balthazar

oh; THERE it is!!

What's worse- a established brand having to go to it's competition to source components/parts, or a start-up doing so?

Good for you; it shouldn't. Inflation is on a long-term downward trend, was below 2% in Feb & March :

What kind of F-d up metric is that? Let's see : 'If Rolls Royce, Ferrari & Jaguar were viable companies, they wouldn't have to have bought their transmissions off of General Motors.' How's that work for you?

Here's hoping they also offer a 2-in lowering kit.

^ Some would say the Tesla was a cool looking top-dollar car from an unheard of brand when it came out in 2012 or whenever. But I think it's the potential shake-up / unseating of the Germans fraternal triplets that Tesla (& perhaps Karma) that's the threat. MB/BMW's electric efforts to date have been pathetic and they are a decade behind Tesla.

I'm not disputing the factoids as sourced from MS or UBS. I'm challenging the selective light they were cherry-picked to present by the CBS writer. The choice of words even in the title ("hurting") sets the tone before you read it. Where was the mention of adjusted tax brackets or the reminder about withholding adjustments? This source published 04.01: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/01/retail-sales-february-2019.html says January consumer spending numbers were revised upward from +0.2 to +0.7, and February's numbers were only down -0.2. Apparently (CNBC / Reuters) is stating that since Jan 1, retail spending is actually UP +0.5%. What do I do with that info tomorrow morning? If being down 0.6% is "hurting" and 'representative of a slide', is being up 0.5% cause for a celebration? These, IMO, are percentages of no consequence. Retail fluctuates on a number of factors, all the time. Me, I try and avoid a 'sky is falling, again' leaps of faiths. BTW : I don't think any of the statements I made above can be argued against (successfully).

>>"Analysts say that lower tax refunds are largely to blame for the drop in spending, since many families use refunds as a "mandatory saving" mechanism that pays out each year come tax time."<< • If people are spending this on retail purchases, they aren't saving it, are they? • Article states actual Jan-Feb drop was a mere 0.6%. • The entire approach of having the IRS hold your money for a year plus, then you splurge spend it when they give it back to you is why such a large percentage of Americans have no savings/retirement funding. >>"lower refunds means less spending money. "<< Disingenuous. Tax brackets were adjusted downward, therefore most people saw larger paychecks throughout the year (no way to say how that stacked up against 2018 on the exact same circumstances).

JZDeLorean, circa '65 ~

Tundra is an uncompetitive turd that only sells to hardcore toyoloyolists. And there's not enough of them to steal any sales from the Big 4 trucks- the product is just an unfortunately ugly dud.

Amazing pic. Upper full shot, right to left : '53 Cadillac LeMans concept (1 of 4 built) '53 Cadillac Eldorado (632 built) '54 Packard Panther Daytona concept (1 of 4 built) '53-54 Corvette (300 built in '53) '54 Kaiser Darrin (435 + 6 built) '53 Buick Wildcat I concept (1 of 2 built) '53 Olds Starfire concept (1 of 3 built)

'Business reason not to' implies a loss. No way is building a Silverado regular cab a loss scenario, or close to it. - - - - - Linda Hamilton, 1990 (age 35) and circa 2018 (age 62) ~

Significant to mention WRT U.S. sales : Tesla's sales are down 61% vs. the previous quarter (77,525 > 30,600). All other brands monthly/quarterly sales charts reported here are U.S. numbers, not global.

Got this up on eBay right now, D-60 fin emblem:

^ Perhaps... assuming Level 5 AD cars can be proven to be safe. AND they are affordable; any fleet buyer is going to weigh an AD vehicle against the cost of a human driver.

Linked article doesn't quite paint a rosy picture, does it? Level 5 consumer-ready regular production is a decade out, guaranteed. And if it's presented as a separate model (like an EV vehicle is), the take rate is going to be microscopic.

^ If you somehow swapped in a TH400, it should've been quicker, yes. How much is a good question- I don't seem to have a 401 Buick road test handy to compare. I don't think all that much. '63 Riviera ~ 340HP 425, Dynaflow, 3.23 gears, 4190 lbs curb / 4500 lbs test :: 1/4 mile: 16.2. That 340 HP is barely up over the standard '59's 325. '69 Riviera ~ 360HP 430, TH400, 3.07 gears, 4610 lbs curb / 4905 lbs test :: 1/4 mile: 16.5. '60 Olds SUper 88 coupe ~ 315HP 394, Jetaway HydraMatic (4-spd), 3.07 gears, 4370 lbs test :: 1/4 mile: 17.0.

In my case, a complete powertrain/suspension swap/upgrade. IOW; not doable via a Summitt Racing catalog. Of course; many many multples in cost investment. Like I said- to each his own. Just looked it up- my '59 was originally good for 18.3 secs on regular gas, and 17.7 on premium in the 1/4 mile. That's pretty horrible... but it was never built originally as a high performance car. But under the point of drag racing as an amateur, it seems to me the things you mentioned might need a timeslip to tell the difference. So am I going to buy/install a handful of parts, go to the track, pass tech, and make some runs to only see a tiny percentage of gain?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/teslas-disastrous-first-quarter-hints-its-car-may-not-be-the-future-of-driving-120110465.html

The autcross & dirt bike racing is supposed to stay (for now). But the whole 'I bought a house near a NHRA Tier 1 drag strip and didn't think it would be noisy/didn't bother to investigate' is a special kind of stupid that shouldn't be catered to. ykX- I'm about 25 mins from E-town, have been going there for years for the swap meet (also in a long tailspin towards death IMO, but still running for now). I never raced there myself, tho I've watched racing there a bunch of times. I did hope to run when(ever) my car gets done. There's still Atco in south Jersey, but that's a bit over an hour from me. A cat-back exhaust & a cold air box are not my idea of 'building a fast car'. Taking a stock ride from -say- 13.5 secs to 13.2 secs is kinda anticlimactic. Now, going from -say- 18 sec to 10.5 sec... now you can open some eyes. To each his own, of course.

Well, that is some excellent info there, my friend. Consider me now informed. Yes, perhaps I was confused. 6.5' is acceptable (even tho it's only a half foot longer than a traditional short bed). But the 5.5' bed still angers me. So does the fact that perhaps I am NOT shopping in 2019, but must put it off until '20. I can still look tho. Here's hoping that the sales downtick in Q1 and the possible 'embarrassment' of the Ram slipping past the SIlvie in volume makes Chevy start throwing all possible combos on the lot, including a RC/6.5' version.