Car models that came back
so now there is an age limit on automotive appreciation?....
i grew up around cars stemming back to model A's... i've seen a lot of cars and inherited the interest from my father(although not his mechanic abilities). i dont need an age of approval to have an opinion on a classic car any more than you do..
you wanna believe that you're owed some type of seniority on the subject b/c of your age, fine.
but dont think b/c of one's age, that im limited to having an opinion on cars from 1987 and up...
i dont hate dodge, or their current line-up, im simply disappointed that they would badge the current car a charger. to me, it doesnt capture the essence of what the charge was.
now you're starting to understand
i grew up around cars stemming back to model A's... i've seen a lot of cars and inherited the interest from my father(although not his mechanic abilities). i dont need an age of approval to have an opinion on a classic car any more than you do..
you wanna believe that you're owed some type of seniority on the subject b/c of your age, fine.
but dont think b/c of one's age, that im limited to having an opinion on cars from 1987 and up...
i dont hate dodge, or their current line-up, im simply disappointed that they would badge the current car a charger. to me, it doesnt capture the essence of what the charge was.
now you're starting to understand

This has nothing to do with age and seniority. The Charger was before my time as well. And while I have a deep appreciation for it, its before me, and the current charger is the one I know best. I have no issue with it being a four door. The complaints you make are the ones from the guys of THAT generation. I just find it silly. And I do think the current charger, more specifically this new gen embodies the OG Charger.
Right-- it should'a been an inline 6 or Slant 6 like the original B-bodies. 
I think every muscle car and ponycar started with an in-line 6 as a base car back in the '60s and '70s.
FWIW, I think the current V8 M3 is a blight on the M3 name because a proper M3 should have a 4-cylinder or 6-cylinder.

I think every muscle car and ponycar started with an in-line 6 as a base car back in the '60s and '70s.
FWIW, I think the current V8 M3 is a blight on the M3 name because a proper M3 should have a 4-cylinder or 6-cylinder.

I wanted a 1G Scirocco so bad when I graduated high school, I was looking at used ones for a college car. My dad called his insurance company and it was $1K/year in 1980 so that put that dream to rest 
I test drove a handful of them and although i know it was basically a rabbit chassis, VW did a decent job with the springs and swaybars that it's handling was really nice.

I test drove a handful of them and although i know it was basically a rabbit chassis, VW did a decent job with the springs and swaybars that it's handling was really nice.
Last edited by Legend2TL; Mar 1, 2011 at 06:42 AM.
One model to me that never had a low point would be the 911, really can't think of any period where it lost it's edge as it evolved. Where as to me the Ferrari 348 was a drop from the 328 it replaced, it took another 2 generations back to the 360 to see it return to form.
I would say the 996 was a step backwards from the 993. Of course, being the last of the air-cooled engines lends some bias but the egg-shaped headlights and craptastic interior of the 996 represent a recent nadir in the 911s evolution which thankfully was remedied by the 997. Let's hope the 991 isn't a step in the wrong direction either.
For looks I still love the 911SC's and 911 3.2's, they had the best classic 911 looks. The 997's look much nicer than the 996's but since he got a 2004 996 convertible inspected (not CPO but a full Pre-Purchase Inspection) with less than 40K for under $35 was a great deal. My brother has all the luck he also found a great deal on CPO 2004 Cayenne Turbo a few years ago for $40K.
Funny you should mention a 996, my brother just received his 2004 Cabriolet black/black 2WD today. Originally he was looking at 993's, I convinced him to look at the 996 over the 993. Looks wise although I don't care much for the Boxster/996 headlights, however I much prefer the 996 interior over the 993. The main reason was what was underneath, a 996's engine/suspension/transaxle/chassis are far better than the 993. Price-wise the 993's are only slightly less or some cases equal for similar mileage/options/condition but I'm glad he got the 996. The early water cooled six's had some teething problems (a former boss had a 2001 996).
For looks I still love the 911SC's and 911 3.2's, they had the best classic 911 looks. The 997's look much nicer than the 996's but since he got a 2004 996 convertible inspected (not CPO but a full Pre-Purchase Inspection) with less than 40K for under $35 was a great deal. My brother has all the luck he also found a great deal on CPO 2004 Cayenne Turbo a few years ago for $40K.
For looks I still love the 911SC's and 911 3.2's, they had the best classic 911 looks. The 997's look much nicer than the 996's but since he got a 2004 996 convertible inspected (not CPO but a full Pre-Purchase Inspection) with less than 40K for under $35 was a great deal. My brother has all the luck he also found a great deal on CPO 2004 Cayenne Turbo a few years ago for $40K.
I see some low mileage 993s priced in the ballpark of 2005 and 2006 997.1 so I guess it depends on the market and the condition of the car obviously. Your bro snagged a late model 996 so obviously that's a big step up. In the end, your bro is behind the wheel of a 911 and that's pretty much the bottom line.
How about the 300? The old 300 was fast, but not much to look at. Now the new 300 is nice to look at and is a bit fast (for the big sedan that it is).
And I have to agree, the Challenger came out real nice, just a bit heavy. The Mini should be an unmitigated success. Until you start talking about the "variants".
And I have to agree, the Challenger came out real nice, just a bit heavy. The Mini should be an unmitigated success. Until you start talking about the "variants".
I still consider the 993 to be at the top of the pyramid with it's ineffective air-conditioning and spartan interior. The interior made a big gain going from the 996 to the 997 no doubt but I will always have a special place for the air-cooled engines.
I see some low mileage 993s priced in the ballpark of 2005 and 2006 997.1 so I guess it depends on the market and the condition of the car obviously. Your bro snagged a late model 996 so obviously that's a big step up. In the end, your bro is behind the wheel of a 911 and that's pretty much the bottom line.
I see some low mileage 993s priced in the ballpark of 2005 and 2006 997.1 so I guess it depends on the market and the condition of the car obviously. Your bro snagged a late model 996 so obviously that's a big step up. In the end, your bro is behind the wheel of a 911 and that's pretty much the bottom line.

In terms of the 996 and 997 what changed on the interior? I'm not that familiar with the changes. I thought the only significant changes were the climate control, radio, dash chronometer, and window switches. Mostly center stackup stuff. From pictures it looks like the vents are nicer and the dash is more a one piece. I thought the instrument cluster was larger carried over from 996 to 997. I vaguely remember the shiny switch gear that was the choice of the former Toyota exec who was at Porsche in the late 1990's.
996

997
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mugen TSX
Eastern Canada
0
Sep 1, 2015 11:05 PM










