beater cars

jeff,

i think the only stipulation is it has to have been registered for a at least the last year. and get less than 22mpg

fox,

the car is painted in krylons finest blue, and spent its life as a new england daily driver so it has its share of rust. if it were as clean as mine i wouldnt drive it.

 

The version that's been talked about,here in SoCal,is; any car that gets less than 18 mpg city and/or 22 highway can be traded in...That includes younger vehicles less than 8 years old,like pick-up trucks and SUV's,even some minivans.Going by the 18 mpg city rule,someone could turn in their two-three year old Crown Vic or Grand Marquis...If there's a stipulation about cars older than a certain age,"they" are not mentioning it...Usually,in the past,when "they" wanted older cars turned in for money or tax credit,the TV ads almost always showed American cars.I think I saw ONE,where a Volvo was being hooked up to a tow truck.And it was a wagon...Tom Bosley,who played Mr. Cunningham on Happy Days,even did an ad for Father Joe(or something like that)standing in front of a mid-50's Chevy,talking about how if your old car just sits around eating up insurance premiums,you can give it away to a charity...Sounds like Father Joe was looking for cars to auction off at Barrett-Jackson...

 

from CNN:

"However, cars that have not been insured for the past year or those that are older than 25 years are not eligible to be traded in for vouchers."

http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/09/news/economy/cash_for_clunkers/index.htm?

 

that IS good news,indeed...My car's been insured,,,no really...But it was made in April or May of 1985.It's 24 and a half! Well,only 23 and a half, if you go by model year...I'm thinking,what they really want is, for people well off enough to have finished buying a car during the last ten years,to trade in and start buying another new car...Most people who drive true clunkers and beaters,do so because they CAN'T afford brand new cars...That's the main reason they're not getting either one of my cars.And the junkyard is only getting the Taurus...

 

So planned obsolesence didn't work, now its forced obsolesence. Bailout money AND a legislated market demand. What other industry gets a deal like that? :confused:

 

People just need to understand that all cars need not be saved. I don't care how many Yugo clubs exist they just don't need saving.

There are just a small hand full after 1999 that need to be saved. Specialty models that are few. Can anyone here imagine a 2000 Chevy Malibu that deserves saving? How about a Dodge Neon? Or a Ford Contour. Or any Daewoo, Kia, Hyundai, Toyota, Nissan (OK maybe one or two), Saab built in the last 15 years that deserves saving? Maybe just one or two.

I've said it before. Nobody is forcing anyone to give up their favorite car.

 

Tbird, I agree that very few of the newer (post 1990) Asian cars are worth more than a second thought. A lot of the US mongrels that were rebadged Asian cars don't cut it either. When Andy and I drove to ND's southwest corner to get his Fairmont wagon, I don't recall one small car on the highways, except near Fargo and Grand Forks. They just are made for a long comfortable drive. I suppose some urban folks might like them, but they'll lack the great roadtrip stories that we can have.

As for the pending legislation, so far they haven't gone as far as changing Import Tarrifs or rules, so we probably won't get hit as hard as it seems.

 

Consumer activists complained so much,about planned obsolesence,during the 50's and early 60's---Detroit actually did something about it...Cars made in the late 60's,and especially during the 70's,were some of the best built,longest lasting cars in automotive history.Even the bad ones!..Many like to point out that,in 1977,Detroit recalled more cars than they made,but leave out that most of the recalls had to do with working out the bugs in the newly created smog pump systems...In the late 80's/early 90's,people were writing letters to the editors of the LA newspapers,asking;"What was Detroit thinking?When they made all those 70's cars so good they're still around!?" I bet the Hollywood movie industry would like a bailout...I'd like a bailout.And not billions or even hundreds of millions.A measly five million dollars will do me just fine.

 

I've never heard an anecdotal story about comparing covered wagons or horse buggies or why one was better than the other. Doesn't mean they're weren't. Consumers of those were just thankful to have one, or build there own with a few wheels they could get made in town for $20.

It's gone off the rails. We've seen the Green movement build up since the mid-sixties, to the point that they are among the best paid and funded lobbyists going. We never countered with rational arguments until it was too late. If you asked politicians to demand an Emissions Content sticker on every car made or sold nationally, the little cars wouldn't score any better. From smelting the metals, burning the old tires and upholstery, to moulding the seats, bumpers, etc. All we've done is pushed the dirty part of manufacturing to other countries. No net gain in emissions reductions. If anything, we've lost that score too. The big industry polluters left, and we've become a lotus-flower economy of services. Very little new manufacturing.

 

My brother-in-law has pointed out that,in the name of "safety",little cars now weigh as much as big cars did forty years ago.(1)that makes the little engines that are supposed to be so clean,actually run dirtier than they have to,because they have to work harder just to make the cars go.and(2)really aren't getting the great mpg's they could be,if they didn't weigh so much.He put a diesel engine from a newer Jetta into his 69 Fastback VW.The Jettas are advertising mpg's in the low 40's.He says he's getting mpg's in the 60's and 70's in the Fastback...He could run it on bio-diesel,if there was someplace to get it,here in LA...There IS a hypocrisy going on;we are told we NEED safer cars,so those who refuse to drive responsibly can continue to do so without hurting so many of the rest of us---and that we HAVE to be saving the planet by ridding the world of cars that really aren't that much worse than the newer ones...

 

Without doubt the Chevy is the better car.
That "Herizon" is a prime example of why FIAT now owns Chrysler. It was a chunk of **** when it was built and hasn't gotten better with age.

 

What do you base such a ridiculous statement on?
The sixties and seventies cars were awful. Take off your rose colored hindsight glasses please.

The stuff from Detroit was so hastily and sloppily assembled they were near worthless after only a few years. They rusted almost instantly, some didn't even have PRIMER on the inner panels. The engines were built with cast iron rings that were blowing oil after 60k miles. Interiors were made of the worst crap you can imagine, dashes cracked, seats split, pieces broke off in your hand. Plus the manufacturers told us to F-off after 30 days or 12,000 miles for the powertrain.
The Japs had even worse little overdecorated copies of Detroit's garbage and the Euros were still making tiny little cars that couldn't even cope with American highways.
I love American cars of the sixties but not because they were any good.

 

The mass of a car has an effect in a collision. There have always been two schools of thought.

1. Small cars can more easily avoid an accident because they are more manueverable.
2. Big cars crash better.


I think this is predominantly true in the hands of a competent driver.

Think of attempting to steer around a mattress on the road with 73 Fleetwood Broughm at 75 MPH as compared to a 73 Pinto.

When being struck head on by a Kenworth as both you and the truck are traveling at 70 MPH. I don't care whether you are driving a VW Golf or a Chevy Suburban....you are going to die.

We need better driver training and more severe fines for reckless driving and jail time for yacking on the phone or texting while driving.

 

Always said the tie goes to the truck.

 

Well said.
FWIW While returning in caravan from a wedding rehearsal dinner in 1977 a friend driving a '70 Corvette failed to avoid a mattress fallen onto Chicago's Eisenhower Expressway(par for the course). About the first four cars in our procession also went over it. The rest of us and many others wound up sliding 60 mph sideways on the shoulder or playing dodgem with the other two lanes of traffic. Hopefully our skills have improved since.