Sign In Join 



Memories Of The Old GM And Its Cars

383 messages,  Last post on Nov 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick, Classic Cars


Messages Page 39 of 39
1
...
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#376 of 383
Re: front benches [andre1969] by lemko
Jun 30, 2009 (8:54 am)
Reply

Replying to: andre1969 (Jun 30, 2009 8:21 am)

Heck, I had EIGHT of us in my 1975 Cadillac Sedan DeVille one time. It was cramped, but everybody fit.
#377 of 383
safety first. by tomcatt630
Jul 01, 2009 (7:59 am)
Reply
The 80's Gran Fury M-Body was actaully a slightly stretched Volare'/Aspen F-body [no, not related to the GM f body Camaro!], called a 'compact' in 1976.
 
And sure those old big cars could fit 7-8 people, but safety is more important.
#378 of 383
Re: safety first. [tomcatt630] by andre1969
Jul 01, 2009 (9:41 am)
Reply

Replying to: tomcatt630 (Jul 01, 2009 7:59 am)

The 80's Gran Fury M-Body was actaully a slightly stretched Volare'/Aspen F-body [no, not related to the GM f body Camaro!], called a 'compact' in 1976.
 
Actually, it was on the same 112.7" wheelbase as a Volare sedan/wagon, although there was a bit more overhang. I think my Gran Fury was about 205" long, whereas a Volare sedan is around 202. Not a huge difference.
  
And sure those old big cars could fit 7-8 people, but safety is more important.
 
Well, my Gran Fury had an airbag. Crumple zones. Rudimentary crumple zones by today's standards, but still had 'em. Side door guard beams. Fewer blind spots than probably any car built today. EXCELLENT brakes, as it was a copcar. Also had a beefed up suspension, and enough power to get out of its own way. It was also a heavy, solidly built car. Smaller than a Caprice or Crown Vic, but not much lighter.
 
Your typical similar-sized car of today is going to be safer, as time has marched on and so has technology and safety standards. But I'd hardly call an M-body a death trap. I also wouldn't recommend 7-8 people, as it only had 56" of shoulder room! My guess is that it's about as big inside as a Ford Fusion, but actually feels roomier because of the big windows, no center console, less intrusive dash, less curvature of the sides, etc.
#379 of 383
Re: Large cars [imidazol97] by dieselone
Jul 01, 2009 (11:43 am)
Reply

Replying to: imidazol97 (Jun 29, 2009 5:07 pm)

How often do people carry three adults in their rear of the sedan? I know lots is made about the W-car's rear seat but I think it's a relatively small number of trips made with 3 in the rear.
 
Considering that many W-car's have been sold to fleets as company cars it's probably a fair amount. My wife often has 3 other people in her company car when traveling to meetings and/or lunch. I find the backseat of her GrandPrix to be borderline dangerous as my head gets wedged between the roof and the rear window, it's horrible. It's fine for kids, but anyone over 5'10 and/or has long legs will not want to sit back there long.
#380 of 383
Re: front benches [tomcatt630] by hammer77777
Nov 12, 2009 (6:48 am)
Reply

Replying to: tomcatt630 (Jun 30, 2009 7:20 am)

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH FRONT BENCHES...MY TOWN CARS SEAT 6, AND THAT IS PERFECTLY FINE.
HAMMERNJ.NET
#381 of 383
Re: front benches [hammer77777] by garrison16
Nov 12, 2009 (4:44 pm)
Reply

Replying to: hammer77777 (Nov 12, 2009 6:48 am)

I agree, so does my Chrysler Concorde
#382 of 383
Re: front benches [garrison16] by andre1969
Nov 12, 2009 (4:52 pm)
Reply

Replying to: garrison16 (Nov 12, 2009 4:44 pm)

I agree, so does my Chrysler Concorde
 
How is the center spot on that Concorde? I'm curious, because I have a similar 2000 Intrepid, although I have bucket seats. I've seen a few of them with a split bench though, and that center spot looks like a total waste to me. The dashboard juts out at the center. Plus, while it's FWD, the engine/transaxle are longitudinally-mounted, and do intrude a bit into the passenger cabin. You don't really see it so much with the bucket seats, because the console hides most of it. Also, these cars do have a vestigal "driveshaft hump", as they were originally intended to have an AWD option that never materialized.
 
I think those split bench seats can be nice because they let you stretch out more, and the center armrest is usually more comfortable than what they give you with buckets and a console. But for 3 across seating, I'd imagine they'd be horrible.
 
I also have a 1985 Silverado, which just has the old fashioned regular bench seat. It has about 65 inches of shoulder room, more than any car ever had, with the exception of maybe GM's '71-76 big cars, and their '91-96 "bathtub" style cars. Honestly though, even with that truck, I don't like putting 3 across, at least not for a very long trip. As the driver, it just makes me feel hemmed in.
 
Guess it just depends on what you're used to.
#383 of 383
Re: front benches [andre1969] by garrison16
Nov 12, 2009 (5:33 pm)
Reply

Replying to: andre1969 (Nov 12, 2009 4:52 pm)

I also have a 2002 Intreped with bucket seats. The bench seat on the Concorde is
nice the 3 or 4 times that I needed to make a brief trip with 5 other adults. It was not too uncomfortable. Once I made a round trip of about 70 miles with 2 other adults and three teenagers. It was not too bad. You would not want to do it too
frequently. The Concorde is an LXI with a dual power leather bench seat. The Intrepid is a base model, cloth interior driver side power only. I think that with 2
people in the front the confort is about the same. I do like the Concorde better

Messages Page 39 of 39
1
...
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
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

Today's Chats

Advertisement