So...

[razoredge]

I simply must weigh in on the hardtop issue (I tried to shush myself but I wouldn't listen).

By time-honored definitions (and no; that does not mean wikipedia- the TwiddleDickTionary Site) the SSR --covered bed aside-- is a coupe. It cannot be a hardtop as it only has one side window per side. A hardtop is a variant of a sedan (which means B-pillars). A hardtop has no B-pillar between the side windows. The SSR has no side windowS. It's a truck first & foremost, but 'cabin-wise' it's a coupe, just like the Corvette or Viper.

Note: Wikipedia lists "pillared hardtop" which is a bastardized misnomer.

[post="26773"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

OK I see it on this example but Im still having a real hard time understanding between Coupe and 2dr Hardtop ? Could you give older comparitive examples ?
or is it simply whether they have one or two side windows per side ?

[Cory Wolfe]

Like I said the BOF construction is awsome as is the Atlas-5 (many of you have said it was inpossible to use one in a Car)

I hope you're not talking about me... As I never said that.

[balthazar]

A 2-dr hardtop is a '66 Riviera, for example. No B-pillar between the side windows. You may be familiar with these... ;) There is no such thing as a 'pillared hardtop'.

"Coupe" is somewhat argueable. The term is derived from 'close-coupled' and is often relative to other models within a given marque.

Examples are best shown from the '40s IMO, because all were plentiful and marketing BS had yet to rear it's sniveling, snot-nosed face.

2-door coupe (also referred to as a "3-window coupe"):


Another (note: still 'close-coupled', this one is also referred to as a "5-window coupe"):


2-door sedan (note relative size of passenger compartment/greenhouse to the above 2):


Also note how a "sedan delivery" supports that term with it's lengthy passenger/(cargo) space:


I truely believe '70s & '80s TV & movies did a lot to promote the 'dumbing down' of "coupe" to mean a 2-door and "sedan" to mean a 4-door. All those cheesy cop dramas and the like.

In the post-war years a coupe is moreso a car without rear side windows such as a Corvette, because few (none??) manufacturers offer different length passenger compartments on one body shell.

There are numerous people who will argue this (Hi Croc!) quizzically pointing to such Shining Sources of Leadership & Truth as the Environmental Protection Agency :wacko:, as if they should have anything to do with the terminology of the automobile business.


But the 'true' definitions are supported by the majority of production models (there have been numerous 'stretches' of these terms by various marketing departments over the years)- the sheer volume of which defines the definitions....

I am terribly sleepy, so if this still doesn't make sense..........

[pow]

Werd... I swear I thought the SSR had a rear 3/4 window. Guess not... must have been an illusion, the result of the curvy greenhouse.

[Cory Wolfe]

:blink: I think I'll just stick with 2-doors = coupe and 4 doors = sedan. I'm glad I wasn't around back then...

[Croc]

Werd... I swear I thought the SSR had a rear 3/4 window. Guess not... must have been an illusion, the result of the curvy greenhouse.

[post="26849"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yea me too originally, but yea...nope.

[Sixty8panther]

Measure twice, cut once. BV: no it was not you but I have been told I'm an idiot (in a ropundabout way) for suggesting Atlas 5 & 6 inlines in the next Camaro and in a future RWD Chevy/Buick/Pontiac car architecture along the lines of Zeta.

[Croc]

They called you an idiot for that? Where? I missed that thread...

[Sixty8panther]

ONE window per side. Where the heck would a 1/4 window dissapear to whe the top is down? The top ends just behind the doors. No room for 2 windows per side.

Balthazar:

Don't you agree (being a bit of a wise old sage on this site) taht since the term "Hardtop" was invented to describe a sort of simulated hardtop to call any convertable car a hardtop is erroneous. IF you use the term "retractable hardtop" it's less misleading but to say a car is a hardtop if the whole roof comes off seems like saying a car is a "Factory Hot Rod", another retarded marketing phrase IMO.

[Sixty8panther]

They called you an idiot for that?  Where?  I missed that thread...

[post="26858"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Old board, remember how a few people ridiculed my idea for a turbo-4.2 inline six Camaro? Or my idea of a Caprice Classic built using Trailblazer framework/drivetrain dropped down to car height.

[razoredge]

Buick sold this as a Coupe, compared to the four door sedan it might be a legitimate coupe ? Inside passenger compartment is same size - large - if I remember right there just a bit less headroom in rear, all else the same, well windshield is different part number and some say windshild is more raked. I should get outside and measure, ey?

What do you think ? Rear windows are fixed incase you dont know.




Sorry for the cheap photo of sedan. I know its stupid but Ive always wondered and have a personal interest in these cars. So what do ya say , is it a coupe or not ?

[razoredge]

since the term "Hardtop" was invented to describe a sort of simulated hardtop to call any convertable car a hardtop is erroneous. IF you use the term "retractable hardtop" it's less misleading but to say a car is a hardtop if the whole roof comes off seems like saying a car is a "Factory Hot Rod", another retarded marketing phrase IMO.

Not sure what you are saying here.

If you have an old Brit roadster your hardtop is your hardtop, it means just what it says. Leave it home and all you have is your rag top - your soft top. I just dont think you can go there in the convertable world. What else would you like them to call it ? Im not sure what term was used for the 55-57 Thunderbirds, or the Corvettes that have them, Mercedes SL had them.

The factory steel hardtop for my 64 Alpine had hinged quarterwindows that opened out from the rear. THe B pillor was little more than an aluminum hinge for the window and enough support for it, seems like it was a little 1/2x1/2 angled sheet metal the window assembly screwed into.

Oh yea, it was a factory hotrod too B)

[Satty]

On the topic of the Atlas I-5....I freaking want it in the SKY. Sure 5's usually sound strange, but it has more potential for natually aspirated power than the EcoTec.

[Croc]

Old board, remember how a few people ridiculed my idea for a turbo-4.2 inline six Camaro? Or my idea of a Caprice Classic built using Trailblazer framework/drivetrain dropped down to car height.

[post="26860"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well those other ideas deserved to be laughed at.

[razoredge]

Well those other ideas deserved to be laughed at.

[post="26886"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

such issues

[mustang84]

Time to break out the popcorn

[LosAngeles]

I have been told I'm an idiot (in a ropundabout way) for suggesting Atlas 5 & 6 inlines in the next Camaro and in a future RWD Chevy/Buick/Pontiac car architecture along the lines of Zeta.

[post="26856"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I think this comes from folks around here believing the only sixes that should go in cars are V-6es. Though I also think many forget the Atlases even exist, let alone that they're worth using beyond the Colorado and Trailblazer.

[ocnblu]

Mercedes lost some of its old-world charm when they went to V6s. BMW has the right idea. From what I understand, it's easier to get torque and smoothness out of an inline engine. I'd love to see a Bel Air with an Atlas engine.

[balthazar]

...the term "Hardtop" was invented to describe a sort of simulated hardtop to call any convertable car a hardtop is erroneous. IF you use the term "retractable hardtop" it's less misleading but to say a car is a hardtop if the whole roof comes off seems like saying a car is a "Factory Hot Rod"...

:wacko: what?? If I understand the question, yes: calling a convertible a "hardtop" is dumb. If the roof is hard & detactable, ala a '60 Corvette, it's a convertible with a DH. But I can see calling a retractable hardtop as such, I guess mainly because the feature is so undeniably prominent. Technically it's a convertible, of course. Did I answer your question?

Buick sold this as a Coupe, compared to the four door sedan it might be a legitimate coupe ? What do you think ? Rear windows are fixed incase you dont know.

[img]

In more recent years (as opposed to the '40s examples of my earlier post), these terms become less rigid because of a greatly increased variation of vehicles. No longer is a marque one basic body with different door/greenhouse configurations. But in this example it's still clear in my mind: the red 2-dr is a 2-dr sedan. Their decklids are the same length (aren't they?) and the C-pillar ends in the same spot: not enough difference to define it as 'close-coupled'. Proportionally, it does not appear 'close-coupled' either.
I'm not surprised that Buick called it a 'coupe' however. My '64 GP was called a "Sport Coupe" by Pontiac, tho it is undeniably a 2-dr hardtop.

To me, flat-out calling it a "coupe" because it merely has 2-drs is like calling an SUV a 'car'. But that's the State of the Union these days, where marketing defines way too much ("NEW & IMPROVED!!")

[Sixty8panther]

Mercedes lost some of its old-world charm when they went to V6s.  BMW has the right idea.  From what I understand, it's easier to get torque and smoothness out of an inline engine.  I'd love to see a Bel Air with an Atlas engine.

[post="26928"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Absolutely. I've said exactly that a dozen times on the old board. Talk to an engineer and ask him what the best, smoothest all around finest engine in the world is... he'll either say V12 or I6. Since A V-12 is basically two I6 fused at the hip it's not wonder they're the ultimate. Although a V16 is a sweet too but then we're gettting into severe packaging issues in 90% of the current applications for passanger vehicles.

I6 rule. The only real lovable V6 out that that I am infatuated with is the Buick 3800. That engine was enginered when the planetary alignment was JUST right. I wish it could be around for another 40 years.



Balthazar:

Yup, you answered it. As far as I'm concerned the SSR in other words is still a Convertible with a hard top. Not a "hardtop" (one word) but I'm not arguing that point any longer.



Mustang:

Put the popcorn away buddy, I'm through with this pettty crap. Wait till the next RWD vs. FWD thread. Everyone will forget I ever said anything positive about the Mini Cooper, SRT4, Cobalt, Grand Am & all the other FWD cars I've admited to liking. Even though I've driven thousands of cars while a salesman at several dealerships and happen to prefer a RWD one over any other combination of drivewheels thy'll insist how I'm a narrow minded fool.

[Cory Wolfe]

Put the popcorn away buddy, I'm through with this pettty crap. Wait till the next RWD vs. FWD thread. Everyone will forget I ever said anything positive about the Mini Cooper, SRT4, Cobalt, Grand Am & all the other FWD cars I've admited to liking. Even though I've driven thousands of cars while a salesman at several dealerships and happen to prefer a RWD one over any other combination of drivewheels thy'll insist how I'm a narrow minded fool.

Preferring one over the other doesn't mean you have to bash FWD constantly... Guess what? I prefer RWD too. Do you see me bashing the hell out of it for no reason what-so-ever? No, I defend it when people like you chime in with your idiotic comments. You can't deny that you do it, either. We all know you do. The fact that you bring up all these FWD cars when someone calls you out for it is.. ironic. I would think that if you truly do like these cars, you wouldn't bash FWD in 90% of your posts. Huh... :huh:

So.. yeah, you're a close-minded fool. Just accept it.

[LosAngeles]

Kinda reminds you of "some of my best friends are Black"...

[Sixty8panther]

Kinda reminds you of "some of my best friends are Black"...

[post="27293"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Let's not bring P.C. into this LA... WTF are you saying I'm a racist now just because I believe that 95% of GM cars should not be FWD. <_<

Perhaps if GM still made a few RWD Chevy cars including a Caamro, at least one RWD full size Buick and one RWD Pontiac sedan for less than a $30,000 GTO I'd be less pissed about all these crappy FWD cars they are showing down our throats. For those willing to compromise and buy a FWD car they have dozens of cars to choose from, some as cheap as a typical Kia compact all the way to like $50,000:

The Impala LS/SS, Monte Carlo LS/SS, G6 convertible, G6 coupe, G6 sedan, (in all their engine combos) Lacrosse, Luscerne (3800/no*), DTS, LeSabre, Park Ave, Malibu LS/SS, Malibu Maxx LS/SS, Grand Prix GT/GTP/GXP, Bonneville sc/na, Ion sedan, Ion Quad-coupe, Ino Quad coupe Redline, Cobalt sedan, Cobalt coupe LS, Cobalt Coupe SS/ SS-SC HHR, Vibe, Aveo, L200, L300 (sedan & wagon), 9\3, 9\5...


What do we RWD fans get?

well finally we get a pair of nice RWD roadsters but for those who want/need a backseat there's NOTHING shy of $30,000. Not one car.

GTO: $30-35K
CTS/ CTS-V $30-48K
STS/ STS-V $40-$60K
Corvette Coupe/convertible $48-55K
CorvetteZ06 $65-70K

Those are the choices. Two sedans, one 2+2 coupe and a three 2-passanger sports cars. Should I be doing cartwheels singing "Only the Rich and single deserve RWD cars!"? :angry:

[/pseudo-apology]

[Sixty8panther]

So.. yeah, you're a close-minded fool. Just accept it.

[post="27127"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

You're a snot nosed brat who has driven 0.05% of the cars I have and is about 10 years younger. I choose to talk about the lack of RWD, you chose to talk abot the Fiero and how Chevy sucks... Last time I checked you dop a lot of complaining yourself about a crappy Pontiac lineup, people who like the Sky over the Solstice, your constant frustration with your ride etc. For the record I has ONE car when I was your age and it was a pathetic 1994 Sunbird 2.0L auto. At least it was a coupe but that's NOT saying much. Did I complain? Yes, but I did not act like a victim. Later I got a job and got myself the first of a string or RWD V8 powered cars.

Seems to me like people in glass houses....

[ocnblu]

Well, I was going to post something insanely hilarious but I think this thread should be killed dead as a stone. It's too ugly. Edited October 12, 2005 by ocnblu

[Croc]

... Edited October 12, 2005 by Croc

[Flybrian]

You're a snot nosed brat who has driven 0.05% of the cars I have and is about 10 years younger.

[post="27349"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Don't be Harry.

This is done.