The General Car Thread - The Facelift.

[The Two Jerseys]

This is just a thought experiment.
Imagine you're 17 and your parents will buy you a nice car. Nothing crazy and hard to insure like a Mustang GT or a jacked-up Ram 1500. What do you go for?
Personally, I'd pick a Mazda 6 Grand Touring. Looks good, fun to drive, good mix of features and affordability.

Any of these

My cars are on the list, kinda. It says Ford Crown Victoria, but I have a Mercury Grand Marquis.

How on earth do they figure that everyone thinking you're a cop is a con for the Crown Vic? People will get out of your way!

Plus we all know the 4th gen Caprice is better anyway.

[NeoOasis]

This is just a thought experiment.
Imagine you're 17 and your parents will buy you a nice car. Nothing crazy and hard to insure like a Mustang GT or a jacked-up Ram 1500. What do you go for?
Personally, I'd pick a Mazda 6 Grand Touring. Looks good, fun to drive, good mix of features and affordability.

A Subaru BR-Z or WRX to be honest. Cheap, cheerful, and fun. Still thinking about buying myself a WRX 15 years on.

[Auzkhia]

Any of these

My cars are on the list, kinda. It says Ford Crown Victoria, but I have a Mercury Grand Marquis.

How on earth do they figure that everyone thinking you're a cop is a con for the Crown Vic? People will get out of your way!

Plus we all know the 4th gen Caprice is better anyway.

They'll go slow around you. Though kids these might be driving around their parents' Explorers, which are the new cop cars.

Australian Caprice, though

[Petrolheadia]

So this morning I saw a 3rd gen Mercury Capri. I don't think I've even seen a Capri before...

I remember seeing one sit on a dealer's lot for a while near me. I'd seriously buy one, tbh.

Also, I saw two Mustang II cars today.

I once saw a Mustang II bodyshell in someone's yard in southeastern Poland.

This is just a thought experiment.
Imagine you're 17 and your parents will buy you a nice car. Nothing crazy and hard to insure like a Mustang GT or a jacked-up Ram 1500. What do you go for?
Personally, I'd pick a Mazda 6 Grand Touring. Looks good, fun to drive, good mix of features and affordability.

I don't know, I've got a budget for a not-so-nice car and that's what I'm looking for. Currently looking at 90s automatic Benzes.

In terms of "nice cars" for a slightly-above-average price, this 2007 BMW 530d wagon seems kinda nice.

Also, how much more than an average car's price is a "nice car's" one?

[Elwher]

This is just a thought experiment.
Imagine you're 17 and your parents will buy you a nice car. Nothing crazy and hard to insure like a Mustang GT or a jacked-up Ram 1500. What do you go for?
Personally, I'd pick a Mazda 6 Grand Touring. Looks good, fun to drive, good mix of features and affordability.

If we are going for me as 17 now, Mazda Miata, Nissan 370Z, or to get outrageous, BMW i8.

If we are talking about when I was 17(1969), Triumph TR6, MGB, MG Midget come to mind.

[Costa Fierro]

The year is 2010 and my answer would be a Golf GTi.

[Petrolheadia]

Also, I found some more interesting cars in the average "nice for a first car, even automatic" price range:

- 2004 BMW Z4,

- 1990 Jag XJ12,

- 1974 Dodge Dart Brougham.

If "nice car" means "somewhere around the 10th percentile for price", I found a somewhat endearing 2007 S-Class. Even if I don't like the color, and it's a V6.

And besides it, I saw an Excalibur'd 1987 Town Car limo and a KTM X-Bow.

[Lamborghini Aventador]

let's do manual trans

[Elwher]

Also, I found some more interesting cars in the average "nice for a first car, even automatic" price range:

- 2004 BMW Z4,

- 1990 Jag XJ12,

- 1974 Dodge Dart Brougham.

If "nice car" means "somewhere around the 10th percentile for price", I found a somewhat endearing 2007 S-Class. Even if I don't like the color, and it's a V6.

And besides it, I saw an Excalibur'd 1987 Town Car limo and a KTM X-Bow.

Love the BMW, and under $6,000 USD is a good price. Too bad it's a) in Poland and b) an automatic. Seems sinful to have that in such a vehicle.

[Petrolheadia]

What cars are the motoring equivalent of what certain musicians or bands are in the world of music?

I'll start off:

- AC/DC is the Mazda MX-5 of music. Commercially successful for its sort, popular among beginners and often seen as something low-level. Had a string of what the fans may not necessarily call their best material, but then managed to rebound.

- The Rolling Stones are the BMW 3-Series. Both have a variety of options for different listeners/drivers, have spent quite a lot of time on the more purist side, whether soft or hard, and aren't going anywhere despite their age.

- Humble Pie are performance RWD fullsize Holdens (e.g. HSV versions of the Commodore). Loved by the fans and achieved quite the level of competence, but ultimately gone due to external factors.

- Keith Moon's solo career (or simply his lone album Two Sides of the Moon) is the Triumph Stag of music. You would have expected a lot more competence from a known name like this. However, a mix of having the wrong focus and really big, somewhat foreseeable, trouble during development made for something that wasn't what one could expect. There was going to be a follow-up, but outside trouble prevented it.

[Cannot think of a name]

When custom vans ruled the land...

[Novus America]

Frankly manuals are grossly overrated for a daily driver.
They are fun on the open highway but get very annoying in city driving and traffic.

Plus modern automatics get similar or superior performance.

They are not the old slush boxes.

Some sort of hybrid is best. Manual (but no clutch or stalling) when you want it, but automatic for traffic and slow driving.

[Oyada]

This is just a thought experiment.
Imagine you're 17 and your parents will buy you a nice car. Nothing crazy and hard to insure like a Mustang GT or a jacked-up Ram 1500. What do you go for?
Personally, I'd pick a Mazda 6 Grand Touring. Looks good, fun to drive, good mix of features and affordability.

Me? Well, the year would be 2004 and I'd probably want a Ford Capri. I lusted after the Capri; a chap down the road from us had one in that odd diarrhoea brown the 1970s was so fond of. That, or a Sierra Cosworth; those things were astonishingly fast and pretty roomy cars. Unfortunately, they were also very easy to nick.

Realistically, they'd have found be a slightly ropey but functional two-door econobox to potter about in until I totalled it or something vital died. Probably a Ford Ka.

Frankly manuals are grossly overrated for a daily driver.
They are fun on the open highway but get very annoying in city driving and traffic.

Plus modern automatics get similar or superior performance.

They are not the old slush boxes.

Some sort of hybrid is best. Manual (but no clutch or stalling) when you want it, but automatic for traffic and slow driving.

I don't see the logic. The one place a manual box makes no odds is on the open road, because you generally shove it up into top gear and leave it there until you're forced to slow down. If I'm doing the 90-mile run home, I'll spend about 70 miles of that in 5th gear if the road's clear.

The virtue of the manual box lies in simplicity, reduced initial cost, and enhanced driver control (for those rare occasions when an automatic still can't get the gear selection right). It's also quite satisfying when you get a gear change (especially 1st to 2nd) just right. That apart, agreed regarding practical use.

[Cappuccina]

Automatics should really stay with pleb moblies like vans and SUVs, they don't belong in sports cars. Sports cars aren't supposed to be comfortable or accommodating, I say with high performance cars the car isn't supposed to acclimate to you, you're supposed to acclimate to it.

[Novus America]

This is just a thought experiment.
Imagine you're 17 and your parents will buy you a nice car. Nothing crazy and hard to insure like a Mustang GT or a jacked-up Ram 1500. What do you go for?
Personally, I'd pick a Mazda 6 Grand Touring. Looks good, fun to drive, good mix of features and affordability.

Me? Well, the year would be 2004 and I'd probably want a Ford Capri. I lusted after the Capri; a chap down the road from us had one in that odd diarrhoea brown the 1970s was so fond of. That, or a Sierra Cosworth; those things were astonishingly fast and pretty roomy cars. Unfortunately, they were also very easy to nick.

Realistically, they'd have found be a slightly ropey but functional two-door econobox to potter about in until I totalled it or something vital died. Probably a Ford Ka.

Frankly manuals are grossly overrated for a daily driver.
They are fun on the open highway but get very annoying in city driving and traffic.

Plus modern automatics get similar or superior performance.

They are not the old slush boxes.

Some sort of hybrid is best. Manual (but no clutch or stalling) when you want it, but automatic for traffic and slow driving.

I don't see the logic. The one place a manual box makes no odds is on the open road, because you generally shove it up into top gear and leave it there until you're forced to slow down. If I'm doing the 90-mile run home, I'll spend about 70 miles of that in 5th gear if the road's clear.

The virtue of the manual box lies in simplicity, reduced initial cost, and enhanced driver control (for those rare occasions when an automatic still can't get the gear selection right). It's also quite satisfying when you get a gear change (especially 1st to 2nd) just right. That apart, agreed regarding practical use.

Well it is must fun accelerating into a highway. Or taking of from a light on those roads that have lights but a high limit.

Slogging through stop and go traffic with a manual gets old fast though.

And it most us cars it does not save you much if any money.

[Novus America]

Automatics should really stay with pleb moblies like vans and SUVs, they don't belong in sports cars. Sports cars aren't supposed to be comfortable or accommodating, I say with high performance cars the car isn't supposed to acclimate to you, you're supposed to acclimate to it.

Actually though modern automatics can outperform manuals.
So if performance is the idea, manuals are actually often now inferior.

[Cannot think of a name]

Hot take: Buy the transmission you like and gives you pleasure 'cause you're the one driving your car.

[Cappuccina]

Automatics should really stay with pleb moblies like vans and SUVs, they don't belong in sports cars. Sports cars aren't supposed to be comfortable or accommodating, I say with high performance cars the car isn't supposed to acclimate to you, you're supposed to acclimate to it.

Actually though modern automatics can outperform manuals.
So if performance is the idea, manuals are actually often now inferior.

Sports cars aren't about efficiency, necessarily, but the experience. Yes, modern automatics aren't the slushboxes of the past and are quite good, but they can't replace the feel of an old fashioned 5 speed.

[Cannot think of a name]

In a twist, a car that is listed as a 'project' where the term isn't a euphemism for "A pile of rust with a VIN attached" but a car that just needs a refresh. I mean, it's still a project since you have to rebuild the heads and all the normal rot parts like rubber and brake stuff, but it's a doable project not a 'what the fuck are you thinking' project.

[NeoOasis]

Actually though modern automatics can outperform manuals.
So if performance is the idea, manuals are actually often now inferior.

Sports cars aren't about efficiency, necessarily, but the experience. Yes, modern automatics aren't the slushboxes of the past and are quite good, but they can't replace the feel of an old fashioned 5 speed.

Last I heard, modern sports cars are about competence and speed. Manual uptake rates reflect this. You can go faster and do it more consistenly in a self shifting sports car, and the increased fuel economy is just an added bonus. And as far as comfortable and accommodating goes... I disagree. All cars regardless of purpose should have a modicum of comfort and usablility. Otherwise why would I drive it? If I'm buying any car, it'll be driven daily, and I won't find myself in a iron maiden, manual or not.

And honestly I question the feel of an old fashioned 5 speed. Since manual transmissions are often an after thought on modern cars, the manual transmission is a dog to use and enjoy half the time. Not every automaker is Honda, and not every automaker can be arsed to make a manual as good as Honda's...

The reasons for manual transmissions these days are more emotional than practical. The strides made with automatic transmissions really puts manuals at a disadvantage in everything but simplicity and price. Despite that I'll still have my next car as a manual simply because that's what I like. (should be harder to steal as well)

[Novus America]

In a twist, a car that is listed as a 'project' where the term isn't a euphemism for "A pile of rust with a VIN attached" but a car that just needs a refresh. I mean, it's still a project since you have to rebuild the heads and all the normal rot parts like rubber and brake stuff, but it's a doable project not a 'what the fuck are you thinking' project.

Yes, a legitimate project car for once. Needs work but is still a gorgeous vehicle with potential.
Obviously you still need an engine rebuild or swap which is a serious project but doable.

Not the “combine this and a show car and you (almost) have enough parts for one car” garbage.

[Cappuccina]

Sports cars aren't about efficiency, necessarily, but the experience. Yes, modern automatics aren't the slushboxes of the past and are quite good, but they can't replace the feel of an old fashioned 5 speed.

Last I heard, modern sports cars are about competence and speed. Manual uptake rates reflect this. You can go faster and do it more consistenly in a self shifting sports car, and the increased fuel economy is just an added bonus. And as far as comfortable and accommodating goes... I disagree. All cars regardless of purpose should have a modicum of comfort and usablility. Otherwise why would I drive it? If I'm buying any car, it'll be driven daily, and I won't find myself in a iron maiden, manual or not.

And honestly I question the feel of an old fashioned 5 speed. Since manual transmissions are often an after thought on modern cars, the manual transmission is a dog to use and enjoy half the time. Not every automaker is Honda, and not every automaker can be arsed to make a manual as good as Honda's...

The reasons for manual transmissions these days are more emotional than practical. The strides made with automatic transmissions really puts manuals at a disadvantage in everything but simplicity and price. Despite that I'll still have my next car as a manual simply because that's what I like. (should be harder to steal as well)

Performance cars aren't supposed to be practical.

In my opinion modern sports cars have gone too far from their roots, there aren't many I'd actually car a sports car, most are just grand tourers. They're too big, too heavy, too cushie. My heart goes to the more Spartan cars, no a/c, no heat, manual, rough ride, no electronics, just a sexy car that looks good, sounds good, and and is an event everytime you're behind the wheel. Modern cars in general have more in common with smartphone than an automobile.

[Petrolheadia]

Last I heard, modern sports cars are about competence and speed. Manual uptake rates reflect this. You can go faster and do it more consistenly in a self shifting sports car, and the increased fuel economy is just an added bonus. And as far as comfortable and accommodating goes... I disagree. All cars regardless of purpose should have a modicum of comfort and usablility. Otherwise why would I drive it? If I'm buying any car, it'll be driven daily, and I won't find myself in a iron maiden, manual or not.

And honestly I question the feel of an old fashioned 5 speed. Since manual transmissions are often an after thought on modern cars, the manual transmission is a dog to use and enjoy half the time. Not every automaker is Honda, and not every automaker can be arsed to make a manual as good as Honda's...

The reasons for manual transmissions these days are more emotional than practical. The strides made with automatic transmissions really puts manuals at a disadvantage in everything but simplicity and price. Despite that I'll still have my next car as a manual simply because that's what I like. (should be harder to steal as well)

Performance cars aren't supposed to be practical.

In my opinion modern sports cars have gone too far from their roots, there aren't many I'd actually car a sports car, most are just grand tourers. They're too big, too heavy, too cushie. My heart goes to the more Spartan cars, no a/c, no heat, manual, rough ride, no electronics, just a sexy car that looks good, sounds good, and and is an event everytime you're behind the wheel. Modern cars in general have more in common with smartphone than an automobile.

Have you ever actaully bought a sports car?

Because when people put that much money down on a car (even the cheapest sports cars cost as much as a Ford Focus), they prefer not to have a one-trick-pony. And I don't think something like a new 911, F-Type or 812 Superfast isn't an event.

[NeoOasis]

Performance cars aren't supposed to be practical.

In my opinion modern sports cars have gone too far from their roots, there aren't many I'd actually car a sports car, most are just grand tourers. They're too big, too heavy, too cushie. My heart goes to the more Spartan cars, no a/c, no heat, manual, rough ride, no electronics, just a sexy car that looks good, sounds good, and and is an event everytime you're behind the wheel. Modern cars in general have more in common with smartphone than an automobile.

There's practical, not practical, and then there's useless. Ignoring all safety tech, most cars have AC, heating, better ride, and electronics because people won't buy it otherwise. At the end of the day modern sports cars don't require the compromise to go fast and have fun. You can have your cake and eat it. As someone who lived in Alabama, and currently lives in Japan... a heater and AC aren't luxuries, but requirements.

Fact is modern advancements have shifted the paradigm, and today's family sedans can out perform yesterday's super cars without any troubles. I'm happy where we are right now, not so happy with where we're going.

[Cappuccina]

Performance cars aren't supposed to be practical.

In my opinion modern sports cars have gone too far from their roots, there aren't many I'd actually car a sports car, most are just grand tourers. They're too big, too heavy, too cushie. My heart goes to the more Spartan cars, no a/c, no heat, manual, rough ride, no electronics, just a sexy car that looks good, sounds good, and and is an event everytime you're behind the wheel. Modern cars in general have more in common with smartphone than an automobile.

Have you ever actaully bought a sports car?

Because when people put that much money down on a car (even the cheapest sports cars cost as much as a Ford Focus), they prefer not to have a one-trick-pony. And I don't think something like a new 911, F-Type or 812 Superfast isn't an event.

I've bought, owned several, and still own sports cars of various types and styles. All older cars of course.

I just don't enjoy modern cars, I loathe the majority of them to be frank. I like having a sports car not a Swiss army knife. I don't need or want infotainment, or a million buttons, or ridiculous reverse cameras.