Big Beat

The Wanker... er... Wankel rotary engine. The number one automotive flop/lemon/dog on my list. Ask the man who owned one

I'm planning to go to Hershey for the first time this year too. However, I have to pick only one day to make a day-trip of it. Out of the four days, which day would you guys suggest as best for a newbie to get an overall feel for the event? Do most people arrive early on Wednesday, or would Saturday be busiest and most interesting? Thanks!

Matt, I remember reading about the Buick restoration on your site, and wondering "what happened" when the updates stopped. Glad to hear you're back on your feet.

I got another '79 Monte a few years ago after regretting getting rid of my first for 25 years. Same year, same color. Not as "vintage" as some of the others here, but time is on her side.

I had that problem in NY. An "I" was entered as a "1" in the title. The DMV clerk accepted a printed photo of the VIN plate.

I'd resurrect something practical, like the Checker. We need a proper taxi again. I also quite seriously think GM should just bring back the '57 Chevy. A limited-edition re-issue. You can practically clone a brand new one from kit parts already, anyway. Fiddle with it just enough to add modern brakes and safety equipment, and put it on the market. It will sell better than any current model.

I have the following issues of AQ available: Vol. 4 – # 2, 3 Vol. 7 – # 1, 2 Vol. 9 – # 4 Vol. 10 – # 4 Vol. 11 – complete set of 4 Vol. 13 – # 4 Vol. 15 – # 4 Vol. 16 – complete set of 4 Vol. 17 – complete set of 4 Vol. 18 – complete set of 4 Vol. 19 – # 3, 4 Vol. 20 – # 1, 2 Vol. 21 – complete set of 4 Vol. 22 – # 1, 2 Vol. 23 – # 1, 2, 3 Vol. 24 – complete set of 4 Vol. 25 – # 1, 2 Vol. 26 – # 1, 2, 4 Vol. 27 – # 3, 4 Vol. 29 – # 4 Vol. 30 – # 1, 2, 3 All are in very good condition. The price is $10 per issue, plus $5 shipping (I will of course combine shipping if you're buying more than one book). I will also trade for issues that I'm missing. If you wish to trade, ask for my want list. Please contact me at bigbeat_66(at)yahoo(dot)com.

Sounds great! Pull the switches and other parts you need off your wrecked '89. Post some pics of your new ride when you get a chance.

I've always had a problem with this concept of "crumple zones". Sure, it's great for a modern car to crumple up and absorb the energy in a major, life-threatening collision. It's very impressive when staged slamming into a wall with crash-test dummies. But unfortunately, they also seem to crumple up like a tin can even in case of relatively minor impact. On a late model car, often enough it's a total loss for what was previously just a fender-bender. For the vast majority of real-world accident scenarios, all things being equal, I'd prefer to take my chances behind the wheel of my big old solid steel, body-on-frame Chevy. 48, I hope it all works out for you.

I tend to dismiss any model that's on the radar of non-car people. Tri-five Chevies, Mustangs, Camaros, hot-rodded 1930's Fords.... All nice cars I'm sure, but overexposure killed them for me a long time ago. I really hated it when the movie "Training Day" came out, and suddenly my '79 Monte Carlo got on people's radar. My car is a totally stock unrestored survivor, and I intend to keep it that way. It never got too much attention before, but it was different enough to suit me. Suddenly, everybody started telling me what a cool ride I had, and how I should paint it black and turn it into some sort of pimpmobile. Plus it is now far more attractive to thieves, who would probably do just that with it. You can keep THAT kind of appreciation. Driving an antique car is a sort of subtle rebellion against mass culture to begin with, so wanting to be just like everybody else within the hobby and worshipping the same few icons makes no sense to me at all. The more popular a model is, the less I'm interested.

The Canadian car is a GAZ-14 Chaika, not a GAZ-13. A newer model from the 1970's with a more modern body. The GAZ-13 Chaika is considered a classic in Russia. The GAZ-14 is interesting enough, but was never as popular or as iconic.

About 10 years ago I saw a convertible Chaika in Freeport, NY. Supposedly it was left behind by Khruschev. I could have bought it for $40K. They sell for more than that in Russia today. The design was based on a Packard. Chaika engines were also used in unmarked Volga KGB cars.

Yes, I understand about the limited use, that's not a problem. And I do know that in some states, the procedure makes far more sense. I just wanted to hear some comments from fellow forum members who live in NY and have already been through this, just in case I was missing something. If the only actual benefit is the ability to use those ugly yellow plates, I think I'll pass.

Most of us here are aware of the difference. And I, for one, consider it absurd that ANYTHING from 1985 should be called an antique, whether it's cars or Boy George LPs. But what we have here is a hobby-specific, de-facto standard, which has nothing to do with regular English usage.

One of my other hobbies is old guitars. There, we don't use "classic" or "antique". The term is "vintage". Of course, there are just as many vintage guitar collectors who argue about the definition of "vintage", and every now and then some smart alec pipes up about how the original and correct usage of the word should only refer to wine and that therefore only the wine collectors should have the right to use it. This kind of thing is universal Personally, I think "antique", referring to cars, should be re-defined as "pre-1948", with the same kind of firm cut-off date that the CCCA has. And anything newer can be "special interest", "collectible", small-c "classic" or yes, even "vintage". But I certainly don't try to impose this idea on anyone. For better or worse, in this hobby, antique = 25 years old. Like it or not, get used to it.

My '79 Chevy currently has regular registration. I'm thinking of registering it as historic when I renew. The DMV site is not very informative, hopefully someone here with firsthand experience can help. Regular registration for this car is currently $133.50 ($103.50, plus $30 use tax), but this is for two years. From what I understand, historic registration has to be renewed every year, and it's $68.75 in NYC, according to this: http://www.nysdmv.com/forms/mv440H.pdf So it's actually a few dollars more, plus the additional hassle of renewing annually instead of bi-annually. So what exactly are the benefits then? Is there any reason to switch? Am I missing something? Also, will I still have to do the annual safety & emission inspection with historic registration? Thanks!

Yes, those silly plastic chrome strips are one of the things I like least about 3rd gen Montes, even though mine are still mostly intact. It was a very dumb idea. And if you had one with vinyl seats, they do tend to crack. Still, what you're describing is disappointment with a NEW car. We're all impatient about such flaws in a new car. Thirty years down the road, when no longer dependent on these cars for daily transportation, one can afford to be a little more indulgent. The Monte may not be the greatest car in the world, but its competition was no better.

In the early 80's, we all wanted late 60's cars. They were affordable and much more interesting than any typical used cars (which in those days meant Volares, Citations and early Japanese compacts). One of my friends back then had a Barracuda, another a 2-door Torino. These cars were only about 10-12 years old then. I really wanted to upstage both my friends with a '68 or '69 GTO, which was my dream car then. But no GTO's were available locally when the time came to stop daydreaming and actually buy something, so I settled for a clean late-model '79 Monte. Not a muscle car, but still a 2-door, V8, GM coupe, and still roughly fitting the same mindset. Years later, my first "collector" car was of course a late 60's Pontiac. Still not a GTO, but at least I got those out of my system, though for some time 60's muscle cars remained my main interest. Eventually, though, I realized, that EVERYBODY thought along the same lines, and hence there were plenty of muscle cars at every car show, but not a single '79 Monte like the one I had. Which made finding another far more appealing. And so my next car was a return to my own personal roots, rather than just another attempt at achieving an old teenage fantasy. I guess this kind of explains why a lot of us are now looking towards the 70's & 80's cars that we actually drove then, rather than the 60's ones that we wished we did.

I find it rather hard to accept anything from the 1980's & up being collectible yet as of today, with the exception of semi-exotic stuff like the above mentioned Porsches and Allantes, and all the usual ponycar suspects (Corvettes, Mustangs, etc.). I can imagine all the other 80's & 90's cars eventually getting there, but I think it will take decades. It seems that the newer a car is, the longer it takes for it to become collectible. As mentioned, 50's cars were already generally accepted as collectible in the 1970's, when they were around 20 years old. My '79 Monte Carlo is 30 years old this year, but it still doesn't have the same status. To many it's still just an older used car, despite being 30 years old. It may take another 10 years before its acceptance is universal. By the same token, a typical late 1980's model may need to be 50 years old before it gets any real appreciation, and a 90's model perhaps even older. My choice of the '79 Monte was personal: I had one for my first car in the early 80's that I wish I had kept. So a few years ago I went looking for one that's the same year and color, found the nicest, low-milage, totally original example I could find, and let time turn it into a classic. "Ti-i-i-ime is on my side, yes it is..."

Here's mine, a $100 Catalina hardtop. The little old lady original owner put a dent in each of the four corners trying to handle this barge, but she kept the interior dead mint. I started to restore it, but the frame rusted all the way through and one day the engine ended up on the ground. My mechanic showed up with a jack and a 2x4, and we drove the car to the nearest junkyard under its own power. Got $50 for it and kept a few parts. Taught me to be a bit more careful with my next selection

Any such list that includes a Volvo 240 but NOT a '62 Dodge Dart has been compiled by someone with absolutely no clue as to what "ugly" really means

1974 Mazda Rx-4 Rotary wagon. This was our first family car and still somewhat of a private joke 30 years later. Leaf springs sagged. Brakes broke. Carpets rotted. Water leaked. Totally unreliable, rust prone, impossible to find parts for, extremely expensive to maintain and impossible to find anyone who would do a rebuild on the rotary when it inevitably died. The worst POS I ever had the misfortune to own. 1982 Olds Delta 88. It was supposed to be everything the Mazda wasn't. Except it was even worse. That car had problems I couldn't ever forsee having. Like a self-disintegrating dash, electric windows shorting out in a thunderstorm, a horn beeping on every bump and the driveshaft coming loose at 60 mph. 2 transmissions and one engine changed before I gave up. I cheered when Oldsmobile went under years later. The only redeeming qualities it had was a solid, comfortable interior. If you could look past the falling headliner, that is. And of course it was much cheaper and easier to find parts for. 1989 Colt Vista. Uggghh. Just ughhh. Great little box-on-wheels design, but horrible quality and reliability. Didn't last at all. Utter crap. Junked when the engine died. 1990 Mitsubishi Sigma. Boy, I just had a knack for finding "white elephants" to buy. I loved that car when it ran, though. Despite having to replace each front axle three times in two years at four times the cost of the same job on a Toyota (that's just one example).

I simply like old cars and enjoy owning one. Plus I've always been somewhat of an amateur historian and preservationist by nature. I'm always accumulating, repairing and restoring various vintage objects, cars included.

#1 is OK if it was built from a repro body, or a lot of work was put into a totally trashed original that wasn't worth restoring AND it was done years ago (these days, a lot of old stuff is rare enough to be restorable that once wasn't considered good enough. With repro parts for these rods easily available today, there's no excuse to ruin anything salvageable anymore). If I knew that a decent Ford was cut up to make that rod, I wouldn't be happy about it. #2 is a kind of thing that I simply have no appreciation for whatsoever. It's just junk to me. I can understand how someone can have fun building one of these, and it's better to assemble a pile of total junk into something useful than to just let it rust away. But if something decent was cut up in the process to make this thing, I wouldn't be happy about it either. In any case, I have absolutely no interest in such cars, either hot rods or rat rods or street rods. It's a totally different world and I don't consider myself qualified to pass any kind of judgement on it. I just tend to ignore it. To me, a well preserved stock Pinto holds more interest than either of these two. #3 I'm no expert on 1930's Buicks, but that car just doesn't look right. What exactly is throwing me off is hard to tell from that one photo. It might have been mildly street-rodded (regrettable, but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. Such work, at least, is reversible if someone wants to put this car right at a later date). Or, the original was in such bad shape that proper restoration was impossible (in which case, someone did a pretty good job, actually).

I agree, whatever works for you. Nothing wrong with chrome wheels per se. I'm not about to tell people how to live their lives, and I don't consider everyone who disagrees with me to be wrong. But that's not really the point, is it? What I'm talking about is the general trend. If half the people would tell me about how they'd chop up my car, that's perfectly fine. When it's closer to 98%, something's wrong.