4wd Station wagons

There was someone here who for many years had a Caprice wagon on a full size 4WD frame. The running gear was most likely from a full size Chevy pickup, blazer, Suburban, whatever fit best. With no inspections, I see a lot of things around here on full size frames. Some look ok, others pretty bad when they don't take the time to make the wheelbase match. About 10 miles away last month there was a VW Rabbit on a full size 4WD frame. It might still be there.

Carbs seem so finicky, especially with the weather extremes here. My comfort zone with vehicles is the little golden zone of fuel injected OBD1. You get the reliability of fuel injection and a simple ECM to run the engine. You get the simplicity of being able to flash the codes out with a paper clip to give you a good direction of what's wrong. And the light only comes on when something considerable is wrong. No light because of a loose gas cap. And it's usually pretty easy to track down a problem. No multiple body computers, etc.

 

????????

i am actually thinking about one of these come fall to replace my caprice.

 

http://www.rocky-road.com/sx4.html

 

Read up a lot on those Suzuki's, Ian. I haven't heard very good reviews on them......
Kind of slow, ho-hum ride and handling.

 

i dont know marshall. suzuki sells the $hit out of them around here.
i am contemplating it or a diesel cruze when it comes out in the fall or a new focus. car and driver has been raving about the focus's chassis

 

My coworker drives this cars twin, slightly more weathered. Its a 90 civic wagon awd.

 

Just because something sels like hot cakes doesn't mean much in todays world, the auto industry is full of hot sellers full of problems.

I listened to the Forums advice when it came to getting my honey's ride. Yours and KK's opinion was the "buy" it, because you had one before and KK's knowledge. Just my 2 bits Ian, take KK's advise and do the home work

 

iv ridden in one one, IMO slow, sh*tty handling, and bland styling

 

I'd rather have the Colt Vista. I'm a little biased though since I run coltvista.com but honestly what else can hold 7 people, have 4 wheel drive, and get 25mpg? There's not many this side of the pond. I'm sure Europe has plenty of E-Class 4Matic wagons with the 3rd row seat. And I think the Volvo Cross Country can do 25mpg but I'm not sure you can get the 3rd row.

And that one picture on page one is a FIAT Tempra, not a Ford. Tempra was the old blue car George Clooney drove in The American.

 

All I know is that if I wasn't driving a 4x4 this morning I would not have made it in. It snowed yesterday, melted, then froze over then a nice dusting of snow on top... It's a rink out there. Was following a 2wd pickup down a hill this morning and he locked 'em up.. needless to say he just froze behind the wheel... stopped his picked mid hill and wasn't going down any further... So I had to pass him and head on in. Once down in the valley here it's a sheet of ice. 4x4 doesn't help with stopping or turning, but when you're at a red light and it turns green and you want to move forward it sure comes in handy.

I LOVE those 4wd Colts.. I'm going to have to checkout that website!

 

I'd say you are more likely to find someone who can properly diagnose and sort a fuel injected vehicle than someone that can properly tune a carburetor. And yes if something does go wrong it does throw a check engine light so you do know something is afoul. I'm not following you on the value of a LS powered GM (let's call it a Camaro) in 20 years, but I'm sure it will have more value than scrap based on past history.

My first comparison with your uncle's Mustang was to show that you could have increased performance and mileage with increased technology. I was going to also compare it to an LS6 Chevelle as well, but didn't feel like typing that much, but let's look at that too. First you have to throw out the horsepower rating of the '70 because it was measured using the older method of measuring gross horsepower. Newer engines are measuring net horsepower which takes into account losses for exhaust, emissions, belt drives, etc. Second the 1970 454 had almost no emissions standards to meet when compared with a late model LS engine. To make the comparison fair you'd also have to include emissions levels of the two engines. Then we still come to mileage. As you mentioned the 454 is probably in the low teens at best. 1/4 mile performance numbers are difficult to compare at best. Numbers I found for a 1970 LS6 Chevelle are somewhere in the mid to high 13's. Numbers I'm seeing for a late model Camaro v8 are in the mid to low 13's for stock vehicles. If anything the late model Camaro is probably just slightly heavier than the old Chevelle. I'd still put a late model LS3 Camaro which gives up almost 80 cubic inches up against a LS6 Chevelle and like my chances.

We have crumple zones and air bags so the car absorbs most of the shock of impact instead of throwing you into the windshield or dash of the car. Take a look at some older crash tests and you'll see all kinds of scary stuff going on. There's normally quite a bit of intrusion into the passenger compartment. Seats (which aren't even structural on an older car) are normally seen floating around inside the car. Just because a car is rigid like a tank doesn't mean the best for the passengers inside the car. Likewise if I knew I was about to be in a crash with my family in the car and I had the choice between being in a 1970 Chevelle and a 2012 Camaro I'll take the Camaro anyday.

Hey I like old cars and carburetors and distributors and making old stuff work as much as the next guy, but to dismiss newer cars just because they appear to be more complex is silly in my opinion.