This thing's ugly

[cecilia]

speel, i think the beer has not worn off. you seem to be suffering from circular "logic"
 :-D

[whabang]

T_Bone wrote:
While I'm {bleep}ing about cars, why doesn't anyone make station wagons anymore?

Volvo? Saab?
Or have they concentrated the US sales on the XC90? :-?

[whabang]

PMC wrote:
@T-Bone & QuikSanz

Now THIS is a good looking wagon....

http://wawawoum.imagesfiat2.free.fr/images/italie/alfa/2000_156_sportwagon_9.jpg

http://us1.webpublications.com.au/static/images/news/aw/alf0002291amg.jpg

and this:

http://www6.ocn.ne.jp/~sinsho/images/img92.jpg

NICE! :-o

[PMC]

Here's the saloon version of the range topping GTA model(couldn't resist...)

http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/02/alfa_156-GTA_front800.jpg

http://autozine.kyul.net/gallery/alfa/156_GTA.htm

Maybe Speel is right after all?

[Speelgoedmannetje]

cecilia wrote:
speel, i think the beer has not worn off. you seem to be suffering from circular "logic"
 :-D

*sigh*
you do not know how many times that happened to me :lol:

(me remembers a night that I tried to push the power button of the stereo standing next to the monitor with the mouse pointer)

[PMC]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:

you do not know how many times that happened to me :lol:

(me remembers a night that I tried to push the power button of the stereo standing next to the monitor with the mouse pointer)

:lol:

A night on the ale with lack of sleep perhaps?  So what's your idea of a good looking car then?

[Cyberus]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:

cecilia wrote:
speel, i think the beer has not worn off. you seem to be suffering from circular "logic"
 :-D

*sigh*
you do not know how many times that happened to me :lol:

(me remembers a night that I tried to push the power button of the stereo standing next to the monitor with the mouse pointer)

Smoking too much good weed will also have that effect.

[T_Bone]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:

cecilia wrote:
speel, i think the beer has not worn off. you seem to be suffering from circular "logic"
 :-D

*sigh*
you do not know how many times that happened to me :lol:

(me remembers a night that I tried to push the power button of the stereo standing next to the monitor with the mouse pointer)

 :lol:  :lol:  :roflmao:

[blobrana]

Hum,

>>"tried to push the power button"


There is no `try`...


not enough practice young padawan  ...

[Ilwrath]

...and automakers have failed to realise the genius of the "wagon" design. Same body/frame as the regular car, but without a trunk. There's not a SINGLE auto line nowdays that has a car with a wagon option. I only need one truck damnit, but it'd be nice if my second car could be something useable too.

Oh boy... I feel a good ole' Detroiter's rant coming on!


In the US, you can thank your local greenie weenies for the death of the station wagon.  

To understand what happened, you need to understand a thing called Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE).  Basically, what it means is that for each class of vehicle an automaker sells, the entire volume of sales in that class must average out below the mandated miles per gallon (mpg) figure for that class.  Currently, the standard for passenger cars is 27.5 mpg, while for light trucks it is only 20.7 mpg.  

So, in other words, if, say, Ford sells 10 SVT Mustang Cobras at 15 mpg each, they'll need to sell 20 base i4 Focus models at 34 mpg each to offset it and come in below average for their car lineup, provided those 30 cars are all that are sold that year.

So the idea to get from this example is that for every fuel-hog that gets sold, several fuel efficient models must be sold to offset it.

Now, wagons eat more fuel than passenger cars.  They have to.  They're larger vehicles.  They have more weight from size, extra safety features, etc, so they need a larger engine to still maintain a base drivability that consumers look for.

There are only two CAFE classes for passenger vehicles.  Cars and Trucks.  Originally there was also to be a third class of vehicles, which would have included station wagons and full-size vans.  This was dropped because the environmentalists petitioned the EPA to hold station wagons to the same fuel economy standards as the cars they are based off of.

Of course, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that automakers are shifty and want to make as much profit as possible.  Station wagons hurt their average fuel economy ratings, but don't bring in as much money as high-end sports cars.  Which one do you think they cut out of their lineup to help their average fuel economy?

So, now station wagons are still wanted, but automakers refuse to make them, because of the negative impact each station wagon sold has on their car class CAFE.  

But, remember, light trucks go in a seperate class.  So, now to fill the demand for station wagons, the SUV (a light truck with a full passenger shell) is introduced.  Well, thats fine and dandy, except they're a lot less efficient and more dangerous than the station wagon they replaced.  But, it's all good, because they only count against the higher truck CAFE, which they can usually meet or beat.  As a bonus for the automakers, the volume of SUVs sold gives them enough room to introduce even larger high-end (high-markup) luxury trucks and sell them for a fortune, too.  So the automakers are high on the hog, and huge SUVs and trucks now rule the US roads, much to the chagrin of the environmentalists....

So the next time you nearly get run off the road by a soccer mom in an Expedition, remember to thank your local short-sighted environmentalists at least as much as the profit-hungry automakers for making it all possible.

[PMC]

@Ilwrath

I agree to a point, but the demand for the dreaded SUV isn't wholly confined to Stateside.

Personally if it were up to me I'd have every single SUV crushed (preferably with the owners still inside) unless it was either wearing UN decals, working on a farm or is painted in camo.

The same car buyers who wanted coupes in the 70s and 80s are buying SUVs now because they see them as more "practical".  On any given weekday in the UK you'll find dozens of the ugly mostrosities parked up in front of schools with a solitary child on board.  

Anyway, let's get back to more pictures of some seriously good looking cars....  

[whabang]

@PMC
Well,
there are exceptions.
I, for example, am too tall (and fat? :-P) to fit in a regular Nissan Micra. I need something like a Jeep Grand Chereokee if I'm to sit comfortably.
This could be solved by making more room in regular cars, but that doesn't seem very likely to happen.

Two months ago, my driving teacher wanted me to drive an MG Sport. It cost me a brand new pair of jeans to get into it. :-P

[PMC]

@Whabang,

You must be built like Arnie...

I struggled for five years with an old VW Polo.  I have longish legs and big feet so I struggled to find enough room in the footwells to get comfortable.  Driving in town was a nightmare as I had to constantly adjust the position of my left foot on the clutch.  

As a consequence, the seat was on it's rearmost setting and my arms were almost locked straight to grasp the wheel.  I normally prefer plenty of footroom and to have the wheel closer to my chest.  My Alfa is a bit of a compromise as the Italianate driving position of old hasn't been fully exorcised, but I get comfortable thanks to being able to adjust the position of the wheel.

The most comfortable car I've ever driven has to be one of the humblest; the Mk2 Golf got the driving position absolutely spot on.  

[whabang]

I'm a bit taller than Arnold, not as well trained, but yes, I'm rather well-built. :-)

[PMC]

More nice looking Italian cars...

http://www.carsfromitaly.com/alfaromeo/index.html

[PMC]

whabang wrote:
I'm a bit taller than Arnold, not as well trained, but yes, I'm rather well-built. :-)

Jeez...  Ever thought of a soft top?  No problems with headroom there!