Some more classic pictures

6B9B4D9F-44C9-45FA-946A-8B05794A75AB.jpeg
 
Two things I noticed looking through this thread; Cars were way cooler back then and people were a whole lot thinner back then. Before the days of fast food for our regular diet.
 
I don't know the forum rules about bumping older threads, but I wanted to say:
I really wish Chrysler were able to fully realize the Turbine cars.

I guess mechanically speaking, the components of the turbine engine were a lot more complicated to work on than a conventional internal combustion engine, but god, the styling on the car is so cool that I wish they at least reused it on another model, even if it did have a normal engine.

Even then, I still think the turbine was cool as hell. Imagine cruising in a car that can run any anything remotely combustive and spins at 24000 rpm. GM and Ford may have made good cars, but very few compete with the sheer engineering prowess Chrysler had in the 60s. Just my opinion.
 
I don't know the forum rules about bumping older threads, but I wanted to say:
I really wish Chrysler were able to fully realize the Turbine cars.

I guess mechanically speaking, the components of the turbine engine were a lot more complicated to work on than a conventional internal combustion engine, but god, the styling on the car is so cool that I wish they at least reused it on another model, even if it did have a normal engine.

Even then, I still think the turbine was cool as hell. Imagine cruising in a car that can run any anything remotely combustive and spins at 24000 rpm. GM and Ford may have made good cars, but very few compete with the sheer engineering prowess Chrysler had in the 60s. Just my opinion.
Take a look at the back end of the '68 Chrysler 300 and tell me that the Turbine Car was not the influence for that styling cue. Just saying, Jer
 
I always wished they had dropped a 383 in the thing and produced the car.
The turbine cars ran like a sluggish 316 in a B body. Sounded cool as hell though!
 
Back
Top