Skip to comments.
The Return of the Muscle Car
Opinion Journal ^
| 04/23/03
| COLLIN LEVEY
Posted on 04/22/2003 9:05:55 PM PDT by Pokey78
Edited on 04/23/2004 12:05:30 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Horsepower and martial valor couldn't have come at a better time.
The French semiologist Roland Barthes once said he considered cars "almost the exact equivalent of the great Gothic cathedrals
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-166 next last
To: mhking; dansangel
Great picture! dansangel is already thinking of putting in an order...
121
posted on
04/23/2003 1:40:50 AM PDT
by
.45MAN
(If you don't like it here try and find a better country, Please!!)
To: Dan Zachary
Not bad either!! Hmmmm
122
posted on
04/23/2003 1:44:09 AM PDT
by
.45MAN
(If you don't like it here try and find a better country, Please!!)
To: mhking; .45MAN
The *minute* that car hits production, it's MINE!
I miss my all-black '86 Monte Carlo SS that some scum tried to relieve me of in May 2000. Because of the damage done to the transmission (not covered by insurance) I had to give it up after happy ownership for 14 years.
I'm *very* interested in the new Chevy SS. Oh, .45Man.....seems to me there's an anniversary present in here somewhere.....
123
posted on
04/23/2003 4:42:23 AM PDT
by
dansangel
(America - love it, support it, or LEAVE IT!)
To: merak
You are so correct. The Turbo New Beetle I had with a 1.8L engine that I mildly modified would blow the doors of an olds 442. Those old muscle cars weren't near as fast as people think they were. The old Corvette I had could be beaten by a Honda Accord in 0-60...
124
posted on
04/23/2003 4:55:01 AM PDT
by
tje
(Some mornings it's not worth gnawing through the restraints.)
To: Capitalist Eric
The Corvette may be a lot of things, but it was NEVER a muscle car. You're obviously misinformed, and never heard of the ZL-1, the L-88 or the contemporary Z-06.
Depends on the particular Corvette and the particular "other" car. Generally speaking, the Corvette combines better than average acceleration with awesome handling. Most vettes handle very well, some have awesome acceleration while some years are pretty pathetic. The focus is on high speed stability and handling.
Muscle cars primary focus is on strait line acceleration and some handled ok, some cornered like a panel truck. Modern muscle cars have acceleration and handling just short of the vette, generally speaking. The focus is on 0-60.
Corvettes are "sports" cars, as opposed to being a "muscle" or "pony" car.
I drove a 69 Firebird for 12 years (now undergoing restoration), and drive a 96 vette.
To: wardaddy
I had a TR4A in high school, loved that car. Later I bought a 280Z, and really enjoyed it. Then, I got married, and when the baby came bought the dreaded "family car".
To: Bonaparte
That's just a beautiful car, in fact; I was just looking at a 1950 Buick Dynaflow on Ebay.
Are you selling the Roadmaster? If so, Freepmail me with the detail. Thanks.
To: gortklattu
I used to live in Irvine CA; I could hear the "Funny Cars" from the racetrack some 10 miles away. Dang, those things were loud!!
To: hopespringseternal; Capitalist Eric
Corvettes are "sports" cars, as opposed to being a "muscle" or "pony" car.Exactly. This is not to deride the ZR-1 or any of the later engines. This is not to deride the sheer speed or finesse of the Corvette, which I would put head to head with any of the Italian/German/Japanese super coupes (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Maserati, Mercedes, Porsche, Toyota, Honda) any day, and win.
The classic American muscle car is the epitome of Detroit power and metal. Lots of chrome, massive engines, throaty roars akin to Harley Davidsons on steroids and classic lines. They were inexpensive to build, yet the ultimate expression of raw power.
No, I can't minimize the Corvette, but to compare it to the classic muscle cars from Ford, Mopar or GM is not fair to either type of vehicle - apples and oranges indeed.
129
posted on
04/23/2003 6:06:58 AM PDT
by
mhking
To: Servant of the Nine
Anyone who buys a high performance front wheel drive car has a deathwish. They make the notoriously squirrely handling of the rear engined Porche look civilized. That's dated info. Try actually driving Neon.
130
posted on
04/23/2003 6:08:44 AM PDT
by
merak
To: Pokey78
131
posted on
04/23/2003 6:13:51 AM PDT
by
kjam22
To: mhking
Another melted bar of soap.
132
posted on
04/23/2003 6:15:02 AM PDT
by
Centurion2000
(We are crushing our enemies, seeing him driven before us and hearing the lamentations of the liberal)
To: Billy_bob_bob
What, you need more than a Viper?
Actually, if Chrysler would stuff its 240 HP version of their 4-banger Mitsu engine in front of a 5-speed in a Neon or Stratus, the car would be a lot of fun--not exactly a 430 HP Chevelle, but hey...I'm old.
133
posted on
04/23/2003 6:19:03 AM PDT
by
ninenot
To: billbears
Ahhh, the 351. A dog if there ever was one.
134
posted on
04/23/2003 6:20:48 AM PDT
by
ninenot
To: KneelBeforeZod
What the hell is that, what the hell is that, get away from that you don't know what the hell that is.
135
posted on
04/23/2003 6:22:05 AM PDT
by
bmwcyle
(Semper Gumby - Always flexible)
To: merak
Then again, if you really need to drive fast, you have modern fast cars like the SRT4You certainly get the speed from the souped up modern front-wheel drive power boxes (Dodge, Ford, Honda, Subaru, Mazda, et. al.), but while they'll go head for head on speed, they won't come close to the sheer power of the muscle cars.
Both types of car are great, and have their place. But they are not in the same class in terms of what they do and how they do it. They're both fast cars -- the comparisons stop there. It's like saying that apples and oranges are both types of fruit.
136
posted on
04/23/2003 6:23:43 AM PDT
by
mhking
To: mhking
Nice car. But an AUTOMATIC???
Why no 6-speed geargrinder?
137
posted on
04/23/2003 6:25:14 AM PDT
by
ninenot
To: B-Chan
You need yield to no one on matters doctrinal.
However, "Mopar" is the brand name for Chrysler's Parts Division (Motor Parts), NOT GM's Pontiac.
Ex-wrenchbender insider lingo.
138
posted on
04/23/2003 6:27:35 AM PDT
by
ninenot
To: merak
...and still feeling tight and new after 150,000 miles.Unibody cars NEVER feel tight. It's impossible to be sturdy and tight without a frame.
139
posted on
04/23/2003 6:27:57 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I'm not always cranky.)
To: arm958
Historically, you are right. Have you had any recent experience driving late model, high performance front wheel drive cars though? I had my Neon R/T in Europe, and with some big, fat, low profile Z rated tires, it handled curves with aplomb. Yep, you just weren't driving it hard enough. If you drive a rear wheel drive or 4 wheel drive, front or mid engine car at 10/10ths you can control your turn radius with steering wheel or throttle.
If you drive a front wheel drive car 10/10ths you must set up your turns absolutely perfectly, because neither steering nor throtle will let you tighten the radius of your turns.
No one can set up their turns pefectly every time.
Drive faster and you will find out.
So9
140
posted on
04/23/2003 6:55:16 AM PDT
by
Servant of the Nine
(We are the Hegemon. We can do anything we damned well please.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-166 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson