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.
You fix the problem by properly inflating your tires,or simply lowering the car. Lowering 60-64 Corvairs means automatic negative camber. Not dangerous.
Some of my friend Tim's cars. He drives either the white Corvair Spyder turbo or the 2002 every single day. Except for his 1975 2002 rotary project (not pictured), these are his only vehicles. Young guy also, younger than the millennial generation. Untitled by tim wilson, on Flickr
I even had an early Corvair, a white 1962 Monza coupe with red interior, powerglide automatic. Never crashed once.
We own one of the cars on the list. It also seats four 6'0" passengers comfortably, handles 80mph on I-10 with ease, and will get 32-34 mpg if you slow it down to 55-70mph. Projected reliability is above average, and it has a timing chain rather than a timing belt. And I like the pod car aesthetic- it may not have fins but it's futuristic in its own way.
Seeing the damage some of those cars sustained at low speeds is laughable compared to how cars of today are affected by the same type of crash.
Doesn't mean we have to care, and yet repair costs are higher.
And for something different, you have to remove so many different things to get to/replace one part, like on our aforementioned 2012 Malibu. I shouldn't have to remove my front bumper cover to change a headlight bulb.
We own one of the cars on the list. It also seats four 6'0" passengers comfortably, handles 80mph on I-10 with ease, and will get 32-34 mpg if you slow it down to 55-70mph. Projected reliability is above average, and it has a timing chain rather than a timing belt. And I like the pod car aesthetic- it may not have fins but it's futuristic in its own way.
I'm loving my appliance right now.
That's because it's so boring that you fall asleep behind the wheel and never get to drive it.
This very same debate can be found on sailing forums, where some of the older crowd will still decry the dwindling popularity of classic wooden boats as compared to the new-fangled "plastic tubs".
"Sure, the new boats are cheaper, safer, faster and much, much easier to maintain, but they lack soul, they lack verve, they lack pizzazz, they lack style." Generally from people who had formative experiences in wooden boats, of course. And as they age out of the sport (and sadly, of the population), wooden boats become less and less attractive - to the point where they now, quite often, literally can't be given away.
A hard core of the most attractive wooden boats will survive, among those who cherish them - just as there are still people enjoying horse-drawn carriages or flying biplanes. But by far the majority will go away. And the same will happen to cars. Classic cars will still be around - but fewer and fewer, as the definition of "classic" will become narrower and narrower. So it goes.
Go to any car show or swap meet (as I do often) and you will see plenty of people in their teens-20s that appreciate classic cars. Most cannot afford them, and since they didn't grow up with wrenches in hand like some of us, cannot afford to maintain them. Prices for classic cars are still going up as many boomers with cash now buy them before retiring, to enjoy when they have more time. I sold my 1972 El Camino in 2007, and just recently searched for a '69-72 Nova or '64-67 Chevelle, because I missed having a muscle car. After test driving a few, and remembering how much time I spent updating the El Camino and keeping it running and tuned, I ended up with a 2013 Challenger. I'm not into having a car sit in the garage and come out only for shows and sunny day drives. Muscle cars need to be driven to appreciate the fun, the Challenger is my daily driver now. When I retire I'll be looking for a 1950-53 Chevrolet 3100 5 window truck to restore.
The heck with not knowing how to fix them, most millennials cannot drive a stick, so that eliminates a lot of great cars.
Seeing the damage some of those cars sustained at low speeds is laughable compared to how cars of today are affected by the same type of crash.
Well, point of order: Crash damage to cars doesn't really matter, as compared to damage to the occupants. If you abruptly stopped an M113 armored personnel carrier - by driving it into a (thick) wall, say - the M113 would look pretty unscathed as compared to a random 2015 sedan hitting the same wall. The occupants, though...
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.
