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.
Not on stock parts, they ddint'. Those cars were acid dipped, modified well past the limits of the rules in place, and so far from teh street cars it's not funny.
But the person I replied to seemed to be repeating the myth that classic muscle cars could barely corner.
Quote:
I like both. Sorry.
I'm sorry, too! (Just kidding )
Quote:
In comparison to full size cars, they were short overhangs. In comparison to modern cars, they are still long overhangs, Even my 2006 Mustang, which is moder, with shorter overhangs, still has more than modern hatchbacks.
They were also short overhangs compare to mid-sized cars.
Quote:
Mail slot? Most modern sedan have trunks that open more than vertical, which allow easy access to the trunk, but the main thing is thre are more hatchbacks now, which have ginormous openings to get MUCH larger things in teh trunk. Even those larger full size cars of old, while having width and lenth, didnt' have much height to their trunks, and gas tanks and spare tires used up a lot of useful space.
Yes, mail slot. Check the photos below to compare. A typical late-model car (Nissan Sentra) and my '69 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham (with its 20-cu-ft trunk). The cars of old didn't have the "tall" trunks you see now, but that made for better visibility. See the 5th photo for an example of how those high rear-ends/trunks hamper visibility. The spare tire in my '69 Cadillac is mounted out of the way, above the rear axle.Isn't it true that with today's cars, some don't even have a spare? Unless you order it as an option? Incidentally, the spare was mounted under the trunk floor in my '66 Dodge Dart GT V-8.
Ah, so you picture one of the early '50s biggest cars with a modern Japanese market Suzuki that is smaller than even most of the tiny cars from Japan that we don't even get in the US? 99% of modern cars are at least double the size of the Suzuki pictured, INCLUDING modern economy cars. OTOH, the Suzuki is about the same size as a '60s MG Midget. SHoudl I reverse your image and post a '60s MG next to a modern Toyota Avalon and say, "see modern cars are bigger and more useful?" It's just as appropriate a comparison (and just as ridiculous).
It was comparison made in jest. A photo I found on the Internet. It's not supposed to be taken that seriously.
But the person I replied to seemed to be repeating the myth that classic muscle cars could barely corner.
I'm sorry, too! (Just kidding )
They were also short overhangs compare to mid-sized cars.
Yes, mail slot. Check the photos below to compare. A typical late-model car (Nissan Sentra) and my '69 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham (with its 20-cu-ft trunk). The cars of old didn't have the "tall" trunks you see now, but that made for better visibility. See the 5th photo for an example of how those high rear-ends/trunks hamper visibility. The spare tire in my '69 Cadillac is mounted out of the way, above the rear axle.Isn't it true that with today's cars, some don't even have a spare? Unless you order it as an option? Incidentally, the spare was mounted under the trunk floor in my '66 Dodge Dart GT V-8.
And getting stuff over that huge front lip of that Caddy trunk would be a complete PIA compared to the lower openings of most of todays vehicles.. and a Caddy with a bigger trunk than a compact or barely mid size car?? Truely "impressive".. 20cuft is the same as a Taurus. trunk..
And getting stuff over that huge front lip of that Caddy trunk would be a complete PIA compared to the lower openings of most of todays vehicles.. and a Caddy with a bigger trunk than a compact or barely mid size car?? Truely "impressive".. 20cuft is the same as a Taurus. trunk..
20 cubic feet is almost as much as I can put into my Elantra Touring. Before I fold the seats down.
And getting stuff over that huge front lip of that Caddy trunk would be a complete PIA compared to the lower openings of most of todays vehicles.. and a Caddy with a bigger trunk than a compact or barely mid size car?? Truely "impressive".. 20cuft is the same as a Taurus. trunk..
The liftover height for the trunk of my Cadillac is a little over 2 feet (27"). Very accessible.
The Cadillac has not only a large trunk, but a very roomy interior (see photo).
Is the 20-cu-ft trunk space of the Taurus useable trunk space? Also, because of the high trunk/rear end of the Taurus is why the visibility to the rear is poor.
Isn't that an SUV? Why are you comparing an SUV with a car?
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Luxury
It's a hatchback, but your point still stands.
It is a compact hatchback, and smaller than every last one of those muscle cars. His point not only does not stand but has been knocked flat onto it's overhanging rear-end. Tailfins and all.
Guess I should be more fair and go find that Suzuki you found the photo of, and only compare the ancient muscle barges with that?
It is a compact hatchback, and smaller than every last one of those muscle cars. His point not only does not stand but has been knocked flat onto it's overhanging rear-end. Tailfins and all.
My point stands because I fail to see why you are comparing a car with a non-car (the Elantra Touring being more of a station wagon). Maybe your Elantra should be compared with a '60s station wagon, which had a lot more than 20-cu-ft with the rear seat up and 80 to 102-cu-ft with the rear seat folded down? "Smaller than every one of those muscle cars?" For me, that is not a plus! And I'll take tailfins over plastic bumpers and a chrome-less body any day!
Quote:
Guess I should be more fair and go find that Suzuki you found the photo of, and only compare the ancient muscle barges with that?
Any photos of Suzukis would be for entertainment purposes only!
"Muscle barges?" Again, a 1970 Dodge Challenger (wheelbase 110", overall length 191.3") is actually smaller, overall, than a new Dodge Challenger (wheelbase 116", overall length 197.7").
And a 1968-'70 Plymouth Road Runner is 202.7" long, about the same as a modern Lexus LS. Both are mid-sized cars (going by 1970 definitions) and not "barges" (more accurately known as full-sized cars).
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.
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.
)
20cuft is the same as a Taurus. trunk..
