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.
IMO 1970 was the ultimate year for Chevelle...although 67 SS cars are pretty nice too! The 1970 had the option for the LS5 and LS6. The LS6 was an absolute monster 454/450 horse w/ 500 ft lbs of torque. They fetch a pretty penny nowadays.
Edit: To stay on topic; the Volt? no thanks. The only GM vehicles I will ever buy again would be another Corvette or Tahoe. The new vettes get 28mpg, good enough for me.
The LS6 must be the one I remember, bad ass American muscle cars. I'll have to watch the Barrett Jackson auctions to even see one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ergohead
Broughm
351 Clevor
Other good stuff.
On cold days her eyes only close halfway.
It's my driver car.
I'm second owner, bought it in 1987 for $500.00
Torino Brougham models came standard with extra exterior and interior trim, finer upholsteries, wheel covers, unique emblems, extra sound insulation and "Hideaway" headlights. "Hideaway" headlights were headlight covers that were styled to look like the grille of the vehicle extended across the front end without any headlights at all. When the lights were turned on, vacuum actuators would flip the covers up and out of the way to expose the quad headlamps. Motor Trend wrote that "when you get into a Brougham, it's the same feeling as an LTD, or even, dare we say it, a Continental. But in a more manageable scale." Motor Trend gave accolades to the 1970 Torino Brougham 2-door for its quiet interior that only allowed "the muffled thump of freeway expansion-joints to intrude."
car of the year? Unproven, technology that is less than cutting edge, styling that may be appealing to sunday school teachers and all for a price tag of a really fun to drive well designed Chevy Camaro. A car that if well maintained will hold its value and become destined to be a collectable.
Volt car of the year? Maybe to some but certainly not I.
Motor trend once again has proven that they are a rag of sell outs. Sort of reminds me of when an off road magazine named a Lexus 4 wheel drive of the year.
For $41,000 I can do a heck of a lot better than this.
For a car in extremely limited supply (10,000 will be produced this year, and 42,000 in 2011), millions of Americans won't have access to it in the first place.
If you think this will result in normal people rushing out to purchase an overpriced "green" car that doesn't even get the mileage Government Motors claimed it got, that will cost you an arm and a leg just to recharge after going a max 40 miles on the battery, think again.
GM paid the magazine to award it car of the year. Too many sheeple buy whatever that magazine says is best. It is so obvious that is how this went down. How could a car get car of the year when it hasn't even been put through it's paces yet to see how it ACTUALLY performs?
So GM and its government handlers screw the shareholders who, up to that point, were protected by law.
GM head guy goes media to brag they paid the loan back....by borrowing from one card to pay the other.
41K ???? what demographic is targeted to buy this limited use car that takes 3hrs to recharge.
The tiny Volt at 41K makes a great case for dropping a LSx engine with EFI and o/d trans in a 65 chevelle.
As a lifelong GM customer I wouldn't spend another dime to enable their handlers to claim bragging rights to ressurecting a now emasculated automotive giant.
Remember Obama received a Nobel Peace prize. Arafat was man of the year. That was the beginning of established institutions and news media turning to mush in an attempt to appease the new world order. Motor Trend now walks among the emasculated and evicerated as it rolls over to please the powers that be.
All these flat earth types seem to despise anything that leans forward, even if it is in it's infancy. I don't understand the mindset myself. Why such animosity anyway?
Because neither the government or the auto industry is serious about this. They WANT you to use MORE electricity making the electricity industry more money. How do I know this? That's easy. If they were really serious about this, why isn't there solar panels on the roof and trunk lid to recharge the battery when the car is parked? How come there aren't alternators built into the wheels that recharge the battery as they turn? Why weren't these ideas put into it? TO MAKE YOU PAY FOR THE RECHARGING! To create a demand for GE's CHARGE STATIONS. It's all about washing each others hands to make each other richer.
Amen to that, and that's been the case for many decades.
I still consider this car to be DOA; it's way too small and way too expensive, and the model showing the car at the Auto Show here in LA last weeks stated that modifying the electrical wiring of a house in order to recharge this car properly would cost $2,500.00 or thereabouts.
I'll pass.
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.
Yasser Arafat, Al gore, Obama and the volt....
