balthazar

Yeah- that's not my thing. As the last few years go by -working on my '40- I have less & less appreciation for those COEs that have been re-chassis'd and modernized. "What chassis is it on?" is as common a question as "what year is that?". There's a bit of blasphemy in that, I now feel. If you like a -say- '39 Dodge truck, part & parcel (some would say 'the soul') is that low-power, low-RPM flattie under the hood. Designed & built by Dodge, refurbished- it can run forever. Otherwise, some of these resto-mod vehicles are akin to a Halloween costume- they aren't real but a facsimile. With my '40, a running original-spec truck is in the VAST majority today. But as I went thru each sub-assembly and as each 77 year bolt or fixture came apart with relative ease and was in good condition, it seemed to say 'I have more life to live'. It also feels like a time machine to a degree. Throwing a flathead 8 on the scrap pile feels like automotive murder. It's not that IMO an old vehicle needs to remain totally stock, but I do feel strongly that it should 'stay in the family' and be some combination of original and 'period'. Thusly, the B-59 must at minimum retain it's soul (or the soul from the bloodline) : a Buick engine.

I haven't adjusted my seat or steering wheel since I bought my truck in 2006. Haven't gotten any taller in that time span, either. ;P There are such things as 'street/strip' cars; vehicles you can drag and drive on the street. My B-59 will be one of those: no steering adjustment, no A/C, no cup holders, but quicker than a '17 Stingray Z51 in the quarter mile and more interior room than any RPO 2017 car. Hip room w no center console : 66". Ahhh- luxury!

Very true- Audi is an 'anti-mercedes'. Problem is the brand is in real trouble with half their line-up; sales have evaporated in the US. I'm surprised there's going to be a new A7.

I've seen 0-60 as 2.3 sec for both the top-option Model S and the Demon, don't know how one would call that "destroying".

They could mount the body upside down on the platform- no one is buying an A7.

$97,500 to start had better get you an alarm system. https://www.porsche.com/all/media/pdf/owners_manual_cayenne_pcna.pdf Page 245- there is a factory system- this had the LEDs at the traditional door lock spot on the doors. Doesn't say anything about how it works tho.

Apparently got too close to a Porsche Cayenne GTS in a home garage today. Windows were down and although I touched nothing, apparently it has a proximity alarm, because it went off. Loudly. Luckily- no one was home so I exited, shut the garage door and went on my way. Got me thinking about (is it the CT6?) 360-degree cameras. Not that I am at all worried, but I wouldn't be surprised if such a system took a 360-degree pic when the alarm goes off.

Well; no regulations per say, just vague projections of possible future ICE bans in some markets.

just pickin' - factory PRs make it so easy.

The volvo profile is the concept- no doubt it'd be tweaked for production (side glass for sure, prolly smaller rims). Cleary, it's a bit cleaner than the Camaro. I kinda like the blunter nose/tail... but something's 'off' on the polestar I can't put my finger on.

• Shouldn't the "polestar 2" slot below the Tesla 3/ BMW 3/ Mercedes 'third letter of alphabet' models? Simplistic morons everywhere are going to be so. confused. • "thor's hammer headlights' - hahalolOKsure. • So an electric hybrid is the "perfect drivetrain" but all future polestars are going to not offer this?

Quick glance, going the other way : '70-74 Challenger on ca trailer, solid unrestored.

They are quite generic, I must not notice those few running around.

The OEMs that survived at least some notable period of time (the Depression scorched that industry along with every other one) did make money- my point was it was not related SOLELY to the powerplant. Look at Doble- built steams cars with AMAZING technology, lasted 1909 to 1931. Again- the Depression, which killed off a disproportionate number of fine marques. I'm not seeing much of a parallel from the early 20th century to the early 21st here other that the obvious switch from electric to IC. However, the significant contrast with that is; today's US market breakdown is like 94% IC and 6% EV... the early days were never close to that one-sided. Also- the vehicles were largely comparable in what they offered, how it performed & drove. An EV then wasn't any faster (or slower) than a low-end IC car. The 'change over' was relatively fluid & quick and was consumer-driven. Today the market is ridiculously one-sided and most EVs include range numbers that are less than enticing. Plus EVs have already taken longer time to achieve a tiny sliver of the market vs. than the the rise of ICs early on took. EVs will take off once they achieve 2 critical factors; they're priced competitively with IC competition and offer range numbers comparable to IC mile ranges, with charging stations at least 50% as common as gas stations. It's really only 2 things: range/ charging time/ charger commonality... and vehicle price. Everything else is comparable right now (other than EVs being a thin selection of vehicles so far).

^ What- that early EV CO's were making money & ICE companies were not? No- in no way was that unilateral. There were thousands of companies that failed in the beginning (first 25 years) of the industry, I'm not aware that any 'belly-upped' solely tied to propulsion choice.

This thread is not about the feasibility from the owner's standpoint; Sergio is talking about the economics of manufacturing/selling EVs. I'm no fan of him professionally, but on this point he is correct. From the only numbers I've seen, Chevy loses $9K on each Bolt, FCA loses $20K on each fiat 500 EV, and Tesla lost $750,000,000 last year. From the business model standpoint- as of right now, there is no money to be made. Unless respective governments want to court bailouts, the countries & states that are considering outright ICE bans would do well to make sure there are manufacturers around to build these cars and at least cover their costs (which would still be a case of no profits/ expansion/ future development).

You mean like the rumored MB F-1-tech sports hybrid that hasn't been tested yet, yet someone is quoting all sorts of performance and power figures??

Looked up S2000 production figures and was surprised (110K worldwide). I hardly saw them when new and they seem to have already disappeared in the years since.

• The CLS has nice lines, but it was certain neither anything new nor innovative. GP was doing the fastback, fat c-pillar look a year earlier- CLS is the same proportion & profile with a jacked-up beltline. • Article clearly states the 367 HP CLS will do 0-60 in 5.0 sec, and the 430 HP AMG version will do it in 4.8 secs.

So MB is going to bump HP in the AMG version by 63 and only cut 0.2 sec off 0-60?? What a way to completely devalue the AMG package. - - - - - RE the above pic; there utterly no reason whatsoever to camo the car- the shape is the same it's been for years & it'll wear the same nose as 32 other MBs.

Now you're talking about 1 model / MPG, when I responded to your comment about 'the Hemi never gained any power'. Pick a damned point & stick with it, ONCE.

I believe that's only on the SIlverado / Colorado anniversary editions (all 2018's?).

Chrysler 300 SRT8 : 470 HP.

Nobody going from 350 HP to 485 HP is going to also see a MPG increase. Not the point tho here, is it?