balthazar
In Hibernation
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by balthazar
-
-
-
Outside of a track, where do you see Civics in heads-up competition for handling? And what percentage do you think are used in competition? Maybe, just maybe someone likes Hondas, and especially likes Civic Rs, and finds it so appealing they buy it, yet actually doesn't give a shit how it handles vs. a Mustang; better or worse, because they just like it and want to own & drive it. What a concept.
-
I have always cast a side eye at the generator. Battery seems to not be charging, and the manual says -get this- the generator needs to be removed & cleaned inside every 6 mnths or 5000 miles. So out it comes; basically the last component not given any attention. Had to drain the cooling system most of the way and unhook one of the upper radiator pipes to get it out, as you can't really disconnect the fan (yes- the fan is bolted to the generator). Inside was pretty filthy, and the 'mica grooves' were packed full of crud. Will have to sit and clean the thing out- looks like a good 2 hours work.
-
If I paint it Deere Green, will you come help work on it? You can pretend its a tractor.
-
-
OK. Here we are, EIGHT YEARS LATER, but, never mind that; gotta keep it positive, right?? Work has started again on the B-59, I think. Put the center link together this afternoon, so it's finally done. Note the date on the above quote. This way, after installation, I can roll the car outside & at least the front wheels will talk to each other. Want to spatter paint the trunk, have a bit of wire wheeling to do back there first. Anyone out there who's tried moving a dead car with no steering linkage knows the fun. Stay tuned...
-
1948 Packard Eight, out of barn after 30 year slumber. Check that hood ornament and the little grille screens. This was the bottom line Packard in '48; there was the Super Eight and Custom Eight above it. All 3 had the butter-smooth I-8 but with 288, 327 or 356 CI displacements, respectively. Dismissively dubbed the 'bathtub Packards', they were widely panned stylistically at the time. Hard to say how they fared sales-wise; Packard didn't adhere to model year breaks until 1951- the '48s were built from August '47 thru May '49. In fact, in November of '48, dealers were instructed to return the data plates to he factory, and got code-updated plates they reattached, making them '49s (officially: '23rd Series'). I never cared for them; I always tended to agree they were just too amorphous… but they've grown on me (at least the front clips) in recent years. Doc Brown drives a '48-50 Custom Eight in Back to the Future.
-
Having had a Jeep Liberty in the driveway for a year now, I have no problem with CUVs (tho being BOF, perhaps the Liberty is an SUV). But it has a passable amount of room in it, esp with the rear seat folded (flat). SO many of these uber-teensy CUVs have room for 2 grocery bags, but I agree; it's not that they are appealing, it's that cars have gotten so cramped. IMO; OEMs F-ed up when they strove to make cars smaller & smaller; first it forced truck sales to explode, then SUVs, now CUVs. Meanwhile convert & coupes are like woolly mammoths anymore. I know it's not going to happen (and I don't believe it will, either), but in the day when a mid-size car was 200-in and a full size was around 212 and larger, the insides, the rear seat and the trunks were immense. There were only a few SUVs and trucks were for farmers.
-
That's still over 2 decades of the V6, after dumping all the development work on the I6. Now, apparently, MB is admitting they have a rough-running V6, so they dump the billion they spent there, and spend another billion to develop another, ancient I6 to address the problem. Perhaps they can save money, since more & more MBs are going to go to 4 bangers in the near future...
- 16 replies
-
- february 2017
- sales
- sales figures
- buick
-
Tagged with:
-
That space, up near the roof (because the base of the C-pillar is in the exact same spot) is basically useful for inflated balloons. 0.9 cubic feet with the seats up; there's no measurable/useful additional space. NO ONE will chose this over the sedan because of 0.9 CF more space- that's nuts.
-
What- 3 cubic feet? Who is loading anything in a Panamera?? EDIT: From R&T ~ "As you'd expect, the Sport Turismo is more practical than its sedan counterpart, though not by a significant margin. With the rear seats folded up, cargo capacity is 18.3 cubic feet to the sedan's 17.4, and 49 cubic feet with the seats folded down, versus the sedan's 46. NAILED IT!
-
• Mercdes has been selling V6s for decades now- it's who they are. The 1950s is forever ago- another company; they weren't even building luxury products then. The "copying", as you should consistently define it, is the fact they're dumping all their V6 development to go with the ancient inline configuration, when basically only BMW has been building them (volvo don't count here). • Please link us to where specifically Cadillac stated "how can we make it like the Lexus RX". I'll wait. And it is uniquely Cadillac.
- 16 replies
-
- february 2017
- sales
- sales figures
- buick
-
Tagged with:
-
This is the root of your analysis problem: these aren't 'copies'; they are entries in a product segment. Most people call this 'competition', not 'copies', which implies direct demonstrable likenesses. Size and taut handling aren't sole properties of a single producer, they never have been. I notice you never bother to 'admit' that mercedes 'copied' the 3-series in this manner either; when the close proximity of MB & BMW models come up, you like to group them under 'the Germans' as if they were co-developed by a single company. For example: mercedes MUST be 'copying' BMW by returning to an old-school inline 6, after decades of V6s, right?
- 16 replies
-
-
- 1
-
-
- february 2017
- sales
- sales figures
- buick
-
Tagged with:
-
CT6 isn't anymore 'German' than the S-class is 'Chinese' or 'American'. Cadillac has been building technologically advanced, comfortable, well-performing sedans throughout most of their history- nothing new from that aspect. No one in the market is advocating a return to a Deville from the '90s (softly-sprung & overstuffed), for example, so stop talking like anyone is. Your ship has sailed, and decades ago.
- 16 replies
-
- february 2017
- sales
- sales figures
- buick
-
Tagged with:
-
-
Porsche maybe moved the top rear edge backward like 6 inches. The bottom of the C-Pillar is in the same place. If it didn't have that black plastic 'air dam' there, most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference. And the sedan is already a hatch. This is pretty amazingly pointless- anyone who wants a Porsche and wants to carry things already bought a Cayenne.
-
Cadillac is not in Chevrolet's portfolio. You are approaching marketing from the boardroom/accounting angle. Do you have a professional interest in accounting?
-
There's a relation on an engineering level. But Camaro on Alpha & ATS on Alpha is still immaterial to what Chevrolet & Cadillac are doing with each model and overall.
-
Is Rolls royce a "half a luxury brand"? Is Ferrari or Lamborghini "half a sports car brand" for not having luxury models? Sports cars can be fun- they sell a lot of posters for teenager's bedroom walls, but one doesn't mean the other 'has' to be there also. And an actual 'luxury sports car' is relative new in the grand timeline of things. Personally I would MUCH prefer a 'production concept' Cadillac than a 'sports car' people hardly buy any of.
-
Like you said: Cadillac has nothing to do with sports cars. Which is why Cadillac is not building sports cars. See, you answered your own question. As for Camaro pricing, see your first quote above. It doesn't matter to Cadillac what Chevrolet prices the Camaro at.
-
-
-
• Funny you should ask- I was @ the DMV today & asked that ? but I don't place a ton of faith in those DMV 'receptionists'. But he claimed if it didn't have it as original equipment, they can't retroactively require it. I've always subscribed to that theory… but that doesn't mean that every traffic cop knows that mantra. NO ONE is going to know what this had as original equipment- I barely do. If it was conventionally registered, in NJ it would have to be 6001 lbs or more to require them. What you see above is 4570 lbs according to FoMoCo lit; I would shoot for 5900 if I was doing conventional reg… but apparently, that's not an issue either way. No flaps here, don't want 'em. • I do not have plans for any sort of bed. I dislike flatbeds/stake bodies because they look too 'farmer-y' to me. I've drawn a long teardrop enclosed container… or have also contemplated a really vintage, round-nose horse trailer box with ribbed sides… but there's no active plans to do that. I like the 'factory' cab/chassis look just fine.
-
Ran her outside for insurance / DMV pics, then back in- no problems to report. Truck idles in 2nd gear with no pedal- she's turning out to be easier to drive than my recollections of modern 4-spds…. tho I reserve judgement 'til out on the road and hitting 4th.
