@nibby68: That is a good call. I was thinking biggest convertible possible so I was thinking old Merc. I am particular to Saab 93.

@GreenN_Gold: That is what he had. Aparently he is moving on.

I have a buddy who's Chrysler 2.7l just went. He is looking for a used convertible for about $15,000 and taking suggestions.

Too easy.

@jedchev: I agree. It is either one (plus one) slow to load page or ten (plus one) slow to load pages.

@Tossed Mazda3hatch's Chicken Salad all over Accord's face with a plate of croutons and Bleu Cheese dressing: I think being almost 40 years old.

To me it looks less agressive than the standard wagon. It could be the color though.

Just remembered this one. Radial Engined Goggomobil

@teencarfreak: If we are talking ideas. My idea would be a new GM 2.0l turbo in a 1960 Cadillac Coupe. I don't know why.

Fiat Topolino with Chevy V8. I saw one about a month and a half ago and it looked stock. I gawked at the tiny car for a while but something wasn't quite right. Took me a while but when I realized what I was looking at my jaw hit the floor. This isn't the car I saw but the rules clearly state: Pics or it didn't…

Pads: $20

One could say that someone lit a fire under his ass.

Additional question:

@tonyola: "Yeah. My topfuel dragster gets 2 furlongs per hogshead. "

Go Suzuki! Best looking car yet.

I have a game for PS2 "Rally Fusion" that has a hill climb. To advance you must come in first place. This is ok with multiple stage races because you don't have to win each stage to win overall. But the hill climb is one monster race and if you are in second by 0.01 seconds you get to do it over and over and over.

I would just wait for the Hyundai Veloster.

My kids have a Wii and we just got the Netfilx disk last night. It worked so much better than playon.tv (mostly because our computers suck) but it was easy, fast, and intuitive.

@Beldrueger: True that you didn't mention the government but it seemed implied when you say "safety standards". Standards set by whom?

@Beldrueger: It is lazy to suggest that the government must intervene with regulations to get an outcome you desire. For example, you want less polution. Do you go to the company that polutes less or the one with the best price or the best service?