If it weren’t for those silly BBS rims, this might just be my dream coupé. Just the right amount of sleek, aggressive, chrome and proportions – this one has it all. Though the BMW 3.0 CS has been featured in CC several times before, I couldn’t resist this one, especially since it lacks the 5mph bumpers found in other posts. I’ve recently been won over to this version of the BMW coupé after years of preferring the earlier 2000 CS. Add to this the CC effect (a recent post by my esteemed CColleague and partner in CCrime, Don Andreina, just a day before I found this car), and we have the makings of a BMW love-fest. So rubber up, it’s going to get sticky.
(Please disregard the last bit of that intro. I just moved to Thailand, so my mind tends to wander in places it shouldn’t. Anyways, this is a car of the ‘60s and ‘70s. Prophylactics were about as useful as a hole in your shoe back then. Or so I’m told. On with the post, already.) The BMW Neue Klasse hardtop coupé originally came out as the 2000 CS / CA in 1965 with the largest 4-cyl. engine the Bavarians could muster, a 2-litre providing 120 PS (100 PS for the CA).
The 2000 CS was designed in-house under Wilhelm Hofmeister, but the cars were all made in Osnabrück by coachbuilder Karmann. This initial version was pretty and quite successful, but it came out just as BMW were finding their feet, style-wise, after a difficult decade of Baroque Angels and Isettas. The trend-setter was the Neue Klasse saloon, with its prominent Corvair-like beltline and forward-canted front end.
But the 2000 saloon, with its trendier rectangular headlamps, was slated for imminent production. So when the 2000 coupé came to be (actually pre-dating the 2000 saloon by about six months), BMW took those headlamps and sort of stretched them on the new shape. The result was rather good, in my opinion, but the visual identity that BMW were building with their range was left a little worse for wear: unlike other BMWs that came before or after them, the 2000 and 2000 CS were the only Bimmers without round headlamps. Looking at the 2000 CS straight on, a case could be made that this face looked a bit too busy and glassy-eyed for its own good. But help was on the way, in the form of a bigger engine and a new front end.
Now that’s more like it! When the 2.8 CS, known internally as the E9, came out in 1968, the coupé finally received the quad headlamps and full-width grille it deserved. The longer nose and slightly longer wheelbase up front mated well with the rest of the car, which was not tampered with – nor did it need tampering – aft of the A-pillar.
The rear end’s delicately drawn features stayed put while the badging changed – from 2000 CS to 2.8 CS, and finally to 3.0 CS and 3.0 CSi in 1971, good for 200 hp. The 4-cyl. coupés with the original design were dropped after 1970, having sold 9999 units in five years. The coupé’s engine had grown by a full litre and 80 hp in under five years. The rear drum brakes switched to discs and the suspension was tweaked a little tighter, but otherwise, few things had really changed. The oil crisis also gave us the 2.5 CS, a reduced displacement 150 hp version of the straight-6 that failed to make much of an impact – fewer than 900 were sold in 1974-75. A total of over 30,500 6-cyl. E9 coupés were made between 1968 and 1975. BMW’s sublime two-door went through several engines, but required only one major facelift in ten model years.
Which brings me to my one gripe about this particular car: if BMW were happy not changing anything, why bother with those dreadful rims and tyres? I’ll never understand folks who do this to their cars. One look at the 3.0 CS with proper wheels and things will be all right again.
There. That’s what the car’s stance should be and what well-designed alloys look like. It’s not like this car needs more chrome, it already has plenty. It doesn’t need to be closer to the ground, either. And the non-flared wheelarches! Soooo much nicer this way… I know, those are stock on the blue car, but I’m not a fan. This looks much cleaner.
One feature I’m particularly fond of is the E9’s greenhouse – another facet of the car that stayed the same from 1965 to 1975. The windshield’s slight wraparound and compound curves offer a great view from the cockpit, which is light and airy thanks to its thin pillars. Many Italian cars of the period also had these features, but they were never designed this way, with rounded corners.
To my eyes, the only car that might compare would be the 1963 Panhard 24, which was also a coupé with a Corvairesque beltline. The French car has a similar feel to its glass areas, though it is not a hardtop like the BMW and employs anodized pillars to make the roof even more “floating” than the BMW’s – almost like the Pagoda Benzes. But the Panhard’s rounded edges and curved glass has a certain kinship to the BMW’s, with one notable exception, which I’ll get into right this minute.
Of course, the styling trick that makes the BMW’s greenhouse stand out is the obligatory “Hofmeister kink”, complete with a side BMW logo. The kink always seemed to me to be an ideal place for the blue and white roundel, as it was on the car that first introduced it (and this coupé’s direct ancestor), the 3200 CS. It just so happens that in this car, the roundel is also a cabin air extractor, adding function to form in a very cool way.
One amusing and rarely seen gadget are the headlight washers/wipers. They do nothing for the car’s aesthetics (and are probably quite useless), but they’re almost comical, so they can stay.
This 3.0 CSi is something of a rarity, in that it is a RHD automatic, one of 215 made from 1973 to 1975. The slushbox used herein would be a 3-speed ZF unit, which seems to be the object of major discussions and differences of opinion amongst E9 aficionados. Most folks would rather have the 5-speed ZF manual. Performance-wise, that is a no-brainer. But the scarcity of the automatic transmission is a compelling counter-argument, as would be the ease of driving this in urban areas such as Bangkok.
The BMW hardtop coupé, whether in 4- or 6-cyl. guise, with or without automatic transmission, with go-faster stripes or painted in a calm shade of blue like this one, is an automotive masterpiece. But it’s a very delicately balanced one. Very little could be changed without it losing a lot of its appeal. A drop-top or a four-door version of this design, for instance, would be a complete disaster.
It was one of the easiest cars to photograph I’ve ever encountered, even given my complete lack of skill and the rather difficult lighting conditions I found it in. almost whatever the angles, it looked ready to pounce, its brightwork gracefully underlining its lines and its detailing catching the eye here and there. I’ll leave the Neue Klasse saloons and the 02 Tourings to all the Hofmeister debaters out there. Just leave me one of these (with the correct wheels) for my fantasy garage.
Cohort Sighting: BMW 2000CS – A Pretty Rare Bird, by PN
More From The CC Cohort: BMW 3.0CSi Coupe – The Neue Klasse’s Valedictorian, by PN
CC Capsule: 1974 BMW 3.0 CS – Bringing the Gentrification, by Jim Grey
Curbside Classic: 1974 BMW 3.0 CS – The Ultimate Driving Legacy, by Eric703
I think the front end of the 2000CS was the weakest part of the car’s design. Not only was the shape rather tub-like, but the row of vertical slots behind the front bumper was a mess. The US version was even clumsier with quad round headlights replacing the smooth Euro items. The 2800CS was a night-and-day transformation for the better, also helped by the longer wheelbase.
Agreed. It was the weakest element of the 4 cylinder coupe. I just couldn’t get enthused about it until it got the new front end. It’s like it was trying to pass as a rear-engine car.
Years ago a BaT commenter remarked the Euro 2000CS reminded them of “Hitler in Ray-Bans” That still makes me laugh.
One thing that surprised me in reading about the development of the E9 was the build quality of the extended structure. A few contemporary tests reprinted in the Brooklands compilation remarked the work was rough and amateur looking in the extreme.
And then owners say Karmann left unpainted shells outside in the weather and that’s why they all rust. Beautiful but flawed, and yes, I would still love one.
The successor E24 6 Series pales in comparison regardless of their merits and I could never get excited about them.
Agreed, the 2800 CS was a vast improvement – the six cylinder, the new nose. I got to drive a 2000 CS on Cape Cod one weekend in 1980. Generally an OK-looking coupe that needed more power( and got it, thankfully). And, I’m fine with the BBS wheels on the blue 2800 CSA, personally.
2800 CS is correct, not 2.8 as in the article, that changed with the three litre – possibly because BMW had already sold a 3000 GT a few years earlier when they bought Glas, the Frua V8 “Glaserati”.
Without a doubt one of the most beautiful cars of all time! I dream of having one in my collection some day 🙂
The Panhard is also quite attractive. I was on a vintage car drive a few years ago, and there was one behind me. We all pulled over for a breakdown ahead of us, and I got into conversation with the driver. He showed me that there was a quite substantial looking round thermometer in the glove box door that seemed to read the temperature inside (rather than outside) the box, which was quite deep,. We wondered if the setup was meant to monitor the atmosphere in there for the odd bottle of wine.
A peeve of mine on this site is the disdain for custom wheels. Personally, I like ’em, most of the time 🙂 If I were looking to purchase this or any other car but hated the wheels, its an easy thing to overlook.
Wheels are the easiest things to modify on a car that can be completely undone. You are generally 14 to 20 nuts and 30 to 45 minutes away from putting things right by changing them back to stock or whatever tickles your fancy.
By ’74 the beautiful alloys were gone, replaced by mundane multi-spokes also used on the 530i, Mahles were an improvement. The used car dealer I purchased my 3.0 CSA from installed a set of gold BBS, totally complementing the gold (!) leather interior, contrasting with the Sienna Brown metallic exterior. Also, the Mahles allowed larger tires which fit better visually with the federalized diving board bumpers. Still drove like a BMW!
I like a nice set of custom wheels myself, particularly the 80’s era BBS ones. They may be a cliche of sorts now, but to me they still look pretty good. I’d agree that it is possible to go badly wrong with aftermarket wheels – “what my XJ6 needs is a nice set of teddy bear alloys!” – but in general it’s a harmless way to personalize one’s car. To each their own, though.
The Mahles were so popular GM did a knock-off optional version on the new, downsized Gas Crisis full-size Chevrolet sedans.
I agree that BBS wheels don’t look right on this otherwise fine looking automobile but IMHO the stock wheels and tires just look too narrow to me. Most modern cars look better with somewhat wider wheels and tires, too many cars look like they’re riding on pizza cutters 😀 .
I disagree. The BBS wheel was born on the racetrack, and IIRC, the racing versions of these used BBS wheels. I happen to like them, and think they look quite right on this car. They are appropriate upgrades for these cars, unlike more modern wheels. Of course I put the same ones on my W124 too. 🙂
I agree they do look right on this, though I think these are bordering on the stretched ‘hella flush’ look with a wheel that is wider than optimum for the tire’s width.
The other thing is that tires that are available in or near the OE size are probably extremely limited and most of what is available is probably 3 tier mfg crap or expensive but basic all-season tires.
These BMW coupes are easily in the top 10 of the most beautifully styled cars ever. With the optional Chromadoras they are perfection. The Mahle rims from around 74 are no where near as good. If only they were built by Mercedes 🙂
The BBS rims are pure evil and do not belong on ANY car (maybe a SUV…)
The Panhard is great too.
As I said before, all the competition versions of this car used BBS wheels, hence it makes a very appropriate and period-correct upgrade.
The German BBS wheels were extremely successful on racing cars due to their superior strength and light weight. Hence they were also used on many street cars in the 80s. They are not poseur wheels. They were the best upgrade at the time to increase wheel size and width for German (and other) sports/sporty cars. And they most certainly don’t belong on an SUV. All wrong.
Yes I’m quite aware they were used for racing at the time. They are functional but not attractive at all.
My comments regarding their fitment to SUVs was of course factitious.
The ’70’s were NOT a pretty time, BBS Mahles were aesthetic delights in that era!
Amen, Paul. If there were ever a perfect aftermarket wheel to put on a vintage BMW it’s a basketweave BBS.
Also, and I’m just guessing, the tire for the factory correct wheels are made of unobtanium these days, and what is available won’t grip to the level these BMSs are capable of.
And yeah, I’m not sure I have ever in my life seen a SUV with BBS wheels added on. I know you were being factious, but you could have had a better or at least less specific example than that!
The only issue with these wheels as mounted is that this particular wheel is too wide for this particular tire and thus the metal sticks out beyond the rubber. A slightly narrower wheel with a small change in offset or perhaps a slightly wider tire would do wonders for “the look”.
Agreed; these are too big. I didn’t really look closely at them before, but a set of 16″ with reasonable width would look fine.
Tires in the OE sizes are probably available but are most likely no name junk or expensive but basic all-season tires.
If this was a racing e9, then some large period BBS rims would make sense.
This is a street e9 however, completely stock, and these rims give it a stanceworks hipster ken-block baseball cap vibe, which I’m not a fan of. I just think it steals from the overall proportions.
I do have to begrudgingly agree however, that there is motorsport precedence in this case, and it’s hardly uncommon to see rims like these on an older BMW.
Besides, like it was posted earlier, This is an easy fix for any new future owner of said car.
The first BMW dealership in Chico was Chico BMW/Saab in the early 70’s. I was doing nearly all the dealer cars that went into showrooms in Chico but Volpato’s (the Plymouth Chrysler and Imperial dealer) and Chico BMW/Saab had every car detailed that went through their business’s. The BMW shop sold 5-10 coupes a year, the majority silver with black or dark blue interiors, a few were silver/blue with blue interiors. ALL were switched at the dealer to BBS wheels similar to these (not as large diameter) and most of the cars lowered slightly, even some of the Bavaria 3.0 sedans got the same treatment. They had one squirrely salesman there that rolled his black Turbo Saab over, demonstrating the cornering. I next saw him in one of the 3.0 coupes, he made the comment the Saab was inferior and only a complete idiot could roll a 3.0 coupe. He managed to get it upside down in two days. I was amazed how well the slender pillars held the roof up. The car was repaired, I’m not sure the factory even knew what happened, as the dealer bought it himself as a personal car. I helped him do a dealer trade to the bay area, coming back in the coupe, he made the comment he needed to take a performance drivers course because he never had gone very fast in one. I asked if he wanted to go fast that day. A close friend had a Bavaria 3.0 sedan which we had changed off driving the coast highway from Washington state to southern Cal.,. The dealer had me get behind the wheel, we headed for a tight winding twisty road I knew well. It was empty on weekdays and had good visibility. I didn’t even push hard, taking curves and switchbacks at up to 85-90 mph. He did soon take a drivers course. I loved the styling, comfort and handling of the big series BMW’s from that time. My friend still has his Bavaria 3,0 sedan, it has been sitting in his garage 35 years. He’s had every BMW he’s wanted since, but can’t let go of the Bavaria. Before he garaged it we took one last trip through the Sierras at a rapid pace, still trying to get him to restore it.
I agree that the 2000CS’s weakest point was that ugly front end. The CSi looks so much better.
I don’t know what the designers were thinking with the 2000 CS front end. Also what’s up with the top of those fenders? Those look like they should be on a Mopar Fuselage car.
What’s up with the 2000CS’s fenders is awesomeness.
BBS wheels were the only wheels to have on these back in the day. And they still go great with my gold chains and bell bottoms…
Easily the best looking BMW ever. 5 speed for me please.
I like the BBS wheels, but would prefer a little smaller diameter and taller tire on this example.
Only 4 speed manual or 3 speed automatic @ the time. The English language brochure had a page explaining the automatic – it was still a new luxury item in Europe, even receiving a separate model designation & trunk badge!
I think the “style 5” wheels are too big for this car, maybe 17 inches in place of the 14 inch original (I think, Cromodora) wheels. And, they’re too brightly polished. But–assuming it helps you get better or cheaper tires, I’d say 15 inch, matte-finished (or darker gold-tone) style 5’s would be fine with me. I don’t think BMW put 17 inch wheels on anything until, maybe, the E32??
Otherwise, I’m always happy to see an E9. Somehow, the proportion of the greenhouse to the rest of the car makes me think of a helicopter, it just looks practical and right for the purpose of getting down a good road in good time.
I dont see how anybody could not like these BBS wheels. On a weight verses strength issue, they were an engineering masterpiece; I wanted some for my Corona Mark II, but they were rightfully spendy; but in 1982 if you had these on your car you either used to own a disco joint and sold it at just the right time, or you were the neighborhood coke dealer. If I only had a dollar for every 280ZX that had BBS wheels on it back in the day….
I’m not against all accessories, but they should be made to fit the car. Those BBS wheels, as noted above, are too big and too wide. It doesn’t kill the car’s look entirely, because it’s such a beautiful design and the rest of the car is completely stock, but it’s like a guy wearing an impeccably tailored suit with white sneakers.
The BBS wheels were a very common period modification, so I’m inclined to let them pass. These later silver ones with the covered lug nuts are less garish than the gold painted ones form the 70s. I’d still go with a Panasport/Minilite style and 60 series tires.
Regarding the BBS wheels, I like them and find them perfect for this car because it is of the same period. However I don’t the BBS center cap. The black BBS sticker seems to throw it off a bit and seems to draw attention to itself every time you look at the wheel. This detracts from the attractive design of the wheel.
Wasn’t there an optional BMW Logo center cap offered for the BBS wheels?
Yes, there was. And they were quite common. BBS wheels were a very popular upgrade on BMWs back in the day.
Most of the BBS wheels the dealer put on new coupes and Bavaria’s had the BMW centers. Also the center was not a sticker but a plastic insert done very well.
Agreed. There were so many bargain basement BMW 318i’s running around here (Portland OR and suburbs) in the early-mid 80’s with BBS wheels I thought they were a factory option
As Road & Track pointed out in their original test of the 2800 CS, with the factory alloys there were 8 roundels on the car! 9, if you include the steering wheel. C pillar roundels have made a return on the new X2.
I really do love the e9’s and have been fascinated with them ever since I started paying attention to cars. There was a green 3.0cs (if I remember correctly) in my neighborhood in the late 70s and I remember finding it quite odd looking. It grew on my over time, and in the late 90s I had a 2002 and a 633csi and a buddy of mine had two 2002s and a 2800cs in Malaga. It was so beautiful. All that long winded intro said, I’m still an e3 man! Make mine a Bavaria with a 4-speed and dog dish hubcaps!
Excuse my OCD. I’m a photographer and despair bad photography. You need to clean the glass on your smartphone every time you use it; sticky print marks everywhere. Secondly, your phone has taken it’s exposure reading from the bright area outside the building. Pre focus on the lower area that’s darker, then raise the phone to frame correctly, still keeping your finger on the button. That way, the exposure will be ‘brighter’.
Great car, bad rusters I believe. One wag commenting, “Open the glove compartment and you’ll probably see the engine interior”
That’s the mist of nostalgia in that picture; gauzy memories of days gone by. 😉
Lost mine to rust – underground parked it during the Canadian winter, kept hearing Neil Young’s “Rust Never Sleeps” in my head. Years later I read in a British collector magazine that for some unknown reason Karmann had a sheet metal box behind the driver wheel well, apparently to store everything kicked up from the road. Sure enough, signalling a left turn, my car started to smoke – fuse box was behind the sheet metal box, rotted right thru, exposed to grass, dirt, water… Sold the car, had to return the buyer’s money – frame was rotted as well. Once had the rear shocks punch thru the rear wheel wells when they seized on a road trip – guess the dealer failed to inspect them on my most recent service!
Thank you for taking the time to give me a few pointers. I readily admit my complete lack of photographic skills. The lens cleaning thing is something I try to do, but in sticky and steamy Bangkok, not an easy task…
There is simply no bad angle from which to view this car — if there ever was an automotive definition of beauty, this is it.
What has propelled the 3.0 CS/CSi to the top of my wish list is that it’s not just about appearances. This ranks among the top 5 cars I would love to drive someday (though without the automatic…).
The parking garages of Thailand sure seem to hold a lot of surprises!
What a neat find! The headlamp cleaning system makes me wonder what market/country this car was originally intended for—back then, those systems were required in Nordic countries, but AFAIK nowhere else, though they were permitted elsewhere. The Nordic requirement was specifically for headlamp wipers; pressure-jet sprayers were not considered sufficient by themselves. So that’s one question mark above my head about this car.
The other is the placement of the rear fog lamp, on the left side of the car. That’s weird because a single rear fog lamp has always, by law of places where such lights are required, been placed between the centreline and the outermost extent of the offside (which is usually the driver’s side, though plenty of countries permit “wrong”-hand-drive vehicles, i.e., RH-drive vehicles in RH-traffic or LH-drive vehicles in LH-traffic). The reason for that is to give maximum possible chance for following drivers to have a line of sight to the rear fog lamp.
This car you’re showing us has the fog lamp on the nearside—the left, in a RH-drive car. I’m sure vehicle lighting regulations are quite a bit less stringent in Thailand than in Germany or the rest of Europe, and I’m pretty sure a rear fog is not required equipment in Thailand, but there were RH-mount rear fog lamp parts for these cars (because UK), so…why wouldn’t they be on this car? Strange.
I had a ’74 Bavaria with that same automatic transmission. I wished it had an overdrive, or a different final drive ratio. It was pushing 3000 RPM at 60 MPH — which did not make for quiet highway cruising. Yes, I realize that perhaps was great for performance, but this was not a car designed for US driving. The pricing, when new, was in Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham territory — which was a car designed to be just purring quietly at freeway speeds.
Yup. It was designed to accelerate up hill out of the twistys. It was simply out of it’s comfort zone here in the States. The Suzuki Samurai was in the same sinking boat.
A stately looking older lady had an ice blue metallic E9 coupe up the street from my folks while I was in jr. high and high school. I always made a point of walking past her house on my way home from jr. high school, even though it was a bit out of the way, just to see if that lovely 3.0 coupe would be in her driveway. Made my day when it was. A bucket list car for me, I intend to own one someday. In ice blue metallic, of course.
These were always a favorite of mine. The absolute best looking one I’ve seen iisn’t a coupe thought, it’s a convertible. I’ve always been a convertible nut and usually have 4 or more at a time. A doctor in town is the same, He bought a 3.0 coupe in silver/blue, driving it a few months, it disappeared a few months and when back, was a gorgeous convertible, which he kept til just a few years ago, build quality was excellent.
A friend of mine was big into thes ein the late 80s. He was collecting them – got up to around 15 of them at one time. Including a green with saddle interior that had VIN 00019 or something like that – can’t remember the year or if it was a CS or CSi. He had Alpinas, regulars, Bavarias, plus some 1600s and 2002s. Pretty cool collection. I helped keep them clean and ran parts for him a lot. He was a banker and I was a student. Got to drive whatever we worked on except the 2002 Turbo.
I would imagine collecting BMW’s is like beating yourself in the head with a hammer. It feels so good when it stops.
I have always been a coupe guy. These have a light and airy greenhouse. Great outside visibility and such a cheerful light filled interior. My brother bought a new 320i in 1980 and it was like a smaller cheaper version of this car. Maybe not exactly, but at least in concept. The original Acura Legend coupe has a similar greenhouse, and I can afford one of those, if I could find a good one.
The greenhouse is amazing on these. It’s not possible to have a lighter and airier greenhouse this side of a convertible with its top down. With the hardtop, thin pillars and tall roof, it’s the antithesis of modern coupes.
Beautiful cars in ther own right, yet nobody notices they look like a combination of a Lancia Fulvia coupe and Alfa Romeo Giulia 2 door in larger scale? Window kink aside, I don’t see much originality here (just look at the front of the first Alfa and the first BMW… Twin kidney’s aside, it’s awfully similar). Both the Italians I mention predate the BMW, if that’s even nessesary to point out.
I should clarify some details don’t match, but things like the belt line, revised shark nose, and greenhouse really don’t lie…
And how many cars are truly original? Yes, the Giulia Sprint was one of the most brilliant designs of the modern era, so yes, it was highly influential. And as such, yes, the BMW coupe does not compare in its originality or influence. But it was nicely executed, the second time around. And the BMW’s basic body shape comes of rather differently, due to it appearing lower, flatter and more horizontal.
And much the same can be said about the Fulvia coupe. Let’s face it; Germany was hardly a hot bed of design in the 50s and 60s. And Italy was. Everybody either copied the Italians or hired them. For good reasons.
The new front end made all the difference between potential also ran and milestone in the history of BMW.
I’d never really seen the Corvair or Panhard visual links before, but new I can’t overlook.
Very tempting, practical and I suspect durable.
Here’s 2 3.0 CSLs I saw earlier this year.
One of the few complaints I have about this car is really a generic complaint about all German cars of this time period: Their lackluster Air Conditioning system!
We had two of these in our extended family; I had ample driver’s seat time in both.
The A/C capacity and blower speed, coupled with the car’s generous ‘greenhouse” window square footage area, combined with the intense heat & humidity that soaks the New Orleans are for the 8 months of the year the natives call “Summer”, made for a miserable mix.
The effect of the A/C on max cold and the blower on high was like having a warm, damp, noisy washcloth on your face! The A/C “sounded” like it was working; but to no avail during the daylight hours.
Both cars had their A/C system checked several times by various dealers. The service technicians would just mutter “Zat ees de best da dealer add on system kin deuu.”
Made all the more irritating by the fact that the cheapest Toyota of the time period had A/C that could make icicles hang off your nose and ears.
Delightful car to drive at night, though.
Weather in Bahgkok is exactly like Louisiana in the summer, though you guys get much cooler nights than we do. And here rain is seasonal (May-November).
So yes, A/C is vital here, as it is in the southern US. No idea whether this E9 has A/C, but according to what you said, that would make little difference…
Several of my Viet Nam war draftee friends, when asked to describe the weather in ‘Nam, Cambodia, Laos, et al would reply “Just like New Orleans in August.”
The symmetry of the Panhard’s pillars confuses the eye. Which way to the Front?
Dude just said BBS RS are not well designed hahahaha why is it always guys on blogs talking shit about something they don’t know about?