oldshurst442

I saw that episode too. That is why I downvoted Blu... When folk have predisposed ideas in their heads and spew #fakenews...

*yawn*

Ill take this far. Uncertain future? Its safe to say that you are not a Native American. Even if you were, your ancestors did have to travel to get to North America anyway. But, I think that your ancestors came from Merry Ole England. They had to travel the Atlantic Ocean back when they thought the world was flat. It was proven otherwise by some chap named Christopher Columbo. Be as it may, there must have been some folk that doubted that and disputed that fact vehemently. Yet, for whatever reason, your ancestors decided to leave Merry Ole England, Or Ireland, or Scotland, because their future on that God forsaken island was...uncertain...to come to a new place to start fresh and take a chance on a perhaps better uncertain future. In America, like I said, their future was also uncertain. If I know my American History (which New France history coincides with American History...and I do live in Quebec and we actually do learn about American History do to the fact that the French fought Les Anglais...) and between the French and their Native American Indigenous peoples alliance versus YOUR British roots and their Native American Indigenous peoples alliances...well, all of our futures were uncertain. Famine, wars, cold winters... And if all that is still not enough, when the 13 colonies were established and New France was kept at bay, at the Natives tamed, that STILL was not enough, your ancestors decided to complicate their future slightly more and create more uncertainty by deciding to declare independence from Merry Ole England. And STILL that wasnt enough as some of your countrymen decided to trot further west into the wild where the Natives seemed to be more savage and the weather even more savage-ier. Uncertain future you say? To put it mildly...YES!!! And then as a young nation, you went all out on a new technology called the railway train... You know Blu, its fun talking to you...but if you havent noticed...if YOUR ancestors were truly afraid of an uncertain future, like you seem to be, then your ancestors would have never left that rainy, foggy island. If your ancestors were truly afraid to embrace new technologies, they would have never learned about what MY ancestors brought to the table... and perfect it and utilize it to colonize half the planet with it and rule the world with it later on, and then start a new nation with it and then police the whole world with it... all with uncertain futures attached it...to the history of...well human kind really... Here is another angle... Man always dreamed about flying...and ALWAYS failed trying. A couple of thousand of years later after this story was told... And the flight of that bird...well, it was shorter than the length of a Boeing 747. Even though flight failed a million times before 1903 and thousands of times after 1903... Because after that disaster, the future of flight was...uncertain... We still kept at it...and if we stopped and just held unto the same ole same ole safety zones...well... That would have never have happened... Phoque man...let it go, bro!!!

Point proven on my side. Adapting is a very human trait. Humans ALWAYS adapt to their environment. THAT is why humans have become the apex creature it has become. Hell, humans have this crazy idea of colonizing Mars and beyond. EVs with a 40% range loss because of cold is a mere nuisance in the grand scheme of things. Bratt Pitt said it best. (For 40% range loss at the shortest level and if you like...for the grand scheme of things...Mars colonization, moving from England to the new world, and then leaving the East to go West and getting killed by the savages and tornados we may encounter, changing from ICE to EVs, going from Coke to diet Coke to Coke Zero back to Coke) You know, my partner owns a Model S. In the 4 years he has owned it, he NEVER once complained about range loss...he has mentioned it to me, but never complained about it. And, it was NEVER an issue with him either. Keep in mind that I DO live in Montreal and not in warm Los Angeles where this may or may not be a thing... This whole thing about cold weather range loss that just popped up everywhere the last month is probably hate propaganda from anybody that has an invested interest in oil and gasoline... I repeat. The low end Model 3 has a range of 220 miles. The story was just entertainment value. 50% of 220 is 110. Same as my story line. Yes it had a purpose. Yes I did the 220 thing on purpose to prove a point. 110 mile range. Each and every day when someone starts their day. In the morning. At an extreme level of trying to prove a point. If your employer has a charge system set-up for their employees to charge up...moot point. that would be another 110 mile range. One could stop and shop and joy ride. Even if the commute to work IS 60 miles. Like 3.3 million Americans do everyday. The average commute is 16 miles. Common man! Theoretically, one could charge his 220 mile range, after losses 110 mile range EV after the 2nd day with out any panic... Even if the battery loss is compounded... 110 becomes 60, which becomes 30. This is getting a little tiring, talking about non-existent range anxiety. This is not an issue anymore. Move on from it!

310 miles for a Model 3. You start your day at 310, because you plugged it in the night before. 310 miles minus the 40% drop gives you? Hell, Ill go with 220 miles starting your day because you left work at 5:00. Called your wife saying that your boss needs you to stay because you need to file files that havent been filed for 5 years. Went to happy hour instead, saw a buxom blonde. You bought her a wine spritzer. From a wine spritzer it became a Long Island Iced Tea. From there it became mutual belly shots and then...well, you went home at 3:00 in the morning and your wife was none the wiser. You plugged it your Model 3, but 7:00 AM came fast (and so did you coincidentally) and your Model 3 only has got 220 mile range. We will reduce that range by not the 40% they say, but by a whopping 50%. So now you got 110 miles top go to your work that is 40 miles , 50....hell 60 miles away. You go to work every phoquing day 60 miles away from where you live. 60 motherphoquing miles. SHYTE! 60 goddamned miles. You got enough to get there, but how do you get back home? You could ask that buxom blonde from the night before to pick you up and drive you back home. You could entice her by asking her for a quickie in the backseat of her soccer mom SUV that is gasoline powered... Anyway...back to the 60 mile problem...because now you only have a 50 mile range and you got to travel 60 miles... 1. Maybe your employer has installed charger stations? 2. What the phoque are you complaining about the 40-50% ? You are travelling 60 miles to work everyday. I think you got a bigger problem than 40% range loss because of cold weather in your EV, find yourself travelling and losing time doing it every phoquing day... If that scenario was real...120 miles to go to work every day will bankrupt you in gasoline if you had a joe schmo job and you drove even a V6 automobile let alone a V8. Also, the wear and tear on that V6. 4 cylinder you say? WEAR AND TEAR I SAY. So...as you see, even in extreme scenarios, 40% is a lot of range loss. But man!!! YOU ALWAYS START THE PHOQUING DAY WITH A "FULL TANK OF GAS" SINCE YOU COULD AND MOSTLY LIKELY YOU DO PLUG IN YOUR CAR EVERYDAY AFTER COMING HOME... ON A 1st GENERATION LEAF THAT HAD 30 MILE RANGE, YOU MAY HAVE A BIIIIIG PROBLEM, YES! BUT ON ANY TESLA, CHEVROLET BOLT, EVEN THIS GENERATION NISSAN LEAF, AN AVERAGE COMMUTE FOR THE AVERAGE AMERICAN TO GO TO AND FROM WORK IS ABOUT 16 MILES. THERE ARE SOME THAT TRAVEL 50 MILES,YES, BUT A 40% RANGE LOSS IS MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING. EV HATERZ FIND THE JOY, BUT EV OWNERS JUST ADAPT AND THEY MAKE SURE THEY PLUG IN AND IN THE MORNING, A FULL TANK OF GAS AWAITS THEM... BATTERIES ARE GETTING BETTER. BETTER INSULATED TOO...SO THIS WILL EVENTUALLY BECOME A MOOT POINT TOO!!! https://itstillruns.com/far-americans-drive-work-average-7446397.html But even with my very extreme examples, those 3.3 million Americans could STILL get home with juice to spare...

Yeah...they should do a BEV Blazer, like yesterday. This is where I do NOT understand the product planners. We saw a couple of years ago how many people forked over deposit monies for the Tesla Model 3 without ever seeing the car and how it looks on the inside and the outside. The crossover trend has been on the rise since the mid-1990s. Like...no-one at GM (or any other company for that matter) could marry the two together? Is it THAT hard to come up with a BEV that meets the masses expectations? CUVs sell. EVs DO sell. Yes its only Tesla that has a run-a-way success rate. But man...dont CEOs see what I, and many other folk like you guys see that the Nissan Leaf just plain SUCKS visually. The BOLT SUCKS visually. The Leaf and the Bolt are NOT the right package. The Model 3 is at the most minimum of car length and size. No one at these companies that get paid quite well, I might add, they cant figure that out? The Model X may not sell quite as high as the Model S...but it does sell. This is where I do NOT buy the argument that only Tesla EVs have the capacity to sell. 1. The Model S and Model 3 sell in a CUV/SUV dominated world. 2. They are attractive, normal looking cars 3. They are NOT that affordable yet swathes of people are flocking to them 4. Both the Model 3 and Model S are quite capable in cargo hauling duties and are quite comfortable in daily driving their owners and their families from point A to point B without being CUVs. 5. If Chevrolet has a tough time selling sedans, but they do not have a tough time selling Equinoxes, maybe a cool factor BEV for them CAN be a BEV midsized, sporty CUV...like the Blazer... If you cant beat Tesla and their Model 3 because Chevy does not have a BMWesque little sedan to do battle head on with the Model 3, because the Bolt and the Model 3 are THAT different from one another, then Chevrolet could STILL play in that game by offering something COMPLETELY different yet just as cool as the Model 3 yet sticking it to Tesla by making a BEV Blazer and giving the fight to the Model X... Undercutting the Model X in price. The Blazer as is, is a SEXIER SUV than the Model X (in all honestly, the Model X is ugly AF!!!) Its easy as that... There is NO risk. CUVs sell. They sell a lot. There IS a market for EVs. GM and Chevy are NOT tapping into the right segment. Chevy has ITS strengths and they COULD do CUVs BETTER than Tesla. I said that the Model 3 is eons ahead of the Bolt. Well, a BEV Blazer could be eons ahead of the Model X. Sure the Model X has cool rear doors. Make a Blazer a more practical and capable BEV CUV and Chevy might be able to peddle at least 200 000 BEV Blazers...at least... You cannot tell me America is not ready for EVs when Tesla sells a ton. You cannot use the Bolt and Leaf as proof because the Leaf and Bolt are crap as compared to the Model 3. You cannot use the iPace as Jaguar does NOT have the charging network that Tesla has. The Jag asks Model S and Model X prices but Jag does NOT have the charging network behind it. You cannot use the Leaf and Bolt as "affordable" BEVs when in actual fact, they are about the same price as the Model 3...Tesla has a charging network behind it. The other EVs are based on same model cars that are considerably more expensive than their ICE model counterparts. The Volt 2nd gen included over the Cruze but it still did well enough. A BEV Blazer, although GM does not have the charging network of Telsa, will have a huuuuge price advantage OVER the Model X. Maybe EV folk will overlook that. Its not as if the Blazer comes cheap either. But a 60 000 BEV Blazer, (what?) I think the ICE Blazer is 50 000, still undercuts the Model X considerably at 60 thousand... They wont make money off a BEV Blazer? Well...didnt GM just say they will go full out on EVs anyway...so moot point!!!

bland exterior. Interior looks to be a great place to spend daily in. Bottom line: Id rather the Camry over this.

Yup. For me, its not about the price. Well, its not JUST the price tag, but how small it really is. I get that tech is expensive and the early adopters have to foot the bill for new tech, and usually Im NOT the first early adopters, but somewhere between, the second wave of early adopters to just before half of the population accepts the new tech. Its just that the Bolt is a sub-compact. I dont do sub-compact cars. And Im guessing many people are like me in that they too, dont do sub-compacts. This is where General Motors really needs a BEV slightly BIGGER than the Cruze/Volt. It could be slightly smaller than the Malibu, but ideally, for the masses for GM to really sell 200 000-400 000 BEVs per year, like Tesla's Model 3, is really doing a Chevy Trax, but more so an Equinox sized CUV BEV. If they truly are serious, which I think NOW they are, but when they did the Bolt and released the Bolt for sale, I think they just wanted to be the first to market. (with an "affordable" BEV to beat the Model 3.) But I feel that was a piss poor effort, in hindsight. It is NO secret now as it was NO secret then: 1. sub-compact hatchbacks do NOT sell well in the North American market. Like ever. 2. compact, but more mid-sized CUVs are the hot ticket items 5 years ago and even more so today. But the trends were showing themselves then. Piss poor attempt to capture the market with piss poor decisions or the product (the packaging) and piss poor marketing. Being the first to market, while it works if you got the perfect product, is NOT a good marketing strategy...and the Bolt is NOT the perfect product in its class. The Telsa Model 3 wipes the floor with it. And THAT is the reality. The Bolt is a very good BEV. The Model 3 is eons ahead of it. And then we have Tesla's (super)charging network. I will keep on stressing that part as Tesla's image is not only the cool factor with its cars, and the crazy, zany Musk pet projects like the loop tube and the space rocket thing, but Tesla's image is strong with the EV folk with their charging network.

Los Angeles.... I was waaaaaay off. LOL Dont know Everlast as a soloist either. Its funny we are mentioning House of Pain and West Coast hip hop and hooligans from a ghetto somewhere as I was JUST JUST listening to Straight Outta Compton. I saw the movie recently, like last week I think, or was it the week before....anyway, and I always had that song stuck in my head all this time while resisting the urge to play it on youtube. Well, the 5 seconds that I listened to The Disturbed Shout cover, I went all out ghetto hip hop. And while House of Pain was not part of the playlist, other bling bling and gangsta rap was. I like some rap. Not all. Some bling bling rap like Biggie Smalls is kinda funny to me. Although I dont like the lyrics to Straight Outta Compton, I do realize and respect why its there...but I like the "melodies" and the beats to these. Kinda fun to listen too once in a while. Back to February car spotting. I got nothing interesting other than the Pontiac G8 for today. I did see a cleanish Buick Park Avenue last week. It was an Ultra. With the portholes on the side telling me it was a 2003, 2004 model?

Yeah...a bunch of white boys...Irish? From Bahsten? Or was it New York? trying to be be all ghetto. It was all the rage back then... I heard that song for the first time while I WAS in New York for the first time... I believe my friends and I went to the Palladium dance club. I liked the song back then. Dont hate me! Not so much today though.

RIP

Black Pontiac G8. Couldnt tell if V8 or V6. Despite all the ice, literally ice covered trees, roads, cars , the G8 was super clean. Garage queen perhaps. But why was she out and about today? I dunno, but Im sure glad I got to have a glimpse of her.

I LOVE The Disturbed covers they do! The dude's voice is amazing. Sounds of Silence and Land of Confusion are masterpieces way beyond the originals and the originals are masterpieces in themselves. I never knew they made a cover of Tears for Fears' Shout. So...I said to myself...why not?! Surreal seems to like it, I kinda like The Disturbed...it wont hurt to listen to it." But I got to tell you, as soon as I heard the first "shout", something triggered in my brain. Could it be mild spasms? Then the second "shout" came along...and my brain, hands and fingers coundnt react fast enough to end it!!! Anger and frustration and hatred flooded my brain waves. Im laughing about it now. But the dark thoughts were real. Im not kidding you. Something about the song just makes me go bonkers. LOL. And the strangest thing is, as unique and distinctive as David Drainman's voice is and he certainly does NOT sound ANYTHING like Tears for Fear...I IMMEDIATELY thought...Tears for Fears. I may need to see a psychiatrist because this level of animosity towards anything aint normal....

There is the Cadillac CTS-V for that ballsy nature you folk crave for. The Grand National was a Regal, but not a GS. It was a GN. (Grand National) The top dog was a GNX. (X as in experimental as in Grand National experimental) And those were muscle cars. The fullsized GSs of the 1960s were touring cars with gobs of torque. One could say fullsized muscle cars. The Skylark's GS was a true midsizer muscle car. None of those Buicks that I mentioned were sport sedans. Therefore, as a REGAL, a GS Regal, the lineage did really start with the W-Body... And THIS iteration is the best one yet. We WANT to dream that a Riviera GS was a sports sedan. But it was a luxo-barge personal coupe. We want to dream that 1960s and 1970s Century and Wildcat GSs were sports sedans, but they were land-yachts. We have fooled ourselves into believing something that does not exist. A Regal GS is exactly what I posted...ANY GS for that matter are just cars that drive comfortably over long hauls...and GM NEVER hinted other wise with this new Regal. We concocted a tale in our heads. Germany sourced? Buick NEVER advertised that in the open. Never hinted it had German sport sedan Nurburgring lap times as its strengths. THAT kind of thing was openly sold for the V Series Cadillacs. Im just defending this new Regal's honour. I feel like someone has to do it. I think this new Regal GS is unfairly judged. I try my best to do good for it.

Thank-you for enduring me when I got off the rails. Thank-you for creating interesting reads about the automobile. I got most of the new car information through your research and writing. I appreciated you and this site for keeping me informed. Good luck in your new endeavors.

I feel for you as a fellow (former) GM lifer. (I say former because I put my money where my mouth is and my last few car purchases were NOT GM cars, so if I was honest about this whole GM lifer thing, I cant call myself a GM lifer since I havent bought any GM cars in a while...) But...to compare market share from the 1940s-1970s to today's world is not a very good metric on how good GM, or in this case, a Regal GS is... And this is where my ranting is directed to all who wanna diss on the new Regal GS... I posted something similar a couple of pages ago, but all of you just prefer to go an a pissing rant about the GS WITH NO MERITS...and ignore me. Well...I aint going away!!! You all want a GS...a REAL GS whatever the phoque that means?! THIS was the last "REAL" AMERICAN Regal GS Yes...GS. THAT is what a GS has stood for since the late 1980s early 1990s. Beccause the last GS before that one was A W-Body front driver... This new one is a million times better in EVERY way. No. No it does NOT have 400 horsepower with 400 ft/pounds of torque. But Ill tell you what else it doesnt have. No cheap interiors of the W-Body kind. Could be better, but really not that bad. No squeaky interior. No badge engineered siblings No torque steer No transmission failures due to the transmission not being able to sustain multiple jack rabbit starts. It does not have 240 horsepower. It does have 310 horsepower. It does have 2 ft/pounds of torque albeit higher on the RPMs... Ya 'll bitchin' about an old 3.6 liter V6 that GM uses it on everything yet the last real Regal GS had an even OLDER design (from the 1960s...)and GM put THAT one in everything too...actually, that ole 3.8 was used in MORE models than the 3.6 inluding on ugly dustbuster minivans. It was stated that the new Regal GS is a great touring car. It aint a sport sedan. Does it have to be a sport sedan? It aint the "GS" nomenclature that states it to be a sport sedan/coupe because the W-Body is anything BUT... I know...I had a 2005 Impala SS. 2005. Not a 1997. GM dragged THAT cat until 2006. And in 2006, that Impala SS was EXACTLY how that 1997-2004 Buick Regal GS was. The Impala SS just took over the Regal GS. This Regal GS is miles ahead of what old GM was pumping out. Yet, we GM lifers reminisce about the good ole days? The W-body Regal? Buick of the 1990s/2000s/2010s are NOT Audi competitors. GM/Buick NEVER intended Buick nor ever marketed Buick as such. Pontiac tried to be a BMW competitor towards the end. Oldsmobile WAS a foreign car fighter towards the end. Buick remained Buick in North America. And what is that? THE GREAT AMERICAN ROAD BELONGS TO BUICK Floaty ride on endless stretches of STRAIGHT HIGHWAYS!!! The new Regal GS is a fantastic touring car. THIS IS THE BUICK SEDAN FOR THE GREAT AMERICAN ROAD!!! What possesses you folk to think otherwise is beyond me!!!

But...I think this dissing of the Buick Regal (GS or not) is taken too far. No...it aint a KIA Stinger as in its not a RWD vehicle. Yes, it could have used the XTS' twin turbo V6 and a tweaking of that torque vectoring AWD system with a more aggressive transmission tune along with a more sporty suspension set-up. 2 things wrong with that approach...for Buick. 1. Buick has never been a sport sedan brand. It had...2 muscle cars in its history. Just 2. The A-Body from the early1960s was luke warm at best. In 1970 though, it became something worth talking about. Then the muscle cars from Buick ceased to exist. Until the Grand National arrived in the 1980s. That muscle car lasted even shorter of a time than the original GS of the 1st generation A Body to the 2nd generation. The rest of the hot Buicks were indeed, luxury touring cars. Personal luxury luxo-barge coupes. 2. The XTS TTV6 probably does sell well, but the other RWD V Series sport sedan Cadillacs dont. Even if Buick offered a more sport sedan Regal GS...few takers would be the result. Guaranteed. We shouldnt be that harsh on the Regal. We should just look at the positives of what it is rather than look at the negatives of what it is not and what it could be. It could have been a very capable vehicle that could have done battle with Audi's offerings, even if the interior falls short. But it aint an Audi competitor. Not it terms of price point. Not in terms of niche. Not in terms of image. Not in terms of anything. Buick just needs to be Buick. Nothing more. What is that? Well, I think the Regal GS is in the perfect direction it needs to be. Buick should "GS" their CUVs (with better interiors) JUST like the Regal is and all will be well for Buick. The 2018 Buick Regal GS is probably the best all around sporty and luxury Buick since the 1980s... Remember, the Grand National and the GNX were not that luxurious...nor did they handle all that good They were not bad handlers as far as GM cars of that era went, but pitiful really as compared to...lets say...BMW of that same era...and you dont know how much I hated saying that just now...I gotta wash my mouth off with soap... But yet, we wanna give it flack for whatever reason...

Hey...give me some of that credit too. Ive had run ins with them too. But, the other guy that got banned, Casa had probably more heated run ins than you and I together with him. But yeah...not a Ford guy you are. Not a fanboi of any brand Id say.

And I would agree with this 100%!!! I would own a Hellcat/Red Eye first. Or a Scat Pack. A Mustang GT, any engined convertible, GT350 in second place and Id skip the Camaro entirely. Maybe Id do a Trans Am 455 SD from Trans Am Depot in 3rd place instead of an outright Camaro.

That's in Montreal!!!

Montreal is a beautiful city. Not more than any other city on this planet. But Montreal is unique. It has English and French architecture. Its got both old world European flair with modern American panache. Cuisine? Montreal always had world quality restaurants. Las Vegas, Boston, Houston are some North American cities that have equalled and perhaps surpassed Montreal in that area..but...Montreal, along with NYC still remain surprisingly relevant. What makes Montreal (and especially NYC) that great in all these areas? Montreal (and NYC) are trully real cosmopolitan cities. For a couple of centuries now. Food is where this shows. Walk the streets of Montreal in the summer and then you get to see how cosmopolitan Montreal really is. its just not the architecture that is stunning, just how NYC stuns you with its high rises....its how the people interact with each other. All the colours of the ethnics...how each is represented in the city. Its great!

Yes! Yes and YES!!!

Maybe you should take a visit up here and see for yourself. You know, Montreal is not Lancaster... in that the Province of Quebec with its Crown Corporation Hydro-Quebec actually produces a good chunk of the world's hydro-electricity. At a fairly cheap price for us Quebeckers to consume... Its too bad you dont believe. Please, come take a visit. Ill take you out on a date to entice you. We'll catch a Habs hockey game while we're at it. The Penguins or Flyers? You choose.

? (I care a little less for the manual transmission part. But the rest of what you love about it, I love also) (Ill just add the actual 'retro-reminiscent' adolescent names that the various Challenger comes in along with the silly adolescent logos. Hellcat, Demon, Red Eye, Scat Pack, R/T... Just like Superbee and The Judge and Trans Am and of course Demon and Roadrunner with the silly cartoon character graphics) (Let us not forget the wide array of awesome, eye catching exterior colours with just as an interesting interior too.)

Roger Goodell or Gary Bettman? Who gets the loudest, longest boos between them? LOL