Coco Crisp? Awesome. God Shammgod? Widely recognized as one of the best. Dick Butkus? Okay, that one is really too easy. But we are forgetting some of the lesser known, but more fantastic names. Also, I will include some that you definitely know. Here we go.
20. Quentin Jammer
19. Fred
18. Rusty Kuntz
17. Rollie Fingers
16. Coco Crisp
15. Longar Longar
14. Muggsy Bogues
13. Dick Butkus
12. Milton Bradley
11. World B. Free
10. Dick Trickle
9. Keith Toogood
8. Miroslav Satan
7. God Shammgod
6. Majestic Mapp
5. Scientific Mapp
4. Commander King
3. Selvish Capers (doesn't that sound like a fantastic villain name?)
2. Immaculate Perfection Harris
1. Wonderful Terrific Monds III
The only reason Wonderful beats Immaculate is because of the simple fact that he is the THIRD one of that name. Thank you, and good night.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Saturday, August 21, 2010
New Muscle: Revised, Revisited and Renewed Autos of the 60's
Since the release of the 2005 Ford Mustang, there has been a resurgence of American automobiles exhibiting features of the beloved muscle cars of the 60's and 70's. This is something very near and dear to me, as a long time fan of classic cars.
I'm mostly concentrating on looks for this post. It's typically enough for me to have someone tell me "it runs good," even if it is a guy with three teeth and head-to-toe oil stains (in my experience, those guys somehow know what they're talking about). Also, when we're talking brand-new cars, it's hard to point out if something is going to have a mechanical problem in the future. Granted, there are certain features I look for, but generally they don't have a lot to do with the engine (though I have to admit, I don't mind a good V8 when I see it - or hear it).
So let's compare.
We'll start with the Ford Mustang. When Ford debuted its completely revised Mustang in 2005, I was impressed. For years I lamented the descent of the Mustang into the mediocre shell of what it had once been. For nearly a decade and a half, the Mustang was a symbol of power in a beautiful, muscular shell. It was the epitome of what a car was supposed to be. Then, in 1979, this happened:
Um, what the hell, Ford? For 25 years, the holy name of Mustang was further abused and its visage distorted. And then, in 2005, something beautiful happened. You know what I'm talking about. I finally breathed a sigh of relief for the fate of the sacred house of Mustang.
As much as I loved the Mustang in 2005, I love the Dodge Challenger now. If anything, the Challenger is the perfected revisitation of muscle. In my mind, it looks more like the '66 Mustang than the 2010 Mustang does.
Compare:
2010 Challenger
2011 Mustang
1966 Mustang
See what I mean? And that's kind of a problem for me. The Challenger so perfectly exemplifies the cars of the 60's that it has completely pushed the Mustang out of my heart. I now see the Mustang as flawed, imperfect. It's kind of painful to admit. Though Ford returned to their roots first, they didn't do it nearly as well as Dodge. I have to give the Challenger credit there, they really went all the way with this one, and that's how you have to do it. Otherwise you end up with worthless crap like the late 90's Mustang *shudders*.
Though the unanimous agreement amongst experts seems to be that the Camaro is the best of the big 3, I have to be honest. I just don't like the way it looks.
And just like when picking a boyfriend, I can't go on performance alone. There has to be some kind of physical attraction too, and it's not there for me. I mean, the Camaro is too flashy for me, kind of like a fist-pumping Jersey boy in an Ed Hardy t-shirt. It just isn't my style. I have always felt this way about the Camaro, even before the debut of the redesigned model. To me, the look of the Camaro has always lacked that intangible element, the facet that lies somewhere between classiness, subtlety, and plain coolness.
That said, it should be obvious that my favorite is the Challenger. It's got hard edges, unlike the Mustang, and isn't overwrought, like the Camaro. These are the things that deep down make up the aesthetic of a muscle car, and are why the Challenger, to me, is a true throwback.
I'm mostly concentrating on looks for this post. It's typically enough for me to have someone tell me "it runs good," even if it is a guy with three teeth and head-to-toe oil stains (in my experience, those guys somehow know what they're talking about). Also, when we're talking brand-new cars, it's hard to point out if something is going to have a mechanical problem in the future. Granted, there are certain features I look for, but generally they don't have a lot to do with the engine (though I have to admit, I don't mind a good V8 when I see it - or hear it).
So let's compare.
We'll start with the Ford Mustang. When Ford debuted its completely revised Mustang in 2005, I was impressed. For years I lamented the descent of the Mustang into the mediocre shell of what it had once been. For nearly a decade and a half, the Mustang was a symbol of power in a beautiful, muscular shell. It was the epitome of what a car was supposed to be. Then, in 1979, this happened:
Um, what the hell, Ford? For 25 years, the holy name of Mustang was further abused and its visage distorted. And then, in 2005, something beautiful happened. You know what I'm talking about. I finally breathed a sigh of relief for the fate of the sacred house of Mustang.
As much as I loved the Mustang in 2005, I love the Dodge Challenger now. If anything, the Challenger is the perfected revisitation of muscle. In my mind, it looks more like the '66 Mustang than the 2010 Mustang does.
Compare:
2010 Challenger
2011 Mustang
1966 Mustang
See what I mean? And that's kind of a problem for me. The Challenger so perfectly exemplifies the cars of the 60's that it has completely pushed the Mustang out of my heart. I now see the Mustang as flawed, imperfect. It's kind of painful to admit. Though Ford returned to their roots first, they didn't do it nearly as well as Dodge. I have to give the Challenger credit there, they really went all the way with this one, and that's how you have to do it. Otherwise you end up with worthless crap like the late 90's Mustang *shudders*.
Though the unanimous agreement amongst experts seems to be that the Camaro is the best of the big 3, I have to be honest. I just don't like the way it looks.
And just like when picking a boyfriend, I can't go on performance alone. There has to be some kind of physical attraction too, and it's not there for me. I mean, the Camaro is too flashy for me, kind of like a fist-pumping Jersey boy in an Ed Hardy t-shirt. It just isn't my style. I have always felt this way about the Camaro, even before the debut of the redesigned model. To me, the look of the Camaro has always lacked that intangible element, the facet that lies somewhere between classiness, subtlety, and plain coolness.
That said, it should be obvious that my favorite is the Challenger. It's got hard edges, unlike the Mustang, and isn't overwrought, like the Camaro. These are the things that deep down make up the aesthetic of a muscle car, and are why the Challenger, to me, is a true throwback.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)