Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

Random Thoughts Thread

TaurusSHO

By TaurusSHO
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 26.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • David

    4803

  • balthazar

    3966

  • A Horse With No Name

    2591

  • Robert Hall

    2287

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Drew Dowdell
Drew Dowdell

This whole crossover craze has gone a bit too far....

Cmicasa the Great
Cmicasa the Great

Been away for a while.. summer stuff.. figured I'd get out an live while the weather was warm. Decided to get back into riding bikes.. had given it up back in '05 after my then wife (now ex) had issue

balthazar
balthazar

• • • ORDERED A TRUCK TODAY. • • •

Posted Images

oldshurst442 Grand Master

oldshurst442

Posted
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Wife & I just had a difference of opinion, so I thought I'd ask here. I won't say which side of the question I was on.

If a man was to say to a woman "You're a lot to visually process"... would that be considered offensive, or just 'neutral'?

Toughie...

It all dépends on the context and tone of voice, I guess.

Picture a Sam Malone of Cheers fame. Or Dan Fielding of Night Court fame. In other words, a man whore. A lothario.

A woman walks into a bar, but she is NOT sleazily dressed, normal attire waiting for her girlfriends/boyfriend/working collègues to arrive and this cruizer guy strikes up a conversation and it lends to say to her "You're a lot to visually process"...

In today's PC, #metoo, world, not a flattering thing to say.

Hell, in that scenario that I described, even in the loosey goosey era of the 1970s and 1980s, it be a hard sell...

Same scenario, but the girl looks lke she wants to be picked up by a guy to have a one night stand (does that even happen anymore?) I dont think its offensive.

 

But, if two friends are talking. Two very good friends, when consensuel flirtation has taken place many times before, I do not see any harm there.  Especially if the lady has worn something tres tres sexy, not necessarily anything revealing, but tres tres sexy, I dont think its offensive at all...

If two not so quite friendly acquaintances but friends just the same are talking and  are together in a casual surrounding and there has been some very mild flirtations going on, and the guy says that...in a very funny and charming way, not harmful at all. But if he says that staring at the girls breasts, drooling like a pig, well...offensive.

 

Now...if the lady happens to be..fat.  Well...not a very nice thing to say, no matter what the tone suggests.

 

Edited by oldshurst442
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A Horse With No Name Experienced

A Horse With No Name

Posted
Posted

My daughter hitting 177 Miles per hour in a 911 GT3 at a Las Vegas Exotics experience. I guess all that autocross time paid off for her...

19 hours ago, balthazar said:

Wife & I just had a difference of opinion, so I thought I'd ask here. I won't say which side of the question I was on.

If a man was to say to a woman "You're a lot to visually process"... would that be considered offensive, or just 'neutral'?

Depends on the woman.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Grand Master

David

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, balthazar said:

Wife & I just had a difference of opinion, so I thought I'd ask here. I won't say which side of the question I was on.

If a man was to say to a woman "You're a lot to visually process"... would that be considered offensive, or just 'neutral'?

In the 70's, hell even in the 80's depending on dress and environment it could be fine. In todays world of the #metoo movement, nope, would be taken as offensive no matter the tone. 

Would be better to just be honest if what the person is wearing is not pleasing to the eyesight or just call it beautiful if that is what your looking at.

Sadly todays politically correct world we live in is just sucking big time.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
balthazar

balthazar

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Did that start life as a hearse/ambulance?

No- coachbuilt purposely as a wagon. Standard wheelbase, standard height roof.

Hearses almost always were on extended wheelbase commercial chassis'. Here, rear door is stretched (and suicided), and there's still a foot of space between it & the rear wheelwell ~

Screen Shot 2019-03-12 at 11.34.29 AM.png

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robert Hall Veteran

Robert Hall

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

My blurry morning vision read that as Nescafé and I'm sitting here wondering why there are race cars in a coffee shop.... 

Marketing, I guess...the local Quaker Steak & Lube here has several NASCAR and Indy Cars along w/ racing memorabilia on display...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Drew Dowdell Grand Master

Drew Dowdell

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

Marketing, I guess...the local Quaker Steak & Lube here has several NASCAR and Indy Cars along w/ racing memorabilia on display...

no no... I misread Nascar Cafe as Nescafé, which is a type of instant coffee. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ocnblu Newbie

ocnblu

Posted
Posted

LOL the Ram e-Torque is such a load of BS... rated for 22 MPG, gets 16.8 in real world, purpose-driven MPG loop by these guys... mighty little Chevy 2.7 got over 24!  And right now Ram has suspended availability of the e-Torque Hemi in the Rebel and 1500 Off-Road package trucks!  I told you guys it was a scam!  :roflmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Grand Master

David

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, ocnblu said:

LOL the Ram e-Torque is such a load of BS... rated for 22 MPG, gets 16.8 in real world, purpose-driven MPG loop by these guys... mighty little Chevy 2.7 got over 24!  And right now Ram has suspended availability of the e-Torque Hemi in the Rebel and 1500 Off-Road package trucks!  I told you guys it was a scam!  :roflmao:

Poorly designed and you get poor results. They rushed it and they have egg on their face. This does not mean it does not offer other benefits such as better torque from zero over ICE only.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ocnblu Newbie

ocnblu

Posted
Posted

People have NO CONCEPT of what this sign means.  Some stupid broad in an old MKX didn't even try to slow down merging onto the highway tonight.  I held my ground, she fell in behind... then promptly floored it, pulled up beside me, and proceeded to cuss me out at 60 mph.  You know what?  Eff that!  🤬

index.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robert Hall Veteran

Robert Hall

Posted
Posted (edited)

http://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/engines/cc-weird-engines-outtake-oldsmobile-v5-diesel-grasping-at-straws/

Inpired by the X8, I was googling odd numbered V engines like V3s, V5s, etc.  I found an Olds V5 Diesel engine prototype.   Wild.  

I wonder if anyone ever experimented with weird configurations like a V6 w 4 and 2 rather than 3 and 3 or a V8 with 6 and 2 or 5 and 3 cylinders per bank.  

Edited by Robert Hall
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robert Hall Veteran

Robert Hall

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Since they clearly didn't carry inventory, I wonder how long it took from order to delivery. 

Maybe their lot is out of camera range to the right or behind the building. 

Edited by Robert Hall
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
balthazar

balthazar

Posted
Posted

I admit I don't have hard data on this era handy. I believe the dealer would have a small cache of cars, you went in & picked the one you wanted. I've not heard tell you could send an order in & have it built that far back, but I don't know. Call it a gut feeling.

Don't forget; in 1915, Chevrolet was an independent marque, and Louis Chevrolet's core product was a very high priced luxury 6-cylinder car, the Series C classic Six. The Royal Mail model came out in '15 for the '16 model year, and Chevy moved into the GM house that year too. Chevy wasn't in the top 8 for 1915 in sales, and tho they were #5 in 1916, they were selling less than 10% of what Ford was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trinacriabob Veteran

trinacriabob

Posted
Posted

Anybody seen "The Green Book?"  A Jewish lady I know strongly urged me to go see it because she thought it would be right up my alley.  She was right.  Simple story, more or less ... a lot of message embedded within it.  It has its difficult spots but emerges as a feel good movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Grand Master

David

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, trinacriabob said:

Anybody seen "The Green Book?"  A Jewish lady I know strongly urged me to go see it because she thought it would be right up my alley.  She was right.  Simple story, more or less ... a lot of message embedded within it.  It has its difficult spots but emerges as a feel good movie.

You talking about the movie "Green Book" with Viggo?

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6966692/?ref_=nv_sr_2 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Grand Master

David

Posted
Posted

WOW Pictures from a 100 auto crash on Highway 25 due to the Bomb Cyclone winter storm.

http://www.thedrive.com/news/26957/bomb-cyclone-blizzard-causes-disastrous-100-car-pileup-in-colorado

Amazed no one is dead, just a few serious injuries.

Oops, VW Leadership makes an error in using a slogan that was heavily used by the 3rd Reich in addressing company management. Work will set you free.

OUCH 😮

http://www.thedrive.com/news/26956/volkswagen-ceo-sorry-for-invoking-nazi-slogan-during-company-meeting

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robert Hall Veteran

Robert Hall

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, trinacriabob said:

Yes.  It's great.  Have you seen it?  Or has anyone else seen it?

I haven't seen it...probably will, but I did see an article about the inaccuracies w/ the '62 Cadillac in it...(the car they used was more worn than it should have been for the period, etc).   

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
trinacriabob Veteran

trinacriabob

Posted
Posted

I won't say that much because y'all need to see it.

When I knew that Tony "Lip" Vallelonga was going to be driving him around the Midwest and the South, I knew before I saw the movie there would be a phenomenal scene following that then new Cadillac aerially as it crossed the George Washington Bridge from Manhattan to New Jersey.  And there was! Beautifully done.

The funniest scene to me may not be the funniest to others.  As they start driving off and are in PA, Dr. Shirley starts telling Tony that he needs to clean up his vocabulary because of the sort of people they'll be around.  Dr. Shirley said, "I have a problem with your diction." Tony got defensive and told him that everyone understands him just fine.  Dr. Shirley looked away and said something like, 'Perhaps your diction has some charm in the tri-state area.'  I howled at that one.

The movie is definitely very Yankee versus Southerner.   And it does rely a lot on stereotyping, which probably held water in 1962.

Also, they HAD to cross on the George Washington Bridge because the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge wasn't opened until 1964 or so.

Epic flick.  A lot of great music from that era, too.  I wasn't expecting it.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings