The Official MPG Thread

[Oracle of Delphi]

1969 Pontiac Custom-S, 11 MPG. You just got to love it.

[A Horse With No Name]

Hell, I've known loaded for bear big blocks that get like 12-13 on the highway.

You wouldn't be abusing that poor elderly poncho now, would you mr Borger?

Chris

[Cory Wolfe]

I haven't gone below 28 when I've calculated thus far. Though, I've probably seen 26 or 27 on tanks I didnt calculate.

[A Horse With No Name]

Really pretty good for that car, Mr. BV.

Should be cheaper than the cutty to fuel

Chris

[Oracle of Delphi]

Hell, I've known loaded for bear big blocks that get like 12-13 on the highway.

You wouldn't be abusing that poor elderly poncho now, would you mr Borger?

Chris

Nahhh, she is loaded to the hilt though. The trunk is completely filled and I have some things in the back seat too. She looks like a jet ready to take off with her nose pointed high in the air. Air force

Edited July 26, 2008 by Pontiac Custom-S

[Camino LS6]

The Duramax is all over the place with mileage depending on how I'm using it - so I really don't keep track.

There are just too many variables: 2wd vs. 4wd, loaded vs. empty, towing vs. not towing, plowing vs. not plowing, babying it vs. standing on it (usually the case).

Even so, it does much better than the 6.0 gas engined 2001 I used to have. That truck was a real pig on fuel.

[Satty]

One of our cars just ran out of gas like a mile from the house. Knew there was something else I needed to do yesterday. Probably ought to go take her the gas can, then again, thats what she gets for using my car for her dirty deeds.

I do estimate, however, that on the tank that just ran out, the Fusion got 30mpg, or just under 30.

[Newbiewar]

The Duramax is all over the place with mileage depending on how I'm using it - so I really don't keep track.

There are just too many variables: 2wd vs. 4wd, loaded vs. empty, towing vs. not towing, plowing vs. not plowing, babying it vs. standing on it (usually the case).

Even so, it does much better than the 6.0 gas engined 2001 I used to have. That truck was a real pig on fuel.

im currious as to what you usually get tho... my 8100 gets 10-12 mpg... i've actually seen my best fuel ecconomy while towing over the rockies... lol sounds weird... but driving the freeways in LA, i usually got 11-12 mpg empty, towing my firebird & crap in the back, i got 14 mpg (85mph going from LA to El Paso using the 10) my wifes civic couldnt keep up with me, she had to keep throwing it in 4th to catch up to me...

i've been wanting to throw headers exhaust and intake to try to reduce fuel consumption... as i only get about 10mpg around base... max speed is 30-35...

[Camino LS6]

The thing will do mid teens under the right conditions, my 6.0 did 11 with a tailwind.

I may do a real check sometime soon. It's been quite a while, and most of my driving is stop and go with it.

[A Horse With No Name]

The Duramax is all over the place with mileage depending on how I'm using it - so I really don't keep track.

There are just too many variables: 2wd vs. 4wd, loaded vs. empty, towing vs. not towing, plowing vs. not plowing, babying it vs. standing on it (usually the case).

Even so, it does much better than the 6.0 gas engined 2001 I used to have. That truck was a real pig on fuel.

The Duramax is a great diesel. I've been thinking of picking one up used to act as a work truck/tow vehicle.

Chris

[Camino LS6]

The Duramax is a great diesel. I've been thinking of picking one up used to act as a work truck/tow vehicle.

Chris

If it weren't for the Duramax, I would never own a diesel.

I've always hated diesels, but the D-max is so good that I would have nothing else in a work truck now.

Ditto the Allison trans.

[Sixty8panther]

F$#k FWD, a typical W-body woudl have to get like 45mpg for me to

deprive myself of my BOF, V8 daily driver... granted the 7.0 liter in

the Banana was a bit too thisrty since it breathed/drank gas through

a giant 4bbl carb & carried around about 4800 Gross Lbs.

I sat down the other day & calculated milage for the RoadmOnster,

since the 16.5 figure I postd earlier was from Jan. to March, when I

was delivering Chinese food in cold weather, in other words tons of

ideling and warm up on cold days... now as of April 4th to lat week

the RoadmOnster is getting 18.02 mpg and that's only 1/2 highway,

my new job means I drive about 75% highway & I'm going against

traffic most of the time... so I think 20 should be realistic.

So again, to hell with all those FWD sh!%boxes you guys drive that

have 1/2 the Liters/cylinders/torque I do, lug around much less

weight, lack a spine and still can't even doub;e my milage!

Now I just need to trade up to an LT-1 powered '94-'96 Cadillac

Fleetwood Brougham with less than 100,000 miles.... for now I'll just

drive the wheels off my '92 TBI350 Buick.

Long live the B-body!

[Intrepidation]

F$#k FWD, a typical W-body woudl have to get like 45mpg for me to

deprive myself of my BOF, V8 daily driver... granted the 7.0 liter in

the Banana was a bit too thisrty since it breathed/drank gas through

a giant 4bbl carb & carried around about 4800 Gross Lbs.

I sat down the other day & calculated milage for the RoadmOnster,

since the 16.5 figure I postd earlier was from Jan. to March, when I

was delivering Chinese food in cold weather, in other words tons of

ideling and warm up on cold days... now as of April 4th to lat week

the RoadmOnster is getting 18.02 mpg and that's only 1/2 highway,

my new job means I drive about 75% highway & I'm going against

traffic most of the time... so I think 20 should be realistic.

So again, to hell with all those FWD sh!%boxes you guys drive that

have 1/2 the Liters/cylinders/torque I do, lug around much less

weight, lack a spine and still can't even doub;e my milage!

Now I just need to trade up to an LT-1 powered '94-'96 Cadillac

Fleetwood Brougham with less than 100,000 miles.... for now I'll just

drive the wheels off my '92 TBI350 Buick.

Long live the B-body!

Can't doube your milage? Please, I pull 36-40 mpg regualary in my little FWD econbox, depending on how $h!ty traffic is. So there

The Intrepid can't do double, but 28-29 mpg highway isn't too shabby for a full size car I think.

Edited July 28, 2008 by Dodgefan

[Sixty8panther]

Can't doube your milage? Please, I pull 36-40 mpg regualary in my little FWD econbox, depending on how $h!ty traffic is. So there

The Intrepid can't do double, but 28-29 mpg highway isn't too shabby for a full size car I think.

The Intrepid gets impressive MPGs on the highway, but it is NOT

fullsize... not in 2008 and esp. by MY standards. Remember that

Bicentenial LeSabre that you stored for Fly after I sold it to him?

THAT is a fullsize car. In 2008 the intrepid is a bigger car than

most bt a far cry to a DTS or Towncar... those are fullsize.

As far as the Toyopet-Geode-Prizm, no offense but I'd rather

rollerblade to work than drive a FWD, 4-cylinder, car with a

valvetrain actuated by rubber-band & about as much room for

people & luggage as my Aunt's VW-based Skoda in Slovakia. Not

to mention all the Toyo-DUH sourced content.

NOT MY STYLE. Different strokes for different folks I guess. :wink:

I'm an ENTHUSIAST. I have standards, twisted as they may be,

one of my biggest turnoffs is buynig something that was an

econobox, no matter how mint or low milage it is. My parents

always had a new car, every few years they'd buy one brand

new and one 5K-12K mile used car... butg they were never

anything impressive. A whole bunch of J-bodys & a few N-bodys.

I'd ratehr have a high milage car, that was/is something

impressive. Some old man probably bought my Roadmaster when

it was new, it might have been a plastic clad, Roadmaster

sedan with a baby-chevy V8 but it was still quite impressive as

compared to some FWD, 3800 powered Regal, and more so to

some 2.3 liter quad4 Skylark N-BODY.

If I had to drive a Prizm, after all the FULL size Chevrolet trucks,

Oldsmobile Aircraft Carriers, Buick Battleships, Cadillac Yachts &

other such high-end vehicles that were either meant to tow an

airstream larger than your garage or were meant to be driven by

ladies in white gloves &/or executives of companies like WANG,

Pan Am airlines, Sinclair Petroleum & Western Electric.... well I

just can't bring myself to do that.

It would be like asking Hugh Heffner to settle down with a stuffy

old, conservative woman with modest looks after the life he's led

for the past five decades.

Now sure, some of my cars would look at home in a junkyard...

the RoadmOnster is one of them, but then again my B-59 and

many of my other "beaters" are only a few cosmetic quirks

away from being returned to their former glory.

Edited July 28, 2008 by Sixty8panther

[Intrepidation]

The Intrepid gets impressive MPGs on the highway, but it is NOT

fullsize... not in 2008 and esp. by MY standards. Remember that

Bicentenial LeSabre that you stored for Fly after I sold it to him?

THAT is a fullsize car. In 2008 the intrepid is a bigger car than

most bt a far cry to a DTS or Towncar... those are fullsize.

As far as the Toyopet-Geode-Prizm, no offense but I'd rather

rollerblade to work than drive a FWD, 4-cylinder, car with a

valvetrain actuated by rubber-band & about as much room for

people & luggage as my Aunt's VW-based Skoda in Slovakia. Not

to mention all the Toyo-DUH sourced content.

NOT MY STYLE. Different strokes for different folks I guess. :wink:

I'm an ENTHUSIAST. I have standards, twisted as they may be,

one of my biggest turnoffs is buynig something that was an

econobox, no matter how mint or low milage it is. My parents

always had a new car, every few years they'd buy one brand

new and one 5K-12K mile used car... butg they were never

anything impressive. A whole bunch of J-bodys & a few N-bodys.

I'd ratehr have a high milage car, that was/is something

impressive. Some old man probably bought my Roadmaster when

it was new, it might have been a plastic clad, Roadmaster

sedan with a baby-chevy V8 but it was still quite impressive as

compared to some FWD, 3800 powered Regal, and more so to

some 2.3 liter quad4 Skylark N-BODY.

If I had to drive a Prizm, after all the FULL size Chevrolet trucks,

Oldsmobile Aircraft Carriers, Buick Battleships, Cadillac Yachts &

other such high-end vehicles that were either meant to tow an

airstream larger than your garage or were meant to be driven by

ladies in white gloves &/or executives of companies like WANG,

Pan Am airlines, Sinclair Petroleum & Western Electric.... well I

just can't bring myself to do that.

It would be like asking Hugh Heffner to settle down with a stuffy

old, conservative woman with modest looks after the life he's led

for the past five decades.

Now sure, some of my cars would look at home in a junkyard...

the RoadmOnster is one of them, but then again my B-59 and

many of my other "beaters" are only a few cosmetic quirks

away from being returned to their former glory.

Eh, the Prizm makes a great daily driver...good on gas, everything besides the cruise works, and the money saved on gas goes to other things, and when I do get another tank, I won't care how piss poor the fuel economy is.

Just remember one thing about what you say about being an enthusiast and about the Corolla with an identity crisis...it's a manual. What are yours cars? Automatic. That counts for something. :wink:

Edited July 28, 2008 by Dodgefan

[Sixty8panther]

I will agree that your Prizm has some redeming value

being a 5-speed manual, so many pu$$ies out there

these days insist it simply HAS to be an automatic,

as if the alternative was horrific, appauling... or just

plain unthinkable!

Now if you show me an affordable '59 Buick in decent

shape with a 3-on-the tree in ANY bodystyle I'll run

out and buy it quicker than a jackrabbitt on crack.

I did so very much want to buy that 3-on-the tree

flattop (hardtop) LeSabre in New Jersey in 2005 but

as Balthazar can tell you the car was toast. It had

been completely submerged in water in a flood back

in the early 2000s. That was the closest I ever got

to buying a '59 Buick other than the one in Freeport

Maine and my own 4411 that I now own.

When you are in the market for a one-year only 48

year old used car you can not be too picky, esp.

since only the LeSabre had the option for a manaual

trans in 1959, something like only 38% of the

production (258,000 total) were LeSabres & out of

those only 12% IIRC were manual 3-on-the-tree

cars. In the conservative 1950s manuals were

considered old fashioned & cheap, everyone wanted

a slushbox, after all, remember even the Corvette

was born as auto-only.

Now I'd like to see you find me a 1990s B-body with

a manual trans... man that would ROCK!

Same goes for the 500SEC hardtop, it was THE most

expensive M.B. in the 1984 lineup and as such, being

the flagship for a luxury car brand in the 1980s you

could get any transmission you wanted as long as it

was a 4-speed AUTOMATIC.

[Intrepidation]

I will agree that your Prizm has some redeming value

being a 5-speed manual, so many pu$$ies out there

these days insist it simply HAS to be an automatic,

as if the alternative was horrific, appauling... or just

plain unthinkable!

Now if you show me an affordable '59 Buick in decent

shape with a 3-on-the tree in ANY bodystyle I'll run

out and buy it quicker than a jackrabbitt on crack.

I did so very much want to buy that 3-on-the tree

flattop (hardtop) LeSabre in New Jersey in 2005 but

as Balthazar can tell you the car was toast. It had

been completely submerged in water in a flood back

in the early 2000s. That was the closest I ever got

to buying a '59 Buick other than the one in Freeport

Maine and my own 4411 that I now own.

When you are in the market for a one-year only 48

year old used car you can not be too picky, esp.

since only the LeSabre had the option for a manaual

trans in 1959, something like only 38% of the

production (258,000 total) were LeSabres & out of

those only 12% IIRC were manual 3-on-the-tree

cars. In the conservative 1950s manuals were

considered old fashioned & cheap, everyone wanted

a slushbox, after all, remember even the Corvette

was born as auto-only.

Now I'd like to see you find me a 1990s B-body with

a manual trans... man that would ROCK!

Same goes for the 500SEC hardtop, it was THE most

expensive M.B. in the 1984 lineup and as such, being

the flagship for a luxury car brand in the 1980s you

could get any transmission you wanted as long as it

was a 4-speed AUTOMATIC.

Why don't you find a way to hook up a manual to the RoadMonster? I mean, I've heard crazier ideas from you.

Edited July 28, 2008 by Dodgefan

[Sixty8panther]

Agreed!

I don't think the effort would be worth it on the Roadmaster

but more than a few times in recent weeks SP and I have

brainstormed a Chevrolet 250 inline-6 and 4-speed manual,

shifted on the floor, in the B-59.

It would allow me to drive that car everyday without feeling

like I'm signing over half my paycheck to Exxon/Mobil.

My buddy Sean (the "454, T5 tranny" Crazy Asian) were

planning on throwing an M22 in my tripple silver Fleetwood

Brougham, hooked up to an original 302 out of a '69 Z/28.

Seriously. It never happened but he owed me a favor and

if I had given the go-ahead that nutcase would have done

it in like 48 hours.

He took that 302 out of his '69 Camaro and dropped in a

454 & Super-T10 trans in less than 24 hours, BY HIMSELF!

[Intrepidation]

Agreed!

I don't think the effort would be worth it on the Roadmaster

but more than a few times in recent weeks SP and I have

brainstormed a Chevrolet 250 inline-6 and 4-speed manual,

shifted on the floor, in the B-59.

It would allow me to drive that car everyday without feeling

like I'm signing over half my paycheck to Exxon/Mobil.

My buddy Sean (the "454, T5 tranny" Crazy Asian) were

planning on throwing an M22 in my tripple silver Fleetwood

Brougham, hooked up to an original 302 out of a '69 Z/28.

Seriously. It never happened but he owed me a favor and

if I had given the go-ahead that nutcase would have done

it in like 48 hours.

He took that 302 out of his '69 Camaro and dropped in a

454 & Super-T10 trans in less than 24 hours, BY HIMSELF!

So is this who I ask when I decide to put a 3.5 in my Intrepid?

I bet it would be easy for this guy, since besides the exhuast pipe that needs to be bent to fit, it's all plug `n play.

Edited July 28, 2008 by Dodgefan

[Sixty8panther]

Sean is a nut like myself... he only works on old school 'Merican vehicles.

He's the one that built the Humm-Burban-lanche, not sure if you ever saw

it on the forum, it was an ex-state popo-dot Suburban in white that had a

H1- Hummer inspired nose, hand built out of 1/4" steel!

Then Sean also took a sawzall to the ass end & made a 1990 Avanalche.

I think the newest car he's ever worked on was his son's 1994 Camaro.

His son f***ed up the LT1 so Sean decided, since there's no emissions

test in Vermont where his son was living at the time (in college) that he

would drop in a carburated '60s SBC 327, managed to hook it up to the

6-speed manual too after soe difficulty.

[A Horse With No Name]

So is this who I ask when I decide to put a 3.5 in my Intrepid?

I bet it would be easy for this guy, since besides the exhuast pipe that needs to be bent to fit, it's all plug `n play.

Would it not be easier to buy a Concorde with a 3.5 or a 300 (300LX, not current 300) with a 3.5 and enjoy the upgrade in ammenities?

Chris

[Intrepidation]

Would it not be easier to buy a Concorde with a 3.5 or a 300 (300LX, not current 300) with a 3.5 and enjoy the upgrade in ammenities?

Chris

I perfer the look of the Intrepid, plus if you know e well, I hang on to my cars for eva! muhahaha

Besides, if I go the 3.2 route the engine is only $800. Probably a little more to get the extras I'd need for a swap. A used Concorde LXi/LHS/300M would easily cost over $5,000. I like the idea of upgrading my Intrepid as I go. Ideally I'd like to find a wrecked LHS or 300M with a black interior and and put those ultra comfy leather seats in mine, as well as the automatic climate control module. Anyway, the 2.7 is still going strong, and problem free since I replaced that crankshaft sensor. Once I do the timing chains she should be good for quite some time, hopefully. I'm interested to see how far it'll go, and maybe set some record for most miles on a 2.7L.

On Dodgetalk there's a guy who did just that, and the results are sexy. Chrysler luxury with Dodge sporty styling.

I love my car too much to ever get rid of it.

Edited July 28, 2008 by Dodgefan

[Sixty8panther]

The 300M pissed me off since it's 240 horsepower was WAY short

of what the name advertised! "300 series" cars were named that

for their 300+ horsepower outputs!

The other thing (besides the FWD, DUH!) that bothered me about

the 300M was the slightly awkward rear, looke like someone used

a putty knife to cut off the ass end of a Conorde.

[Intrepidation]

The 300M pissed me off since it's 240 horsepower was WAY short

of what the name advertised! "300 series" cars were named that

for their 300+ horsepower outputs!

The other thing (besides the FWD, DUH!) that bothered me about

the 300M was the slightly awkward rear, looke like someone used

a putty knife to cut off the ass end of a Conorde.

I actually didn't mind the rear, it was the front of the 300M (and Concorde and LHS) that bothered me slightly. Couldn't ever put my finger on it, something to do with theheadlights shape and small grill. I still like them though.

The 300M did have 250 horsepower at one point, it was also the sportiest of all of the LH cars and was considered to give some of the Euro luxury marque's cars and the Japanese luxury marques a run for their money.

[A Horse With No Name]

FWD or not it's a hell of a car.

Not everyone shares the RWD Bias...

For 99.7% or the motoring public, it would work just fine.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

I perfer the look of the Intrepid, plus if you know e well, I hang on to my cars for eva! muhahaha

Besides, if I go the 3.2 route the engine is only $800. Probably a little more to get the extras I'd need for a swap. A used Concorde LXi/LHS/300M would easily cost over $5,000. I like the idea of upgrading my Intrepid as I go. Ideally I'd like to find a wrecked LHS or 300M with a black interior and and put those ultra comfy leather seats in mine, as well as the automatic climate control module. Anyway, the 2.7 is still going strong, and problem free since I replaced that crankshaft sensor. Once I do the timing chains she should be good for quite some time, hopefully. I'm interested to see how far it'll go, and maybe set some record for most miles on a 2.7L.

On Dodgetalk there's a guy who did just that, and the results are sexy. Chrysler luxury with Dodge sporty styling.

I love my car too much to ever get rid of it.

You still may want a Concorde....alongside the Intrepid.

I sold my Concorde 3 years ago and still miss it.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

...besides, Sixty Eight, the 3.5 Chrysler had PLENTY of power for most driving situations.

Not enough to do mindless burnouts in a high school parking lot, but still plenty of power.

But I digress, the 300 cars of the 1960's were the Shizzle.

I had a chance to buy a 65 Chrysler ragtop a few years back and still regret not buying that car. Ahh, lost opportunity that never comes again!

Chris

[01LightningGal]

New 2008 F250 4x4 Crewcab Lariat, V10, loaded (Navigation, DVD, Tow Command, etc)

First tank: 10.4mpg (mix of city and highway)

Second tank: 12.4mpg (more highway.......... but mountainous highway)

Third tank: 9.7mpg (all city)

Current tank: will be in the 10's (all city)

The truck currently has 1065 miles on it. When fully broken in (10K-20Kmiles), I fully expect 11's in town, and up to 15's on the highway.

I LOVE my new truck.

[A Horse With No Name]

New 2008 F250 4x4 Crewcab Lariat, V10, loaded (Navigation, DVD, Tow Command, etc)

First tank: 10.4mpg (mix of city and highway)

Second tank: 12.4mpg (more highway.......... but mountainous highway)

Third tank: 9.7mpg (all city)

Current tank: will be in the 10's (all city)

The truck currently has 1065 miles on it. When fully broken in (10K-20Kmiles), I fully expect 11's in town, and up to 15's on the highway.

I LOVE my new truck.

That is an Amazing truck. I'd have gone diesel myself.

Chris

[01LightningGal]

The diesel is $5K more to buy, only gets marginally better mileage (because it meets the 2010 emissions regs and has a particulate filter the size of a small house, goes into regen mode all the time, and has 2 EGR's), costs much more to maintain, and diesel is 24% higher than gasoline here.

We will keep the truck forever, as it will do everything we will ever need it to do. It is my daily driver, but I don't drive much (with son going back to school, about 300 miles a month unless we play).

The V10 is a great engine. It makes plenty of hp and torque (362hp 457lb ft of torque), gets out of its own way easily, and is reliable as all get out.

We set out to buy the V10, as we have wanted one for a while. We originally thought we would buy a 2005-2007 version, but after test driving the '08, with its fantastic interior (sorry, but I like my truck interior to look like a truck interior) and driving characteristics (it really drives much smaller than it is)............ there was no way I could buy the last gen truck.

[Camino LS6]

Test drove an F250 Diesel before I bought the duramax - wasn't impressed.

[A Horse With No Name]

Glad to hear your happy with the V10. We are getting about 15 or 16 out of a 1 ton econoline diesel at work.

300 miles a month? That truck OUGHT to last forever.

Good luck with it!

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Test drove an F250 Diesel before I bought the duramax - wasn't impressed.

Like I said, the Duramax would be my first personal choice in a work truck.

Chris

[Sixty8panther]

FWD or not it's a hell of a car.

Not everyone shares the RWD Bias...

For 99.7% or the motoring public, it would work just fine.

...besides, Sixty Eight, the 3.5 Chrysler had PLENTY of power for most driving situations.

With all due respect it's exactly THAT kind of

"close enough for Rock & Roll" attitude that

got us where we are TODAY!

By that I mean 15 million Camrys, Accords & Corollas on the road!

What the hell do I care if it is good enough "for most people"?

It was still a pathetic attempt at a 300-letter car!

Did it have 300 horsepower or NO... yes or NO.

This isn't horseshoes or hand granades... not that 250 is even close to 300 anyway.

It frustrates me to NO end whe you guys come in here and act

like enthusiasts and then rave about some FWD $h!box just

because it's slightly removed from a Toyopet Camry &/or is just

a bit more exciting than a Taurus GL.

The 300M should have never existed. PERIOD. It should have

been called something else, & by that I DON'T mean Imperial.

[01LightningGal]

Test drove an F250 Diesel before I bought the duramax - wasn't impressed.

Out of curiosity, what year F250 did you drive???

[Intrepidation]

With all due respect it's exactly THAT kind of

"close enough for Rock & Roll" attitude that

got us where we are TODAY!

By that I mean 15 million Camrys, Accords & Corollas on the road!

What the hell do I care if it is good enough "for most people"?

It was still a pathetic attempt at a 300-letter car!

Did it have 300 horsepower or NO... yes or NO.

This isn't horseshoes or hand granades... not that 250 is even close to 300 anyway.

It frustrates me to NO end whe you guys come in here and act

like enthusiasts and then rave about some FWD $h!box just

because it's slightly removed from a Toyopet Camry &/or is just

a bit more exciting than a Taurus GL.

The 300M should have never existed. PERIOD. It should have

been called something else, & by that I DON'T mean Imperial.

You should know from experience that the LH cars are a whole different car compare d to the Camrys and Accords. They handle very well, drive very well, and handle speed very well (we cruised 80-100 mph all the way to Tulsa and back). They are also special cars due to their revolutionary design, and while they may be FWD, the engine placement is of the correct direction.

The 300M wasn't just about power, it was about luxury and all around handling. Besides, the next generation became RWD. Meanwhile the historic Impala nameplate soldiers on as a FWD car on an outdated platform. Get back to me when GM ever makes it RWD.

I also take more than a little offense that you imply that just because I love my FWD car, and that it isn't some massive, 5 ton, gas sucking, poor handling aircraft carrier that I'm not an enthusiast, or less of an enthusiast. There's different kinds of enthusiasts, we don't all have to adhere to one person's idea of what makes a car enthusiast.

[Sixty8panther]

99% of Modern cars = compromise.

Plain and simple.

[Robert Hall]

You should know from experience that the LH cars are a whole different car compare d to the Camrys and Accords. They handle very well, drive very well, and handle speed very well (we cruised 80-100 mph all the way to Tulsa and back). They are also special cars due to their revolutionary design, and while they may be FWD, the engine placement is of the correct direction.

The 300M wasn't just about power, it was about luxury and all around handling. Besides, the next generation became RWD. Meanwhile the historic Impala nameplate soldiers on as a FWD car on an outdated platform. Get back to me when GM ever makes it RWD.

I also take more than a little offense that you imply that just because I love my FWD car, and that it isn't some massive, 5 ton, gas sucking, poor handling aircraft carrier that I'm not an enthusiast, or less of an enthusiast. There's different kinds of enthusiasts, we don't all have to adhere to one person's idea of what makes a car enthusiast.

I've always liked the LHes... I loved the styling back when they came out for '99 (the 2nd gen models). Very comfortable and smooth cars..I rented quite a few Intrepids, 300Ms, and LHSes from around '99-02.

[Robert Hall]

99% of Modern cars = compromise.

Plain and simple.

Such is life...compromise is everywhere. Nothing is pure or completely focused.

[Intrepidation]

I've always liked the LHes... I loved the styling back when they came out for '99 (the 2nd gen models). Very comfortable and smooth cars..I rented quite a few Intrepids, 300Ms, and LHSes from around '99-02.

I've driven newer cars, although not the LX cars or the G8 yet, however among the cars I have driven these still ride and handle extremely nice. They were also of the era when Chrysler made an effort with their interior designs, which, save save for the extra chrome and metallic surfaces on newer interiors, looks perfectly modern.

[Sixty8panther]

Ok.... true, but for every one or two practicall compromises

that we had on cars 4 or 5 decades ago we had HUNDREDS

of little awesome details, styling, practicality, durability...

it seems the tables have been turned, 99% of a modern car

just turns me off like a wet blanket.

FWD

scarce availability of ANYTHING other than a 4-door sedan

DOHC

transverse mounted motors

computer watchamagig on/in/around EVERYTHING

... I'd keepo going but you get the point

[A Horse With No Name]

You should know from experience that the LH cars are a whole different car compare d to the Camrys and Accords. They handle very well, drive very well, and handle speed very well (we cruised 80-100 mph all the way to Tulsa and back). They are also special cars due to their revolutionary design, and while they may be FWD, the engine placement is of the correct direction.

The 300M wasn't just about power, it was about luxury and all around handling. Besides, the next generation became RWD. Meanwhile the historic Impala nameplate soldiers on as a FWD car on an outdated platform. Get back to me when GM ever makes it RWD.

I also take more than a little offense that you imply that just because I love my FWD car, and that it isn't some massive, 5 ton, gas sucking, poor handling aircraft carrier that I'm not an enthusiast, or less of an enthusiast. There's different kinds of enthusiasts, we don't all have to adhere to one person's idea of what makes a car enthusiast.

Exactly, Dodgefan. I'd rather drive a 300 LX car than the Bananna boat or the B-59 as a daily driver. MUCH better as a real world automobile.

The 300M is another one of the cars on my short list. Probably one of the best driving big sedans detroit has built in the last 20 or 30 years.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Such is life...compromise is everywhere. Nothing is pure or completely focused.

Exactly. There is plenty of compromise in "old" cars also.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Ok.... true, but for every one or two practicall compromises

that we had on cars 4 or 5 decades ago we had HUNDREDS

of little awesome details, styling, practicality, durability...

it seems the tables have been turned, 99% of a modern car

just turns me off like a wet blanket.

FWD

scarce availability of ANYTHING other than a 4-door sedan

DOHC

transverse mounted motors

computer watchamagig on/in/around EVERYTHING

... I'd keepo going but you get the point

So don't buy a modern car. But the 99.7% PLUS percent of car buyers will, and were you to line up a hundred people with the Bannana Boat and the 300m I would lay a hundred bucks on the hood that at least 92%-95% would prefer the 300M.

Chrysler, Honda, and Toyota didn't get where they are in the modern car market by ignoring what people want in cars.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

With all due respect it's exactly THAT kind of

"close enough for Rock & Roll" attitude that

got us where we are TODAY!

By that I mean 15 million Camrys, Accords & Corollas on the road!

What the hell do I care if it is good enough "for most people"?

It was still a pathetic attempt at a 300-letter car!

Did it have 300 horsepower or NO... yes or NO.

This isn't horseshoes or hand granades... not that 250 is even close to 300 anyway.

It frustrates me to NO end whe you guys come in here and act

like enthusiasts and then rave about some FWD $h!box just

because it's slightly removed from a Toyopet Camry &/or is just

a bit more exciting than a Taurus GL.

The 300M should have never existed. PERIOD. It should have

been called something else, & by that I DON'T mean Imperial.

You do realize that Toyota has managed to sell, at a profit, probably 50 or 60 Camry's for every Buick built in '59, don't you?

You aren't most people, and quite frankly what you think doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference to the people who build, sell and buy Toyotas, Chryslers, Taurus, et al.

I highly doubt with the $1500-$5000 you want to spend on your next car that your rreally the market that toyota has in mind when they market the Camry anyways.

You do also realize that the Taurus was waldly succesful and profitable for Ford. Hell, it probably kept Ford in buisiness...which is why we have the modern Mustang. And just like Sept 12, 1966...no Mustang, no Camaro. So if you do ever get a new Camaro (wiht the B-pillar delete) you can in part thank the Taurus for making that happen.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

With all due respect it's exactly THAT kind of

"close enough for Rock & Roll" attitude that

got us where we are TODAY!

By that I mean 15 million Camrys, Accords & Corollas on the road!

What the hell do I care if it is good enough "for most people"?

It was still a pathetic attempt at a 300-letter car!

Did it have 300 horsepower or NO... yes or NO.

This isn't horseshoes or hand granades... not that 250 is even close to 300 anyway.

It frustrates me to NO end whe you guys come in here and act

like enthusiasts and then rave about some FWD $h!box just

because it's slightly removed from a Toyopet Camry &/or is just

a bit more exciting than a Taurus GL.

The 300M should have never existed. PERIOD. It should have

been called something else, & by that I DON'T mean Imperial.

You do also realize that Chysler OWNS the 300 name and they can basically do whatever the hell they want to with it, right?

And that the 300M was a very well liked and profitable car for Chrysler...

Chris

[Sixty8panther]

Exactly, Dodgefan. I'd rather drive a 300 LX car than the Bananna boat or the B-59 as a daily driver. MUCH better as a real world automobile.

The 300M is another one of the cars on my short list. Probably one of the best driving big sedans detroit has built in the last 20 or 30 years.

Chris

Have fun in the "real world".... the Banana Boat was one thing

but my B-59 does not need to apologize to ANYONE, it drove

my ass around for about 7000 miles last summer!

Plenty of "modern" used cars bought for MORE than the B-59s'

price can't go that kind of distance between major issues.

Oh, and What LX?

We were talking about the LH as in his FWD Dodge Intrepid.

You call the 300M a "big sedan"?

I guess that about sums up where our differances lie.

And the comparison between a 1959 Buick & Toyota

Camry is both absurd and insulting.

Back in 1959 GM made good money on every car made

without playing dirty like Toyota and their market share

was well over half the USA car sales.

It's pointless, all you guys will always just keep making

excuses as to why modern cars suck and have to

continue sucking, and that is why things will never

change. I hope I die a quick death if I ever put things

like the amount of cup holders or ease of finding parts

high up on my list of 'must haves' in a car.

What many of you consider to be "nice, respectable cars"

I find to be disgusting, ugly pieces of garbage... esp. the

$h! made by Toyota & Honda.

If you're going to defend those piece of $h! appliances

than we're on opposite sides of the fence... but for the

record YOU are the one in EASTERN Germany FYI. :wink:

[Intrepidation]

Or here's a thought: not everyone has to abide by someone else's definition of what makes a desriable car.

What a f@#king concept.

Edited July 29, 2008 by Dodgefan

[Satty]

Just wanted to add something constructive.

[Satty]

Or here's a thought: not everyone has to abide by someone else's definition of what makes a desriable car.

What a f@#king concept.

No way man, cars are THE most important thing in the world. More important than family, friends, home, money, sex, war, peace, boobs, laughter, children, the elderly, responsibility, pride, puffy Cheetos, oxygen, nitrogen, movies, books, newspapers, computers, cockroaches, dirt and sloppy blowjobs from bulimic prostitutes.