Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Classic Cars I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today!
18064 messages, Last post on Dec 08, 2009 at 6:13 PM
You are in the Classic Cars Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (May 24, 2008 4:17 am) 
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (May 24, 2008 4:17 am) Still, compared to a '58 Buick or Olds, I think the Pontiac was the best looking of that trio. Heck, if I had money to burn, I'd take it! Seems like it sold for a fairly reasonable price, too. I know '58 is considered a low point for Detroit styling, but in the GM lineup, I think the only real offenders are Olds and Buick. The Pontiac seems reasonable to me, and I find the '58 Chevy and Cadillac to be attractive.
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (May 24, 2008 4:55 am) Speaking of obscure cars, I received an excited call from a friend about 0730 this morning - he was driving through Olympia WA and claimed he was driving beside a Tucker. I know the LeMay museum in Tacoma has a Tucker, a blue one...my friend said the one he saw was a light yellow. He said it had collector plates, so I guess it shouldn't be a fake. Seeing a Tucker on the road has to be pretty unusual. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (May 24, 2008 4:55 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 24, 2008 9:03 am)  Although, maybe some GM or Ford spies spiked the water coolers at the Chrysler design studios around that time. That might explain the 1961 Mopars. I always looked at 1961 to Chrysler as what 1959 was to everybody else.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (May 24, 2008 9:10 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 24, 2008 9:21 am) Standard engine was a 370 V-8, that put out 255 hp wit the manual shift, 285 with the automatic. Next up was 300 hp, but it took Tri-Power to get there. And it took fuel injection to get to 310. That just doesn't sound that impressive to me, for a brand that was supposed to be transforming into GM's performance division. Heck, DeSoto was getting 280/295 hp out of the 350-2/350-4bbl, and 295/305 out of the 361-2/361-4bbls. And with the hotter engines, it was 345 with dual quads and 355 with fuel injection. Not trying to build DeSoto up here, but I just happened to know those numbers, without having to look 'em up, so I figure it's as good of a reference point as any.  Just out of curiosity, what is usually a better setup...three two barrels or dual quads? |
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 24, 2008 9:21 am) 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: texases (May 24, 2008 11:43 am) I don't see 2-4s as very practical. a 3 X 2 setup can be very nice if you dial it in right, for everyday driving. I can't see 2 X 4 unless you have a really radical engine that can consume that level of fuel all at once. |
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (May 24, 2008 9:10 am)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Classic Cars I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today!
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
