Hot Rod Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Monster Mouse 436
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
is it some kind of law keeping hi milage cars from looking good? why cant they make a prius-milage sporty looking car and still be less that 18k?
 

·
Member# 3287
Joined
·
2,625 Posts
I think he's asking why the new high mpg cars are so ugly and so expensive.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
18,396 Posts
For years, they were saying it was aerodynamics...............but now they are getting big and boxy again.................but still UUUUUUGGGLLLYYYYYYYYYY
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
584 Posts
#1 reason why I stay away from newer model cars is this simple fact..






I could onnnnn and onnnn just to show how many hideous cars there are but I think I'll just stop.. :pain: :pain:
 

·
russlaferrera
Joined
·
203 Posts
stupid manufactures

Classix Lover, The Honda (Red & black on the bottom) is the new "07 rat rod" They make them to look ratty so years from now they will have a head start...russ
 

·
Home School Valedictorian
Joined
·
1,639 Posts
If they made the economy cars sporty looking you would drive it with your foot to the floor = bad mileage. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,189 Posts
Our US brand cars, and particularly trucks, are all falling into the influence of the Nipponese School of Design for cartoon vehicles. Huge plastic panels that will be rotten sunbaked shreds in 10 years, flat edged wheel pockets, dump-nosed funky monkey grilles, big ghetto wheels with little rubberband ghetto tires, and all the weird angularity possible in the world. Hey, cheap and high MPG isn't the only thing that spells U-G-L-Y.

We have the PT Cruiser and the HHR which are the ONLY decent looking entry level relatively good MPG vehicles in the field at all. And they are based on old designs made new, the 37 Chrysler and the the 47-54 Suburban respectively.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
pasadenahotrod said:
We have the PT Cruiser and the HHR which are the ONLY decent looking entry level relatively good MPG vehicles in the field at all. And they are based on old designs made new, the 37 Chrysler and the the 47-54 Suburban respectively.
Wouldn't you just love to see a remake of the '57 Nomad? Or maybe the '53 Vette? I've been hoping like crazy that Ford would remake the '32 Coupe or Roadster. Hell, even a Nash Metropolitan with a modern fuel injected 4-banger would be cool - I mean, look what they did with the Mini Cooper.

We're coming up on the 100 year anniversary for a lot of good car brands (some have already come and gone) and it would be nice to see some of the carmakers revisit some of these old designs - engineered for today of course...

Yeah, I know Ford had done the Mustang and T-Bird (love 'em both) and, as you said, there's the PT Cruiser and the HHR (let's not forget the Plymouth Prowler and Chevy SSR - would still love to see an SSR done like the Rod & Custom Dream Truck - see pic below,) but there were some fantastic designs over the years that deserve to be revisited. I mean, wouldn't you line up to test drive a remake of a '53 Studebaker if it was based on a Corvette C-5 type chassis, and had a LS-6 for a powerplant?

I know - I'm dreaming....


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,189 Posts
The reason the Tbird is a dead dog is becasue it was based on the Lincoln LS platform and overpriced.
The SSR has the same problem. Chevy dealers are stuck with them by the factory, sales or no sales. There are dealers in the Houston area that use them for parts chasers and go get lunch vehicles.
We were talking about decent looking entry level vehicles, not factory musclecars with $40-70K price tags.

I'm much more pleased to 1000s of Beetles and HHRs and PT Cruisers running around than the once a month sighting of a Tbird, SSR, Prowler or other rich man's toy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
You're right. I got involved in the design aspect and forgot about the original post - less than $18K. I really don't know what the new Mini is going for, but it would seem to me it wouldn't be considered a "rich man's toy."

Still, take my other example - think about an updated version of the Nash Metro. How about a Rambler American? I'm just tossing out names here, but you get my drift. A classic design, redone for the 21st century, that wouldn't require a second mortgage to get into. The success of the PT Cruiser, Mini, and the New Beetle certainly established the fact that there is a demand for these types of cars.

I agree the SSR was a total disaster - then again so were a lot of vehicles that came out of Detroit. Remember the Aztek? I won't even bring up the EV1...

I do agree, however, that the carmakers are looking in the wrong direction. It appears the new Camaro and Challenger are taking center stage, and you just know neither of those are going to be offered for anything even near $18K. I don't know haw many Vipers or Ford GTs are sold in any given year, but it certainly can't compare to the number of cars that could be sold if they took a design like the '64 Dart or '63 Falcon and target it toward the 20 - 35 year old looking for a dependable, fun car to cruise around in.

Still, my '53 Stude idea would sure be neat... :thumbup:
 

·
Member - AMC/Rambler "guru"
Joined
·
1,771 Posts
If Chrysler came out with a new Rambler American it really would be neat!

Back in 1955 Nash stopped producing the 100" wheelbase Rambler. All 1956-57 Ramblers used a 108" wheelbase. In 1958 AMC reintroduced the 100" wheelbase Rambler as the Rambler American. It was basically a slightly modified 1955 Nash Rambler! They literally pulled the old dies out, modified the hood and a few other things (like cut the wheel openings out) and started making the old car again! This is the only time in US auto maker history that an old model was reintroduced later as a "new" model. I'm not talking about resurrected names, but the actual car!

Of course Chrysler would never do anything like that, but a car that had some of the styling cues of the now becoming popular 58-60 American (and 50-55 Nash Rambler) could be produced with the same name. It would, in a way, be the THIRD resurrection of the car. The 58 American, by the way, is partially credited with "saving" AMC. At the time they were cash strapped after the Nash/Hudson merger and poor selling big cars. The Rambler was selling well, so they dropped the Nash & Hudson names and reintroduced the smaller Rambler to be sold alongside the bigger model and a new longer wheelbase Ambassador (which was originally to be the Nash Ambassador with a Hudson Hornet version). The US was starting into a recession in 1958 -- AMC was the only company to make money that year because they had a full line of mostly economical cars (the Ambo had a 327 that got about what similar sized cars/engines from other makers did -- 12-15 mpg on the highway).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,622 Posts
My Wife refers to Cars like that Honda and the Avalanche (that have "Plastic" looking Fenders that are Gray and such) as "Luggage" because they look like a piece of Samsonite-
 

·
Hotrodders.com moderator
Joined
·
9,581 Posts
Ford Focus

Well heavens I needed something late model that I could drive and not lose all my HotRod cred..

I bought a Ford Focus..So far so good works for me..there is quite a bit of stuff available from Ford Performance for these things including a blower kit and handling packages springs/shocks etc. Runs pretty decent and handles well according to my seat of the pants feelings..No actual time slips as yet,,

Less than 18k and gets 35/40 mpg in my normal driving..Is it "perfect"? well no but it was not the price of some of the other choices out there either..

Sam
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts

·
Member - AMC/Rambler "guru"
Joined
·
1,771 Posts
Redo of the Hudson Hornet? Hey, that could be done on the Chrysler Magnum/300 platform, or a lowered Pacifica/Grand Cherokee pan!!

The main reason the real high-mileage cars, especially hybrids, cost so much is the technology involved. Toyota loses a bit on every Prius they sell, but it draws people in the showrooms and gives them a good feeling about Toyota in general, so it pays off in the long run. To get high mileage in a cheap car takes a stick shift. I have no problem with that, but Mr/Miss Average American does!! My 19 year old daughter wants to learn to drive a stick, and I fleetingly though about it when I replaced her old Toyota Corolla this week (210K and still running good -- oil light came on while I was driving it though, probably just a worn out sending unit but... $2K car bought 2.5 years ago...). But I don't want her driving in traffic back and forth to school just learning to drive a stick. To much traffic here in Dover, DE!

Cars are more of an appliance to Americans, especially cheap ones, than a driving experience. Americans drive because they have to -- it's a big, spread out country. Only the biggest cities really benefit from mass transportation. You could live in a mid sized city in Europe and never own a car! It can be done in large cities in the US -- I know a guy in Los Angeles that does it. He still drives -- he rents a car 3-4 times a year for a weekend or week at a time when he needs to go where public trans can't take him. But the average American family living in the suburbs just can't do that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,189 Posts
Basically and politically incorrectly, the biggest market for those expensive uglymobiles with "greenie" approval is women and effeminate men and their life partners or significant others. This demographic group generally has no idea when it comes to automotive styling but they can furnish a really nice apartment and make a yard look like heaven!!
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top