Re: [FWDLK] Shiftless.....and clueless

--- Begin Message ---

From: Brent Burger <cgico@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 16:40:09 +0000

There might be that select group of owners who happen to possess actual survivors from these years AND possess the desire and willingness to really push them to the limits to see how they all stack up, but I suspect these numbers are almost in the nil range, particularly when it comes to ultra exotics like the D-500-1 cars. Getting those virtually non-existant owners together in one spot at one time to make a few passes seems an impossibility.

Back when parts were not so uncommon, I might risk breaking something in the pursuit of fun, but anymore ? It seems an unneeded concern to know if my car can whoop the pants off another one. Maybe I am getting old ? Maybe this is "maturity" setting in ? Just sitting at curbside is good enough if it involves the right car. To look under the hood of our D-500 is magic. It is all there ( I still need to find a correct oil filler cap), and unmolested from the day it was built. I have not even got it running yet, and it is plenty muscular, just sitting there in quiet repose. It WILL go like hell. I have no doubt. Just like any stock Fury or 300, they are the embodiment of the fledgling spirit of new-stock racing that was an exciting part of the 1950's car scene. That pretty much sums it up for me. Can your 300 whoop my DeSoto ? Maybe it can beat it to the line, and maybe it can't! . It doesn't really matter. Both made it to survivor status, and that is the toughest run these cars ever faced. I am just tickled to see them at all.

-------------- Original message --------------
From: DupontTim@xxxxxxx

Neil, As I have pointed out the 56 D500-1 was never tested by any magazine and therefore no publication compares figures on what the 56 D500-1 was capable of. This whole question of what cars were capable of should include the scope of performance that was recorded by all sources to see a clearer picture of performance in respect to other contemporary vehicles. The lack of overall direct comparisons and incomplete information leaves us resorting to speculation on how these subsequent cars match up. When you revert back to just the verifiable facts......When contemplating "stock vehicles" I conclude that with respect to stock competition the best performance Chrysler vehicles of the Forward Look era were the C300 and 300b letter cars and the 56 D500. These cars when shown on the national stage were consistently breaking thru a wide range of performance barriers. While Chrysler's emphasis on performance was still quit! e formi dable for many years it nevertheless failed to see the across the board success in a broad range of performance areas that was the hallmark of these early performance oriented models. There are probably a lot of contributing factors... but the facts are the facts. I would fully expect that eventually the early performance marks would fall but when you look at performance or Racing competition as a realtime test of capability when it came to the national venues the history shows that these three models were Chryslers best performers of the Forward Look era. We can bench race from here to eternity swapping trannies and gears til the cows come home, but the real story is only what the recorded history can reveal. Tim

*************************************************************

To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1

*************************************************************

To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1

--- End Message ---