J.P.

Lincoln Mark VIII was ahead of its time it seemed....

But the Lincoln Continental Mark VII was straight gangsta, that one I wish was back.

mmarshall

You may be overestimating the tendency of the Genesis rotary engine to fail. Earlier versions had the tendency to use oil excessively and wear out the apex-tip seals (the equivalent of piston-rings in a conventional engine), but the Genesis rotary in the V8 was much-improved. Its only significant problem was an lack of low-RPM torque (and worse-than-average oil consumption).

I agree that the Fleetwood Brougham and Roadmaster were nice to drive (more cars today should ride that smoothly), but, aside from the strong body-on-frame chassis, I didn't think either was particularly well-built, and had a poor reliability records. Oddly, for some reason, though built on the same platform, the Fleetwood seemed to handle a little better than the Roadmaster, which rolled like a beach ball and squealed its tires on corners at absurdly low speeds.

bagwell

+1 !!!!


no go on #4 and #6

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

Assuming you mean Charger? Challenger is already a two door

mmarshall

Though physically much smaller than the old SS, a new one with V8 and RWD is on the way...essentially an updated version of the old Holden/Pontiac G8 GT with a Chevy body/trim. It will be on the American market shortly, and may be available at some Chevy shops now.

mmarshall

What makes you two so Gung-Ho on the old 90s-vintage RX-7? True, its twin-turbo rotary had some spunk (though more HP than torque), and the extremely light weight gave it Miata/Lotus-like handling....I'll admit that. But the car was clearly designed and built of too-light materials. Its body was like a tin can, noisy enough to wake up the dead, and the lightweight aluminum steering/suspension parts underneath were often bent or damaged going over potholes and bad bumps in the road.....mechanics/technicians spent a lot of time repairing them. In addition, of course, the rotary engine had the usual rotary deficiencies in durability, parts-expense, and oil-consumption, though some of those shortcomings were improved in the later Genesis rotary used on the RX-8.

Fly4u

My 1994 SAAB 900 experience harkens straight from automobile hell. OK, possibly the older build "real" SAAB's had merit, but the 1994 vintage tainted by the GM parts bin ranks right down there with my lamentable 1976 Audi 100LS.

mmarshall

Just curious.....seeing that you are a pilot, did you choose a Saab car because of the company's aircraft experience? (Saab Aerospace, of course, builds combat jets and twin-engine turboprop commuter airliners).

You're right, though, that GM both over-Americanized the brand and did rebadged versions of other imports like the Subaru Impreza (9-2X), driving away a number of traditional Saab buyers without gaining a lot of new ones.

You mention the "lamentable" 1976 Audi 100LS. I hope yours was even halfway reliable........too many weren't. Mid-70s-vintage FWD VWs and Audis were notorious for keeping repair shops in work.

Kira X

iTrader: (24)

Yes! I meant the Charger. I don't know why I wrote Challenger.

I don't mind it being smaller. A RWD V8 sedan would be very nice. I heard about that new Chevy SS which looks a lot like the G8 and I like it a lot so far.

cino

iTrader: (1)

Supra Mk5 nuff said!

Aron9000

^ I'll still stand by my opinion of the rotary being a piece of junk in real world, everyday driving applications. There were a TON of recalls on 2004-2006 RX-8's, ranging from bad starters and excessive oil consumption causing the catylitic converter to fail.

Then there was the recall about blown apex seals and motors losing compression. Mazda even put out a "good faith" warranty saying on a case by case basis it would replace up to 8 years/100,000 miles rotary engines with low compression.

As for those old b-body's being unreliable, you're full of crap. I owned two, that 1991 Brougham pictured was A TANK. Drove it from 100k to 150k, it was 17 years old when I bought it. Replaced a sagging headliner, a throttle sensor, a fan blower motor, new rotors/pads/shoes, a pitman arm, and new ball joints. I think that car owed me about $900 in repairs when it was all said and done, I was astounded at how reliable and how cheap that old boat was to keep on the road. It was even "good on gas", I averaged 18mpg, on the highway doing 60-70 it would do 25mpg.

Also had a 1995 Fleetwood, owned it for about 2 years and 10k miles. No problems with that car, but I will agree with you about it being cheaply made. Compared to that 91 the interior was plain, all the chrome and polished stainless bits were chromed plastic, it just didn't feel "special" like my 91.

Fly4u

I first saw the newly-designed 1994 SAAB 900 at an auto show and fell in love with the bodystyle, interior, and perceived quirkiness of the brand. The fact SAAB has an aerospace history was a mild motivator. I test drove a 900SE hatchback at a small combo SAAB/BMW dealership. The experience was notable on two counts: the salesman gave me keys + car and allowed a solo test drive (!) and also suggested I'd be happier with a cross-shopped 3-series BMW . I should have listened..... My scarabe green and taupe leather 5-speed equipped vehicle (still have the Monroney Window sticker) rendered a miserable experience. Without delving into excruciating detail, it was riddled with recalls, poor build quality, nasty torque-steer, and even performed two cases of unintended acceleration. (reported to NHTSA) I dumped it before the second anniversary.

The '76 Audi 100LS was a gift from my parents to replace my first car, a Pinto. I drove it from nearly new to 75K miles and a well deserved final journey to the wrecking yard. Almost everything that could fail did, particularly the electrical system. Only the engine and automatic transmission were reliable. I truly enjoyed the vehicle when it ran well, but such moments were too fleeting. Believe it or not, I recently scored a mint condition owners manual on Ebay..... nostalgia is indeed powerful!

bagwell

IMO, the RX-8 looked way too big/long, didn't handle great, pretty slow too.....but yes, it was quieter than the RX-7 . The RX-7 failed because it was too expensive, not because of anything else...again, just my .02.

Fly4u

I had an '88 RX-7, drove it uneventfully for 3 years. Loved the car, particularly the "riding on rails" chassis dynamics, but not the lamentable choice of automatic* trans! Frankly, this was during my younger years of incrementally increasing vehicle performance and accoutrements; the Mazda replaced a flashy but tepid Subaru XT.

I do recall maintaining a stash of motor-oil in the hatch; seemed to require a quart every 800 miles or so.



*I knew better, but didn't want the hassle of a manual during my commute in often heavy traffic.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

I'd love to see another Integra Type R. The engine was a gem!