Why is the interior of the Lynx a car from the 50s? The Aries and the Reliant are the same car. The vast majority of Buick Centuries were sold with the 3.1 l V6, which was a good performer for the day. Many of these cars are the very least expensive versions of the cars, purchased by people concerned with operating costs and purchase price, not speed.
@chriss1757 "Why is the interior of the Lynx a car from the 50s?" Because American Muscle Wheels doesn't know anything. But he knows that with the right subject and video name he'll get some views and make some money even with garbage content.
Yet the base engine Camaro/Firebird is missing. Equipped with the base 2.5 4 cylinder and automatic transmission, I believe the 0-60 time was almost 20 seconds.
I had a 1988 Reliant station Wagon. It had the 2.5 litre 4, and it had decent power for a 4 cylinder Wagon. I also had a 89 Buick Century with the 3300 (3.3 litre) V6. It had decent power and it handled well.
Ah yes the Chevrolet Chevette. Dare I say, I Bought 3 of them. In 1984 I bought a used 1981 Chevette Scooter. It had the optional rear seat. About a month later I traded in the Scooter on a 1984 base model. Then in 1987 I traded up to a CS. All were coupes. And the 87 was the only one that had an automatic transmission. Both the 84 and 87 were the only cars I ever bought new. (I have bought 3 new Pickup trucks.) I didn't think they were all that slow. Now the one car I had that had no get up an go, was a 1981 Ford Fairmont sedan. I bought that car in 1991. That was a base car. 3.3 (200-6) I had it 2 years.
First off, i had a 1988 Plymouth Reliant station Wagon. The engine was a 2.5 litre 4 cylinder. It may not have been a racer, but it was no slug either. Second, a 1989 Buick Century with the 3300 ( 3.3 litre) V6. That car was quick.
I had the Pontiac version of your number two car. A 1987 Pontiac 6000STE. It was equipped with the V6 engine and five speed manual. It was one of the more exciting cars I have owned and I have had Mustang, Camaro and Cuda. My current ride is an SL 500 Mercedes.
Ironic that while showing incorrect photos for the Lynx interior the narrator says "made from materials that felt like they were sourced from a dumpster."
The 81 Chevette with the 1.6 has 70 HP, not 53. This is one car that performs far better with the 4 speed or 5 speed. There's also a HO option for the 1.6 in 81 putting out 74 HP.
I watched the first car only. That's because you claimed horsepower of 53 when it's really 70, 19 seconds zero to 60 when it's 16, and 35 mpg when it's really 33. Figures are with an automatic as you have pictured. You're even farther off on gas mileage and 0-60 if you're talking about a manual. And an 82 Chevette automatic diesel is 23 seconds to 60 mph and gets 43 mpg with 51 horsepower. So at least with that one you'd be closer on the horsepower and it is really a car that should be on your list instead of the 81 gas version. There's so much garbage on youtube.
Worst car video I've ever seen. A couple cars mentioned twice...maybe with different badging, but whatever. Video footage of cars not even related to the topic(!) Several models were popularly available with stronger engins that were perfectly adequate...not even mentioned. Wrong on facts. For example, the '86 Cimmeron was nowhere near as slow as the '82 Cimmeron, which had a much smaller engine. Cheap AI-sounding commentary that repeated the same cheesy one-liners more than once. Whoever was behind this video might be as slow as the cars in it!
If I had a choice of a very reliable car to get me around or a car that gets me from 0 to 60 in 6 seconds but wears out or breaks I choose the reliable ones!🧐
those 1st 3 cars weren't built for speed esp the AMC EAGLE which was said it was ALL WHEEL DRIVE so you don;t expect them to be BURNING RUBBER and oh btw the FORD EXP wasn't slow NOT the ones I've seen when I was growing up Those cars wasn't meant to be a PRO STOCK CAR, now if you were going to talking about THE K-CARS then YES THEY WERE SLOW and as far as the CHEVY CHEVETE which was going head to head with the FORD ESCORT
"Oh Wow" thinks American Muscle Wheels "I heard 80s cars were real slow. I think I'll do a video about it. I don't KNOW anything about 80s cars but I'll do a quick study and I'll know more than most people on youtube. Y'know, you don't really have to know anything to make money off a youtube channel."
the Eagle was never supposed to be a race car it was the precursor to the sports utility, with all the car companies following and some even slower, Cadillac should have waited for the 2.8 or higher v6, my in laws had the 4 and later v6 the v6 was a great car, humm the Reliant sound like the Dodge I wonder why it was the same car different badge oh and back than and before it for the American auto makers all about the v8 the fours they made and bought were anemic, Europe and Japan were making lighter cars with awesome HP we were down tuning engines, 70-90 hp when you could very easily get 100-120 hp with very little effort, the v6s were treated even worse, today they have their s--- together no reason a four shouldn't get at least 140hp plus , a v6 300hp
The Chevy Chevette was slow for you,,but it beat the Volkswagen Beetle,,why do these goofballs always bashing domestic models? You don't deserve a like😮
Why is the interior of the Lynx a car from the 50s? The Aries and the Reliant are the same car. The vast majority of Buick Centuries were sold with the 3.1 l V6, which was a good performer for the day. Many of these cars are the very least expensive versions of the cars, purchased by people concerned with operating costs and purchase price, not speed.
@chriss1757
"Why is the interior of the Lynx a car from the 50s?"
Because American Muscle Wheels doesn't know anything. But he knows that with the right subject and video name he'll get some views and make some money even with garbage content.
@@bradkayThis is AI GENERATED content. I can tell by the writing structure and word choice.
Yet the base engine Camaro/Firebird is missing. Equipped with the base 2.5 4 cylinder and automatic transmission, I believe the 0-60 time was almost 20 seconds.
The video clip showing the lynx interior…nice to see you got a pic of a late 60’s triumph 2000 in there 😅
Underachieving, sounds like this post!😊
You didn't picture the correct engines for some of the cars shown. Ex. the Cimarron had a 1.8 liter 4 cylinder but a HT 4.1 V8 was shown.
I had a 1988 Reliant station Wagon. It had the 2.5 litre 4, and it had decent power for a 4 cylinder Wagon. I also had a 89 Buick Century with the 3300 (3.3 litre) V6. It had decent power and it handled well.
@althunder4269
American Muscle Wheels doesn't know anything.
You are Great 😊😊😊
The Fiero was a commuter car..with sporty looks and fuel economy, not a mid engine Sports car at all
Ah yes the Chevrolet Chevette. Dare I say, I Bought 3 of them. In 1984 I bought a used 1981 Chevette Scooter. It had the optional rear seat. About a month later I traded in the Scooter on a 1984 base model. Then in 1987 I traded up to a CS. All were coupes. And the 87 was the only one that had an automatic transmission. Both the 84 and 87 were the only cars I ever bought new. (I have bought 3 new Pickup trucks.) I didn't think they were all that slow. Now the one car I had that had no get up an go, was a 1981 Ford Fairmont sedan. I bought that car in 1991. That was a base car. 3.3 (200-6) I had it 2 years.
First off, i had a 1988 Plymouth Reliant station Wagon. The engine was a 2.5 litre 4 cylinder. It may not have been a racer, but it was no slug either. Second, a 1989 Buick Century with the 3300 ( 3.3 litre) V6. That car was quick.
I had the Pontiac version of your number two car. A 1987 Pontiac 6000STE. It was equipped with the V6 engine and five speed manual. It was one of the more exciting cars I have owned and I have had Mustang, Camaro and Cuda. My current ride is an SL 500 Mercedes.
Ironic that while showing incorrect photos for the Lynx interior the narrator says "made from materials that felt like they were sourced from a dumpster."
Another hilarious video on UA-cam showing pictures of the wrong cars and the wrong engines.
And wrong narrative. Just everything is wrong.
The Lynx and Escorts were identical twins under the hood.
That Olds Omega looks suspiciously like an Olds Cutless Supreme. Just maybe you should actually show the slow car you're describing.
The Buick Century you mention a 4 cylinder engine but show a V6.
@@althunder4269 The 4 cylinder engine was the base engine. I had Centurys . 89 with the 3300(3.3) and a 93 with the 3100 ( 3.1) V6 engines.
My 2 slowest were: 1984 Ford Tempo with auto tranny,1983 Olds Cutlass Wagon 3.8 v6 carb. Loaded. Nice wagon but only 120 hp on a 3600 lb. wagon.
The 81 Chevette with the 1.6 has 70 HP, not 53. This is one car that performs far better with the 4 speed or 5 speed. There's also a HO option for the 1.6 in 81 putting out 74 HP.
You missed the Camaro with the 2.5 liter Iron Duke engine.
Well in the 80s the speed limit was 55 mph how fast you need to go 55 right
I tried to outrun a cop in a ford pinto 😂
looks like you didn't have a video of the Olds Omega, substituting a current video of a Cutlass. There must not be any Omegas left :)
I watched the first car only. That's because you claimed horsepower of 53 when it's really 70, 19 seconds zero to 60 when it's 16, and 35 mpg when it's really 33. Figures are with an automatic as you have pictured. You're even farther off on gas mileage and 0-60 if you're talking about a manual.
And an 82 Chevette automatic diesel is 23 seconds to 60 mph and gets 43 mpg with 51 horsepower. So at least with that one you'd be closer on the horsepower and it is really a car that should be on your list instead of the 81 gas version.
There's so much garbage on youtube.
I was expecting the 1.4-liter 1983 Renault Alliance to be on your list, slow as a mule
I had a 1983 Escort, an my father, a 1989 Aries. Engine problems glour.
Your video clips do not align with the audio.
Worst car video I've ever seen. A couple cars mentioned twice...maybe with different badging, but whatever. Video footage of cars not even related to the topic(!) Several models were popularly available with stronger engins that were perfectly adequate...not even mentioned. Wrong on facts. For example, the '86 Cimmeron was nowhere near as slow as the '82 Cimmeron, which had a much smaller engine. Cheap AI-sounding commentary that repeated the same cheesy one-liners more than once. Whoever was behind this video might be as slow as the cars in it!
85 to 88 Cimarrons had an available 2.8 liter F.I. 130 HP V6 which was an okay engine.
If I had a choice of a very reliable car to get me around or a car that gets me from 0 to 60 in 6 seconds but wears out or breaks I choose the reliable ones!🧐
I had a Chevette. Loved it until it blew the head gasket.
Too much use of "not the strongest suit" and "seems even longer than it was"
those 1st 3 cars weren't built for speed esp the AMC EAGLE which was said it was ALL WHEEL DRIVE so you don;t expect them to be BURNING RUBBER and oh btw the FORD EXP wasn't slow NOT the ones I've seen when I was growing up Those cars wasn't meant to be a PRO STOCK CAR, now if you were going to talking about THE K-CARS then YES THEY WERE SLOW and as far as the CHEVY CHEVETE which was going head to head with the FORD ESCORT
There where a lot of cars slower than that!
Bad research! Maybe some AI involved?
"Oh Wow" thinks American Muscle Wheels "I heard 80s cars were real slow. I think I'll do a video about it. I don't KNOW anything about 80s cars but I'll do a quick study and I'll know more than most people on youtube. Y'know, you don't really have to know anything to make money off a youtube channel."
Well produced video. they can't spell Chevrolet correctly.
the Eagle was never supposed to be a race car it was the precursor to the sports utility, with all the car companies following and some even slower, Cadillac should have waited for the 2.8 or higher v6, my in laws had the 4 and later v6 the v6 was a great car, humm the Reliant sound like the Dodge I wonder why it was the same car different badge oh and back than and before it for the American auto makers all about the v8 the fours they made and bought were anemic, Europe and Japan were making lighter cars with awesome HP we were down tuning engines, 70-90 hp when you could very easily get 100-120 hp with very little effort, the v6s were treated even worse, today they have their s--- together no reason a four shouldn't get at least 140hp plus , a v6 300hp
Malaise era, obviously.
Terr-ra-bull!
The Chevy Chevette was slow for you,,but it beat the Volkswagen Beetle,,why do these goofballs always bashing domestic models? You don't deserve a like😮
Terrible video. Cars talked about morph into different models years, 1 slowest car..
Yea, well, he was just taking a break from making his video about there being three shooters involved in the Trump assassination attempt.
94 dodge 4 cylinder avenger. Slowest sports car maybe ever. I should of never bought it
Too much wrong and contradictory information. No thumbs up from me