Total Motorcycle Community Forums

Shiv wrote:At least it's a snazzy looking car. Has more character (and worse gas milage) than the newer, sleeker cars.

i guess i like old school cars.

but i know i don't like old school bikes.

i would love to have a starsky and hutch car replica.

VermilionX wrote:

Shiv wrote:At least it's a snazzy looking car. Has more character (and worse gas milage) than the newer, sleeker cars.

i guess i like old school cars.

but i know i don't like old school bikes.

i would love to have a starsky and hutch car replica.

[img]http://www.moviecars.it/images/auto/for ... g1.jpg/img]

1969 Olds 442 FTW!
Dude came in yesterday in one. Left the parking lot spinning the tires. Chirped second. Than proceded to chirp third. On tires easily a foot wide.

I'm such and idiot, but, what does "FTW" mean?

camthepyro wrote:I'm such and idiot, but, what does "FTW" mean?

FTW - for the win

Oh, thanks. I've never heard that before... or rather, read it.

or "fudge" the world

either one. how it's used in context usually explains how you're using it.

it's like WTF
what the "fudge"
why the "fudge"
who the "fudge"
when the "fudge"
where the "fudge"

ps - i think i've figured out how to get past the language filter but afraid to try it cause i don't want a banning.

TheImp wrote:Might be a good car if you are willing to pay the high price at the pump and greater frequency to feed it. The old fastback mustangs look great, 327's I believe.

I would not mind having one of those... no I would not.

Ditto. There's something appealing about the look of older cars.

Not sure what it is. Maybe the chiseled look.

I think its the straight lines, and the classic touch they have.

Not to mention simplicity of design too. One could actually tinker with them like many here would tinker with their own bikes.