oldshurst442

I dont travel far. I gas up EXACTLY like you. Every 2 weeks. Give or take a day or two. I have gotten lazy with that schedule so I fill-up to the brim almost spilling it and I drive it to the absolute end....almost empty. Yes...I know not good for the car when you do that. Oh well... Im sure the Acura is fine with 87... I know the Acura requires premium but I think the Acura's driver's manual states that 87 will not produce knocks but I also seem to remember reading that one has to put premium more often than 87...or something like that .. I put the "good stuff" in it all the time... Why take a chance? But then again, I drive it to empty more often than not also, so... Where is my logic? Here I am, making a federal case about premium versus regular and how many times/week equals what amount one pays extra and stuff and how I prefer NOT to pay for premium but I actually do and then I drive it to empty...just because... Reality is complex....

Yeah...twice a week is not far fetched. I said thrice a week is not far fetched either. Which is not. But...simple math. I know people, many people, that do gas up twice a week. To fill up, in your case, 30 days...would be 6 times. About. So its 60. I said 80 dollars. 60 dollars is still pricey per month for nothing... But...the premise was 10 bucks. And that 10 bucks is nothing. But it aint 10 bucks. And with my twice/week would be 20 bucks as opposed to your fill-up schedule. That would be 720 bucks more over the course of the year for you, but it would be 960 bucks to other people I know... Still...720 bucks, is a lot of coin. Even for people that have no cash flow problems to swallow just to give it to Big Oil just to fill-up their ride to go from point A to point B stuck in traffic or driving in slow in school zones just because their ride takes premium gasoline... In other words, there is no SAFE enthusiastic driving going on with that so called enthusiastic ride that takes premium gasoline... (Unless the daily driven ride is for your job/business then its a necessity more than anything else and no choice but to drive daily that vehicle) Ive had conversations in here regarding car depreciation and how people try to skimp and save. This conversation is no different. People value different things. People like to put their money in different areas. Which is cool. All is good. I aint preachin' my way is better. Alls Im sayin' is that: For me...I dont necessarily value a premium gasolined vehicle for daily driven purposes if I dont have to... To put this conversation in perspective. I put premium in my Acura. I used to put premium in my 2005 Impala SS. My previous ride. Im just viewing this in another angle that actually does not really represent me personally.

Pierre Trudeau V Richard Nixon When the Prime Minister of Canada, Pierre Trudeau heard that President Richard Nixon had called him an "asshole", Trudeau responded, "I've been called worse things by better people" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- and then there is this: https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2008/12/08/nixon_tapes_include_testy_trudeau_chat.html Ah yes....Nixon...

Hahaha...No Way! ?

Perhaps you want something more recent then?

Or... A gas tan... a tan that you get by a burning Italian sports car?

EXACTLY! But dont kid yourself. If electric power will be the fuel of the future, Big Evil Oil will just be replaced by Big Evil Darth Sidious Electric... Electric power companies will now control our transportation needs. They WILL increase the prices... Dont mind me...Im ranting again. Im bored immensely...

That 10 bucks is per fill-up. As a one-time shot, 10 bucks is nothing, but if you are filling up two or three times a week (not unreasonable for some to fill-up 3 times a week) , that 10 bucks translates to (we will do twice a week) becomes 20 bucks. Per month that translates to 80 bucks... @ 80 bucks...THAT becomes quite pricey. I know I want to do other things with my money than give an extra 80 bucks to big oil... Keep in mind we are talking about a daily driven car...no need to have a premium gasolined daily driven car when a regular gasolined car can and does the same job. Which is getting from point A to Point B. Unless of course its a job and/or business related daily driven car. As a fun car to drive around, a premium gasolined car...well...that sounds like...fun.

Happy New Year @USA-1!!! But not only to you... But EVERYBODY!!!

Why are we basing fuel costs with how big a gasoline tank is? A 26 gallon fuel tank wont make your truck spend more money on gasoline than a 24 gallon one. If it takes you 100 bucks per week for fuel (or 400 bucks per month) than it costs you 100 bucks per week for fuel (or 400 bucks per month) no matter how big your gas tank is... Having a smaller gasoline tank just makes you spend less per fill-up, but makes you visit the gas station more often. In the long run, having a smaller gas tank may cost you more gas as you may spend more fuel re-fueling IF your gas station that you go to more often than not is OUT of your way traveling unnecessarily if you had a bigger gas tan... (But then again...having a bigger gas tank may make you spend more fuel as additional weight also burns more fuel...) (But... ) And if it aint out of your way, you spend MORE time there as you stop more often...and that is just a perfect waste of time... plus if you are the type of person to always buy some sort of stupid trinket or lottery ticket or junk food at the gas station, then you are spending more money NEEDLESSLY... Just a rant...Im bored...

I aint arguing that point either. You are correct with that too. I didnt catch what you were saying though. But yeah. I still like the Taycan's looks regardless. But today's car designs are stale no matter what company we are talking about. With maybe Hyundai and KIA as an exemption.

I aint gonna argue. You are right. I aint a Porsch-O-phile though. Im calling it as I sees it 'cause I know many folk dont and wont make that connection with Pontiacs from the 1940s with any GP but they do have that connection with the 911. Id say though that that styling started with the VW Beetle and the Chrysler Airflow. But Ill still stick to my guns and say that 'tis Porsche and its 911 and now Taycan that have taken the torch.

touché But still does not change the fact that that roofline defines Porsche-uh non-the-less.

To be fair... 1973 Porsche 911 RS (the design language and actual car, really, dates back to 1963...) And yes, the 2nd gen W-Body Grand Prix is a sexy design, but a Porshe-uh dude will tell you that 'tis Pontiac plagiarizing that design language. I like the Taycan's exterior. Its sexy. Tesla, as we could see, also uses that design language on both of their sedans. The Model 3 looks frumpy though as a longer vehicle benefits from that design better. The Panamera just butchers this styling trend so I aint gonna post it in fear of vomiting on my keyboard.... The Taycan looks good. Its fresher than both the Model S and the Panamera. Lets be honest about it!!! OK...Ill retract some of my post. The Taycan does not flow as smooth as the Grand Prix does. The Taycan's front wheel arches to that fender vent opening to the front doors seem awkward. The Grand Prix flows better. But towards the back, a tad less. The Model S, flows the best from front to back from the side view!!! So...Ill agree with Balthy, the Taycan DOES seem dated!!!

yup!!! I nix my comment about old school personal libraries and me forking over money to fund me one of these. Ill take a hint about what @Robert Hall said... and I too, could move on from paper and as long as digitally, there are reliable sources to info such as digital Britannica...then Im good.

I see similarities in this with my life during the same time frame as yours. Before I begin I would like to offer my condolences with the passing of your dad. The mid 1990s for me was just school and partying. Not taking life too seriously. But then in 1996-1997, never liking school because I couldnt do what I really wanted to do with my life, I too started my career in more or less in the same time frame as yours. I opened up my restaurant. I dropped university to do so, never finishing and getting my degree (in marketing)I decided to work long and hard hours (in my own business at least) to compensate for the lack of a bachelors or even a masters degree. Another similarity being that I too, had dreams about my career path that never panned out the way I wanted so I had to settle for something else. That ultimately did pan out. And Im assuming your career path is ultimately successful too from what Im understanding with our short conversations we have in these forums. I still partied hard when I first opened up my restaurant as I was still a young man. And single. Boy, I wasnt mature during that time. Mature enough to own and manage and work my restaurant with my partner, and responsible enough not to blow all my money on partying and girls, but definitely not marriage material. (this is where I may differ from you...and Im sorry your engagement to your fiance fell apart...but maybe for the better? ) Then the new millennium came and just like that, I was ready to settle down. And I met my now, wifey. My restaurant had established itself in the community as a great place for a quick bite to to eat and I was ready to be a man. And I had to learn fast that a wife...is NOT your mommy... I did have a hiccup along the way as I opened up a second restaurant. A Greek and Italian cuisine themed restaurant, as opposed to this one which ia a fast food joint, that...failed. This was a decade ago. Like you, I had a "start-up" that failed... My dad passed away in 2006, about a decade after your passing of your dad. Although my life may not have happened like yours exactly like yours, philosophically, its similar in a similar time frame. I too, am excited to see what the next decade will bring. As long as we have, what the French call, "La joie de vivre" and we will both be fine.

Same here. The Y2K scare seems to me like it was yesterday... I dont feel like Im 20 years older. But everything around me says otherwise. I got married a couple years after Y2K and now my beautiful, blushing bride is a mom of two teenagers. I understand Mr. DFelt though, because after the new millennium, its easy to forget that 2006 is in a different decade than 2016. We still think in terms of "new millennium" and the 2000s... We are 20 years removed, 2 decades removed, from the year 2000, but we are still in the "new millennium" of the 2000s. And still quite early in the 2000s. When we pass this current decade and enter the 2030s, maybe then we will stop seeing the Y2Ks as the "new millennium".

Im in both camps of in favour of Wiki and not in favour of Wiki. Wiki is NOT a reliable source of info. Especially when one wants to have 100% pure unadulterated proof of something being an event, historical or otherwise, or specifications of numbers of something. It is however, a valuable site for information that gets close enough to the truth to casually get you by. Like how @Robert Hall was saying. But like @balthazar is saying, Wiki is not the site you go to either. I use Wiki for fast info. I also use Wiki to confirm information that I already knew but forgot or I wasnt quite sure of. But when I do use Wiki for fast information, Im also conscience and cautious to realize and understand that the information I got may be erroneous somewhat. Close to the truth, but flawed in someway or other... I think its good that its free for us to use when we want to access it. I think its cool and understand the reasons behind the founder of the site does not want to go the advertising route (as that will most probably skew information even worse as it is now in its current state) but I certainly wont be giving MY money to a site that may contain false information either. I would prefer to pay thousands of dollars to my very own personalized home library containing all kinds of encyclopedias and magazines and then give lots and lots of money to my local neighborhood school and municipal library to maintain and acquire lots and lots of educational books, the old school way the way it used to be, than to give a measly dollar to Wikipedia... No...I aint a Boomer that does not like technology. I love the internet and what the internet means for humanity going forward. Instant communication and transfer of information. What took centuries and decades and years and months and days to transfer and share information now only takes seconds... The internet is humanity's latest and greatest invention that made us evolve and change the way we live for ever like how we invented tools and the wheel and fire.... But, sometimes, the internet and its information that it contains, and the way we use all that, is seriously flawed...and while Wiki is awesome...Wiki is like your know-it-all uncle or dad... you realize that your know-it-all uncle or your know-it-all dad maybe wrong more often than not...

Not doubting your love for these vehicles. Not discrediting you for your choices either, especially when you actually own them. But...those would belong in the decade preceding the one that just just left us. Happy New Year by the way!!! 2010-2019...

Modern designers designing cars dont seem to care about the rear as much as the old days. But maybe, I found the best example of a rear end that may have a "cove"? I know its one of the nicest rear ends by today's standards so all is not lost with this post if not a cove. Aston Martin Vanquish Zagato

Challengers of the early 1970s. Platform mate 'Cuda of the same years Pontiac GTO Mustang

About those Rivieras...the comparison of the interiors of the first generation 1963-1964 and the last generation 1995-1999. Its kinda cool that the last gen really emulated the look of the 1st generation. Its kinda cool that that the last generation book-ended the end of the Riviera by imitating the 1st gen interior. It kinda ended up that way. That would be a bummer though that Buick never again gave us a Riviera. Another bummer would be: Its a damned shame that even though the last gen imitated the 1st gen's interior, its a huge shame that Buick gave us a very cheap plasticky interior for it... The original is a zillion times more luxurious... What is Buick? One look at the original and you immediately understand what is Buick. One look at the 1995 interior and you understand why Buick is where its at in the market place in 2019...

Do Corvettes qualify? Maybe the concave is not concave enough and its not flanked by enough closure at the sides?

Several years, Cougar had a "cove" rear, but I not only do I prefer the 1969 version, but I think the 1969 rear exemplifies it the best. 1961 Continental Balthy, you already posted a version of it, but I want to post it again as a Galaxie 500 XL 1963 Impala SS.

These are my personal best cars of the last decade. "Best" in my case means different things. It may mean forever game changing in the car world or it may mean the bestest of the bestest in the quest for speed or it may mean simply the best and better than all the rest or it may mean what I like the best. 1. Tesla Model S. It truly changed the way the world views electric cars and it very well be the one and only electric car that ever existed in the history of EVs that all EVs are judged by and produced and manufactured and sold as. The absolute standard for EV cars going forward into the future and the only EV car ever that single handedly made the ICE world change to ITS standard. 2. Dodge Challenger Hellcat. For me, the bestest of the bestest of all muscle cars ever to grace our streets. The end all, be all of the muscle cars. It made the modern horsepower wars fun like it was back in the good 'ole days (so Ive heard as I wasnt alive during that time). It made exotic supercars cars question themselves and the ONLY ICE car that keeps rabid EV and Tesla fanbois sleepless at night. The Hellcat can keep up and actually surpass the "ludicrously" crazy fast acceleration that Teslas are known for and the Hellcats (Demon) can do that non-stop with trick A/C cooling but that poor Tesla goes into limp mode and Viagara cant help it. When driving a Hellcat, Viagara is not needed as that V8 sound is seduction times a trillion. 3. Chevrolet SS The closest an American car got to have the feels of the coveted BMW sport sedan persona. And not only did it achieve it, it out-BMWed it in this modern era as BMW themselves have lost it. Although Cadillac also achieved this, I am more of a blue collar guy than a snooty 1%er. Its too bad that Oldsmobile wasnt around to get a version of this as Olds would be more me than Chevy, however, the interior of the SS is more akin to a REAL Oldsmobile interior than it is to Chevys, so there is that. And, more importantly...its still a muscle car. A very usably 4 door sedan muscle car. It retains that big cubed, high HP and high torque at low RPMs that muscle car V8s are known for under the hood. 4. Ford F-150 Raptor Surprisingly, Ive started changing my mind with fullsized pick-up trucks. Not that I hated them, but I was more of a car guy. I dont like CUVs,, but fullsized BOF SUVs or the Jeeps like Wrangler and Grand Cherokee is at my limits. But those fullsized pick-up trucks. They rock when I start to look at them without my biased car eyes. Ive ALWAYS loved the muscle trucks and I always loved Big Foot. So...with Big Foot in mind, the Raptor would be my best 2010-2019 vehicle. Seeing that this last decade, no real muscle truck existed, but Ford did introduce a beast of an offroader fullsized pick-up WITH muscle car power under the hood. OK...the last gen got a turbo V6, but...its got the torque and HP numbers to make muscle cars shake in fear in their shoes tires. Dont forget though...GM's midsized muscle trucks of the early 1990s were turbo V6s too... 5. Ferrari 812 Superfast It took me a loooong time to decide upon this one. I wanted a Corvette. Or maybe the last Viper ever. But then I realized. The 812 Supefast IS a Corvette AND a Viper all in one while retaining its Ferrari greatness. 6.5 liters. 396 or so cubic inches of 12 cylinder, 789 naturally aspirated HP madness. What it lacks in torque, "only" 553 ft/lbs, it gains in outstanding acceleration runs, in crazy, muscle car like prowess in ride as its a GT car and not a track car which translates to what I love about muscle cars. In other words, Ferrari created, IN MY EYES, an Italian version of a 1969 aluminum block 427 Corvette ZL-1, a 1996 Viper GTS coupe, with the finest Ferrari Italian leather in the interior with their latest and greatest V12. The Viper is not with us anymore, the Corvette has gone down the European road of mid-engined , RWD engineering but...Ferrari has EMBRACED the "no replacement for displacement" muscle car mantra and upped its V12 to 396 cubic inches and retained the awesome long hood,/short deck, front engine/rear wheel drive layout.