A vehicle's lack of power or the ability to make power does not deem said vehicle "shit"

a vehicle's lack of power or the ability to make power does not deem said vehicle "shit".

discuss.

Most car related events and thereby the people as well are centered around going fast and being faster than others. It is therefore no surprise that the average car enthusiast would deem slow cars shit.

The average car enthusiast is also low key retarded.

How good or bad the car is is judged by how well it does what it's made to do. So if you make a "fast car" and it's slow, it's "shit".
However, if the car is made for something else like hauling a family around, other criteria is more important than speed.

But what if a car was never meant to be fast and people convince themselves that it should have been so therefore it's shit?

It better have other redeeming qualities like good handeling or something.

Having a reputation of having a frame that is such incredibly dense black matter that hippies think its super safe is not a redeeming quality.

Then the fault lies in their logic, not in the car.

/thread for instance volvos are made to be safe, and are probably the best at it

>But what if a car was never meant to be fast
then it still goes fast

The 240 is also reliable as fuck.

True, but that 240 is still shit and a meme car

>shit
Why?
>meme car
Why let other people ruin something good?

It's ugly, got bad fuel economy despite having a weak engine (Even into the 90's), not nearly as tough as the memes make it out to be, and not really that great to drive.
My family has owned 3 240 wagons in the span on like 10 years, and the quality control wasn't really that good.
Volvo should stick to lorries.

>ugly
opinion
>bad fuel economy
not really
>weak engine
only if you didn't buy a turbo, you had turbo wagons right?
>bad qc
only after the 9XX came out

If only Saab were still around

I am very curious as to what you drive.

>ugly
Opinion.
>bad fuel economy
Upper twenties on the highway isn't bad for a 25+ year old sedan
>not as tough as the memes make it sound
Of course not, you fucking mongo.

Yup. I miss my 9000 :(

All you just told us was that you can't drive aggressively and your family isn't very good at maintaining cars.

Volvo 240s are one of the rare cheap accessible rwd vehicles, and they are ultra mega controllable when sideways, even stock

>ugly
>not that great to drive
costanza.jpg

Where the hell is a 240 getting upper 20 mpgs these days? Mine is an absolute fuel hog.

...

>This
Granted mine has a cam and I don't drive it like a grandma, but I get 20 mpg city. Maybe 22 if I'm lucky

>city
That's why I said 'on the highway'.

For city mileage I wish I had that. I have to assume I wouldn't get 28 highway.

How good a vehicle is is entirely subjective from person to person. That's why we argue about it on a website for korean moving pictures.

Well we check our cars atleast once a month where I live in shops, not to mention the check ups we did at home

These kind of cars are my favorite. Not just the 240 but any RWD family car that isn't fast. They're the most versatile of any car.

>buy fast car
>only looks appropriate when you push it
>driving becomes stressful as fuck

>buy slow car
>only looks appropriate when you ease it
>driving becomes comfy as fuck

I get 22-25 in my AW70 '90 245. I could be better but I constantly do 75-80 on the highway at 3k rpm (6k redline); manuals get almost 30mpg.

What quality control issues are you on about?

Mine has given me an exceptional 5 years of daily driving and over 100k miles under my ownership; getting pretty close to 300k on the odo.

The problem is there aren't too many rwd economy family cars. The 240, 740 and 940 are some of the only rwd 4 cylinder wagons made by any manufacturer.

>buy fast car
>don't feel the need to show off
>drive like a grandma

>buy old, slow car
>feel the need to prove that my car and I can keep up with everyone else
>drive like a racer

Well our cars were driven a lot (Not just commuting), reliability was pretty okay, but I remember panels and the interior being garbage.

Crown vics are an example of slow cars that aren't shit. Cheap, reliable, can seat 6, has a fuckhuge trunk and tow trailers and other cars if you're kinda desprate. An SUV might be better than it but not at it's price point.

Fpbp

This desu. I have nothing to prove in my z so I cruise in the inside lane, in my Corolla I'm passing evryone

I remember a news story where a family was driving from Ohio to New York in a volvo and it just fucking randomly exploded on the highway.
I never looked at volvos the same way again

This is true for just about every American landboat.

I love them all so much

How much would I be looking at for a 240? I've heard of people picking them up for $1000-$2000, but every time I find one in my area, they want $4000+ for them. I'm in SW Ohio, btw.

redblocks are known to hold near 300HP booosted

Landboats are fucking awesome

On top of that they're dead simple to work on and most people won't even glance at the car twice.

There's also the late model GM B-bodies.

I ended up with a Grand Marquis because of all this. Didn't trust any dork selling a CV because I've seen how they get driven (muh cop car hurr it goes so fast), so I went with the innocuous, unappreciated member of the Panther family. That, and I was tired of looking for a decently priced truck. I mean, for fucks sake. $3k couldn't land me a half-decent Ranger or S10 with a 4-banger, but $1800 got me a V8 sedan with all the towing capacity and arguably more utility, AND it didn't have half the mileage some of the trucks were going for.

If it feels/is underpowered for its intended area of use then it is a small degree of shit

Trucks are way too expensive nowadays

If thats true why is the ae86 and the miata Veeky Forums's perfect car?

Agreed, many things make a car. Looks, reliability, speed, handling, features, interior.

It's also important to remember when it was made. Any 240 is at least 24 years old now, it wasn't as slow in comparison as it is now.

>tfw volvos are rated to tow 3300 lbs and Panthers only 2000.

I get upwards of 25 in my 91 240 wagon with the m71 in the summer. Driving "spiritedly" but smart.

I agree. Different cars are built for different purposes. If a car doesn't do well with those purposes in mind then it's shit.
For instance an economy car is supposed to be cheap and reliable, if it's slow that's not a problem because it was never meant to be fast, but if it's unreliable then it's shit.
On the other side a super car is designed to be fast, if it's unreliable it's not a big deal, but if it's slow it's shit.

I guess it's really dependent on where you are, but around here (Colorado) there's usually a couple one old 240s on craigslist for under $1000 and usually at least one good running one for about $1500.

I bought mine with 148k miles, an extra set of snow tires, and a bunch of spare parts for $1700. I probably could have gotten it a bit cheaper but the guy was a car bro, so I didn't want to try and jew him.

Damn. Yeah, I don't know if they're rare in my region or if the sellers just overprice the fuck out of them. But I've only been able to find them through ads online. I've only seen one for sale in person a few years back, but I wasn't old enough to drive at the time and someone snagged it pretty quickly.

I'm currently driving a 97 Town Car, and I've been eyeballing the 240 for a few years now. I figure if the Lincoln doesn't work out, I could try to find a Volvo, since it'd be slightly smaller and marginally better on gas.

How the fuck do you all get that kinda gas mileage. Both of my 240s average like 16-18mpg in mixed driving.

Panthers are only rated to tow 2000lbs? That seems kind of fucky given the amount of torque the 4.6 has and the solid frame underneath.

Wasn't there an actual towing package as an option for some of the Panthers?

don't drive like a retard

I think it has to do with the Watts link on the newer ones; I'm not exactly sure when that was added. Before this, they could handle a lot more

Older LTD vics were rated to tow like 5k. 5000 pounds. It inexplicably dropped to 2k with newer models. The entire drive train is still shared with trucks and vans, and even the frame is related to the rangers, and people DO regularly use them for towing without issue.

Some industry marketing fuckery is going on. a VW Golf is rated to tow 3.3k. A yaris is rated to tow 2300 in the uk, 700 in canada, but not recommended at all in the US??? European honda crvs can tow over 4k but us ones have to keep it under 1500? I think arbitrarily low tow ratings in the us are intended to con people into buying big expensive trucks that they really dont need.

I get about 20-25 mostly highway. Turbo is the way to go with volvos

Factory tow ratings have to do with brakes and suspensions not power... So despite the 4.6 being a torque monster compared to a Volvo redblock, the Volvo is rated to tow 1300 lbs more from the factory.

I had a MGM for a bit. I do miss it.

1998, the start of the 'whale' body Panthers. 92-97 are aero bodies, 98-02 are pre-facelift whales (aside from the Crown Vic which didn't get a facelift), 03-11 are post-facelift whales. The post facelift whales have a number of year to year changes like the Grand Marquis and its identity crisis regarding the grille and headlights.

I drive like a goddamn grandma nigga
Something must be fucked up with em

you driving a stick?

>The entire drive train is still shared with trucks and vans, and even the frame is related to the rangers
4WD Crown Vic conversions when?

This. It's generally the Supra, 'Vette and Mustang fags who are obsessed with HP and speed, and don't realize that you don't have to have 300+HP to have a fun car. Miatas, MR2's, Audi TT's are proof of this.

Now days that isn't very true it's alot of form over function

One is the other is an auto