|
|||||
|
|
#11 |
|
|
> Steve added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > > >>erikdblair@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >>>have to disagree with you. This is a cruiser, not a drag >>>racer. 90 MPH on freeway uphill, no problem! The fine >>>details of putting together a rare piece of machinery like >>>this takes a lot of time and effort. That is worth >>>something. This baby is alltogether hotrod! >> >>I agree with you 100% on all of the above statements (I own a >>'66 Polara, 440 2.93 highway gears, would run triple digits >>for 8 hours without breaking a sweat and the AC blowing >>frost). And I'm sure its a great car. > > > Isn't it just a tad dangerous to run 8 hours over 100 mph, not to > mention highly illegal? If you ever get busted by the State > Police, you won't get a ticket, you'll be cuffed and arrested. Depends on what the limit is. "20 over" is usually the threshold for getting "busted" instead of ticketed around here, and there are freeways with an 80 mph limit (I 10, for example). But I'm too old to risk it, I never run more than about 8 mph over any given limit. But the bedwetters are, I think, pushing for busting you for anthing over 90 regardless of the limit now, since the new 80 limit puts "20 over" at 100 and they just can't stand the idea of someone running triple digits and not being a criminal. Besides I said the car "would" do it. And it would, but I've never sustained anything above 85. I took my family on vacation in that car last year, and 80 mph is the posted speed limit on I-10 in west Texas (and people run 85-88 all the time). It purred at that speed for hours, that is 100% in its element and what those cars were made to do. Had to slow down to the mid-70s heading north across New Mexico after that, and it felt like walking :-) > > >>But a 318 C-body still doesn't command that kind of $$ in the >>market. Sorry. > > This part I agree with. The only people who would want such a car > is someone who just wants a "cl***ic" car at a reasonable price > that won't keep them repairing it all the time. I was cruising > again last night on Woodward Avenue (pre-cruise on Saturday > crusing) and saw a number of cars like the OP described. Nothing > wrong with it at all, just not an especially exciting car to The reason I keep my '66 is precisely because its not worth a mint. It allows me to enjoy driving a 440-powered Mopar every day without worrying about it any more than I'd worry about a modern car. Can't do that with its sister- my '69 Coronet R/T. But I do keep it well-maintained. I'd rather keep an old car looking and running good than a new one, and I can't for the life of me figure out why Toyota owners even bother washing the little sh*tboxes :-) |
|
|
#12 |
|
|
You are right of course. Erik On Aug 14, 7:47 pm, "rob" <me @mine.orgg> wrote: > probably right. I was referring to his web site saying the 68 was a cl***ic > muscle car..... > > I'd take a 64 any day. hell ya. > > "John Mielke" <mielkman at excite dot com> wrote in messagenews:h7GdnU3sboTS-1_bnZ2dnUVZ_tijnZ2d@wideopenwest.com... > > |
|
|
#13 |
|
|
> erikdbl...@gmail.com wrote: > > have to disagree with you. This is a cruiser, not a drag racer. 90 > > MPH on freeway uphill, no problem! The fine details of putting > > together a rare piece of machinery like this takes a lot of time and > > effort. That is worth something. This baby is alltogether hotrod! > > I agree with you 100% on all of the above statements (I own a '66 > Polara, 440 2.93 highway gears, would run triple digits for 8 hours > without breaking a sweat and the AC blowing frost). And I'm sure its a > great car. > > But a 318 C-body still doesn't command that kind of $$ in the market. > Sorry. Neither does my Polara, and its a 383 car originally. Now if it > were a pre-66 300 Letter car, or a Monaco 500 convertible.... different > story. Yes, I know. The 318 C-body Polara is still unique in car shows and such. Somebody wants this one. Lots of interest. I'd like a Monaco 500 myself ![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|