<![CDATA[Jalopnik: rambler classic]]> http://tags.jalopnik.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/jalopnik.com.png <![CDATA[Jalopnik: rambler classic]]> http://jalopnik.com/tag/ramblerclassic http://jalopnik.com/tag/ramblerclassic <![CDATA[Even Ramblers Are Consumed By The Crusher's Insatiable Hunger!]]> Maybe you won't shed any tears over the rendering of this '74 Corolla wagon into a tiny cube of China-bound scrap steel, but how about this nearly complete '63 Rambler Classic?

Now, don't go sending me a bunch of those "ZOMG where is this junkyard? I need them parts for my Rambler project!" emails, because I shot these photos a year ago and this proto-AMC long ago served as a tasty snack for the steel jaws of The Crusher, an appetizer for the main course of Tradesman vans and W126 Benzes. Instead, contemplate the temporary nature of life as you peruse this Server Hamster-Approved™ new-style gallery, which I'm hoping won't cause a blackout to descend upon the Eastern Seaboard the very first time a reader clicks on one of its images:









Holy crap! A Weather Eye!



]]>
http://jalopnik.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5303340&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Commenter Of The Day: Rambler Classic Edition]]> You know what we've always liked about the Rambler Classic? The fact that after all this time the Rambler Classic is actually sort of a classic. Who doesn't remember the Rambler? It's the freaking Rambler. And though the Classic isn't as classic looking as, say, a Rambler Six, it is nevertheless a classic and not just in the way that almost any car from the 1960's is a classic. If we had the option we'd grab a Cross Country wagon, but you probably already knew that about us.

Today's discussion centered on what, from the 2000's, could be considered an instant classic car. There were lots of great answers and, in the end, one in particular that was long. Quite long. But DSLPWR nevertheless stuck the landing:

Rarity, beauty, technological significance, cultural impact, originality and performance are some of the factors.

I had a whole fat list. And lost it. Damn.

Rarity: Aston Martin AR1, Lamborghini Reventon, Ferrari FXX, some species of Veyron.
Beauty: Alfa Romeo, Bentley, Aston Martin, Bugatti, Rolls Royce, a few others.
Technological significance: Porsche GT3, Prius/Tesla, R8 TDI, couple others.
Cultural impact: any car which most notably ushered in the second compact car generation or alternative fuel, be it the New Mini, Smart, Scion Xb, Prius, Insight, a TDI model, etc.
Originality: Atom, Can-Am Spider, The Batmobile, Tesla (Elise came out in '96, sorry), perhaps a couple others.
Performance: Veyron, Porsche, Ferrari, Corvette, others which distinguish themselves above and byond mere horspower. The Corvette gets nods for its sheer performance:price ratio, but even that quality is fading as prices rise like the 911 gains fat. Speaking of which, who's willing to go on a limb and say the Cayman is an instant classic? Not I. It'll get noted, but classic? Meh.

Call me heretic on two counts, but I believe Baby Boomer muscle car styling revival doesn't hold as "instant classic" nor as future classic, be it the Mustang, GT40, Camaro, or other 60's resuscitation. I also believe that the STI's and Evo's won't make it, either. They lack sufficient depth in various qualities to warrant "instant classic." Instant, yes. Classic? No. The few that survive intact and unmolested with reasonable miles will retain value for those reasons, but not for deeply intrinsic qualities. After all, how many A1 GTI's remain and why should we believe current STI's and Evo's have more "classic" potential now than the GTI did then? That said, I love 'em all to death and look forward to owning a used one later on.

We mostly agree, but one question: This isn't the "fat list"?

[Photo: Station Wagon]

]]>
http://jalopnik.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=387802&view=rss&microfeed=true