The General Car Thread.

[Costa Fierro]

Chrysler is always going to behind Ford and GM, partly because, they've been through so much troubles and they make same mistakes now as they did in the 1970s. If Lee Iacocca didn't buy American Motors, they wouldn't have Jeep, which is basically keeping them alive at this point. Ford and GM are either first or second, or tied, depending on your take on it, Chrysler is perpetually at third. Sure crossover sales will keep them alive, but they will never be as big as Ford and GM, they need small affordable cars that Americans want to buy, or even Australians and New Zealanders too.

The Aus/NZ markets are very similar in that they're largely dominated by what are called "small/medium" pickups. In NZ at least, half of the best selling models for this year alone are pickups and whilst all of them sell for 20-30k less than the Ram does, there's enough grey imports here that there's some demand for a pickup of that size. In fact the only Chrysler car being made past 2016 is the Neon, and I'm not sure the last Neon sold here gave people a good impression of Chrysler vehicles (although the PT Cruiser did somehow sell better).

Curiously enough, Chrysler sells re-badged Lancias in the UK. Lancia isn't in the UK, it's Chrysler for some reason.

Lancia doesn't have a very good reputation in the United Kingdom.

[Auzkhia]

Chrysler is always going to behind Ford and GM, partly because, they've been through so much troubles and they make same mistakes now as they did in the 1970s. If Lee Iacocca didn't buy American Motors, they wouldn't have Jeep, which is basically keeping them alive at this point. Ford and GM are either first or second, or tied, depending on your take on it, Chrysler is perpetually at third. Sure crossover sales will keep them alive, but they will never be as big as Ford and GM, they need small affordable cars that Americans want to buy, or even Australians and New Zealanders too.

The Aus/NZ markets are very similar in that they're largely dominated by what are called "small/medium" pickups. In NZ at least, half of the best selling models for this year alone are pickups and whilst all of them sell for 20-30k less than the Ram does, there's enough grey imports here that there's some demand for a pickup of that size. In fact the only Chrysler car being made past 2016 is the Neon, and I'm not sure the last Neon sold here gave people a good impression of Chrysler vehicles (although the PT Cruiser did somehow sell better).

Curiously enough, Chrysler sells re-badged Lancias in the UK. Lancia isn't in the UK, it's Chrysler for some reason.

Lancia doesn't have a very good reputation in the United Kingdom.

Pickups in America are full sized, or mid-sized. There are no small new ones anymore. It's like being too small is some sort of truck sin. Personally, I like the idea of pickups, but some are just too big, but Aus and NZ have Utes. Which I would have over the conventional pickup truck.
The states do not get the Toyota Hilux, we have the Toyota Tacoma (mid-size) and the Toyota Tundra (full size). The full Ford F150 is the best selling vehicle.

[Republic of Canador]

http://i.imgur.com/B52KxB5.jpg

My car, a 1991 Jeep wrangler. Took the picture today.

Eventually, I want to put a 4 inch lift on it, some mud tires, and get a snorkel.

[Auzkhia]

http://i.imgur.com/B52KxB5.jpg

My car, a 1991 Jeep wrangler. Took the picture today.

Eventually, I want to put a 4 inch lift on it, some mud tires, and get a snorkel.

Is it a Jeep thing and would I not understand it?

[Costa Fierro]

Pickups in America are full sized, or mid-sized. There are no small new ones anymore. It's like being too small is some sort of truck sin. Personally, I like the idea of pickups, but some are just too big, but Aus and NZ have Utes. Which I would have over the conventional pickup truck.

The term "ute" is largely applied to what would be considered small pickups anyway, although it was coined for a car-based utility vehicle. Neither of which are being manufactured anymore so from 2017 onwards, there won't be anything that is sold in Australia or NZ that comes with a V8, as both the 2500 and 3500 models have the 6.7 litre straight six.

The states do not get the Toyota Hilux, we have the Toyota Tacoma (mid-size) and the Toyota Tundra (full size). The full Ford F150 is the best selling vehicle.

America does get the Colorado though, which is largely the same except for some different engines and a new front. And one of the reasons Ford didn't sell the Ranger north of Mexico was that they didn't want to cannibalize base model sales of the F-150. It's possible that the current Ranger which is sold in international markets might be manufactured and sold in the US in the mid-size market, which apparently is seeing strong sales.

[Costa Fierro]

http://i.imgur.com/B52KxB5.jpg

My car, a 1991 Jeep wrangler. Took the picture today.

Eventually, I want to put a 4 inch lift on it, some mud tires, and get a snorkel.

Is it a Jeep thing and would I not understand it?

Nah, people do the same here except with various Toyota Landcruiser models.

[Auzkhia]

Pickups in America are full sized, or mid-sized. There are no small new ones anymore. It's like being too small is some sort of truck sin. Personally, I like the idea of pickups, but some are just too big, but Aus and NZ have Utes. Which I would have over the conventional pickup truck.

The term "ute" is largely applied to what would be considered small pickups anyway, although it was coined for a car-based utility vehicle. Neither of which are being manufactured anymore so from 2017 onwards, there won't be anything that is sold in Australia or NZ that comes with a V8, as both the 2500 and 3500 models have the 6.7 litre straight six.

The states do not get the Toyota Hilux, we have the Toyota Tacoma (mid-size) and the Toyota Tundra (full size). The full Ford F150 is the best selling vehicle.

America does get the Colorado though, which is largely the same except for some different engines and a new front. And one of the reasons Ford didn't sell the Ranger north of Mexico was that they didn't want to cannibalize base model sales of the F-150. It's possible that the current Ranger which is sold in international markets might be manufactured and sold in the US in the mid-size market, which apparently is seeing strong sales.

They brought Chevy Colorado/GMC Canyon back here, but it's pretty much mid size. Ford could bring the Ranger to the states, but again, would be midsize.
Here's the new vs old, Chevrolet Colorado
[img=http://i.imgur.com/Dj6YJKo.jpg]GMC: Midsize Canyon vs Fullsize Sierra[/img]

[Arkinesia]

So I went ostensibly to investigate an SLK and an IS300 at the same lot, ended up looking more closely at a '06 C280 and a Grand Marquis instead.

Don't chuckle…you'd be surprised what you can cook up with a Marquis when you'll have about a $3000 play budget.

[Costa Fierro]

They brought Chevy Colorado/GMC Canyon back here, but it's pretty much mid size. Ford could bring the Ranger to the states, but again, would be midsize.

Which would be good for sales as apparently the segment is booming again. Ford could sell it with a bunch of Ecoboost/Duratorq engines in it, maybe throw on some NA spec stuff and make a killing. Don't forget when they stopped selling the NA Ranger in 2011, Ford still shifted 70,000 units in it's last year of sales.

[Auzkhia]

So I went ostensibly to investigate an SLK and an IS300 at the same lot, ended up looking more closely at a '06 C280 and a Grand Marquis instead.

Don't chuckle…you'd be surprised what you can cook up with a Marquis when you'll have about a $3000 play budget.

Hmmm a W203 or a Panther Body?

Tough choice, no really, If I were I'd be torn. Eh, maybe I lean towards the Mercury Grand Marquis, those things are bulle-proof and cheaper to fix. If it's the LS trim go for it, the GS trim isn't as nice. W203 would handle better and be better on gas, but potential higher repairs could offset depending on the condition, still, not that bad.

The C-class is good, but I'd rather go for a W204 or W202, depending on the model year. Personally I already have a C-class, so I need to check off another box with the Grand Marquis, since I never had a panther body.

[Petrolheadia]

They used to sell the Nitro, the Avenger, Grand Caravan, PT Cruiser and Neon here too. I wonder if they managed to shift a decent amount of stock, would GM and Ford respond given the former is also going to sell the Acadia here rebadged as a Holden?

Chrysler is always going to behind Ford and GM, partly because, they've been through so much troubles and they make same mistakes now as they did in the 1970s. If Lee Iacocca didn't buy American Motors, they wouldn't have Jeep, which is basically keeping them alive at this point. Ford and GM are either first or second, or tied, depending on your take on it, Chrysler is perpetually at third. Sure crossover sales will keep them alive, but they will never be as big as Ford and GM, they need small affordable cars that Americans want to buy, or even Australians and New Zealanders too.

Curiously enough, Chrysler sells re-badged Lancias in the UK. Lancia isn't in the UK, it's Chrysler for some reason.

It doesn't. Chrysler Europe folded in 2014.

http://i.imgur.com/B52KxB5.jpg

My car, a 1991 Jeep wrangler. Took the picture today.

Eventually, I want to put a 4 inch lift on it, some mud tires, and get a snorkel.

Is it a Jeep thing and would I not understand it?

You don't do it in America? These are basic off-road mods!

So I went ostensibly to investigate an SLK and an IS300 at the same lot, ended up looking more closely at a '06 C280 and a Grand Marquis instead.

Don't chuckle…you'd be surprised what you can cook up with a Marquis when you'll have about a $3000 play budget.

C280? No. "2000s Mercedes electronics" is enough of an answer.

And the Grand Marquis is quite a good car, but make sure you have a complete modification plan before you buy it.

[Auzkhia]

Chrysler is always going to behind Ford and GM, partly because, they've been through so much troubles and they make same mistakes now as they did in the 1970s. If Lee Iacocca didn't buy American Motors, they wouldn't have Jeep, which is basically keeping them alive at this point. Ford and GM are either first or second, or tied, depending on your take on it, Chrysler is perpetually at third. Sure crossover sales will keep them alive, but they will never be as big as Ford and GM, they need small affordable cars that Americans want to buy, or even Australians and New Zealanders too.

Curiously enough, Chrysler sells re-badged Lancias in the UK. Lancia isn't in the UK, it's Chrysler for some reason.

It doesn't. Chrysler Europe folded in 2014.

Is it a Jeep thing and would I not understand it?

You don't do it in America? These are basic off-road mods!

So I went ostensibly to investigate an SLK and an IS300 at the same lot, ended up looking more closely at a '06 C280 and a Grand Marquis instead.

Don't chuckle…you'd be surprised what you can cook up with a Marquis when you'll have about a $3000 play budget.

C280? No. "2000s Mercedes electronics" is enough of an answer.

And the Grand Marquis is quite a good car, but make sure you have a complete modification plan before you buy it.

Not anymore, after a quick google search, I knew they did sell the Lancia Ypsilon as a Chrysler, but that was in 2012, before Chrysler was axed in the UK.

[I didnt vote for Trump]

I guess the Fox Body was pretty out of date by the 90's if you aren't even going to compare this crop.

Not really, since it can beat numerous 90s cars, but I ruled those out because they ceased to fulfill Belantica's question that was about EIGHTIES cars. If you want to move onto the 90s, go ahead, but then you are entering into a different universe for all cars, the Mustang included.

Can't be that different because the third generation of mustang was still being sold along side every car I have listed so far.

Is it just me or are these goal posts getting really narrow?

It's just you. Or would you prefer to compare a 1986 Mustang GT to a 2016 BMW M3, or for that matter, a 1962 Trabant?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but there's a world of difference to excluding cars that were being produced in the same era.

Can we look at this four without some completely arbitrary biased system of passes and fails? Sorry, but I can't respect any system where a live rear axle in the 1980s constitutes passable handling for a sports car and 17MPG constitutes passable fuel efficiency, while 0-60 in 8.0 seconds constitutes a fail? Seems we're pretty flexible about where we draw the line, huh? Perhaps a better system of review is needed!

You've never driven a fox body (I assume, or otherwise you wouldn't be so out of touch as to why some people like it), so you don't know what the handling is like or how the live axle affects it.

Actually I have and it really wasn't that impressive, just like every other car of the era slugged with a similar suspension set up. It's rather like driving a bed.

To you IRS is just another check box to get your d*ck hard because "independent" sounds cool.

Yes, obviously nobody could possibly appreciate the benefits of a smooth and stable ride when changing direction on all variety of road cambers. People just read spec sheets and that's that.

Corvairs and Beetles had IRS, and how well did they handle?

Jesus, you've totally disproven my argument. Holy shit. I am wrong. The well documented benefits of IRS are a complete fabrication because the Corvair had it and it sucked! What can man do against such debating prowess?!?

Not to mention a Mustang GT with EFI (86') easily gets 21 mpg with the automatic, 23 with the stick... stock. That's better than many of the other sporty cars suggested with turbo sixes or... bleh, rotaries.

Based on similar ad hoc, unsourced remarks on internet forums it actually still seems to be worse.

The pass fail system isn't that hard - if it's worse than the mustang, it fails, because it's not better. If it's equal to the mustang or moderately better, it passes. No car any of you could come up with is universally better than the fox body in every single way listed there.

So if equal or better grants a pass for these cars then how does the Mustang manage a full list of passes even when it loses out to another car? Is this when you admit your system is tanked?

Is it because they're destitute street bums that can't afford a better car?

God forbid I don't want to spend 20 grand on a 30 year old car that requires $5k in maintenance and repairs every year and would rather have my 80s fun for a reasonable price. Obviously everyone who doesn't want to have their wallets raped by JDM or BMW mechanics is just some street bum with no money (except, apparently, 4-6 grand to buy a mint Mustang.)

Hyperbole aside, I'm yet to have my wallet raped by a Japanese or BMW mechanic.

Or because they live in America? Or because they just want to go fast in straight line on a tight budget?

Well, no shit they live in America. Just as it's difficult and really not worth it to get a JDM sports car in America, it's not worth it to get a Foxbody Mustang in Japan; same for Europe. It ceases to have its commonness, ease of repair, and cheapness advantages outside of the US. That is why it is, rightfully so, not popular outside the USA.

I don't believe anybody ever specified US when the request came through for "WHAT OTHER CAR THOUGH????"

I don't really care, what people buy is entirely up to them.

In which case, why are you so decided on insisting that they are terrible cars and that your ricers and hot hatches are so much better, even though they are much more goddamn expensive and half of them never even made it to America. "People can buy what they want, but they're dumb and obviously poor street bums if they don't have the same exact tastes as me."

Actually chief, you asked what other cars could compare to the mighty fox body mustang and I just happened to give you a list, as per your request. Toys started flying out of the sandpit after that point, but I don't believe I was the one who made that crucial next post in this chain.

[Petrolheadia]

Imagine you are a 60-year-old businessman, living in 1968 Washington D.C. Your previous car, a 1961 Lincoln Continental convertible, served you well, but now looks old and is getting a bit worn. You want to replace it with a normal brand-new 4-door sedan. The options are:
- Lincoln Continental 460 ci,
- Cadillac Sedan de Ville 472 ci hardtop,
- Imperial Crown,
- Mercedes 250S automatic,
- Rover 3500S 3-speed automatic.

Which one would you choose? I'd get the Cadillac.

[RFI]

Imagine you are a 60-year-old businessman, living in 1968 Washington D.C. Your previous car, a 1961 Lincoln Continental convertible, served you well, but now looks old and is getting a bit worn. You want to replace it with a normal brand-new 4-door sedan. The options are:
- Lincoln Continental 460 ci,
- Cadillac Sedan de Ville 472 ci hardtop,
- Imperial Crown,
- Mercedes 250S automatic,
- Rover 3500S 3-speed automatic.

Which one would you choose? I'd get the Cadillac.

I'd shun all those options and I'd get a

Volvo 164

[Petrolheadia]

Imagine you are a 60-year-old businessman, living in 1968 Washington D.C. Your previous car, a 1961 Lincoln Continental convertible, served you well, but now looks old and is getting a bit worn. You want to replace it with a normal brand-new 4-door sedan. The options are:
- Lincoln Continental 460 ci,
- Cadillac Sedan de Ville 472 ci hardtop,
- Imperial Crown,
- Mercedes 250S automatic,
- Rover 3500S 3-speed automatic.

Which one would you choose? I'd get the Cadillac.

I'd shun all those options and I'd get a

Volvo 164

It actually wasn't sold in America in 1968. And the 144 is both too cheap and too slow for that person.

[RFI]

I'd shun all those options and I'd get a

Volvo 164

It actually wasn't sold in America in 1968. And the 144 is both too cheap and too slow for that person.

Rover P5B 3.5 V8 automatic "Coupé" (in fact it had 4 doors) - my grandfather had one of those - power was 160 hp, that is actually more than the 150 hp of the Mercedes - in fact both the engine and the transmission are the same ofthe 3500S

[Petrolheadia]

It actually wasn't sold in America in 1968. And the 144 is both too cheap and too slow for that person.

Rover P5B 3.5 V8 automatic "Coupé" (in fact it had 4 doors) - my grandfather had one of those - power was 160 hp, that is actually more than the 150 hp of the Mercedes - in fact both the engine and the transmission are the same ofthe 3500S

If high power is your main motive, then I have to say all the American cars have at least 350 HP. (Imperial - 350 HP, Lincoln - 365 HP, Cadillac - 375 HP).

And the P5 wasn't sold anymore in 1968 in America.

[Auzkhia]

Imagine you are a 60-year-old businessman, living in 1968 Washington D.C. Your previous car, a 1961 Lincoln Continental convertible, served you well, but now looks old and is getting a bit worn. You want to replace it with a normal brand-new 4-door sedan. The options are:
- Lincoln Continental 460 ci,
- Cadillac Sedan de Ville 472 ci hardtop,
- Imperial Crown,
- Mercedes 250S automatic,
- Rover 3500S 3-speed automatic.

Which one would you choose? I'd get the Cadillac.

The W111 is already a bit out dated around 1968, it's a late 50's design. There was no 250S sedan, 2.5 liter engine was only the coupé and roadster versions, only the 230S

Why not go for a 280SE from the larger and modern W108 platform? It could have a V8 too.

[Belantica]

Imagine you are a 60-year-old businessman, living in 1968 Washington D.C. Your previous car, a 1961 Lincoln Continental convertible, served you well, but now looks old and is getting a bit worn. You want to replace it with a normal brand-new 4-door sedan. The options are:
- Lincoln Continental 460 ci,
- Cadillac Sedan de Ville 472 ci hardtop,
- Imperial Crown,
- Mercedes 250S automatic,
- Rover 3500S 3-speed automatic.

Which one would you choose? I'd get the Cadillac.

I'd go with the Imperial Crown.

[Petrolheadia]

Imagine you are a 60-year-old businessman, living in 1968 Washington D.C. Your previous car, a 1961 Lincoln Continental convertible, served you well, but now looks old and is getting a bit worn. You want to replace it with a normal brand-new 4-door sedan. The options are:
- Lincoln Continental 460 ci,
- Cadillac Sedan de Ville 472 ci hardtop,
- Imperial Crown,
- Mercedes 250S automatic,
- Rover 3500S 3-speed automatic.

Which one would you choose? I'd get the Cadillac.

The W111 is already a bit out dated around 1968, it's a late 50's design. There was no 250S sedan, 2.5 liter engine was only the coupé and roadster versions, only the 230S

Why not go for a 280SE from the larger and modern W108 platform? It could have a V8 too.

Money, dear boy. The 280SE is just a much more expensive car.

[Auzkhia]

The W111 is already a bit out dated around 1968, it's a late 50's design. There was no 250S sedan, 2.5 liter engine was only the coupé and roadster versions, only the 230S

Why not go for a 280SE from the larger and modern W108 platform? It could have a V8 too.

Money, dear boy. The 280SE is just a much more expensive car.

So, it's too expensive? I see, just go to Belgium and pick one up for cheaper. This is before the dealers, that lobbied congress in 1988, imposed the 25 year rule. Still, it would have been a 230S, and would be like an E-class now.

[Petrolheadia]

Money, dear boy. The 280SE is just a much more expensive car.

So, it's too expensive? I see, just go to Belgium and pick one up for cheaper. This is before the dealers, that lobbied congress in 1988, imposed the 25 year rule. Still, it would have been a 230S, and would be like an E-class now.

Not really. While in Belgium it might be cheaper, the import cost would nullify the difference.

[Auzkhia]

New game: Try to find the modern day equivalent of your car, if it is not a 2016 or 2017 year car.

Me: 1999 Mercedes Benz C280 sport with a 2.8 liter NA V6. Polar White exterior, black leather interior, with carbon fibre trim. It might have costed anywhere from $25000 to $30000, adjusted for inflation, $36,273 to $43,529. Which makes sense, because I remember V6 C-classes were around that price. KBB estimates used car like mine is anywhere from 600 to 3000 depending on engine, trims, and condition.

New: 2017 C43 AMG with 3 liter turbo V6, that is also polar white, black leather, and carbon fibre. It comes to $55,520 (I didn't spec up with parking sensors and premium packages because 90's didn't have that), could be $60-63000 depending on specs. Wow, V6 C-class is expensive, and the name is weird, because the W202 C43 AMG had a 4.3 liter V8, but the W205 doesn't. The w205 2017 C300 has a 2 liter turbo 4 cylinder.

[Petrolheadia]

New game: Try to find the modern day equivalent of your car, if it is not a 2016 or 2017 year car.

Me: 1999 Mercedes Benz C280 sport with a 2.8 liter NA V6. Polar White exterior, black leather interior, with carbon fibre trim. It might have costed anywhere from $25000 to $30000, adjusted for inflation, $36,273 to $43,529. Which makes sense, because I remember V6 C-classes were around that price. KBB estimates used car like mine is anywhere from 600 to 3000 depending on engine, trims, and condition.

New: 2017 C43 AMG with 3 liter turbo V6, that is also polar white, black leather, and carbon fibre. It comes to $55,520 (I didn't spec up with parking sensors and premium packages because 90's didn't have that). Wow, V6 C-class is expensive, and the name is weird, because the W202 C43 AMG had a 4.3 liter V8, but the W205 doesn't. The w205 2017 C300 has a 2 liter turbo 4 cylinder.

I don't think the cylinder number is the important thing here. The more important thing is where the car places in the range. Your car matches better with the C300.

And I have no car yet, although the best match for my dad's Corolla is a 2017 1.4 diesel manual midrange Corolla in silver.

I have a better idea: find the car that is the modern equivalent of your first car, or, if you are on your first car or have no car yet, the modern equivalent of your dad's first car.

In my dad's case, the 1997 Nissan Almera sedan with an 83 HP 1.5 and a manual would be matched by a Toyota Corolla (as the Nissan Pulsar has no sedan version) 1.6 petrol manual sedan in silver.