LosAngeles

Nice to see this kind of work being put in on the Intrepid. Would love to see it stanced, y0! And with a raunchier exhaust of course. That is a sexy one. Might have to consider it for the Volvo if the stock one (itself a sporty piece) ever breaks. Coolant and ATF mixing is probably even worse. Was looking at this guy's 740 wagon, courting it for weeks, and we finally go to get it inspected, only for me to learn that coolant was all inside the tranny. Needless to say, I just kept looking. Manufacturers really need to stop putting coolers of other fluids inside radiators. It's a recipe for disaster. Hopefully the recent Nissan Pathfinder story is the last of such idiocy Owners of those basically say why lose dough selling whole cars to boneyards when they can part them out themselves and make way more. Not to mention those cars will now more likely be rescued from scrapping situations at this point. Those vintages are just worth too much now. Junkyards are with few exceptions now serving your average 92 Camry or 98 Taurus. This whole deal here is how Volvo seekers get lucky. They were expensive when new, but command nowhere near the used prices that, say, Toyotas do. Not to mention they have less miles and tend to be nowhere near as thrashed in many cases. But like every brand, at their cheapest, some major repair is often in order that put the thing up for sale in the first place. Ultimately, with those and the garden variety hipster and mommy beaters notwithstanding, plenty of plum examples at the nice price.

Hey there, Ted. Just read the whole thread, couldn't wait to drop some suggestions, but since you replaced it with the Firebird, they all still apply: -That Achieva could've used a 3800 swap and a turbo (you should see the YouTubes of the W-bodies and swaps into other platforms). But the turbo still applies to this and all 3800 cars (including 98s and Cieras)! -Definitely could stand to be stanced FTW! -And for the love of Jeezus, stop driving your pride and joy in that awful Ontario salt! Let the frame of the Achieva be a lesson to you.

I'm now a Volvo guy, having just bought an 850 Turbo and having immersed myself in the Volvo community. The current whiteblock 5 and 6 cylinders, and the old redblock fours that powered the stereotypical Volvos of the 70s and 80s are extremely durable and reliable, capable of lasting 300,000 miles and beyond. As mentioned above, fuel economy was never one of their strong suits. I don't believe the whiteblocks need to be outright retired, but Volvo hasn't made them very competitive in the horsepower wars of the past decade. 300 horses and 30 combined mpg is commonplace in cars that cost a lot less. No reason those numbers can't come from a stock T-5 or NA 6, but they don't, and maybe the development of this new four was the reason. if it's a long-lasting torque monster to boot, calling it a career for the whiteblock might not be a bad idea. The Volvospeeders and 240 snobs over on TurboBricks will certainly love this "greenblock" if it's easily swappable to their older Volvos.

"Chrysler Barracuda" has a nice ring to it. I don't think it or a new Challenger has to be retro. Why not a sleeker, modern-looking, lighter GT that still packs raunchy 300-400+ hp raunchiness? The retro pony cars were good for reboot (Mustang)/reentry (Challenger and Camaro), but it's time to expand what these cars can look like, add to the heritage.

They were better off making a full-on limo.

ITA about coupe utilities (the kind of car the El Camino and Ranchero is). It would be nice to see maybe a Crosstour built such a way. I do miss formal rooflines. And flying buttresses. If anything, I wanna see more intermediate and full-size coupes and especially wagons. The GTO, Magnum and Mazda6 wagon were steps in the right direction. Also 2-door sedans. And GRAND TOURING cars! What would the Riviera, Supra, Thunderbird, Imperial, et al, be like on today's platforms? Car companies just aren't fearless enough these days in this market. Perfectly content with mimicking the Camcordima and the CRAV4. Soulless 4-door, front-drive, conventional automatic appliances.

I'm not buyin' it, but we can agree to disagree here. I think the cars I named off have style. I don't see the Flex as even appealing to women. The average sedan of today is about as tall as the Flex, do they look akin to trucks too? And as far as AMC, as irrelevant as their name is in the conversation, I'd rather have a standard Concord wagon...lifted station wagons just look silly to me....like someone's lame attempt at building a suburban dunebuggy. Eagle, Outback, XC...all blow super chunks. Pisses me off the way high-riding a Cutlass or Caprice does others. One thing I notice is people have loaded opinions of things and subjects they don't like.

Hardy har har... In the immortal words of Jay-Z, we don't believe you, you need more people. I'll give you maybe EX and Venza, but Flex and R-Class don't look remotely like SUVs. Observe... Come on...let's not act as if I tried to sell the panel on a lowered Highlander or CR-V.

As far as the wannabe SUV crossovers, it's a shame that nice engines and fairly curvy car lines are ruined by the ground clearance and the silly *cue dumb blonde* "SUV bits." I think most all of them should have been standard wagons, or at least more like the Flex or R-Class. It really is a shame to see the industry and the entire automotive scene, all this great tech and luxury and their true capabilities put to the wrong use in this stupid SUV/crossover craze of the past 15 years.

Why dod I read that one part as "Lambadas?" LOL. Anyways, yeah, i generally agree. This category is hard to think out. I don't care for the SUV-ish kind of any size. They may as well just be SUVs. A few are handsome, but that's generally not my kind of motoring, way up in the air like that. I like Flex, Venza, R-Class and such because that's closer to what people with big families should actually drive. Since these people can't be convinced to drive estates, that's the next best thing. Are they driver's cars? With the possible exception of the EX, of course not...but I definitely see cruisers with serviceable fun quotients to them coupled with lots of grown man luxury. Tyoe of car I'd like to see GM, Chrysler, or Volkswagen make.

I was thinking about the so-called crossovers I dig (*those that are basically semi-tall cars and don't remotely look like SUVs)...those one could easily lower and drive like a sedan, wagon (which the thing basically is) or fastback. I see my faves going in this order: 1. Ford Flex-great for family, hanging out with the bros, or a complete date (if you know what I mean!)...looks are cool and inspiring. And it's all-American (sans D3 platform originiating with Volvo) 2. Infiniti EX-it's basically a G35/37 hatch. Just find a way to lower it and it's on. 3. Toyota Venza-yeah, it's partially based on the evil Camry, but I love the exterior. Looks like another great cruiser. 4. Mercedes R-Class-falls to 4th place chiefly on price...though I'm sure examples can now be had for a song by comparison. It's basically an S-Class wagon. A Flex or Venza built by Mercedes. Only considered a minivan by detractors. 5. Acura RDX-I'm interested in that turbo four...but the SUV shaped front spoiler is the only killer. The Freestyle/Taurus X, original SRX, and Pacifica all fell into this category, but all are dead. Element isn't really a car, seems more vannish to me. A long one would make an interesting camper. Everything else made by other makes is an SUV pretending not to be (though Journey and Compass/Patriot have soft carrish leanings). Now, as far as compact box-wagons and retromobiles (HHR, Scion xB, Cube and such), that should probably be a separate category...

Just stopped by a shop today (in order not to tow the car there) and told the guy the exact same story. He says that the tranny would need an overhaul just on the strength of the incident, no matter how quickly it went. You better believe I'm off to get a second, third, and fourth opinion before I spend the kinda cash that sounds like it will be. And that shop won't even get the business just on the strength of not even caring to hear the line theory, as if he was out to do an upsell.

A few days ago, during normal driving, while stopped at an intersection, the transmission suddenly felt disconnected, and as I coasted out of that intersection, I couldn't find any gear to propel the car. Once I stopped coasting and put it in park, the car simply wouldn't connect and move. Put it back in park, got out and there was a puddle of fluid on the ground. Tranny showed no signs of being on its way out before this sudden incident (I know this after struggling for months with the previous gearbox in this car before replacing it). A friend said it might be a blown hose or fluid line. Could this this true, and if so, is it an easy, relatively inexpensive fix?

It's like watching an entire collection of rare vinyl and CDs numbering in the thousands thrown out/destroyed so someone can get a discount on a bullsh*t iPod.

Understandable, there's simply still way too many of them (what, 17 model years worth?) and to keep it funky they aren't all exactly that handsome (non-GT 87-93s don't have that lovely of a front end to them). I wonder what his opinion is of 94-98/99-04? Yeah, the owners of especially those goddamn import dealers are taking way too much perverse glee in destroying Detroit iron. Right in the heart of demolition derby country too. See the connection?