Leaderboard

1 of 1,285 '60 Eldorado Biarritz's ~

Which one would essentially replace the Impala's place in Chevy lore: Tahoe or Equinox? GM's greatest mistake was ditching RWD in all but the pickup trucks and replacing everything with FWD. Really sad, especially since the 300/Charger twins still sell.

Good read and I have to say the writer hits a number of valid points. Chevrolet Impala is worth Eulogizing according to this writer. https://www.thedrive.com/news/32351/the-last-car-why-the-chevy-impala-is-worth-eulogizing

In Seattle George town district we had a very cool Hat's n Boots gas station that I grew up around. The Cowboy Boots were the bath rooms. This was it 5 years or so ago as it got landmark status. It was a Texaco gas station last when it finally closed down. Now it is a restored park for everyone.

Still have mine squirreled away in the shop! This year marks 34 years of ownership. ?

Traverse. FWD, V6, largish family car....Tahoe kind of fits the old Impala formula up through '96---full size, BOF, V8 large family car.

What I was trying to point out was that downsizing to 1.4L and packing a turbo to get in the same power bracket as a 2.0L NA engine does not actually yield ANY fuel economy advantage. I bet you that a 2-valve Inline-4 displacing 2.7 liters but running an Atkinson Cycle cam will deliver the same 150~160 hp with better fuel economy and emissions than ANY 2.0L 4-valve engine or 1.4L turbo. It'll be a bigger engine but it may not necessarily be heavier given that it ditches the big fat DOHC head. Actually, more valves = worse emissions. Remember the 3.2L and 5.5L 3-valve engines from MB about 15 years ago? The reason they went to 3-valves is to reduce the exhaust valve surface area. Less area = less heat loss through conduction during cold starts and quicker catalyst light off. More valves also mean lower intake velocity and poorer mixing at low engine speeds. You can mitigate that with variable tumbler vanes (VW-Audi) or you can simply reduce valve lift or deactivate one valve (Honda) on a DOHC setup. But, the need for such solutions only goes to show that storm drains are not always the best when it comes to intake ports and valves.

Look, if it is profitable it is TAXABLE. If it is breaking even or losing money, it is not. It is very easy to make a division lose money -- just make it do a ton of R&D and prototyping which soaks up all the profits and then some. Now, once developed, the technology is then "shared" or gifted to the rest of the company. NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. This is why high corporate taxes is pointless in the era of multinational corporations. Where do you think they take their loses and where do you think they move the profits? If you guess high tax countries and low tax countries, maybe you are not retarded afterall!

I have not made any factual claims, I have only asked questions. Thusly, no data/links. And it wasn't I who said 2016 was the end of the world. Perhaps Al has your requested data/links. Please site your showing what humans do to the planet to affect climate change.

Something calming about it...not sure why.....

You're daisy-chaining together a lot of ifs and therefores, no? Is the climate / the Earth really that 'tab A > slot B' cause-effective? Or are there 10,000 variables a minute for any singular moment in time? - - - - - Is it that the 'time' was wrong, or that the science supposedly behind the time was wrong? If the latter, why, and what else is wrong? What is right?

I am sure they are very good trucks, but the new Silverados are really ugly-looking in the face. The GMC Sierras look so much better. There is a reason that GM truck sales are trailing both FORD and RAM.

How's that big fat Grand Cherokee running? What a load of BS. But then who here is more known for gobbledygook than our boy olds?

Fascinating random video I saw posted on a couple FB groups...a guy with an in-car camera documenting his commute home on the 405 in LA...in 1988! A real time capsule of traffic and radio from 30+ years ago.

I did the Montreal autoshow sooooo quickly this year. In and out in a record 40 minutes. Saw the new C8 Vette. There were three. A coupe on a rotating thing center stage showcased for Chevrolet. A roadster and a Targa coupe on the floor. We couldnt get to sit inside them. We couldnt even touch them as there were ropes around each. I did stay there a few minutes gawking... Went to Cadillac. Saw the CT4-V and CT5-V. sat inside those. I loved both. Ferrari. There was a Superfast 812, a 458 Pista of some sort and the other Ferrari I forgot what model it was. Like I dont remember what it was. Anyway. I stayed there a few minutes as well as I was mesmerized by all three. All three with that fiery Ferrari red colour. Lamborghini had several models. Nothing that caught my eye as Ive seen them before with previous shows I have attended. McLaren had several models too. Including the new GT thingy. Saw the GT one quickly. It was OK. I prefer the Vette and Ferraris over the GT McLaren. Ove ANY McLaren really. Awesome machines. Boring exteriors. The Ford GT500 was there. Like the Vette C8, there was a rope around it. I was surprised that I like it. In pictures, I dont like the front fascia. In person its GORGEOUS!!! Both Hellcats were there. One Challenger Red Eye wide body and one Challenger regular Hellcat. sat in the Red Eye for a few minutes. I took my time looking at the NSX. Love the NSX too. And...that was it! By passed BMW. By passed Mercedes, Audi, Buick...every other car maker seemed like a waste of time for me... Even Aston Martin I by passed. THAT was a shocker to me as I ALWAYS stare at those for a few minutes...

^ Corollavirus!