balthazar

I read American buyer, not ‘buyer of American auto’. Friend’s wife has a new CX-5, she just said she wouldnt buy it again given the chance. 1 notch below top trim, all sorts of nannies. Its not ‘education’ IMO, its the features themselves. Folk are more interested in the imagined concept than the actual feature.

Not a single proposed model on the horizon with a sub-median msrp. Even if costs drop so radically that its possible, manufacturers will never do it. No one has better economies of scale than Tesla, and there the Model S, which used to be $57K, is now $81K.

Pic taken in Michigan in ‘72, is the truck circa ‘64? Yeah- thats pretty bad.

What is…. 'Special Regular' ???

A 2004 'project car'?? LOL! - - - - -

Good luck raising the ZEV sales by 700% in only 5 years- they've been on the market for 20 now, and BTW; a hybrid is NOT a ZEV.

Architecturally / aesthetically. One is clean & presentable, the other is an eyesore.

A stellar example of the present F'ing up what the past offered : 1946 : 2019 :

^ No doubt a direct influence. - - - - - Hand-in-hand with the EPA's efforts was the vast erosion of manufacturing in the U.S. over that time period.

And I hope true tailfins come back. Let's bet on who's dream comes true first.

'70 Gen 3 Corvair proposal ~

Sometimes, the past holds the key to making things better, because it WAS better in the past.

Question : in looking at vintage press photos, it was common (up into the '50s) to take photos of auto accident victims while the bodies were still on scene/in the pic. No gore or blood, you understand. Of course, it's never done in the press today. Does this sort of thing offend you? 1952 :

I don’t drink coffee and the only time I can recall waiting for service vs. leaving is for tires in a stand-alone tire shop. I have far too busy a schedule to sit for hours and finger chair upholstery.

^ You used 'datsun' and 'racer' in the same sentence! LOL!!! - - - - - 1946 : 2019 :

Wagons = BEVs :: 2% market penetration.

^ I wonder what the parameters for categorizing were used in the above. I ask because insideevs.com states 87,459 electrics were sold in Q2 2019. Which means: 337,098 - 87,459 = 249,639 vehicles were non gas, non diesel AND non-electric. Even looking at the chart above :: BEV sedans: 60K, SUVs: 6K hybrid sedans: 54K, SUVs: 67K plug-in sedans: 17K, SUVs: 5K only equals 209K, not 337K. What's going on there?

CarMax data: average mercedes buyer : 43.7 yrs old average buick buyer : 45.6 yrs old

'61 Olds styling study, O-62s (& Chevs) on a carrier, '63 JT-R concept ~

Guigario is a hack.

$70,000,000 / 225 buses = $311,111 paid for a $60,000 bus. Insanity in CA knows no boundaries. Article goes on to claim they'll save $120,000 in maintenance per bus over 20 years (I guarantee you CA school districts do no permit 20 yr old buses in their fleet); They save $120K in maintenance but paid $250K more to buy them. That means each bus will COST the district another $130K to the bottom line.

'69-70 Stingray coupe, white, very clean, cruisin. circa '85 Corvette coupe, dark blue, very clean, cruisin.

I'm not a modern car styling fan but I think the Bolt looks fine, certainly no worse than any other in it's size class. But to those saying the 'Bolt doesn't sell well' are all wrong. This is the typical filter a GM vehicle must always go thru- "it must sell in the 100s of thousands because it's a GM, or it's a flop". Doesn't work that way, certainly not now. Tesla aside (and there, really only the Model 3 applies), the Bolt sells very well…. FOR AN ELECTRIC. The problem is NOT marketing or the looks or the price, it's the #4 selling BEV in the country. It outsells the Model S and is neck & neck with the Model X. The problem is electrics don't sell well compared to IC vehicles. AT ALL. The Bolt is electric. Duh.