Forums | MacLife

I think you can find a nice, very nice vehicle for 60K or less. Anything more is a hobby car (which is cool) or an over the top "look at me" attention seeking whore machine. I would get something much cooler than I currently drive, that's for sure. But a 100k is even crazy.

gd wrote:

The Caddie's nice but isn't it a little too much to pay for. Can you afford it. I am young and I also prefer luxury and performance. I don't care about having the fastest care as much as I do about having the best looking car. That is where I look at the Rapid. The car is still not out on the market but it is good looking though. If I had a few million dollars to spend this is what I would get.

http://autoforo.files.wordpress.com/200 … pide-1.jpg

http://autoforo.files.wordpress.com/200 … antera.jpg

1) I wanted to keep buying American cars.
2) would never spend 200k for a car because it is way out my price range and the insurance would kill me.
3) But I can afford a car in the 60k range
4) Your young, so dream on, make all of them come true, me.... I have to live with what I have in hand, and what I can afford. I gotta be able to drive it now. Dreams don't get me from home to work.
**said with a nice tone**

robco wrote:

I'd rather have Bumblebee.

I also like that Transformer (bumblebee) edition. Looks nice.

Last edited by CG5Addict (2009-10-23 5:04 pm)

Bren wrote:

Regarding the Cadillac: It's wonderful that you want to buy American, but who really needs 550 horsepower? Even if you can afford to burn that much gas, you really shouldn't.

Well if you buy the performance version (all V-8) of the Camero, Charger, Mustang, these are not fuel saving vehicles. But like the Caddillac all have V-6 version. but still under your vision they should stop making all high output engines and close all NASCAR and and open wheel races. I understand your view on the environment, but fuel and emissions has been lowered considerably in these high performance type cars. and yes, I would love 550 pony's under the hood, even if I just wanna know it's there.

Bren wrote:

Furthermore, like all current Cadillacs, that thing is a styling disaster. Enough with the sharp edges, abrupt angles, and massive, look-at-me front grilles already! That sort of thing looked beautiful on the 1984 El Dorado, but when they try to combine those styling elements with modern, aerodynamic design, it just doesn't work.

Most new cars are hideous to look at. New Cadillacs are just hideous in a different way. So I guess you gotta give them some credit for being unique.

Well beauty is the eye of the beholder as seen in this thread where some like the look of the Camero and others don't.

**just fixed grammar error**

Last edited by CG5Addict (2009-10-23 7:44 pm)

Compared to an M5 or S6, the Caddy is a steal - outperforms, too.
Also, I like the way it looks.

I prefer the XF with 510 over that Caddie. I don't know what is it that some british cars have lately that I tend to like them. As well as the Italians. I would love to see Alfa Romeo go stateside. Driving a Mito ought to be fun.

Last edited by gd (2009-10-23 8:35 pm)

I drool over the thought of owning a CTS-V! Excellent looking car and will get you there quick if need be.

NASCAR needs to use their time productively and bring the Trans Am series back. Actual stock body and chassis Mustang, Camaro, and Challengers racing on road courses!

gd, in terms of beauty I'll take mine in Maserati Gran Turismo form. Best looking and sedan are hard to pull off so I'll sacrifice two doors. Not sure what I like better, the ass, breasts, or hips?

My dad owns one of those fish out if water. It is very beautiful in person. I've been in a Gran Turismo and it is not as comfortable. The quattropporte is very nice inside and out.

Last edited by gd (2009-10-24 1:48 am)

I still get grief from one of my muscle-car driving friends because he can't understand why I don't hate anything built after 1970. I hate that attitude, and I think it's very dumb to have a knee-jerk reaction that everything new is crap, and everything old is gold.

I'm taking things on a car-by-car basis. The '85 Quattroporte was a thing of grotesque beauty, and instantly recognizable, because no other car looked quite like it. The new Quattroporte? Squint and you could mistake it for anything from a melted bar of soap to a Hyundai Genesis.

Cars as recent as the 80s and 90s had soul. Most of the modern cars just looks like the aforementioned bar of melted soap, or they look like angry insects. Some of them look like they're making an ugly face because they've tasted something bitter. Hardly any of them have any real personality, or anything about their looks that are at all endearing or truly artistic.

For what it's worth, the Gallardo is one of the few exceptions to this rule.

"Baroque!" I love it! What really impresses me are those few cars which managed to pull off that style without looking like completely absurd.

Bren wrote:

I'm not exactly tall myself. I'm 5"9, and I find the thing kinda cramped.

I'm 6' right on the nose, and slid right in.

Bren wrote:

I've never been a huge admirer of the first-gen Camaro that it mimicks, but the other day I happened to see a '67 Camaro, and was stuck by how much better-looking it is than the current one.

If you like it enough, YearOne makes every part from the '69 Camaro.  You can have it delivered to your door and build it yourself.

Last edited by Mr. T (2009-10-24 1:18 pm)

Wow, that's worse than the 305-powered California Corvette.

The 80's were a sad time for muscle cars in general.  The damn emissions laws killed off all the horsepower; the rising fuel and insurance costs certainly didn't help much, either.  The industry never fully recovered.

wellfleation wrote:

Robert B. wrote:

wellfleation wrote:

American cars seem to be moving retro (- Beetle), desperate to grasp any glimpse of the glory days. The rest of the car companies are moving forward. The retro thing is getting old fast.

Okay, I don't know smurf about cars, but I do know the Beetle is German.

You obviously did not realize that - (that meant "minus") on my post. Go back and re-read my post now for full comprehension.

WRONG.

Go back and your own damn post.

If you did not intend to include the Beetle in the encompassing classification of American vehicles, then why bother mentioning it? What your post says is "American cars seem to be moving retro, except for the Beetle..." Since the Beetle is not an American car, it's not necessary to mention it at all.

ENGLISH FTW smurf!!

Last edited by Robert B. (2009-10-24 4:10 pm)