XP715

Sounds like the two retarded lowlifes from here in ASSachusetts that "dug up" a box of old money from the 1800's- early 1900's and then went all over television and newspapers bragging about their great find. Turns out later that by "dug up," they really meant "stole out of an elderly man's attic when we were putting a roof on his house." Their fifteen minutes landed them in jail.

"King was a ward of the court and living at a shelter for abused, neglected and emotionally troubled children at the time of the shooting." There's your answer. His family who probably could give a f@#k less about him otherwise has suddenly come out of the woodwork because they're viewing their son's death as a meal ticket and knows the school department has way deeper pockets than whoever actually killed him.

Neutral safety switch?

What kind of high school has a 26 year reunion? That's sort of an odd number.

I would also make a proper two-door panel truck of my generation of Suburban ('73-'91), as well as a two-door barn door K5 Blazer from this generation.

I'd make an Eldorado like mine that pushed instead of pulled. I would also take a last-gen Riviera like I used to have, black on black, and retrofit it with Grand National engine and drivetrain (also pushing instead of pulling).

All of my cars in question have lived similar lives; it seems to be hit or miss on rear window leakage, but the side windows seal every time. My '67 Eldorado and '71 Coupe DeVille were absolutely water-tight through all windows, but my '70 Sedan DeVille, '71 Sedan DeVille, and '67 Eldorado parts car have all leaked through the rear window, but still never any side leakage.

Wow, what a nice little car! There's not a thing wrong in the entire world with a Model A rumble seat roadster, especially not at the price you paid! Best of luck with it!

No worries. Don't rush perfection because it will end up being less. Take care of business first. One would think that with the schedule you keep and the money you're making doing so, you may have enough saved at some point to retire a few years early, and end up having MORE goof-off time in the long run.

Every hardtop I've ever owned (5 so far) has never ever EVER leaked from the weatherstripping between the front and back windows, but I think three out of the five have leaked through the rear window, which is incredibly common for GM's from the 60's and 70's; it's the reason they all get water in the trunks and get that trademark GM rear window rot at the bottom corners as they age. Seems to me like they over-compensated for potential leaks between the side windows and put garbage seals in the back.

GM designates all of their experimental/prototype cars as XP-___. The XP-715 is the original Buick Riviera concept car: I owned a 1996 Buick Riviera when I joined, and have long loved most all incarnations of the car as they are most often, in my opinion, the perfect blend of muscle and substance and style. I'd still like to cross one of every year before 1977 off my list before I die, as well as a nice example of a '79-'85 model as they bring back fond memories from when I was a kid. I'm thinking a convertible version would be nice.

If I could find a deal like that around here it would be in my driveway already. I love the Colonnade-era wagons and they absolutely DO NOT EXIST in my neck of the woods. They were all derbied years ago or rotted up to the door handles and junked. I've seen exactly one of this style wagon in person, a '77ish Cutlass, about four years ago, and it was beat to death. That's it. I would kill to have that wagon! If anybody derbies that wagon I will fly to Arkansas and punch them in the face personally.

1950's-1990's for me.

-I know you weren't trying to convince me; I just don't see one good thing in it at all. Read again what I said about Howard Darrin's name being attached to it meaning literally everything for the car; I absolutely believe every word of it. Like, I feel like there are so many wannabe car snobs and "sophisticates" out there that that feel like they're required to sing its praises without really meaning it because of whose name is on it. As if the Hibbard & Darrin and Darrin of Hollywood days somehow afford him a free pass on this piece of junk. It's like, just admit it: the old man got a little sloppy as time went on. Like all of the people who say they like British and Italian cars but couldn't give you a self-generated reason why and instead talk in whatever generalizations and cliches they've been reading in Motor Trend for the last twenty years. I wonder how many people really truly genuinely like the car. I bet not many. -What I know about the Hudson Jet lineup I could write on a business card. But if you're telling me that a Twin-H Power 202 is like a "High Output" 305, I'd still rock it all day long over the Henry J's powerplant which might as well be an Iron Duke. -I agree with you that the Italia was a neat-looking car; I only think it's "goofy" when you put it up against a "conventional" 1953 whatever.

-About the man's immigrant status, I stand corrected. I had read news reports earlier that had said that he was an illegal immigrant. The subsequent postings since my last post prompted me to dig further and, yes, he appears to have immigrated legally. -When I said close the borders immediately, I never once said or implied forever. However, I certainly don't think it would cause this country any harm, or be an affront to its Americanness (Is that even a word? It is now!) to close them long enough to "take stock" of exactly who is here and deal with them accordingly (read: identify and deport the illegals), and to come up with a system that keeps the illegals out before re-opening them. And I am completely in agreement with you about imposing huge penalties for those that give them any sort of help whatsoever.

-Point taken on your assessment of the convertible sedan, but I still give props to Kaiser for being the ONLY American automobile manufacturer to offer one after the Second World War until Lincoln came out with one in 1961. As for the center posts, I knew that they were "fixed," but didn't realize that they were FIXED. In other words, I thought they were removable like the center posts of some pre-war convertible sedans, or maybe like the window frames of a pre-war body style known as a "four season" or "all-weather" roadster. I would imagine, then, that the sales literature and all photographs show the windows in the up position because that's what would be necessary at any type of speed to keep them from flopping back and forth and bending/breaking in the wind. The front and rear windows probably ride into a channel on this center piece of glass and the interlocking components hold each other rigid. Kinda sucks, but doesn't completely kill it for me (not that the car is even in my top 500, but still). -Not really feeling the Vagabond/Traveler so much. It's the first American hatchback. Hatchbacks are trash. I can't even buy a new Suburban with barn doors anymore because this country's so goddamn fixated on hatchbacks. So if you like them, then more for you! I wouldn't be caught dead in one. -I stick by my assessment of the Kaiser Darrin. It's garbage and that's all there is to it. Your Hudson Italia, as goofy as it may look, is still a hundred times better-looking and a million times better mechanically than a Kaiser Darrin could ever dream of being; I dunno how you could even compare the two. I bet a lot more than 25 would have sold if Hudson didn't come out with them when they were already bankrupt (they were already in talks to merge with Nash for 1954). So what if the Italia was built on the Jet chassis? The Jet might as well be a Cadillac compared to a Henry J. All of the Jets came with a very formidable 202 inline six; you could even get Twin-H Power on a Jet if you wanted. It was no Hornet, but it also wasn't even a tenth of the $h!box a Henry J was. The only Kaiser Darrins that ever saw a decent powerplant and mechanicals, as I mentioned before, were the ones that Howard Darrin bought and had retrofitted himself to save face after he realized he put his name on complete and utter crap. Add in the car's butt-ugly design; that stupid little grille, those retarded bulbous taillights, the useless sliding doors that anybody older than seven would have trouble fitting through, and the faggy little half-top with the queer miniature landau bars, and you've got yourself one incredible piece of $h!. I don't think I could ever be convinced otherwise. -Agreed that the '53 facelift made the cars look a million times better, but they were still nothing to write home about. There's so much better out there as far as independents go (obviously YOU know this; that's a general statement).

Really? Stormfront.org? So now we're all a bunch of chinless inbred skinheads? So you can make the generalization that anybody who thinks that the guy should what he deserves for BUTCHERING AND BEHEADDING A TWENTY TWO YEAR-OLD KID WHILE HE SLEPT are assholes and rednecks and racists, but the rest of us are all nobody to be passing judgement on anybody? Are you for real? Who the f@#k do you think YOU are?! Is this guy reading a different thread than the rest of us? Because I don't see any Neo-Nazi white supremacist undertones (nor do I think that anybody else does), but rather an outcry for things like personal accountability and a law enforcement and court system with the balls to cut through the bull$h! and tell the "murderers are people too" pussies to go f@#k themselves and start bringing people to justice. And in the larger scheme of things, an outcry for the complete revamping of whatever piss-poor system allows those from outside the borders of a nation to enter into it ILLEGALLY (since after all, this is the ENTIRE ISSUE we have with immigration: the ILLEGALS), assmiliate themselves into society, and then commit crimes with little to no recourse and have the full range of due process that a naturalized citizen would. I could give a f@#k less what color, race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation any person is and what benefits of a country they receive as long as they have a documented, LEGAL right to do so. Ask any immigrant of any nationality in the United States or Canada who gained their citizenship through legal means how they feel about ILLEGAL (you do understand what ILLEGAL means, right?) immigration and I'll guarantee you it burns their asses just as it does any natural-born citizen that's paying attention, because they remember all the hoops they had to jump through to do it the right way. If the system worked at all, this guy would have been cracked over the head with a billy club the second he set foot on Canadian shores ILLEGALLY and shipped back to his home port for his own country to deal with him, and an innocent young man would have woken up from his nap, pulled his headphones out of his ears, and walked off the bus. But this system failed him, a legal citizen. And what ways of seeking fair treatment can HE take advantage of from inside his little drawer at the county coroner's office?

If anybody wants to take a two-door Granada and gut it for a drag car body, that's fine with me. However, if anybody wants to restore a Granada or Fairmont or whatever else they called those piles of $h!, they need to have their heads examined.

Is it a common "shared" food (chips, cookies, etc.) or presented in such a way that would lead others to believe it is free for the taking (clear Tupperware, clear plastic bag, perhaps a large quantity), or is it stuff like sandwiches and salads being taken out of personal lunch bags or coolers or brown bags with people's names on it?

My father's daily driver in the summertime, which I spent a large amount of my childhood riding in, was a 1952 Chevrolet half-ton pickup: an all-steel truck with an all-steel interior that had not one ounce of padding inside it except the seat, flat non-tempered glass, a non-collapsible steering column, no seatbelts, and even a non-vented fuel tank INSIDE THE CAB right behind the seat. The doors didn't automatically lock when it was put into gear, and it didn't have any sensors in the rear bumper to tell us when we were too close to something. It also had four-wheel drum brakes, no power steering, no crumple zones, no traction control, no airbags, no daytime running lights, no ABS, no AWD, and no other safety features that make people's vaginas hurt if they're not present in a new vehicle. And guess what: I lived to tell about it! Through some incredible twist of fate, I was able to escape death each and every time my father so irresponsibly and negligently transported me in that awful deathtrap of a truck! I must be the only one! Oh wait, no I'm not. People drove "unsafe" vehicles for the first eighty or ninety years they existed, and it would appear as though there are plenty of them left to tell the tale. If anything, I would argue that modern vehicles are as unsafe as older ones, just in different ways: new vehicles have all but removed the human element from driving, meaning people are being conditioned to not pay attention to the way their car behaves, or even to their surroundings. People are driving off the roads and wondering why their goddamn navigation systems didn't tell them to turn! One would think that with more refined and sophisticated equipment, people would be better drivers than ever, but it seems to be moving in the completely opposite direction. I can't wait until one of those self-parking Lexuses (Lexii?) parks itself on the sidewalk on top of somebody's child so maybe THEN people will realize that they should stop conveniencing themselves into obsolescence and ask for a REAL car that combines REAL safety with REAL control and we can finally set aside all the unnecessary gimmicky bull$h!. Okay...... back on topic: GM, please please PLEASE give us the OPTION of making choice models that are geared specifically towards enthusiasts like the Camaro a hardtop. We're not idiots and we understand that we will never see pillarless versions of any of your mass consumption products, but seriously, you need to stop compromising on what was otherwise perfection.

Absolutely! Oldsmobiles are like cockroaches around here, and that's fine by me (even the wrong wheel drive ones)! There's even a dealership 25 miles away that still proudly displays its circa late 1970's Oldsmobile sign even though it hasn't sold a new one in close to two decades!

Then how come companies like Mercedes can still do it? Sorry, but until I see concrete evidence in black & white that the only reason I'm paying through the nose for such a vehicle (and not really, because a brand new 2009 CLK 350 hardtop coupe can be had starting as low as $47,675 which I GUARANTEE will be around the same price as an American competitor like the Cadillac CTS coupe will start out at) is the fact that an incredible portion of the vehicle's overall cost is associated solely with the fact that the roof has to be made out of some NASA-grade alloy or other such bull$h! to be up to snuff, I'm not buying the argument for a second. Also, you said earlier that "convertibles are exempt from the rule because if you roll one, you are paralyzed or dead." And? Does that mean that while one acknowledges and assumes the risk of driving a convertible, they could never be expected to do so with a pillarless coupe or sedan? f@#k that! We want the choice! And your link is broken just like the rest of your argument.

Kaiser?! Eeeeeeeewwwwww!! I think a Kaiser Manhattan is about the only 1950's car I wouldn't feel guilty about driving through a New England winter..... maybe a few Edsels, too. There was an original, solid, complete running and driving one on craigslist around here for MONTHS with 40,000 original miles whose owner had incredible trouble selling for $1500/BO. The only good thing I can say about Kaiser-Frazer is that it was cool that they were one of the few automobile manufacturers to offer a convertible sedan after the Second World War. Other than that, they have zero redeeming qualities. And the Kaiser Darrin? I couldn't think of a more repulsive, botched abortion of a "sports car" if I had a thousand years to do so. I can't believe Howard Darrin would ever feel good about putting his name on such a cheap, ugly pile of $h! after twenty-five years of incredible work to his name with Thomas Hibbard in Paris and then on his own in Paris and Hollywood for the world's A-list on chassis by Duesenberg, Rolls-Royce, and the rest of the best, and then collaborating with companies like Packard and Studebaker to style some incredible machines. I guess even back in the 1950's there were some things that were being watered-down, cheapened, and repackaged as a feeble attempt to try and pass it off as the genuine article, but at least most people back then were smart enough to realize it: that's why only 435 of them were ever made, of which the last FIFTY(!) were bought by Howard Darrin himself and languished in front of his studio in Hollywood for a long, long time. It took the poor bastard FOUR YEARS to unload the last of these piles of $h!, and that's AFTER he had taken a bath on fitting them with incredibly improved power plants like Willys inline sixes and, in some rare cases, even 331 cubic inch Cadillac V8's. Their value on the open market today, to me, represents the quintessential example of a name meaning literally everything. Face it: if Howard Darrin's name was not attached to the Kaiser Darrin, it would be just another cobbled together early 1950's low-budget home-built fiberglass kit car that got a blurb on page 40 of Popular Mechanics next to the small form you cut out and mail in with a dollar to get the blueprints for it, and would be bought and sold at prices that would reflect this. They're built on Henry J chassis, for Christ's sake! Y'know, the only car that was so blatantly for poor people that one re-badged as an "Allstate" could be ordered out of the f@#king Sears & Roebuck catalog? A car that was so cheap, cheesy, and spartan in original form that it was not even built with such automovive basics (by 1950's standards) as a trunk or a glovebox or anything even resembling a ventilation system (hope your buddy took a bath before you set out on that week-long road trip!) was to become the basis for Darrin's "masterpiece?!" Are you serious?! What a worthless pile of $h!! And I do speak partly from experience on this: a friend of my father's is an unfortunate owner of a 1954 Kaiser Darrin, which I have seen many times and also ridden in, and they are infinitely more unimpressive in person. Henry J. Kaiser should have stuck to building Liberty Ships.

No, but only because the local Costco is kind of a bitch to get to and all the bottom of the barrel members of society like to congregate there. However, we do have a few local furniture chains which offer similar gimmicks that I have taken advantage of on numerous occasions!

Nope, not a saddle tank; all Suburbans have their fuel tanks mounted behind the rear axle, where the spare tire goes on the pickups. Suburbans have a spare tire well on the inside like a station wagon, remember?