ITT: Choose a car from each decade you'd be willing to own.

File: 1481760294055.png (132KB, 2400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 2400x2100px

>>16350675
Template

File: 1481760294055.jpg (586KB, 2400x2100px)

586KB, 2400x2100px

>>16350675
That was easy. Already posted in the other thread but it was almost on bump limit.

>>16350715
amerifat detected

>>16350715
kek

File: garage.jpg (1MB, 2400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2400x2100px

F40 is obviously tied for 80s if money grew on trees.

File: my_decade_is_lit_o.jpg (755KB, 2400x2100px)

755KB, 2400x2100px

Here you lads go!!

File: decade.png (2MB, 2400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2400x2100px

>>16350675

>>16350992
What's the prewar one? Reminds me of the Delahaye and the Cadillac V16 Hartmann cabrio but it's neither of them.

File: o.jpg (1MB, 2400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2400x2100px

>>16350675
>2010's
There aren't many cars of this decade that I like. Your pick is one of the rare that I might find acceptable.

>>16350934
Why are you posting lap times that you'll never be able to make in any of these cars?

>>16350992
Also what's the 1940s one
and the Porsche 930 wasn't made in the 90's, that was the 964.

>>16351053
Oh, it's Porsche anon again :D
I feel the same about the 2010s decade. I could have picked the new Ford GT or the Giulia though.
That said, most cars nowadays are bland AF (even though they're getting better than on the 2000s, now that decade was uninspired)

>>16350992
That's an 80's 911

>>16351071
>930
>964
Where are you seeing these cars?

>>16351081
>Ford GT
It looks decent. Don't know anything much about it.
The Giulia Guadrifoglio has some small design flaws but overall it seems like the best of the sporty sedans.

>>16351151
>Quadrifoglio*
Don't mind my typos.

>>16351151
>Where are you seeing these cars?
isn't his Targa 911 a 930?

>>16351242
I don't see the wing on it. That's a Carrera.

>>16351291
Anon, there were 930 and 964 Carreras...

>>16351329
>That's a Carrera
As just a Carrera.

>>16351329
Wait, what are you even about? That's an 80's 911 Carrera Targa.

>>16351350
Yeah, that's a 930. 930s are 911s.

File: 58d.png (202KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 480x480px

>>16351394
Either you are high, a weird 12 year old or you are trying to troll me.
930 is a turbo version of 911.

File: PORSCHE911Targa2-964--2981_2.jpg (326KB, 1024x748px)

326KB, 1024x748px

>All this Porsche discussion.
Gentlemen, a brief summary of 911 nomenclature.
>991 -> 997 -> 996 -> 993 -> 964 - ?
From 1963 and until 1989, there are no handy three-digit type numbers to separate the various iterations, WITH THE EXCEPTION of the Turbo model, which was and is known the 930. The various models over the years are referenced by engine displacement (2.0, 2.7, 3.0, 3.2 and so on), with the one rule-confirming exception being the SC (Super Carrera), which was a 3.0.
This all changes in late 1989, when the 964 is introduced, and the three-digit type codes we all know and love make everything easier.

The Targa in the picture, BTW, APPEAR to be a 3.2 Targa (vertical slats in the roll bar, no front fender indicator), but it may or may not be.
So, not a 90s car.
But, seeing as we're all gentlemen here, have a lovely one right here <-.

File: 1981 930 rear.jpg (550KB, 1600x1800px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 1600x1800px

>>16351540
>Porsche discussion
The guy tried to tell me that the 80's Carrera is a 930 for some reason.
You can't not notice the freakin wing on 930's hood.

File: 1983-Porsche-911-Targa-Gold5-1170x700.jpg (273KB, 1170x700px)

273KB, 1170x700px

>>16351576
I know, but I believe that the other gentleman was under the assumption that all 911s of that era was referred to as 930s, which I think we can all agree is not an unreasonable one, given how ubiquitous the usage of 911 type numbers are. So, rather than deliberate misinformation, I believe this to be a case of a - rather innocent - wrongful deduction.
This seems a good time to post a Targa, by the way.

>>16351418
None of the three, I trolled myself with my ignorance kek. I thought all the 911s from that era were code 930. I guess Mercedes-Benz spoiled me with its simple chassis numbers.

>>16351540
Thanks for the clarification anon, it was useful. I look insanely stupid now lel

>>16351540
Oh and even though it's not a 930 in the anon's pic that sparked the discussion, it's clearly not a 964, look at those blinkers.
>>16351576
Because I thought 930s was the name for all the Porsches in that era. I used to be aware it was the Turbo but I conflated them for some reason.

>>16351607
You thought well anon, thanks for your consideration and your pretty pics.
>>16351576
Aren't there any 930s with the tail removed though? :P Trying to damage control a bit and not look so utterly ridiculous here.

>>16351734
>it's clearly not a 964
Why couldn't you believe me before?
Try to get your facts straight before you are denying what someone is telling you.

>>16351774
>Why couldn't you believe me before?
Because I thought you were implying it was a 90s car

>>16351886
>That's an 80's 911
Anyhow.. Goodnight!

>>16351926
Oh, my bad. I guess I only read the part where you addressed me. Good night anon.

File: dream garage.jpg (1MB, 2400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2400x2100px

Decided to be difficult with the first row, because I could.
>ywn own an antique fire truck for bragging rights.

>>16352275
Wew lad, first time I hear about Ahrens-Fox and Kutris

File: porsche-356-b-07.jpg (231KB, 1024x731px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1024x731px

>>16353012
>40's 356

File: dsc_0234.jpg (2MB, 3872x2178px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3872x2178px

>>16354106
Amazing cars.

>>16353012
Pre-WWII should be a Tatra.

File: volvo-amazon-09.jpg (308KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 1280x960px

>>16355016
>no Amazon for the 60's box
Anon pls

>>16355016
>no PV51
>no PV444
>no Amazon
>no P1800
>no 480 Turbo
>no V60 Polestar

>>16355035
>50's
Best Volvo

>>16355016
What's that 70s Volvo? Looks like sex

>>16355626
>V60 Polestar
>not S60 Polestar
You dun goof'd

>shit cars the thread


>>16355141
except this clown i own a gn so that's cool.

>>16350992
This man right here has impeccable taste.

>>16357549
That's a sedan. Why would I want a Volvo sedan?

>>16357953
He chose the shitiest classic 911 from the wrong decade.

>>16358490
>That's a sedan.
Yeah, it's more elegant.
I'd still not buy it, fuck autotragics.

File: OC-o-My-Decades-Garage-2016-12-22.jpg (1MB, 2400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2400x2100px

>>16350675

>>16359026
I'm not seeking for elegance in Volvos.
Not a fan of brand new cars in general but I find them one of the most decent looking cars on the streets right now.

>>16359566
What did you mean by this?

>>16359799
What exactly?

>>16359816
You say they're good looking but that you're not looking for elegance in them, and you don't say what you're looking for in them.

>>16359910
Is ''elegan'' a sinonim for ''good looking'' for you? They are just decent. It's what I couldn't say about all the cars out there.

>>16359952
well, you have to look good in order to look elegant

File: m.gira.jpg (46KB, 550x332px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 550x332px

>>16359976
And what if I don't want to look elegant?

>>16360210
You can look good and outrageous, like a Hummer

File: cartmanbra.jpg (68KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 500x500px

>>16360236
I didn't say I don't want to look good. I'm not an elegan lad, nor I wan't to look so. If I'd like to have an elegant sedan it would be something like a Jag or a Merc, best version of 2017 Panamera would be the best in that case. But it definitely wouldn't be a Volvo. It doesn't matter cause that isn't my style anyway. If a car has a coupe version then that's the best version of it, if it has a wagon version then that also would be the best in most cases. Only cause wagons are more practical. It could be different for you. We got our own tastes.

>>16360430
Oh don't get me wrong, I like wagons too.
RWD V90>S90

File: rsz_11rsz_1481760294055.png (3MB, 1800x1575px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1800x1575px

re-posting mine from the previous thread.

Pre WW2: 1934 Chrysler Airflow
40's: 1949 Ford Coupe
50's: 1957 Plymouth Fury Christine replica\
60's: 1967-1969 Chevrolet Camaro Z28
70's: 1976 Lancia Scorpion
80's: 1984-1988 Pontiac Fiero
90's: 1991-1993 Toyota Celica GT-Four ST185
00's: 2007-2013 Suzuki SX4 Turbo
10's: 2013-2015 Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE

>>16360459
It looks decent but I'm not into luxury stuff.

>>16360577
Nice Ford. 40's was hardest for me. I'm not an US car expert and I didn't know that it existed. Otherwise I would consider it as my pick.

>>16360844
the 40's were hard for me too. It was either the 49 Ford, or the 1948 Tucker.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucker_48

>>16360820
Why would you prefer the Polestar V60 to the S60 though? It has the same drivetrain but it's more pigfat so it's slower

>>16352501
Found it when I was bored and on Hemmings.

>>16361206
probably the love of space and the ability to beat people at the drag strip while carrying a family of 5 and a dog.

>>16361300
The S60 can carry a family of 5 too, although it would be extremely painful for the dog.

>>16361206
If only you could read, right? I already explained myself >>16360430
Because it's a wagon! And it has a decent performance for a wagon. I wouldn't look into Volvo only for its performance. Also, as I said, I'm not into sedans. I'm coupe guy. I'd go for a wagon if I'd needed a practical family car. A sporty Volvo sedan in a decent pre-owned 911's price range won't be for me.

>>16350992
This is excellent.
>>16351033
This is the work of a retard.

File: decade garage.jpg (3MB, 2400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2400x2100px

>>16350675
Little late to the party but here's mine.

>>16362454
Patrish.

>>16362595
>patrician
>rotary
pick one.

>>16362620
I couldn't care less about the 90s

File: xj220.jpg (89KB, 640x404px)

89KB, 640x404px

>>16362644
>not caring about this
Cuck

File: god help.jpg (2MB, 2400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2400x2100px

>>16350675
I will NEVER change

>>16362644
>OP
>I couldn't care less about the 90s
what a fucking faggot

>>16363706
Damn, you're right. 80s are still my favorite decade though. Too much bland stuff in the 90s although the best stuff is God-tier

>>16350992
top notch, bravo!

File: 1408417788775.jpg (53KB, 550x605px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 550x605px

>>16364747
>bravo
>747
BRAVO NOLAN!

File: the best.gif (973KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

973KB, 500x375px

>>16351053
930 is missing for full perfection

File: 1482275888199.png (3MB, 2400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2400x2100px

I am a humble man, thought I don't have much taste for anything before muscle cars, since they were all slow and boring for the most part.

Which is why the Tucker is ok, since he wanted something that could go not slow, and handled not shit.

File: 2009-pontiac-solstice-gxp-coupe-instrumented-test-car-and-driver-photo-260544-s-429x262[1].jpg (18KB, 429x262px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 429x262px

>>16365508
>Pontiac Solstice
>that time GM decided to build a TVR

File: Favourite Cars 2016.png (4MB, 2272x2052px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2272x2052px

Hope I'm not too late.

Here are my favourite cars.

What do you guys think?

derp

File: 6a005fb0d398c5824deb7738999f3f51.jpg (386KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 1200x800px

>>16365508
pleb

File: BACK IN BLACK 76 -930.jpg (493KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 1000x667px

>>16365231
I love 930's but there had to be a hotroaded early 70's 911. I knew that there will be three 911's at lest so included my favorite GT car for diversity. So the 930 was left out.

>>16365508
>1980s, 1990s
Best of their kind and time.

>>16365583
4/10 for my taste.
But not bad at all.
>1940s
I'm not so much into roadsters but that's a cool Jag.
>1950s
An amazing car.
>1960s
Mr. Mojo Risin' himself had one like that. I like American fastbacks. I even included one in my list.
>1980s
It's only my dream car. And what a cool hot rod you've chosen for the picture.

>>16365583
Patrish