balthazar

But will they sell? EV sales are not even half of 1 percent.

Interesting that the deposit for the 3 is 1/5th the deposit for the X, yet the X is not 5 times the starting cost of the 3. As mad behind schedule as the 3 is, let's hope Tesla has a MUCH better grip on getting it's new model to customers than it did with the Model X- there it took 4 months to deliver a whopping 208 SUVs.

No, because Cadillac billed A&S as being bold and fresh, yet the ATS was staler than Subway spinach. Tesla has no such pretensions. Actually, according to a blog on teslamotors.com by von Holzhausen, Tesla's chief designer, dated April 2009, Tesla's design goal is to be : So now we know: they have the loftiest of pretensions possible. Back to the Model 3 ……...

I find it a bit of a letdown stylistically. From the front, all I can think of is an old Pink Pearl eraser. All those who have ragged on Cadillac that the ATS isn't 'bold enough' are going to be extremely displeased here.

Video : http://www.theverge.com/2016/3/31/11335272/tesla-model-3-announced-price-release-date-specs-preorder

Pics are out now via twitter. Not much to look at: a smaller, relatively inexpensive looking, slightly more twerked Model S. Have to see some pro shots….

In that 'it so reminds me of the fiat/mini' ?

This pretty much sums up my take on their take. - - - - - - I'm feeling resistance to suddenly rating headlights in this arena. Lighting in general is more powerful now than at any other time, ever, yet models that get saddled with 'poor' or 'marginal' are going feel marketing pressure to up & up & up headlight power. A few years of these headlight ratings (and the inevitable advertising usage) and cars are going to be blazing with atomic winter fire out the front. Now, if 'tech' properly manages the function/brightness (tho I am loathe to encourage needless complexity), there's a chance the aging U.S. driver population won't all be driving up the nearest tree/ guide wire/ center divider an hour after sunset. You get what I'm saying? The standard keeps changing (ESPECIALLY with the IIHS rating system), yet the worst headlights today are likely better than those from the '90s. IE; it's a self-perpetuating, sliding scale that will always have "poor" and "marginal" lights that are only going to get brighter & brighter with each MCE/redesign. Is it really necessary?

Not a fan of ferrari's designs. This includes the Enzo above, too disharmonious & cut up. That's poor design in my book; really poor. I do like the Aventador- and it's world's apart (& above) from the Enzo, design-wise… but I prefer the cleaner LP400-4.

Cadillac doesn't care how long the s-class is. But they very well may wish to -coincidentally- exceed that length anyway- since it's not all that lengthy as it is. A CT8 could be 215"-ish and leave plenty of room for the 204" CT6.

According to carscoops from the fall of 2014, it was "nearly one out of every two" S-classes are sold in China. 1 out of 3 is 33.3%, but 'nearly 1 out of two' may run as high as 45% or more. Without a doubt mercedes has been building the s-class with China heavily in mind; the corporate mindset of 'Revenue Above All Else' is proof enough of that. China is probably why we never got the F700 (not the Ford HD truck; the future S-class concept MD teased). Oh sure; it was horribly mutated, but at least you noticed it.

^ Doesn't seem to for mercdees; 1 out of every 2 S-classes are sold in china and it's as soft as baby's bottom, yet they still sell here OK.

• Got the last drum turned- my buddy has a brake lathe machine. I'd say it's about 80% 'good to go', tho I will do a little hand work on it too (Scotchbrite). Then I can do the bearings & re-mount those dually tires. • Had a local machine shop look at my pedal assembly- they cleaned up the shafts & trued the bushing up, I put it back together & greased the crap out of it. Brake pedal still wobbles, going to try something else to steady it where it comes thru the floor. Assembly is back in the truck. • Re-routed some wires with an eye toward tucking them out of sight better. • Next up is tackling the distributor, which is a complicated sucker, which also has to be removed from the motor to service.

367 CI ~ 427 CI

1965 GTO, 389 Tri-Power 4-spd (documented), Bluemist Slate blue, black interior, aftermarket Radir 5-spokes. Very nice driver, presentable. My brother's car.

^ I don't put any weight in the 'follower/leader' concept. This may have significance to 0.001% of consumers; who cares. Especially when it's so selectively applied. IE: we never hear that expressed -for example- when car-only makers like Porsche or Bentley bring out a hulking, expensive SUV. Tesla doesn't & cannot 'own' the EV concept. Tesla Model S does not sell for the singular reason it has electric propulsion.

^ That's not how profitability is calculated. You cannot take fixed costs out of a product's revenue and call it 'profitable excluding all the costs'. I mean; you can, but that's not legitimate from an accounting perspective. And Tesla is no longer a 'start up' - the entity has been in existance for 13 years now. In auto industry terms, that's around 4 generations of a model line. Tesla is doing some things VERY right : buzz, exposure, image, acceptance in high-priced tiers, and volume. Those things alone obviously do not guarantee business success. Time will tell.

'66 Merc Monterey 4-dr hardtop, super clean & straight, green-tinged dark blue, in driveway taking in some spring sunshine.

Hudsons are a great choice, their 308 Wide Block I-6 was NASCAR champ for a few years running in the early '50s.

Only aspect I like is the 'holes' in the front fender indent. There are a lot of warts on the design otherwise.

Pssst!! Cadillac is NOT, repeat: NOT racing mercedes to sell millions upon millions of vehicles in every price class.

306 CI ~ 366 CI. -- -- -- '57 Pontiac Super Chief Catalina, 347 CI V8, Tri-Power, 317 HP : '57 Cadillac Eldorado Seville hardtop, 365 CI V8, 305 HP : '57 DeSoto Adventurer hardtop, 345 CI Hemi V8, 345 HP : '56 Chrysler 300-B, 354 CI Hemi V8, 355 HP : 1948 Tucker 48, 335 CI flat 6, 166 HP, 372 TRQ :

I'm a-waitin on the 5.0+, 6.0+ and 7.0+ threads…..

Ugh is it a gruesome beastie. And why MB insists on plastering the same nose on every car they build is beyond me. BTW, I've completely given up on trying to sort thru the alphabet soup of MB's 342 different model names.

Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. Not a Chevy guy, so; nope. DB5 doesn't do it for me; it's better than most euro 'sports cars' of the era, but I just don't find it lust-worthy. - - - - - '56 Corvette, 283 CI :