Sign In Join 



Project Cars--You Get to Vote on "Hold 'em or Fold 'em"

19412 messages,  Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 3:45 PM

You are in the Classic Cars Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright

What is this discussion about? Classic Cars


Messages Page 1624 of 1942
1
...
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
...
1942
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#16227 of 19412
Re: I don't know (lokki) by hpmctorque
Dec 27, 2008 (7:01 am)
Reply
"...not really a bad car solid and reliable..."
 
It's interesting that your Citation was reliable. Ours had some solid attributes (roomy, with good handling and performance for its day, for example), but reliability wasn't one of them. How many miles did your Citation have when you got rid of it?
#16228 of 19412
Re: I don't know [lokki] by uplanderguy
Dec 27, 2008 (7:18 am)
Reply

Replying to: lokki (Dec 27, 2008 6:46 am)

That's an '81 or later X11. The '80 didn't have the huge graphic, but had a stripe running down the side there, and chrome wheel opening moldings. The Club Coupe body style was somewhat of a notchback design, with a separate trunk, too. You hardly ever saw them.
 
I gave serious consideration to buying a new '85 Citation II X11 but ordered a Celebrity Eurosport two-door with the MPI V6 instead. I knew they were going to be discontinued and would take a hit on resale value. The X11 was essentially the same car mechanically but was cheaper to buy and could be had with a stick shift, unlike the V6 Celebrity. Sort-of wish I had bought one. The '85 Citation II had a one-year only dash design that was an improvement on the '80-'84, IMHO.
 
Bill
#16229 of 19412
Re: I don't know (lokki) [hpmctorque] by lokki
Dec 27, 2008 (8:18 am)
Reply

Replying to: hpmctorque (Dec 27, 2008 7:01 am)

It's interesting that your Citation was reliable. Ours had some solid attributes (roomy, with good handling and performance for its day, for example), but reliability wasn't one of them. How many miles did your Citation have when you got rid of it?
 
Ahhhh.... I didn't OWN it.... it was a company car... so I didn't even do the maintenance. I had it for a year... maybe 5 or 6 k miles only since I only used it at my office. I guess reliable is a relative term.. I never had anything give me a problem while I was drving it... not true in the !#%!% K-car.
 
That was a noisy, rough, slapped together POS. It was dying lemon yellow too.
 
The Citation was a lot better ride in comparison.
#16230 of 19412
Re: Great! [uplanderguy] by lemko
Dec 27, 2008 (11:14 am)
Reply

Replying to: uplanderguy (Dec 27, 2008 3:10 am)

Didn't the Sport Coupe have a concave rear window? My Uncle Daniel had a really nice dark blue 1970 Chevrolet Impala Custom that had the concave rear window. I really like the front end of the 1971 Chevrolet Impala/Caprice because it resembles a 1969-70 Cadillac.
#16231 of 19412
Re: Great! [lemko] by uplanderguy
Dec 27, 2008 (12:01 pm)
Reply

Replying to: lemko (Dec 27, 2008 11:14 am)

The Custom Coupe (not an Impala trim level, just the formal top with concave back window) looked great; but in '71 and later, the Sport Coupe (fastback) to me didn't look nearly as good as the Custom Coupe.
 
I like the front end of the '72 Chevrolet for the same reason you like the '71, but I like the '71's wide rocker moldings versus no rocker moldings on '72 Impalas.
 
A friend when I was a teen, had both '70 and '71 Impalas in their driveway. Although the '71 looked more Cadillac-like, I do remember him saying that the '70 was so much more solid. I know the '70's interiors were way nicer; no flat black plastic, black steering wheels, and hard plastic lower interior door panels like the '71.
 
Bill
#16232 of 19412
Re: I don't know (lokki) by hpmctorque
Dec 27, 2008 (9:05 pm)
Reply
I'm guessing that your K-car was an early pre-fuel injected one (81-'84?). Those carburated ones were awful, in terms of driveability. Fuel injection fixed the stalling and related problems, but I agree that the GM X-cars drove, rode and steered better than the Chrysler K-Cars.
 
As long as we're talking about Detroit disasters, we shouldn't forget the Ford twins, Tempo and Topaz. These were introduced in the '84 model year, so ford had some time to do a better job than GM and Chrysler, but I'm not sure where these ranked compared with their GM and Chrysler counterparts. Does anyone have an opinion on this?
#16233 of 19412
Re: I don't know (lokki) [hpmctorque] by texases
Dec 27, 2008 (10:48 pm)
Reply

Replying to: hpmctorque (Dec 27, 2008 9:05 pm)

Well, the Tempo/Topaz were not terrible...my FIL had one for a few years, nothing special, but not outrageously bad. Kind of like a big Escort.
#16234 of 19412
K Cars and Tempos by lokki
Dec 28, 2008 (7:12 am)
Reply
You're right that the K car was an early one... and yes, I suppose the later ones were better. But oh my goodness.... that was a bad car. When I was a kid the family owned a 68 Plymouth Valiant with the 225 slant six.... It wasn't any paragon of advanced engineering but it was a solid little tugboat that ran forever without a problem. The K car seemed an insult to that memory.
 
An aging accountant I knew owned a Tempo. It wasn't a bad car to drive, although it was truely an accountant's car. Boring and bland and plain to look at. It was a good thing that she bought the extended warranty.... I think that Ford ultimately lost money on that whole deal by the time they finished repairing everything that broke. I don't recall the details of the problems, but there were plenty of them, I believe.
By that time I was on my second Acura Integra... which seemed light-years better than any of the American competition.
#16235 of 19412
K Cars and Tempos (lokki) by hpmctorque
Dec 28, 2008 (8:07 am)
Reply
Yeah, the K-cars didn't hold a candle to the earlier Slant Six powered compacts. Although my family owned a Valiant, which exhibited the attributes you mentioned, we missed the bullet on the K-cars. My acquaintance with the K-car is from a family friend, who owned three of them, a carburated '81 or '82, which was really bad, in large part because of the carburater; a '85, which was much better than the first one; an '88 "Spirit-of-America", which was a little better than the '85.
 
Our family friend, whose previous car was - you guessed it - a Slant Six equipped Dart, managed to get 100,000 miles from his first K-car, then the tranny went. The '85 and '88 each went >150,000 miles, so they must have been decent for cheap wheels.
 
Of course, no K-car could even come close to the Integra, in terms of quality, engineering, reliability, durability, ride and handling, and so on. One redeeming attribute of the K-car was price. Our friend paid less than $10,000 for his '88, and less for the earlier ones.
#16236 of 19412
Re: Great! [uplanderguy] by andre1969
Dec 28, 2008 (8:13 am)
Reply

Replying to: uplanderguy (Dec 27, 2008 12:01 pm)

I like both rooflines for the Impala coupe. The faster roofline was shared with the Catalina/Bonneville, LeSabre, and Delta 88, and I find it attractive. But somehow, that more formal roofline, with the concave rear window and larger side windows, just seemed so perfect on the Impala. IIRC, the Caprice hardtop coupe also used that same roof.
 
The '72 Impala is my favorite, of the '71-76 generation. I may just be biased, because my grandparents had a forest green hardtop sedan when I was a kid, that I absolutely loved, but overall I think it's just a clean, smooth, nicely styled car. I like the front-end with the low grille, that gives it a sporty look for such a big car. The '71 was good looking too, but I just like the '72 grille better.
 
IIRC, for 1974, they changed the roofline of the Impala hardtop coupe. It still had a formal C-pillar, but just seemed a bit awkward. Plus, the rear window was no longer concave. The Caprice coupe that year went to stationary rear windows that were a bit narrow, and gave the car a mis-matched beltline. I can't remember if the Impala also got that style in '74, but for '75-76 I think the hardtop coupe was retired entirely from the Impala/Caprice line.
 
As for build quality, the '65-70 models were definitely more substantial than the '71-76! I agree about the interiors, too. I really didn't like it when they went to the door panels where the lower parts were plastic. It wasn't too bad in the more upscale models, where they'd glue carpeting on there (it wouldn't always stay glued on, though)

Messages Page 1624 of 1942
1
...
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
...
1942
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics
Advertisement