Is there a car out there that **NOBODY** likes?

DarkMonohue said:

DarkMonohue said:

All this AMC chatter has me wondering whether the stick-shift Pacer I walk past most mornings is in need of a home.

And here it is, in all its faded Curbside Classics style glory, waiting for someone to slip in a lightly warmed up High Output 4.0 and a five speed.

Off topic a bit:

Perhaps not true, but I learned while working at an AMC dealer in 1980 that the Pacer was originally intended to have a rotary engine.

Renesis swap, anyone?  A tribute to the underpaid engineers of Kenosha.

In reply to Streetwiseguy :

Yes, AMC in their All Makes Combined form was going to get the GM Wankel.  GM allegedly had working prototypes as far back as '72ish but they lasted too long, they were trying to figure out how to make them more cheaply so they would last only 100k miles.  (Which sounds horribly cynical, and to a degree it is, but overengineering is still bad engineering - they are making a product to a design spec)

Then the catalytic converter was invented, automakers no longer had to freak out about meeting emissions specs (Ford estimated a 3000mi mean time between overhauls to meet 1975 emissions), GM sort of forgot about the Wankel, AMC put a big bulge in the Pacer's hood so their existing six would fit, and GM converted the Wankel facility into a seatbelt manufacturing plant.

What is interesting is that the GM Wankel was designed with access ports in the end housings so that the apex seals could be replaced without disassembling the engine.  In a Mazda, the apex seals are the last things to wear out, generally it's the side housings and side seals that wear first.   You can break an apex seal from overrevving, but this has internal consequences similar to dropping a valve.  You get to keep the oil pan and water pump and some other bits 

DirtyBird222 said:

Tom1200 said:

DirtyBird222 said:

Anything with a CVT. I've yet to drive a CVT equipped car that was enjoyable outside of being an appliance. 

You Sir need to drive a Formula 500/600.  I knew I'd like the CVT for autocross but found it to be fantastic on a road course as well.

Interesting take. What CVT are they using? From rental cars to the Honda and Subaru CVT equipped vehicles my ex wife and girlfriends have owned. I'm not sold. 

They using snowmobile engines, most of them have Polaris clutches. The primary and secondary are infinitely tunable. Mine has set up that covers 95% of the course or tracks I run, so I just leave it be.

Never being stuck between gears is fantastic.  Even when you have to tune them all you need is about $150 worth of parts (springs weights etc).  You also need about $150 worth of tools to service them..............$300 is still cheaper than a $5000 close ratio gearbox. 

I suspect for road cars the CVT is tuned for mileage and not performance.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to Streetwiseguy :

Yes, AMC in their All Makes Combined form was going to get the GM Wankel.  GM allegedly had working prototypes as far back as '72ish but they lasted too long, they were trying to figure out how to make them more cheaply so they would last only 100k miles.  (Which sounds horribly cynical, and to a degree it is, but overengineering is still bad engineering - they are making a product to a design spec)

Then the catalytic converter was invented, automakers no longer had to freak out about meeting emissions specs (Ford estimated a 3000mi mean time between overhauls to meet 1975 emissions), GM sort of forgot about the Wankel, AMC put a big bulge in the Pacer's hood so their existing six would fit, and GM converted the Wankel facility into a seatbelt manufacturing plant.

 

What is interesting is that the GM Wankel was designed with access ports in the end housings so that the apex seals could be replaced without disassembling the engine.  In a Mazda, the apex seals are the last things to wear out, generally it's the side housings and side seals that wear first.   You can break an apex seal from overrevving, but this has internal consequences similar to dropping a valve.  You get to keep the oil pan and water pump and some other bits 

you know what I have a contact at the archives now so I should investigate what documentation they have on old rotaries and see...

In reply to fidelity101 :

That RX-3 I helped drag out of a barn came with a lot of late 60s early 70s auto and engineering magazines that featured Wankel developments.  I'd scan them but the magazines are pretty fragile.  That is where I get a lot lf neat tidbits from, like how they knew about the high RPM internal airflow problems in the 60s.  Of course it is all from press releases and manufacturer representative interviews, no secret stash engineering data.

I still have the stack of magazines.

Tom1200 said:

DirtyBird222 said:

Tom1200 said:

DirtyBird222 said:

Anything with a CVT. I've yet to drive a CVT equipped car that was enjoyable outside of being an appliance. 

You Sir need to drive a Formula 500/600.  I knew I'd like the CVT for autocross but found it to be fantastic on a road course as well.

Interesting take. What CVT are they using? From rental cars to the Honda and Subaru CVT equipped vehicles my ex wife and girlfriends have owned. I'm not sold. 

They using snowmobile engines, most of them have Polaris clutches. The primary and secondary are infinitely tunable. Mine has set up that covers 95% of the course or tracks I run, so I just leave it be.

Never being stuck between gears is fantastic.  Even when you have to tune them all you need is about $150 worth of parts (springs weights etc).  You also need about $150 worth of tools to service them..............$300 is still cheaper than a $5000 close ratio gearbox. 

I suspect for road cars the CVT is tuned for mileage and not performance.

Ah a powersports CVT. Makes sense in a small chassis. I still hated the CVT in my Polaris 250 4-wheeler growing up. 

In reply to DirtyBird222 :

The CVT in the F500 takes some adjustment to your driving style; mostly it stems from the lack of compression braking. So instead of lifting of the throttle mid corner to get the car to rotate into the second apex you need to lightly squeeze the brakes.

Not sure if anyone has mentioned it , but I doubt there is much love for  the USPS "Jeep" that is in use today ,  somehow they keep them running , I was told there are stock aftermarket heads being made .

there are not many "cars" that get so much abuse everyday for years .

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to Streetwiseguy :

Yes, AMC in their All Makes Combined form was going to get the GM Wankel.  GM allegedly had working prototypes as far back as '72ish but they lasted too long, they were trying to figure out how to make them more cheaply so they would last only 100k miles.  (Which sounds horribly cynical, and to a degree it is, but overengineering is still bad engineering - they are making a product to a design spec)

Wouldn't that longevity have been a selling point since NSU and even Mazda rotaries were known to wear out quickly at that time?

The version I had heard about what killed the GM rotary was that either they hadn't figured out Mazda's secret to long lasting apex seals, or it wouldn't meet emissions rules. Apparently they were planning to use it in the Monza.

I found this so interesting I was looking for a place to post it. This is as good as any. 
I searched cargurus sorting the ads by oldest listings.
The answer to this question may very well be Maybach. 
 

We compared this car with similar 2006 Maybach 57 based on price, mileage, features, condition, dealer reputation, and other factors.

3059 days at this dealership · 3059 days on CarGurus · 41 saves

Price decreased

Price went down by $50,000.