: Speaking of beautiful '80s cars...



I~LUV~Caddys8792
09-30-10, 07:25 AM
I saw this yesterday in Rochester.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j313/Chadillac8705/2010-09-29_11-21-34_0.jpg

(sorry for the not so great picture quality, I snapped this picture while walking into a Papa John's to pick up a few pizzas)

Anyone recognize these?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Volvo780.jpg

It's the 1987-91 Volvo 780 Coupe. Designed by Bertone in Italy, they were built off the 700 series platform, but they were a little lower. They were rear drive, and powered by a 2.8L V6 at production beginning, but by later in the production run, they were running turbocharged four bangers, running anywhere between 175 and 200hp. They came as fully loaded as any other Volvo from that era, and probably compared very well to the 635csi in terms of luxury accoutrements. I thought it was kinda neat looking, especially in terms of the way the body is proportioned and laid out.

Here's the 1988 780 brochure:
http://www.volvoclub.org.uk/pdf/brochures/780LimitedEdition1988.pdf

Night Wolf
09-30-10, 07:49 AM
I was never a fan of the huge 80s Volvo headlights.

The sideprofile looks odd, in the first picture with the dark car... it dosen't flow very well. The area where the dinwo starts does not line up with the hood or trunk and makes the car looked hacked, or missing something.

Stingroo
09-30-10, 08:24 AM
Looks like a bad photoshop where somebody erased two door handles.

Koooop
09-30-10, 08:56 AM
Looks like a bad photoshop where somebody erased two door handles.

Looks like it's been Lambda Probed.

Night Wolf
09-30-10, 09:17 AM
IMO Honda really perfected that overall shape/design to produce one of the best flowing, well-proportioned cars from that era. On the whole, they were pretty nice cars too. I like these cars a lot and wouldn't mind having one if the prices were so inflated, though my 528e fills that spot... atleast for me probably a better choice too.

http://honda-accord.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/1990-honda-accord.jpg

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/autoreview/400x266/1990-93-Honda-Accord-90802041990214.jpg

http://img2.netcarshow.com/Honda-Accord_Coupe_1990_800x600_wallpaper_06.jpg

In comparison, the Volvo looks like an out of proportion mess from start to finish.

orconn
09-30-10, 01:05 PM
I saw this yesterday in Rochester.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j313/Chadillac8705/2010-09-29_11-21-34_0.jpg

(sorry for the not so great picture quality, I snapped this picture while walking into a Papa John's to pick up a few pizzas)

Anyone recognize these?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Volvo780.jpg

It's the 1987-91 Volvo 780 Coupe. Designed by Bertone in Italy, they were built off the 700 series platform, but they were a little lower. They were rear drive, and powered by a 2.8L V6 at production beginning, but by later in the production run, they were running turbocharged four bangers, running anywhere between 175 and 200hp. They came as fully loaded as any other Volvo from that era, and probably compared very well to the 635csi in terms of luxury accoutrements. I thought it was kinda neat looking, especially in terms of the way the body is proportioned and laid out.

Here's the 1988 780 brochure:
http://www.volvoclub.org.uk/pdf/brochures/780LimitedEdition1988.pdf

Not a bad looking Volvo (sort of like "not bad for a Lincoln") but not cigar. This was the second generation of this model and it was better looking than the first generation. The reason why the V-6 was discontinued was it was a terrible engine. It was a design and build joint venture with Renault (same engine was used in the original DeLoreans) and turned out very badly. Apparently they were trouble from the start. The biggest selling point for the Volvo 780 was the quality of their interiors, which were designed in Italy and feature very fine Italian leather. The car was heavy even witth the Turbo four cylinder and suffered from tirbo lag .... as did most all turbos of the '80s.

ga_etc
09-30-10, 01:48 PM
I could have bought a 780 identical to that red one about a year ago for something like $700. It was the 4-cyl turbo too. '91 IIRC. The rear shocks were toast though.

orconn
09-30-10, 02:40 PM
Too bad you didn't tell Night Wolf, if it had been stick and the interior had been redeamable he could have made a good DD of of it. I always thought the 980 coupes were sort of a "razor edge" version of the BMW 633 prportions were similar as was the large glass area. If you could fix the steering so that it had more feel (never have understood Volvo's dead steering feel, non pwer steering Volvo's were OK).

Aron9000
09-30-10, 02:42 PM
Its just well, kind of meh. I like the boxy volvos of the 80's/90's, but it just doesn't work as well on a coupe as it does their seadans and wagons.

http://www.dragtimes.com/images/5148-1988-Volvo-740.jpg
http://static.benjamin.dk/images/vmax/wallpapers/800/Volvo%20740%20-%202.jpg

gdwriter
09-30-10, 03:32 PM
That Accord Rick posted is a '90 or '91. I remember when those came out how disappointed I was after the sleek '86-'89 versions:

http://www.atozautolights.com/images/AutoPhotos/HOAC8689.jpg

I had wanted to buy an Accord coupe when it came out, but I couldn't afford one at the time:

http://mysite.verizon.net/dmz/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/accord_se-i.jpg

I eventually came around on the '90-'93 sedans, but I always thought the coupe looked frumpy compared to the one that preceded it.

I was originally looking for an '86-'89 Accord as a cheap cash car when I bought Cruella, but the ones I found were all thoroughly trashed and still overpriced. I found one for $1,600 IIRC, and the hood looked like it had been painted with Liquid Paper. Using the brush.

http://blstb.msn.com/i/B1/1678D644D0984ACB032D3A4F27967.jpg

ben.gators
09-30-10, 04:15 PM
Let me add Camaro 1980 and 1981. Indeed I do love second gen Camaros, Their production continued until 1981, and that is why I am listing 1980 and 1981 years here...

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b118/scooter916/camaro_aug2007_03.jpg

orconn
09-30-10, 04:45 PM
Sorry, Ben.Gators your Camaro was not an eighties design. The original "berlinetta coupe" 2nd series came out in 1971 and ran, with various front and rearend caps until 1981. The best examples of this series were the "71 Camaro and the 67-68 Firebird.

I thought the '82 Firebird was neat when it came out, then I went to look at one in the showroom it was such a junky heap I didn't even ask to test drive it!

orconn
09-30-10, 04:52 PM
The Fiero was kind of cool. I was asked to attend the market research viewing of what would become the new Fiero. It took place about three years befor the car actually came out as a finished product. The cars they were showing as potential models for the final Fiero were even coller than the car turn out to be. But to me. as far as Americancars went the Fiero was one of the most attractive designs. UnfortunatleyGM couldn't figure out if it was supposed to be a "commuter" (Dad drives it the train station on weekdays) or a sportscar.

gdwriter
09-30-10, 05:19 PM
I thought Chevrolet did a nice job meeting the feds bumper standards with the 1978-81 reskin:

http://www.gmphotostore.com/images/53219372_pr.jpg

Certainly an improvement over those big ugly bumpers from 1974-77:

http://www.gmphotostore.com/images/53219307_pr.jpg

Although the best second-generation Camaros are the split-bumper RS:

http://www.gmphotostore.com/images/53218328_pr.jpg

Stingroo
09-30-10, 05:21 PM
I'm in the minority, I don't like the split bumper Camaros. I'd drive the one Ben posted though, no doubt.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
09-30-10, 05:44 PM
IMO Honda really perfected that overall shape/design to produce one of the best flowing, well-proportioned cars from that era. On the whole, they were pretty nice cars too. I like these cars a lot and wouldn't mind having one if the prices were so inflated, though my 528e fills that spot... atleast for me probably a better choice too.

http://honda-accord.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/1990-honda-accord.jpg

Good point Rick! The '90-93 Accords were really a great design, a highlight of the old-school Japanese school of simplicity in straight, clean cut lines. They didn't get much better than this, atleast from this era. The proportions were just about perfect, and it was very easy to drive because it offered great visibility from all angles when situated behind the wheel. They were pretty fun to drive too, light on their feet and very tossable, but still decently roomy and comfy. I came close to buying one in the fall of '06, but I couldn't find a decent one for less than $3,000. It seemed pretty ridiculous to pay $3,000 for a mediocre, high mileage Honda Accord when I could buy a nice 307 Brougham for the same price.


I thought Chevrolet did a nice job meeting the feds bumper standards with the 1978-81 reskin:

http://www.gmphotostore.com/images/53219372_pr.jpg

Certainly an improvement over those big ugly bumpers from 1974-77:

http://www.gmphotostore.com/images/53219307_pr.jpg

Although the best second-generation Camaros are the split-bumper RS:

http://www.gmphotostore.com/images/53218328_pr.jpg

I'm gonna flat out say this, I don't care for any of the 2nd generation Camaros. They all look too "busy" too me, and they never had the big blocks like the Trans Ams did, and IIRC, the 1970-81 Trans Am was almost always quicker than the 70-81 Z28. The Z28 may have been the better handling car though, I dunno. I prefer the first generation Camaro, second generation Firebird, third generation Firebird and fourth generation Camaro.


That Accord Rick posted is a '90 or '91. I remember when those came out how disappointed I was after the sleek '86-'89 versions:

http://www.atozautolights.com/images/AutoPhotos/HOAC8689.jpg

I knew a guy back in high school that had an '88 Accord LX-i hatchback and SWORE by that car. I don't remember much about it, other than it sat really low to the ground, so it was really fun to cruise around in because it felt like you were going a lot quicker than you really were, in comparison to other vehicles.

I remember when I was real young (5-6 years old), my grandpa on my dad's side of the family had an 87-89 Accord Sedan, and from growing up with that car from time to time, I came to like Hondas at an early age. I can remember one time when we were going to visit him, we stopped at the local Honda dealer (Buerkle Buick/Honda in White Bear Lake FYI) and I looked at the new Accord coupes and really liked them. I also remember seeing the Del Sol then when it first came out.

drewsdeville
09-30-10, 06:35 PM
I prefer the first generation Camaro, second generation Firebird, third generation Firebird and fourth generation Camaro.

Close, for me. Yes, yes, yes, and NO! The last gen TA WS6 with the ram air hood is one of the sexiest looking cars made in the last 20 years. The Camaro was ok in the early years, but became downright ugly after they swtiched to the flush-mounted headlights.

68850

Stingroo
09-30-10, 07:18 PM
Close, for me. Yes, yes, yes, and NO! The last gen TA WS6 with the ram air hood is one of the sexiest looking cars made in the last 20 years. The Camaro was ok in the early years, but became downright ugly after they swtiched to the flush-mounted headlights.

68850

This entire post speaks of truth.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
09-30-10, 08:00 PM
I agree that the Camaro went ugly when they went to the flush headlights in '98, but that LS1 Trans Am is just too complicated looking for me, especially with the ram air hood. It looks like horses' nostrils!

Stingroo
09-30-10, 08:02 PM
For the HORSEpowers.

hueterm
09-30-10, 08:05 PM
My favorite T/A EVAR is a cinnamon GTA with the gold honeycomb wheels......

I~LUV~Caddys8792
09-30-10, 08:59 PM
Yeah, I love the 87-92 GTA's, especially the 91-92 with the revised front fascia and tail lamps.

ga_etc
09-30-10, 09:16 PM
The first car I bought on my own was a '91 Accord EX sedan, Seattle Silver with the burgundy cloth. I gave too much for it from a buy-here-pay-here lot, but it was a great little car. Bought it with 213k and sold it with 224k on it. I took care of it and never had a seconds problem out of it. It rode and drove great to me. And it handled surprisingly well. It would hold as much cornering force as the lowpros on 17s would take. Reasonably quick and good on gas. I don't think you could ask for a whole lot more. The only reason I sold it was because I wanted the Camaro. If it had've been a 5 speed I might still have it.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
09-30-10, 09:39 PM
I learned to drive in a '91 Mazda 626 DX. In terms of size, design and driveability, it was the Accord's closest competitor. It wasn't proportioned as well as the Accords were though, but you could get the Mazda with a turbo. We bought it in 1994 with like 40k on it, and in 2004 or 05, it got hit in a car accident, totaled and sent off to the junkyard. It had 193k on it (which I thought was high at the time, but not so much now considering the Astro is scratching 231k), and it only left my dad stranded once, when the starter relay went out on it at a movie theatre.

Bro-Ham
09-30-10, 10:31 PM
The first car I bought on my own was a '91 Accord EX sedan, Seattle Silver with the burgundy cloth. I gave too much for it from a buy-here-pay-here lot, but it was a great little car. Bought it with 213k and sold it with 224k on it. I took care of it and never had a seconds problem out of it. It rode and drove great to me. And it handled surprisingly well. It would hold as much cornering force as the lowpros on 17s would take. Reasonably quick and good on gas. I don't think you could ask for a whole lot more. The only reason I sold it was because I wanted the Camaro. If it had've been a 5 speed I might still have it.

Ga, the third car I bought on my own was a 91 Accord EX Coupe 5-speed in bordeaux red, bought it brand new in the fall of 90, owned it 6 months and put on 15k miles and traded it on a new 91 Accord SE Sedan in silver with black leather. Those were nice cars back in the day, but the automatic seat belts were miserable. I agree with the folks who like the 86-89 Accords, and, personally, I really like the 82-85 pretty well, and the 77-81 even better! Talk about classic! :)

Bro-Ham
09-30-10, 10:34 PM
One more thing, the Volvo 780 Bertone is a classic. I always liked them as the exotic they were at the time. The Volvo 262C Bertone from the late 70's-early 80's was so much more cool - even had a vinyl top! I would totally love to have one of those..... :)

ga_etc
09-30-10, 10:38 PM
The decapitation belts in the Accord never really bothered me. The only issue was the time I forgot about it and tried to open the door with my head out the window. And what happened? It came up and hit me in the back of the head. Good way to get you to close the door real quick. The '91 Integra would get a short in the passenger side decap. belt latch and it would think it was undone and BEEP incessantly. One morning the only way I could get it to shut up was to almost jump a set of RR Tracks lol. I really like the '86-'89s too. I have an odd thing for pop-up headlights lol.

Bro-Ham
09-30-10, 10:53 PM
I owned a 1989 Bentley Turbo R many years ago that had the same insane automatic seatbelts as those old Accords. A friend of mine nicknamed them "mouse ran up the clock seatbelts" and I think he was right. :)

Koooop
09-30-10, 11:00 PM
The end of the '80's put out the Trans Am with the Grand National Turbo V6. These were a hoot to drive. FAST compared to some pretty fast cars today, they handled good and the looks were smooth as well.

One of the other fun offerings of the 80's was the triumph TR8 drophead, a real hot rod of the day. I had the pleasure of driving a couple of these, too much fun! Just a handfull were made and what a treat to drive.

ga_etc
09-30-10, 11:03 PM
1990-'93 were the same body style, but '90-'91 where the only ones with the automatic belts. Honda dropped them with the '92 refresh. They also changed the front and rear bumpers, grille, brake lights, added a driver air bag, made an arm rest available on the inside of the driver seat, took the Sport mode out of the automatic transmission, and changed the seat fabric. I really shouldn't know that off the top of my head...

Bro-Ham
09-30-10, 11:15 PM
Ga, I not only bought those cars back then but also sold them as a car broker. 1991 was my first year in the car biz, plus my retired business partner only dealt in new Hondas from about 1980 until he retired in early 2000. :)

ga_etc
09-30-10, 11:24 PM
Then you're the best person to know if I missed anything lol. I know weird little stuff like that about other cars, not just the Accord. Well, on here it's not that weird, but I know a lot of people who think I'm crazy for being able to spout off stuff like that. I also notice odd things that most people don't. I've noticed around here recently that a lot of cars, especially trucks and SUVs, with reverse sensors have damage to the rear bumper. I guess people forget what that beep means.

Night Wolf
10-01-10, 12:25 AM
That Accord Rick posted is a '90 or '91. I remember when those came out how disappointed I was after the sleek '86-'89 versions:

http://www.atozautolights.com/images/AutoPhotos/HOAC8689.jpg

I had wanted to buy an Accord coupe when it came out, but I couldn't afford one at the time:

http://mysite.verizon.net/dmz/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/accord_se-i.jpg

I eventually came around on the '90-'93 sedans, but I always thought the coupe looked frumpy compared to the one that preceded it.


The popup headlights were cool, but that generation just screamed 80s Japaneese econocar inside and out.

In comparison, the '90 redesign, while keeping the overall similar body was just refined to such a percise but not over the top level... it was a winner - inside and out. It was also the first car, atleast sold in the US, to have the clear jewel-style headlights (that I really like)

Night Wolf
10-01-10, 12:32 AM
prefer the first generation Camaro, second generation Firebird, third generation Firebird and fourth generation Camaro.


Close, for me. Yes, yes, yes, and NO! The last gen TA WS6 with the ram air hood is one of the sexiest looking cars made in the last 20 years. The Camaro was ok in the early years, but became downright ugly after they swtiched to the flush-mounted headlights.



I agree with the last gen WS6. It was so over the top and obnoxious about what it was all about - there was nothing sleeper about it, but that is exactly what it was made to do.

The last gen WS6 is to the "modern" muscle car era what Chad described the 70's Lincolns are to "PC". It does nothing to hide what it is about all while flaunting it as much as it can - like it or not.

Destroyer
10-01-10, 12:45 AM
I saw this yesterday in Rochester.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j313/Chadillac8705/2010-09-29_11-21-34_0.jpg

(sorry for the not so great picture quality, I snapped this picture while walking into a Papa John's to pick up a few pizzas)

Anyone recognize these?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Volvo780.jpg

It's the 1987-91 Volvo 780 Coupe. Designed by Bertone in Italy, they were built off the 700 series platform, but they were a little lower. They were rear drive, and powered by a 2.8L V6 at production beginning, but by later in the production run, they were running turbocharged four bangers, running anywhere between 175 and 200hp. They came as fully loaded as any other Volvo from that era, and probably compared very well to the 635csi in terms of luxury accoutrements. I thought it was kinda neat looking, especially in terms of the way the body is proportioned and laid out.

Here's the 1988 780 brochure:
http://www.volvoclub.org.uk/pdf/brochures/780LimitedEdition1988.pdf
I recently saw one in this exact combination on Craigslist for $1k. I was almost tempted to buy it but........nahhh! It isn't a car I have ever lusted for and I don't find it particularly attractive but that is subjective. Too "angular" for me and I don't care for the front facia. All that aside, the interior seats look VERY comfortable (per Rick's catalog post) but the dash isn't as nice looking. This Bertone coupe just lacks the sexiness found in Mercedes, Bimmers, Jaguars and even some Saabs and Audi's of the era. :bouncy:

gdwriter
10-01-10, 12:58 AM
The popup headlights were cool, but that generation just screamed 80s Japaneese econocar inside and out.Um, wasn't the title of the thread beautiful 80s cars?

Dumb-ass automatic seatbelts FTL. At least Honda fixed that in 1992.

77CDV
10-01-10, 01:38 AM
Those Volvos, while rare, rather strain the limits on "beautiful".

Night Wolf
10-01-10, 02:22 AM
Um, wasn't the title of the thread beautiful 80s cars?

Dumb-ass automatic seatbelts FTL. At least Honda fixed that in 1992.

uh, yeah... keyword - beautiful. I simply made the comment that the car looked TOO 80s Japaneese econobox cheap to me.... reminds me of the 80s Corolla (not a pretty car)

http://www.toyota-corolla.net/gallery/pic/1988/toyota_corolla_460177.jpg

http://www.thedailycontributor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/1988-toyota-corolla-300x225.jpg

Jesda
10-01-10, 03:29 AM
I liked the late 80s Prelude a LOT.

http://pdftown.com/image/2593-honda-Prelude-91.jpg

The-Dullahan
10-01-10, 06:58 AM
No photo, but I saw a lovely Olds Tornado the other day. I could see myself driving one of those in another lifetime someday.

Stingroo
10-01-10, 07:13 AM
Am I the only person who kinda LIKED those automatic seatbelts? :hide:

Dad had a '92 Maxima that had them. They were really cool to my 12 and 13 year old mind (it was stuffed under a dump truck after about 9 months of ownership, it was kind of sad).

Night Wolf
10-01-10, 07:47 AM
I didn't really see the problem with them... but I didn't have a car with them either.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-01-10, 08:12 AM
My dad's '91 626 had them as well. Kinda neat but kinda annoying. They were cool to me when I was a little kid, because to me back then, the Japanese were the ones putting all the cool robot-like gadgets into the cars, the automatic seatbelt being one of them, but as I grew up (literally), they started to hit my neck and shoulders when I started the car. Come to think of it, my friend's '93 Maxima SE had them as well..... I wonder how many of those seatbelt motors broke over time.....

Speaking of great '80s era Japanese designs, here's the '89-94 Maxima. This is a '93 SE identical to the one my buddy had, except this one is actually nice.
http://www.edmunds.com/pictures/VEHICLE/1994/Nissan/12517/1994.nissan.maxima.8197-E.jpg

drewsdeville
10-01-10, 09:15 AM
My '92 Escort had automatic seat belts as well, though they were only automatic shoulder belts. The lap belt was still manual. I guess they were ok.

I have a bad habit of "forgetting" to put my seatbelt on when I'm on a quick run to the hardware or grocery store. I guess for a guy like me, they are probably a good idea.

Honestly, I always kind of wondered why they never became regulation in the US. They were successful in every car they were used in and seatbelt safety has been pushed ever since they were introduced in '72.

Otherwise, I'm indifferent towards them. They are probably much safer than my '66 Dodge with no seatbelts, what seems like 1/4" thick windshield (if you got thrown forward, the paramedics would be peeling your face off the unbroken glass) and a steel/unpadded dashboard :bonkers:.

Stingroo
10-01-10, 10:19 AM
Yeah, I do that a lot too. I'm terrible about seat belts, unless I'm on the highway, I forget. I don't remember lap belts in the Maxima, they probably were there, but maybe we just never used them. But yeah.


And I loved that Maxima we had. It had really nice, soft leather, smelled amazing from what I remember, and was pretty fast from what I recall too. I remember one Saturday I went to work with dad and we got pulled over for a (as the cop put it) "NASCAR lane change". We had almost missed the exit but cut across and made it, but the cop wasn't amused. lol

I kinda miss that car. Dad wants another one too.

hueterm
10-01-10, 11:07 AM
I hate automatic seatbelts. GM RUINED the late '80s cars with those stupid door mounted seatbelts. The motorized ones were a joke. They could be easily disengaged from the track, and if you didn't use the lap belt with them, you risked decapitation.

GM also had some stupid fetish with that window shade feature on their belts so that they were loose against your chest. I like a belt to have some tension. Apparently there was a way to bypass that window shade function, but dealers wouldn't do it for liability fears.

uber FAIL...

drewsdeville
10-01-10, 01:03 PM
I hate automatic seatbelts. GM RUINED the late '80s cars with those stupid door mounted seatbelts. The motorized ones were a joke. They could be easily disengaged from the track, and if you didn't use the lap belt with them, you risked decapitation.

uber FAIL...

That's not unique to GM...

hueterm
10-01-10, 01:08 PM
I think GM and Honda were the ones w/the door mounted three point belts. The others had the motorized shoulder belt and manual lap belt. Those were the head cutters. The GM/Honda belts would just throw you out of the vehicle when the door popped open.

All were stupid.

gdwriter
10-01-10, 01:28 PM
uh, yeah... keyword - beautiful. I simply made the comment that the car looked TOO 80s Japaneese econobox cheap to me.... reminds me of the 80s Corolla (not a pretty car)Not disputing your opinion of the '86-'89 Accord. The topic was 80s cars. Although since the '90 Accord was introduced in the fall of 1989, I suppose it can be included.

gdwriter
10-01-10, 01:42 PM
Am I the only person who kinda LIKED those automatic seatbelts?Apparently.


Otherwise, I'm indifferent towards them. They are probably much safer than my '66 Dodge with no seatbelts, what seems like 1/4" thick windshield (if you got thrown forward, the paramedics would be peeling your face off the unbroken glass) and a steel/unpadded dashboard :bonkers:.I thought front seat belts were mandated in '64. Betty didn't have seat belts in the back, but I put them in.


I hate automatic seatbelts. GM RUINED the late '80s cars with those stupid door mounted seatbelts. The motorized ones were a joke. They could be easily disengaged from the track, and if you didn't use the lap belt with them, you risked decapitation.

uber FAIL...I agree; I crossed so many cars off my list when I was shopping for a new car in 1989 because I hated them. When GM put an airbag in the Corsica and Beretta in 1991, the seat belts went back where they belonged, and that's when I bought one.


I think GM and Honda were the ones w/the door mounted three point belts. The others had the motorized shoulder belt and manual lap belt. Those were the head cutters. The GM/Honda belts would just throw you out of the vehicle when the door popped open.

All were stupid.Those motorized shoulder belt and manual lap belt were far more dangerous than regular manual three-point seat belts. As Mike pointed out, with no lap belt on, you could easily break your neck in a collision.

I had a Toyota Corolla as a rental with those damn things, and I kept forgetting about the manual belt. And I grew up wearing a seat belt, so it's always been a habit for me. But having that shoulder belt in place, it was easy to think you were all belted in. I'm just glad they're gone.

BTW, good call on the '89 Maxima. I thought it was a fantastic design. Subsequent generations haven't come close to looking as good, and the last two generations have been downright weird.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-01-10, 01:45 PM
Oh yeah, I forgot with those motorized shoulder belts that you had to manually set the lap belt.

Koooop
10-01-10, 03:15 PM
Not disputing your opinion of the '86-'89 Accord. The topic was 80s cars. Although since the '90 Accord was introduced in the fall of 1989, I suppose it can be included.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

ga_etc
10-01-10, 05:30 PM
Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.

Fixed. ;)

Koooop
10-01-10, 05:49 PM
Lol!

77CDV
10-01-10, 10:30 PM
Am I the only person who kinda LIKED those automatic seatbelts? :hide:



Yes.

Stingroo
10-01-10, 11:02 PM
I must be weird. I like automatic seatbelts, I thought the SSR was badass. I even kinda-sora like the Aztek (come on, you could get a tent!).

I'm so strange. :(

gdwriter
10-01-10, 11:10 PM
I must be weird. I like automatic seatbelts, I thought the SSR was badass. I even kinda-sora like the Aztek (come on, you could get a tent!).

I'm so strange. :(:yup:

Stingroo
10-01-10, 11:18 PM
And did I mention wagons and the color orange?

:hide:

Ah well, I do what I can. :lol: Also, I submit to this thread:

http://motortorque.askaprice.com/images/features/428-288/Best-1980-39-s-dream-cars-named-18067.jpg

It's so quirky and 1980s, how could you NOT love it?

The-Dullahan
10-01-10, 11:23 PM
^I know a guy who customizes these out in Texas. I am sure you can guess what he builds them into.


Is the SSR little truck wannabe thing? I remember the Aztek, seriously...did they ONLY come in yellow? I think I saw ONE once that wasn't yellow. Ironically, I had completely forgotten about these and only just now realize that I do not think I have seen one of these cars ANYWHERE in at least five years.

Stingroo
10-01-10, 11:26 PM
My aunt owned a white Aztek. My uncle got it for her as a birthday gift when he was finance manager at a Buick/Pontiac/GMC dealership. I loved it.

Koooop
10-02-10, 12:19 AM
My aunt owned a white Aztek. My uncle got it for her as a birthday gift when he was finance manager at a Buick/Pontiac/GMC dealership. I loved it.

You're a sick, sick man.

Stingroo
10-02-10, 12:21 AM
Aw c'mon Koooop. :(

Night Wolf
10-02-10, 01:16 AM
I don't feel comfortable in a vehicle unless I'm wearing my seat belt... atleast in the drivers seat.

Night Wolf
10-02-10, 01:19 AM
I hate automatic seatbelts. GM RUINED the late '80s cars with those stupid door mounted seatbelts. The motorized ones were a joke. They could be easily disengaged from the track, and if you didn't use the lap belt with them, you risked decapitation.

GM also had some stupid fetish with that window shade feature on their belts so that they were loose against your chest. I like a belt to have some tension. Apparently there was a way to bypass that window shade function, but dealers wouldn't do it for liability fears.

uber FAIL...

My '89 Oldsmobile had the door mounted belts... I never really had a problem with them. I actually heard they were designed so that they can be buckled all the time and then you get in/our of the car... I tried that and it didn't work that well.

Night Wolf
10-02-10, 02:03 AM
Not disputing your opinion of the '86-'89 Accord. The topic was 80s cars. Although since the '90 Accord was introduced in the fall of 1989, I suppose it can be included.

Exactly.

Not saying you, but it amazes me how literal some people take the years of cars. Example, that 1990 Honda is an 80s car in every way, not a 90s car. Some people would see "1990 Honda Accord" and be quick to think, "oh thats a 90s Honda"

Cars come out the year prior to their model year (usually). As you mentioned, the '90 Accord came out in fall of '89.

But, how long was that car being designed? It's not like cars are just thought up in 3 months (again, mostly... I know there are exceptions that someone would just have to throw in). With the prior generation '86-'89, I would say shortly after that, probably around '87 the '90 Accord was really being thought up.... that makes it an 80s design era car.

Another example would be the 1980 Lincoln Town Car. We associate this body TC with the 80s because that is when it was made. But it was most likely on sale in fall of '79 and being such a drastic change from the '79 Fords with the whole new Panther chassis, that thing was probably in the planning stages for a few years... which really makes that car a 70s design.

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/lincoln-cars13.jpg

As a comparison, the newly styled 1988 Continential was most likely released in fall of '87, which means it had to have been designed around '84-'85.... making that car a true "80s design".... looking at it, one can tell it is vastly different then the 1980 TC, which is really a 70s design...

http://www.atozautolights.com/images/AutoPhotos/LICO8894.jpg

Going back to the Hondas - the '90-'93 was an 80s design. The '94-'97 was an early 90s design and was the first Accord to leave it's smaller more basic roots and turn into the larger more Americanized Accord we have today.... but the '98-'02 Accord would be "the" 90s Accord since it was likely designed around '95 or so.

I'm sure I'm nitpicking a lot now and some may not agree with me... but to me, this has been common logic for quite a long time. Model year of a car does not play into what "x0's" car it is... example there is nothing 80s in design about a 1981 Camaro, and in fact since it first came out as a 1970 model, most likely sold in '69 and designed a few years before.... it is really quite a 60s car, but we don't think of things like that.

One can't possibly put a 1992 Fleetwood Brougham next to a 1992 Seville STS and not realize that despite the same model year, they are two decades apart in design. One is a 70s design, the other was a fresh 90s design.

gdwriter
10-02-10, 03:26 AM
^^^ Sheesh. Talk about splitting hairs!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0vd4askdXk

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-02-10, 07:42 AM
Exactly.

Not saying you, but it amazes me how literal some people take the years of cars. Example, that 1990 Honda is an 80s car in every way, not a 90s car. Some people would see "1990 Honda Accord" and be quick to think, "oh thats a 90s Honda"

Cars come out the year prior to their model year (usually). As you mentioned, the '90 Accord came out in fall of '89.

But, how long was that car being designed? It's not like cars are just thought up in 3 months (again, mostly... I know there are exceptions that someone would just have to throw in). With the prior generation '86-'89, I would say shortly after that, probably around '87 the '90 Accord was really being thought up.... that makes it an 80s design era car.

Another example would be the 1980 Lincoln Town Car. We associate this body TC with the 80s because that is when it was made. But it was most likely on sale in fall of '79 and being such a drastic change from the '79 Fords with the whole new Panther chassis, that thing was probably in the planning stages for a few years... which really makes that car a 70s design.

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/lincoln-cars13.jpg

As a comparison, the newly styled 1988 Continential was most likely released in fall of '87, which means it had to have been designed around '84-'85.... making that car a true "80s design".... looking at it, one can tell it is vastly different then the 1980 TC, which is really a 70s design...

http://www.atozautolights.com/images/AutoPhotos/LICO8894.jpg

Going back to the Hondas - the '90-'93 was an 80s design. The '94-'97 was an early 90s design and was the first Accord to leave it's smaller more basic roots and turn into the larger more Americanized Accord we have today.... but the '98-'02 Accord would be "the" 90s Accord since it was likely designed around '95 or so.

I'm sure I'm nitpicking a lot now and some may not agree with me... but to me, this has been common logic for quite a long time. Model year of a car does not play into what "x0's" car it is... example there is nothing 80s in design about a 1981 Camaro, and in fact since it first came out as a 1970 model, most likely sold in '69 and designed a few years before.... it is really quite a 60s car, but we don't think of things like that.

One can't possibly put a 1992 Fleetwood Brougham next to a 1992 Seville STS and not realize that despite the same model year, they are two decades apart in design. One is a 70s design, the other was a fresh 90s design.

I agree entirely.

LS1Mike
10-02-10, 11:13 AM
I always liked these. May explain why I had one.
http://www.shelbyregistry.com/graphics/87lancer.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/Lancer1.jpg
http://www.dempseybowling.com/sheldodg/shl_lcr.jpg
For 1987 it was pretty sharp.

LS1Mike
10-02-10, 11:20 AM
http://www.turboclub.com/turbocars/dodge/Dod_shelby.jpg
http://memimage.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/2807/1041/32015520002_large.jpg
These always get forgotten as well. I think they looked a lot nicer than the F-Body, Fox Body of their day.

orconn
10-02-10, 11:26 AM
Next someone will be siting a Merkur in this thread! After the mention of an Aztec and the above K-car I fully expect an Alfa Romeo "Milano" (apparently a great car but definitely a bad day for Italian design)to be cracking mirrors here soon!

orconn
10-02-10, 11:27 AM
Yeah, ol' Shel was known to whore around a bit when a few bucks was involved!

ga_etc
10-02-10, 12:39 PM
I always liked these. May explain why I had one.
http://www.shelbyregistry.com/graphics/87lancer.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/Lancer1.jpg
http://www.dempseybowling.com/sheldodg/shl_lcr.jpg
For 1987 it was pretty sharp.

What is that, Mike?

And I still want one of these:
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/vehicle-pictures/1995/dodge/spirit/92103451990307-480.jpg

Stingroo
10-02-10, 12:59 PM
http://cache-06.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/12/2010/01/500x_l_1986_dodge_shelby_omni_glhs_02.jpg

Goes Like Hell Som'more.

LS1Mike
10-02-10, 02:26 PM
It is an 87 Shelby Lancer, 780 were made. 400 were 5 speed and 380 were autos, only a few had leather. It is the only Intercooled Mopar that had an auto tranny.
For it's day it wasn't that bad of car 175 hp and 210 ft/lbs of torque.

I would like to find a Spirit RT as well, but from a maintenance stand point, I will just take an intercooled 2.5. The Lotus head is the leak link.

Koooop
10-02-10, 08:44 PM
I don't remember the HP, but I had my wife driving a Shelby Charger GLH some years ago. Probably had 175HP before I modded the crap out of it. These were SO easy to improve, the direct connection catalog was a no brainer.

I owned Merkur XR4ti for a short time as well. Modded Turbo on that one.

Koooop
10-02-10, 09:15 PM
Rides from the 80's... My Dad bought both of these new, we still have 'em both. The Rolls is a 1985, when it was first delivered it had wire wheels! LOL

Night Wolf
10-02-10, 11:59 PM
I'm going to add the first M3, M5 and M6 to the mix :)

http://images.paultan.org/images/History_M3_E30_1.jpg

http://www.m5board.com/photopost/data/504/16225250902005_31_.jpg

http://www.classyauto.com/image_large.php?image_id=357006

gdwriter
10-03-10, 12:12 AM
I like those 80s 6-Series BMWs as well. It helps that in my college years, I had the major hots for Cybill Shepherd, and that's what she drove in Moonlighting:

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/531/moon205100.jpg

Stingroo
10-03-10, 12:22 AM
I like the M6 the best of those three.

hueterm
10-03-10, 01:35 AM
Hellayeah, GD...

ga_etc
10-03-10, 04:56 AM
I'm going to add the first M3, M5 and M6 to the mix :)

http://images.paultan.org/images/History_M3_E30_1.jpg



Is it just me or is that M3 like 3 different shades of red? I'm sure it's just the lighting on it, but it still doesn't look right.

Night Wolf
10-03-10, 11:09 AM
It's just you.

The e30M3 was so different then the regular M3, it really is almost like its own car. The only body panels it shared were the hood and doors.

Personally for me of the first M's, it goes M3>M5>M6. The biggest appeal of the e28 M5 is the 286hp S38, other than that the e30M3 has my vote.

Koooop
10-03-10, 01:56 PM
Looks like 3 different shades of red to me.

Koooop
10-03-10, 02:13 PM
The above Anthricite Grey 6 series looks a whole lot like a 645csi Turbo I had in the 80's. That was a beautiful car in and out.

orconn
10-03-10, 03:17 PM
[QUOTE=Night Wolf;2378885]I'm going to add the first M3, M5 and M6 to the mix :)

http://images.paultan.org/images/History_M3_E30_1.jpg

http://www.m5board.com/photopost/data/504/16225250902005_31_.jpg

While I totally agree with the choice of the BMW 6 series, I have to say I think Rick's enfatuation with all things
'80's BMW and the accompanying hormonal influences have caused him to include the 3 series and the 5 series of that period. While no better or no worse than some of the American designs of the eighties they could never be included in a list of "most beautiful" unless the one nominating them were under some kind of hypnotic spell. Granted they were good handling cars for their day, and while functional in interior design the exterior design of both these models could be judged German eighties "quaint" at best!

ben.gators
10-03-10, 03:33 PM
And did I mention wagons and the color orange?

:hide:

Ah well, I do what I can. :lol: Also, I submit to this thread:

http://motortorque.askaprice.com/images/features/428-288/Best-1980-39-s-dream-cars-named-18067.jpg

It's so quirky and 1980s, how could you NOT love it?

That is a hot car and it always reminds me "Back to the future" movies....

Stingroo
10-03-10, 03:43 PM
I seriously do love the DMC-12. It's awesome.

Koooop
10-03-10, 03:45 PM
I seriously do love the DMC-12. It's awesome.

DMC

Do
More
Coke

This car sucked up the white lines on the road.

orconn
10-03-10, 03:48 PM
I also like the loooks of the Delorean DMC-12. One of the better mid-engined coupe designs of the eighties .... too bad about the Renault V-6 though! John Delorean had good automotive taste and he was married to a Ferrari!

Koooop
10-03-10, 03:50 PM
[QUOTE=Night Wolf;2378885]I'm going to add the first M3, M5 and M6 to the mix :)

http://images.paultan.org/images/History_M3_E30_1.jpg

http://www.m5board.com/photopost/data/504/16225250902005_31_.jpg

While I totally agree with the choice of the BMW 6 series, I have to say I think Rick's enfatuation with all things
'80's BMW and the accompanying hormonal influences have caused him to include the 3 series and the 5 series of that period. While no better or no worse than some of the American designs of the eighties they could never be included in a list of "most beautiful" unless the one nominating them were under some kind of hypnotic spell. Granted they were good handling cars for their day, and while functional in interior design the exterior design of both these models could be judged German eighties "quaint" at best!

The beauty of the M cars was mostly under the skin and the performance was in fact hypnotic but the repair bills provided a very sobering effect.

Night Wolf
10-03-10, 04:29 PM
That above M3 is one color... the M3 has lots of extra angles on it and with the lighting, makes it look different colors.


[QUOTE=Night Wolf;2378885]I'm going to add the first M3, M5 and M6 to the mix :)

http://images.paultan.org/images/History_M3_E30_1.jpg

http://www.m5board.com/photopost/data/504/16225250902005_31_.jpg

While I totally agree with the choice of the BMW 6 series, I have to say I think Rick's enfatuation with all things
'80's BMW and the accompanying hormonal influences have caused him to include the 3 series and the 5 series of that period. While no better or no worse than some of the American designs of the eighties they could never be included in a list of "most beautiful" unless the one nominating them were under some kind of hypnotic spell. Granted they were good handling cars for their day, and while functional in interior design the exterior design of both these models could be judged German eighties "quaint" at best!

The e28 M5 looks very similar to a regular e30... in fact one could even get an e28 M535i, which had all the styling cues of the M5, but with the regular M30...

But the e30M3 as not beaing a beautiful design?!?

IMO the e30 was already the most clean, well balanced designs of 80s era BMW.... the M3 just expanded on that design...

http://www.dancrouchblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/61b8_3.jpg

http://people.oregonstate.edu/~crouchd/craigslist_images/e30%20M3%20for%20sale.jpeg

http://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/1991_BMW_E30_M3_Alpine_White_Rear_1.jpg

Then again I really didn't know what they were before I was interested in BMW's, even then it took a while for me to warm up to them as I didn't like the wider fenders and preffered the regular e30s looks, but now I like it a lot.

Night Wolf
10-03-10, 04:39 PM
The above M3 is one color. The M3 has a lot of extra angles on it and lighting can to tricky things.


[QUOTE=Night Wolf;2378885]I'm going to add the first M3, M5 and M6 to the mix :)

http://images.paultan.org/images/History_M3_E30_1.jpg

http://www.m5board.com/photopost/data/504/16225250902005_31_.jpg

While I totally agree with the choice of the BMW 6 series, I have to say I think Rick's enfatuation with all things
'80's BMW and the accompanying hormonal influences have caused him to include the 3 series and the 5 series of that period. While no better or no worse than some of the American designs of the eighties they could never be included in a list of "most beautiful" unless the one nominating them were under some kind of hypnotic spell. Granted they were good handling cars for their day, and while functional in interior design the exterior design of both these models could be judged German eighties "quaint" at best!

While the M5 was very similar to the regular e28, and could be considered "plain"... in fact there was also an M535i, which had all the styling cues of the M5, but with the regular M30.

The e30 M3, IMO could hardly be considered a boring design. Though because of the age of many members here as well as the preference of car choices, it is easy to see why some favor the M6 over M3. Before I knew what an e30 was, the e30M3 didn't really do much for me, and even after I bought mine, I still preferred the regular e30 look as I didn't like the wider fenders. They have since grown on me and I really like the way they look too. The e30, IMO was already one of the cleanest of the 80s era BMW, the M3 just expanded on that.

http://www.dancrouchblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/61b8_3.jpg

http://people.oregonstate.edu/~crouchd/craigslist_images/e30%20M3%20for%20sale.jpeg

http://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/1991_BMW_E30_M3_Alpine_White_Rear_1.jpg

As for living with day to day, both the S14 in the M3 and S38 in the M5 were straight up race engines, though they performed well on the street and were durable, but 20+ yrs is still a lot of use on an engine designed from the start for high RPM performance. Cost to rebuild both of those engines are extremely high, not to mention purchase cost of those cars are very high. For those reasons, I am happy with my regular e30.... but finding an M535i would be cool.

orconn
10-03-10, 04:55 PM
Having known those cars since they were new, I have to say they were "plain." I never new any who had an "M" BMW who wanted to drive one on a daily basis. The added spoilers and other ephemera IMO didn't enhance their looks, but they sure did enhance their owner's ("mine's bigger than yours" status in boy racer circles, just as Mercedes "AMG" badges and add ons did for Mercedes owners). I don't find "boy racer" editions of street cars particularly "beautiful," functionally appropriate at best, but beautiful no.

ga_etc
10-03-10, 07:09 PM
While the M5 was very similar to the regular e28, and could be considered "plain"... in fact there was also an M535i, which had all the styling cues of the M5, but with the regular M30.

The e30 M3, IMO could hardly be considered a boring design. Though because of the age of many members here as well as the preference of car choices, it is easy to see why some favor the M6 over M3. Before I knew what an e30 was, the e30M3 didn't really do much for me, and even after I bought mine, I still preferred the regular e30 look as I didn't like the wider fenders. They have since grown on me and I really like the way they look too. The e30, IMO was already one of the cleanest of the 80s era BMW, the M3 just expanded on that.

http://www.dancrouchblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/61b8_3.jpg

http://people.oregonstate.edu/~crouchd/craigslist_images/e30%20M3%20for%20sale.jpeg

http://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/1991_BMW_E30_M3_Alpine_White_Rear_1.jpg

As for living with day to day, both the S14 in the M3 and S38 in the M5 were straight up race engines, though they performed well on the street and were durable, but 20+ yrs is still a lot of use on an engine designed from the start for high RPM performance. Cost to rebuild both of those engines are extremely high, not to mention purchase cost of those cars are very high. For those reasons, I am happy with my regular e30.... but finding an M535i would be cool.

I don't know about "beautiful", but I think they are definitely sharp.

Bro-Ham
10-03-10, 07:39 PM
Back in the 80's I liked the looks of the Audi 5000 when it came out in 1984 with its sleek and completely revolutionary design. The 1986+ CS Turbo model was always a favorite, I never cared for Quattro models which only had manual transmission back then. :)

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-03-10, 08:22 PM
I wouldn't call any '80s BMW "beautiful". With those, it's definitely function over form.

Destroyer
10-03-10, 10:01 PM
I wouldn't call any '80s BMW "beautiful". With those, it's definitely function over form.
What about the M1 Chad? That was (and still is) a beautiful car and it was a very early 80's car at that.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m62Km2wgRGY&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDpaEGgvb2Y&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXhmm8gy3EY&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUBintl5BJk&feature=channel

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-03-10, 10:31 PM
Gorgeous car yes, but I do believe it debuted in '78.

BMW never topped that car, atleast in terms of never making another mid-engined supercar again. They should, it would do them good. If Audi can have the R8, and Mercedes with the SLS (even though it's not mid engined) then why doesn't BMW have one?

orconn
10-03-10, 11:35 PM
The BMW M1 was a cluttered, Germanic interpretation of an Italian mid-engined "supercar" .... not really beautiful and certainly not in a league with Ferraris and Lamborghinis or even the Delorean! The apex of beauty for BMW was the 503 roadster and coupe of the early sixties and the 6 series car of the '80s. Most every else was "ho-hum" styling wise .... functionally attractive but certainly not in the big leagues of beautiful cars of any decade.

Koooop
10-03-10, 11:52 PM
The M1 was stunning in it's day, the 635csi was a looker but the rest of the line up was awkward looking but I still drove them, what a blast.

Destroyer
10-04-10, 12:25 AM
The BMW M1 was a cluttered, Germanic interpretation of an Italian mid-engined "supercar" .... not really beautiful and certainly not in a league with Ferraris and Lamborghinis or even the Delorean! The apex of beauty for BMW was the 503 roadster and coupe of the early sixties and the 6 series car of the '80s. Most every else was "ho-hum" styling wise .... functionally attractive but certainly not in the big leagues of beautiful cars of any decade.The M1 was and is a revered machine. My earliest memories of one was in the mid 80's. There was a speed shop locally that specialized in Porsche's but the owner also owned an M1. His had many mods done including twin turbo's and a host of other goodies. Anyways, by '90 I had a mint low mileage 928s (don't ask how I got it at 19) which I took to the shop for mods. I met the owner of the shop and fell in love with that M1 which was in the shop sitting in a corner. After frequenting the shop I became friends with the owner which also owned an '86 911 Turbo. We'd go crusing in the M1 and this modded car was very fast even by today's standards. He thought my 928 was more like a "Cadillac" compared to his M1 and Turbo 911. He was probably right. :thumbsup: