Chevrolet did not make a Malibu again. We have discussed this in the 50s. Did you just get your license? Wow, we can be good ole boys and watch Camrys on the Nascar track next.
In 10-15 years it will be all the Toyota Camrys and Honda Accords in the demolition derbies. So what's your point?
I love how the people who're just trying to stand by the facts, are being passed off as "hating on big cars". Whatever dude.
Several years ago my best friend ran across a beautiful 1977 Lincoln Town Car 2-door coupe in great shape for only $1500. He bought it for his teenaged son who loved it. Unfortunately they lived in a state with private auto inspections, and car owners were at the mercy of corrupt repair shops. After being charged $300 for a tail light bulb and $1500 for muffler, they were forced to sell the car.
100% correct. And to the Toyota guy, stop misquoting people and twisting their words; you're starting to use the same tactics the politicians use to make their opponents look bad.
Oh come on... take the failed inspection and go to a muffler shop. Then put in a bulb. Take it to another town and tag it. Better yet, antique it and make it exempt. I antique my older cars with tags.
Why are there small import owners on a large domestic car review? Are you shopping for one?
I think you misread the comment; to me it sounds like they are joking about the fact that a 59 Malibu doesn't exist.
Nowadays a lot of states don't even have inspections for cars older than 20 years. Here in CT, we have no inspections, and the DMV doesn't ever have to even see the car and they'll register it.
It's funny how you're telling me that I'm "misquoting" when you think that I own a Toyota; you're outright mid-judging me.
I don't even own a Japanese car.
If anyone finds a 1959 Chevrolet Malibu model, I will buy it on the spot for my collection. They never made a 59 Malibu. I suspect someone saw the mistake on the Internet and then repeated the same error on here. They made the Belair in 1959. They made the Malibu later in the 60s. And if anyone takes a teardrop tail light (not a 4 door) 59 and demo derbies it, they are destroying a valuable car.
The big hits (pun unintended) at most demo derbies are the full-size early to mid 70's Ford, GM and Chrysler cars. Probably the most popular are the last of the really big Chevys before they downsized. The most rugged cars I have seen at demo derbies have been the big luxury cars from the 70's, such as the Lincoln, Cadillac and Imperial. It would be absolutely hilarious to see any little tinny Japanese car in a demo derby. They'd do good to get 10 feet before being crushed.
Sorry, but most cars at demo derbies have full on internally welded frames. So I fail to see any correlation between cars like those used in demo derbies, and cars that are out in the real world.
Also - given that many of today's Japanese brand cars - like the Camry and Accord - are now about the size of a Buick, then using the term "teeny" as a default definition for them is moot anyway.
That's not the point. Whenever we say anything bad about things like CAFE standards and overzealous EPA controls, you try to make us look stupid by bringing up leaded fuel arguments, which is totally unrelated, since these cars run on unleaded fuel.
You may not be the guy who's misquoting people, since it seems like we have two people commenting on this review in favor of modern vehicles (a more extreme modern car fan and a more moderate one), but there is somebody on this thread posting comments to discredit people in the same manner as most of our current politicians and "intellectuals" to try as pass his/her logic as the truth.
BTW, why are you commenting on this thread if you're against these cars?
Comment 16:11 says "tinny" not "tiny " with regard to Japanese cars. These cars are definitely "tinny" and poorly built regardless of size. They crumple like tin foil in accidents, and this was the point being made.
If you have an early 70s Mark, or a nice low mileage, pristine garage kept Lincoln, disregard the import owners comments. They are not economy cars, but are great to take the family out in on weekends and nice days. Or long road trips. Take a few adults and split the gas. Cheaper than a bouncy thin seat import, with your knees against your chin on a long trip!
Oh OK... so the comment was that "Japanese cars" are tinny? Really? If that's the case, then how come quite a few of them (along with their American and European equivalents) get 5 star crash ratings? The argument that those old cars lacked most of today's engineered safety cage and frame structures has been run into the ground.
Oh - and about crumpling? That's what cars are SUPPOSED to do.... they are called CRUMPLE zones. Why is that? To absorb an impact that would otherwise be absorbed by you. If you get into an accident - which would you prefer? Would you rather the car or the passenger suffer the impact? Somehow I fail to see how anyone could choose the former.
I guess what bother me most about the overall theme of this conversation is that the emphasis of it could be transferred to countless other scenarios. So for example if we were to jump into the time machine and land in say - 1955, I am sure that the argument would go something like this:
"I tell you what, these newfangled cars with those ugly fins, pointy tail lights, and all those fancy gadgets like power windows, turn signals and air conditioning sure aren't NEAR as nice as those good ole' Model T's. Back then they made REAL cars - not like those jukeboxes on wheels they make today. Things were SO much better back in the 20's..."
These conversations have little to do with actual comparisons in quality and engineering. There is a big difference between preferences and reality. Let's not confuse the two. Is it a legitimate statement to express preference for such and such generation of vehicle? Sure. Absolutely. But then to go on and put them on a pedestal and proclaim them as something they aren't is another matter altogether. There will always be people who will only be comfortable with that they know and are familiar with. That's the reason oldies stations exist. I'm sure that many would say that today's music is awful - then switch on the oldies station and enjoy hearing the music that ironically their parents thought was awful as well. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.