1. Well, they're probably in museums or abandoned for good. 2. Most of the time, yes. --- Post updated --- Probably "aesthetics" or some shit like that.
Another reason why I like it so much is because I don't know why but by the time I saw it on the internet I instantly felt a familiarity sort of. I feel that I've seen this before. That I've been close to it. It is hard to explain and you probably don't understand what I mean but I feel like.. I've seen that IRL, I've seen that before. Something like a Deja vu but with something that I've never experienced... It's weird I know..
I don't think it should even be considered a reason to like ANY car at all. --- Post updated --- ...or maybe the restorer has good restoration experience, as it sounds like you're not sure. Also, do you know when that restoration was (as in year)?
Unless you know the man behind it's contacts or that person who restored one, you'd be shit out of luck. --- Post updated --- So not seeing it means you like it? That makes no sense at all. Atleast I have been in a MDX before that justifies why I like them and have seen them plenty of times.
Just this car. Not seeing something doesn't mean I like it, but regarding this car, yes. It is a tiny reason --- Post updated --- Come to think of it, the name Shelter fits it just fine since while being inside of it you are protected by the bad wether and elements. Even if you're not protected as much as a normal car, still it is a suiting name
1. As in the car where 99.9% of people nowadays don't give a shit about. Even if it's tiny, it's still a unacceptable reason as nobody else would say that about a car they like. 2. Not really. Nobody else named their car Shelter, so what is the excuse here?
Nobody named their car Shelter because they didn't think of it maybe? And why is that reason unacceptable?
1. Yeah, because that would never fit their car well, but apparently this guy thought so. 2. It literally doesn't prove anything that the car's good, so it can't be a reason to like it.
I also felt the same thing when I first saw the Smyk --- Post updated --- Alright y'all. I looked it up and it eventually is Deja Vu
You mean "extremely" strange. I never ever met a person so obsessed with almost-forgotten European 50s/60s cars and a modern French city car.
Because almost every person I've talked about cars is reacting pretty much the same, this is my favourite type of car. Call me bad-tasted, call the cars horrible, ugly, weird, bad, call them whatever you want but this is my favourite type of car: Weird, unusual, rare, in many cases considered ugly, and bad etc.
Volkswagen Beetle, Triumph Spitfire, Porsche 356, Renault Dauphine, etc.) always seemed to have them on the rear only. Is there something that makes swing axle suspension inherently unsuitable for the front end of a car? Can it not be adapted to a steering axle? I strongly suspect that this isn't the case though. Ford's longrunning Twin-I-Beam suspension didn't seem to particularly compromise steering ability, but I'm going to be a little picky about this. Because the pivot points are not located in the centre of the vehicle, I'm going to count it as an entirely different type of independent suspension. So, can anybody think of a passenger car that featured swing axles on the front end?[/QUOTE] This little car (Glass coupe) was also swing axle in the front. https://www.flickr.com/photos/photiste/36839525066
