't there clothes you'd b ashamed to be seen in? For some car guys, it's the same thing. It's not about being a racist or close minded and for you to insinuate as much only shows your ignorance.
Yeah, but with the clothes it implies there is some degree of being inappropriate or unclean or something more objectively undesirable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Texas
42,203 posts, read 49,753,916 times
Reputation: 66975
Quote:
Originally Posted by KAILANI View Post

That's not the question Stan...
Put your nose down a little bit....

Are you certain there isn't ONE car that you would be embarassed to be seen in??
And mine doesn't count!!!
Come on, play along won't ya??
The question was about being embarrassed.

Now, there are plenty of cars I don't like, think are ugly, think are wastes of money, etc, etc...so I don't buy them. But I acknowledge that is my own personal taste and if someone else wants one, that's their business and their style/statement. Doesn't make it 'embarrassing.'

I guess I'd be embarrassed if my car was held together by duct tape, had a coat hanger for an antenna, and had Chihuahua license plates...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 01:25 PM
 
Location: Pikesville, MD
5,229 posts, read 11,484,624 times
Reputation: 4846
Quote:
Originally Posted by WannaliveinGreenville View Post
That'll do, though if I were to build another one, it'd be more road race style (still V8, but set up for handling,too):

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