On this day in 2003, the last old-style Beetle, the economy car produced by the German automaker Volkswagen, rolled off the assembly line in Puebla, Mexico. Why these German "Cars of the People" or "Vahgens uf da Volk" were being made in Mexico is anybodys' guess. One theory is that Adolf Eichmann opened his own Volkswagen factory in the Yucatan peninsula after he escaped from the Nuremberg trials of 1947-1964. Nobody noticed that an obviously German genocidal maniac had opened a car factory in Mexico because nobody cares about Mexico. It's a great place to go and blend in, whether you're a tourist or someone who has just participated in the slaughter of six million Jews.

But back to the car itself. There are so many things wrong with the Beetle I scarcely know where to begin. First off it's made by Germans, who I hate. Or Mexicans. Not crazy about them either. They may be great engineers but their language and accents are atrocious. A simple "have a nice day" in German sounds like you're being ordered to a gas chamber. Not a pretty language. Secondly, the vehicle looks like a bug. I for one do not want my car to look like an insect. Thirdly, I was in my first accident in a Volkwagen Beetle. We got hit by a Cadillac. A word of advice: If you are going to be hit by a Cadillac, don't be in a Volkswagen. Not surprisingly it looked like a squished bug and everyone in the car was badly injured. Safety was not the first priority of the engineers of the Volkswagen. It's the "car of the people" only if you really hate people and want them either maimed or dead. Which seems to describe the Germans.

A few years after surviving that accident, I, being the genius that I am, bought a Volkswagen Beetle. It ran like shit, had no power steering or air conditioning, always smelled like gasoline so I always wondered when I would explode and the worst part was the engine was in the trunk. Who thought that up? I was always throwing shit into the engine. Groceries, luggage, you name it. Which is probably why it ran like shit. And I avoided Cadillacs like the plague.

So I'm glad that the old style Beetle has been retired. Unfortunately, they've brought it back. And it's still as small, round and ugly as ever. And just as popular. With fucking hippies. It's always been a hippy car but now it's the car of the neo-hippies. I hold anyone in a Beetle with absolute contempt. The people who drive them are either hippy college kids who want you to believe they care about the environment, or it's 50-60 year old boomers who are reliving their college days. I don't know who's worse. Eh, I hate them both equally.

In conclusion, I hate the Volkswagen Beetle. And hippies. Also, I'd like everyone to leave a comment about your experiences with the Beetle. Or your experiences with anal bleeding. Hell, I don't care what you leave a comment about, just leave a comment. I'd like to break my previous Today in History record of 4 lousy comments. God, is anybody even reading this? I just want a little adoration. Is that so much to ask? Do you people have any idea how much thought and sweat and time I put into this website? Any idea? A good 20-25 minutes a week, you bastards. Type my fingers to the bone. Fucking ungrateful fucks. I hate you all.

Don't forget to comment! Thanks!!!

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 02:12 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 617 words, total size 3 kb.

So the Old Man and I scoured some more classic cars today. Decided that what we want is a pre-'70's Nova or Camaro that runs and has a decent body.

Found a '69 Camaro today with new paint, side pipes, roll cage, and a 10-bolt rear; price? Insanely cheap. Only thing is, it needs a new carb. So if we want to drive it away, we need to either bring a trailer with us, or a new carb and install it before we leave.

Let me tell you something about classic cars that come with roll cages: they've been raced. A LOT. Yeah, it's never a car that's going to be on a Barrett-Jackson TV whore-fest, but it'll defintely be a car that moves faster than any car that's ever been on a Barrett-Jackson whorefest.

I mean, what's the point of owning a car that moves that fast, if you don't move it that fast on a regular basis?

Posted by: shank at 03:26 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.

Ever since Mom died, Dad hasn't been the same. He's getting better, but he's definitely got a muted affect. He's got a group of guys from work that he shoots pool and plays poker with a couple times a week, and they've been talking about going deep sea fishing recently; but you can tell he's lonely. It's pretty sad, so I generally try not to think about him all by himself in that empty house.

Then I got an idea: I like cars, the old man likes cars; therefore we should get an old car and restore it. Sounds like a hell of a lot of fun, and I think it'd be cathartic in a number of ways. Thus began the search.

Originally, we looked at old MGB's; late 60's to early 70's; mainly because Dad had one back in the day. I was surprised at the prices they were going for. It's a game that you can get into for cheap; for less than $5k you can get a functioning model. We also looked at Ford pickups from the 50's, a few muscle cars, other classic sedans, etc. I think we've decided we want to buy something for less than five grand, and be able to spend less than five grand on it over the course of the next year getting it back in shape. The total cap would be 10 g's, so whatever we saved on the price of the car we'd just put into the restoration. We'd do all the engine and mechanical work ourselves, and either get something with a good body or hire someone to do touch up work for us.

We both started getting pretty excited this past week. After scouring the web for classic junk for sale, I'm optomistic that we'll be able to find something that fits our budget constraints, but's still fun to drive. I'd love to get something that's got a little of that American muscle under the hood, but those kinds of cars are so sought after that it's getting hard to find something that runs and doesn't have a weighty price tag or isn't ate up with a terminal case of Michigan Cancer.

So, if you live in the South East and you've got something you're willing to part with or know someone who does, holler at me.

Posted by: shank at 01:00 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 394 words, total size 2 kb.

The ridiculousness of what Glenn Reynolds has called the 'hairshirt' approach to environmentalism has turned a new corner. According to the article at Bloomberg, some nutter wants to outlaw cars that exceed 100mph:

"Fast, powerful cars within a few years may be outlawed in Europe, an idea that has been raised ostensibly because Ferraris and Porsches produce too much carbon dioxide. For those who abhor sports cars as vulgar symbols of affluence (along with vacation homes, furs and fancy jewelry), such a ban could be a two-fer: Saving the planet while cutting economic inequality."
(emphasis mine)

Firstly, taking someone's Ferrari away is most certainly not going to do a damn thing to cut economic inequality; and such an insinuation is either an attempt incite the class warriors or just petty pot-stirring. What banning these cars would most certainly mean is these people will spend their disposable income on something else. Maybe an exclusive vacation to Fiji - flying in a private jet, no doubt. Or maybe a few extra thousand square feet in their vacation home - that's soaking up gobs of energy all year round.

Secondly, this is an immature attempt at solving a problem, and maybe even a complete misdiagnosis of the problem itself. The problem is not sports cars, it's consumption. That being said, outlawing the relatively small number of exotics in the world would do little to curb consumption. We're talking about the smallest market (per capita) of car buyers, and the cars that are probably driven the least number of miles a year.

A funny little note - just about anything this side of a '73 Civic will hit 100mph. But we'll leave the absurdity of this guideline out, simple out of respect for the member of Parliament who's responsible for this brain fart.

A more viable solution would be to start bumping up our fuel efficiency standards. Via RFK Jr. in Outside Magazine, 11/2004 (one of my favorite quotes):

"Here's how you do it. If we raise fuel-efficiency standards by just one mile per gallon, we save two ANWR's full of oil over the projected 50-year life of the fields. If we raise them 2.7 mpg, that's more than all the oil we import from Iraq and Kuwait combined. If we raise standards by 8 mpg, we don't have to import one drop of Persian Gulf oil into this country. Fuel efficiency is an untapped resource. It's cheap oil."

The good thing about a progressive increase in fuel efficiency standards is that it would pull the automotive industry in conjunction with the recent push from consumers for more efficient vehicles. Give the industry time to learn what consumers want, and to innovate those wants into a quality product. Hell, Lotus has been making fuel efficient, relatively affordable (and immensely fun to drive, might I add) sports cars for years.

As an aside, I just used the words RFK Jr. and progressive in the same breath. Hey, a guy's allowed to dabble, right?

Posted by: shank at 11:06 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 514 words, total size 3 kb.