Locate an Auto Repair Shop in Big Cabin, Oklahoma

Big Cabin, OK Car Consumer Discussions

Re: 50 Worst Cars of All Time [Mr_Shiftright]

by andre1969 on Thu Nov 13 10:18:57 PST 2008

If you view a '71 Imperial in real life, it is rather absurd--it is so huge, and yet has so much wasted space. It's a poster child for everything bad in automotive design. You know how it is, there is big, then there is bigger and then suddenly you cross a little line and go into parody. The Imperial just pushed the "full-size" envelope too far. But is a '71 Imperial any worse than its peers of the time? For example, a 1971 Lincoln or Cadillac? If nothing else, I think the Imperials were rather tastefully styled, although I'll agree that good style and good design don't always go hand-in-hand. Maybe the writer had the benefit of hindsight, since these clumbersome Chrysler cars were the cause of their near-demise a few years later. Actually, when that style came out for 1969, the Imperial was pretty popular. But Chrysler always did have trouble making the Imperial stand out from lesser Chryslers. And sharing the same bodies as they did in 1969-73 certainly didn't help. Other than the 3" longer wheelbase and hood, I don't think the car really gave you anything that you couldn't get on a New Yorker. It would get even worse for 1974, when the cars not only shared the same bodies, but the same wheelbase. The only difference by this time was that Imperials had hidden headlights and New Yorkers didn't. No longer was size used to differentiate the cars. The Imperial went away after 1975, but for '76-78 was replaced by the New Yorker Brougham, a car that was practically identical. If anything, it was probably the fuel crisis that killed the first Imperial. 1974 was a horrible time to introduce an all-new full-sized car...especially one that looked more massive than the one it replaced, even if it really wasn't. All big cars did bad in 1974, and it was only inevitable that the weakest would get culled first. FWIW, I was actually shocked when I found out how big a '69-73 Imperial really is. Something like 230-233", depending on the year (although most of that extra length was because of those big black rubber blocks they put on the cars...something that makes the cars longer, without making them LOOK longer. I mean, a car that's 230" of all car is going to look bigger than a car that gets puffed up to 230" by way of protruding bumpers or tacked-on bumper guards. I always thought the Imperial did a good job of hiding its size. Maybe the coupes are a bit extreme, because of the smallish passenger cabin and correspondingly longer rear deck, but I thought the sedans looked great.

Re: No more worries about $4 gas in CA [gagrice]

by larsb on Thu Nov 06 09:34:14 PST 2008

Here are some of the benefits, Gary, since you seem to miss them in regard to mass transit, without fail: With Obama at the helm in the White House and a majority in both Houses, his vision for 'change' and his version of FDR's 'New Deal,' we can hopefully have the trains operating within 6 years with the entire network completed by 2020. The 800-mile rail line would link Anaheim, Los Angeles, Fresno and San Francisco. Project planners also want to eventually add Sacramento, San Diego and Oakland. "The citizens of California have put the 21st century golden spike in the ground," pronounced Quentin Kopp, chairman of the California High-Speed Rail Authority. No more congested airports, no more removing belts and shoes for security, no more dreaded drive down Highway 5 and contributing to the smog of LA. Instead you'll be able to sit back and relax while traveling up to speeds of 200mph. You'll arrive inspired with plenty of time to see Mickey and his friends. No doubt, the trip will be in an air-conditioned, sound-proofed cabin, with comfortable seats, big windows and plenty of leg room. You'll even be able to enjoy in a nice glass of wine, perhaps take a nap, or catch up on some reading. For the busy business commuters and techaholics there will even be wi-fi connections available for use. The rest of the modern world has enjoyed the benefits of high speed rail for several decades now and it is about time the Golden State caught up with the implementation of slick mass transit, especially if we are serious about cutting back on pollution and wasting millions of hours each year sitting in traffic. And: Questions & Answers Will the high-speed train system create new jobs and boost our economy? Yes. The statewide high-speed train project will require us to draw upon and expand California’s skilled workforce, creating nearly 160,000 construction-related jobs to plan, design and build the system. An additional 450,000 permanent jobs are expected to be created by 2035 as a result of the economic growth the train system will bring to California. High speed trains will further boost California’s economy by: * Improving the movement of people, goods and services throughout the state; * Generating more than $1 billion in annual revenue surplus; * Reducing travel times for train riders; * Reducing delays to air and auto travelers as freeways and airports are relieved of congestion; * Reducing air pollution and related health care costs; * Reducing auto accident fatalities and injuries and related health care costs. How much does our broken transportation system cost our economy? California has three of the top five most congested urban areas in the United States. Right now, congestion costs approximately $20 billion per year in wasted fuel and lost time. What would be the cost of expanding our highways and airports to meet future intercity demands instead of building the high-speed train system? To serve the same number of travelers as the high-speed train system, California would have to build nearly 3,000 lane-miles of freeway plus five airport runways and 90 departure gates by 2020 – costing more than twice the high-speed train system and having much greater environmental impacts. What’s more, the proposed high-speed train system will provide lower passenger costs than for travel by automobile or air for the same city-to-city markets. See, Gary, it's not just money down the trash compactor. It will GENERATE revenue and SAVE wasted gas money and pollution. Don't be such a hater, dude !!!

Handling

by mrpushrod on Wed Nov 05 10:07:36 PST 2008

When you jerk the steering wheel back and forth on the vette going say 40MPH it is obvious that the car is two inches off the ground and there is virtually no sway in the suspension. Feels real crisp. When you do the same in the G8 there is some sway and give initially. That said, when you drive on a twisty washboard road with the vette the impact of the washboard surface is harshly transmitted into the cabin. It also bounces around a bit. They probably don't have much rubber to isolate the suspension, sway bars, etc. Furthermore, the vette takes a bit more attention to drive since wider tires follow road surfaces easier, etc. I tested quite a lot of the new cars prior to buying the G8. The G8 is by far the best bang for the buck. I liked the CTS too but interior space is superior in the G8. The g8 rides more like a 5 series BMW or Mercedes than a Maxima or Accura. Torque from the V8 is also a big plus.

Shifter console gets very hot.

by juanedwardorui on Tue Nov 04 14:21:03 PST 2008

I own a 1994 4runner and when I drive it for about an hour, it gets very hot in the cabin. I recently changed the transmission oil in it and the filter also. Is there by any chance some sort of protection between the transmission and the body of the truck? what can cause this heat? Thanks. Big John Houston Texas.

Re: Another Tank> [boomchek]

by andre1969 on Sat Nov 01 16:53:09 PDT 2008

It's definitely an Imperial, but I'm not familiar enough with them to pick the exact year. All I can say is 1969-73. I always thought those were nice looking cars, and the most attractive example of Chrysler's "fuselage" styling. I've heard though, that they took a big reduction in status in that generation. They were huge cars, but I've heard that all Mopars, from the lowly Plymouth Fury on up through the Dodge Monaco/Polara, the Chryslers, and even the Imperial, all used the same passenger cabin. So the net effect is that the Imperial gave you no more interior room than a Plymouth. A bigger trunk, perhaps, but most of the added length was in the engine bay. In contrast, in '68, I believe the Chryslers were bigger inside than the Plymouths and Dodges, while the Imperials were bigger still. In 1974 they corrected this to a degree, where the Chryslers and Imperials were bigger inside than the full-sized Furys and Monacos. But by that time, Imperial was really a shell of its former self, and just not very distinguishable from the Chryslers.

30K

by stickguy on Sat Oct 25 04:20:25 PDT 2008

I just went through the same thing. My 2005 had about 31K on it when I went in for an oil change about 2 weeks ago. They gave me the sales pitch about needing the 30K service, around $450 too. THey had a list of inclusions (fixed menu). IIRC, it included the air and cabin filter, brake fluid change, oil change, tire rotation, tranny fluid change, valve adjustment (could have been inspection, since most likely they didn't need to be adjusted!), and a bunch of inspections. I passed at the time. Tires just rotated and car aligned at the tire shop (and the visual undercarraige inspections done). I have a manual tranny, so the AT service is not needed, and I can do the air filters myself. So after knocking off the tires, etc, it was about $200 for a bunch of look overs, and they do most of them anyway with the $29.99 oil change and 29 point inspection! I also checked my owners manual (I don't have a MM), and none of the big stuff was called for at 30K (or close to it). Valves inspected at 100K and change the plugs, etc. THe only thing it should have done (and I know noone ever does) is changing the brake fluid every 2 years (in the manual, only Honda recommends that), the air filters are certainly due (mine are 3 years old), and that's about it. The inspections are all stuff that should get done when the tires are rotated. And I will have the brake fluid changed when I finally need a brake job (not for a while yet) or next rotation. The air filters I can probably do myself, or if I get lazy, next oil change. Oh, if you have an AT, I would get the fluid changed at 30K too, especially with a 6 cyl!