balthazar

The homogenization of auto design? Been seeing it for at least 2 decades now. Someone could EASILY put together a like GIF of the profiles of sedans and get a similar impression.

Cutting up a 1980 Motor Trend for a (very) few items, noted the following road test results : BMW 320i ~ 0-60: 12.1, 1/4 mile: 18.7 @ 74, 60-0 was 135'. Price started in the high $9000 range. EPA city was 19. Audi 5000S diesel ~ 0-60: 20.4, 1/4 mile: 21.9 @ 61 There were NO accel times over 60. I didn't keep the article, but the implication there sure is that the 5000 could NOT reach 70 MPH. 60-0 braking was 165', or about 10 feet farther than my old '64 Pontiac with 4-wheel drums. MSRP was $12,110, $13,360 as tested. Trade-off for such glacial 'performance' was an EPA city rating of 36! I guess there is a flip side to only having 67 HP. Caprice ~ 0-60: 10.9, 1/4 mile: 18.1 @ 77. 60-0 was 164'. MSRP was $6579, $9,890 as tested. EPA city was 17.

'No cache, no focus'

"Brand Cache'" is made, not given. The same thing was said about Pontiac circa 1953. Thankfully, those with vision prevailed. YOU think of Hertz; thusly you speak for yourself. I never think/thought of Pontiac that way. I guess my misspent youth was wasted not hanging out in the rental car lot at the airport.

There is a difference in saving Pontiac as it was and re-molding it into something evolved & more focused. No one is advocating a continuance of the G3, regardless of how the haters will scream that. There is just as much room for a niche, few-model 'Pontiac' line as any other limited-production, niche-market offering, IMO, if done with the degree of focus we've all seen from GM in recent years. Some discuss this looking at Pontiac as a division of old; that ship has sailed. But it's not the only ship in the port.

^ True of course, tho the S'coupe is 197" and the CTS is what; 192"? I haven't seen it's interior dimensions, but exterior-wise this is mid-size. That said, I would not chose to be 6'6" in modern cars. Just tight all around for the most part.

Interesting. Buick :: '63(-65) Riviera Cadillac :: I don't think there's a way I could pick one car- the heritage here is too vast. 1st production V8, the V16, the OHV V8, early Eldorados, EB program, 1G Seville... Chevrolet :: '55 V8 Bel Air GMC :: I got nothin' Oldsmobile :: '66 Toronado : engineering tour de force. Pontiac :: '62 SD cars, paved the way for the GTO. SD program really started with the '59, and moreso the '60, but the program hit full stride by '62.

^ Fair enough. Materials and 'fit & finish' (the latter's window which has gotten pretty small these days) are an in-person evaluation. Where it's relatively subjective and largely able to be judged via pic is design & some larger details, and here it falls apart for me. For intance; that 'open/close' vent button would've been far more refined had it been -say- the same size but sitting at 12:00 on the vent's bezel. There's a lot of 'scatter-shot' pasting of elements in that interior that IMO are an attempt to 'bedazzle' the eye rather than have it examine overall design too much. A lot of those small elements could have been combined/refined for a cleaner, more contemporary result.

It's really just 1 model with 7 body styles. I realize that's the way the marketeers like to put it, but it's not like, say; a porsche 911 and a cayenne.

That is a GIGANTIC unit plastered to the inside, upper-center of the windshield! I think this is yet another of those vehicles that necessitates in-person inspection, because the interior just looks blinged up with brightwork, on an otherwise lackluster (for this price class) execution. Just looks so... pasted together. Maybe in person is really works, dunno. BMW 6-series is likely cross-shopped here, it's a bit cheaper but pretty close in specs.

Needs a LOT more uniqueness as the flagship's flagship.

Via the pics elsewhere, I can't figure out what Daimler is attempting here. First they swap up the nomenclature, so those looking for a CL coupe have to figure out where it went, then they glue the nose of a $29K econo-sedan on to the result. I mean; they're identical from the front. Bewildering. You'd think for your $70K premium, you'd at least get a more tasteful, less blingy grille.

Interesting- I'll have to look into Maserati's efforts. Maser: Buick :

^ I have a number of first gen Toro references in my library, but back in the day many mags used 'stopping rate' numbers rather than feet, so I have no distance. '66 tested by R&T recorded 20 ft/sec2, and control was marginal. Rear brake lock-up was an issue here. Overall rating was 'fair'. Toro gained optional discs for '68, there the braking rates improved to 29 ft/sec2, with no fade. Tires were a HUGE component in braking back then. A good radial will improve everything vintage today, across the board. Interesting to note : when Buick gained optional discs, they performed worse WRT fade than the drums they were slated to replace. '68 Rivie with discs: # of stops from 80 (@ 60-sec intervals) before 20% loss in deceleration rate: 2. Rate was 23 ft/sec2. '67 Wildcat with drums: # of stops from 80 (@ 60-sec intervals) before 20% loss in deceleration rate: 6 tho rate was a tiny bit worse @ 22. Buick had the best brake engineers @ GM in the '50s/60s. If you read a lot of vintage road tests you find braking performance is all over the charts. I have 1 test that's still a high water mark; 91' 60-0, '68 Olds 442, IIRC. Must've been a lot of production variances....

Car Life, 1960 Invicta, 60-0 : 138'. 4-whl aluminum 12" drums. The mid-'60s Pontiac aluminum drum cars have done 145'- or almost 20-ft shorter than the 4-whl disc ferrari referenced above (which did not stop well either). 'Drum><disc' is not the end-all determining factor.

Yea, I don't get the 'catfish' reference. We've all seen much closer abstractions, like recent mazdas and the drooping, protruding mouth of the CLA. The cammo'd pic here is in line with current Chevys, and most of the rest of the mainstream.

No; the WX-code 455 was continued into '76 for the Firebird, this; 2 years after the Z-28 was discontinued and the largest motor in the Camaro was the 350. My source book (Pontiac Musclecar Performance 1955-1979) confirms it, and you can google "1976 trans am 455" and see plenty of actual cars available. Unfortunately, performance retreated into the shadow in the late '70s; looking at a road test here of a '77 Ferrari and it's doing the quarter mile in a pathetic 16.7 @ 86 MPH. As retroactively poor as the T/A looks now, it was still among the top performers. It whips the ferrari, after all... In fact, the entire overview of the ferrari is loaded with the pathetic. How's 60-0 in 163 ft sound today? -- -- -- -- May very well be right on the 930 Turbo.

You really should pick one up, DD. Stunning in a way nothing modern ever is.

'73-74 T/A SD-455s were road tested in the mid 13s at around 105 MPH in just the quarter. I did see one test @ 14.7 Only figure I could find close for the BMW was a '77 630csi, which ran a 17.1. Not bad for the day but the T/A SD was a whole 'nuther level.

Even hot water heat needs a circulator pump, not sure about steam tho.

If you have a forced air NG furnace & the power is out, how is the furnace's blower motor powered ?? I suppose there might be a battery backup system for such, but I've never heard of/encountered such.

Really hate yellows on cars. 1938 Cadillac Italian Cream : 1953 Cadillac Artisan Ochre :

A few questions. I thought you had said on another thread that diesels benefited most from using DOHC due to the superior breathing offered from DOHC and the lack of air obstructions in diesels. It would certainly make intuitive sense that an engine that always runs lean would benefit most from using a DOHC valvetrain. IIRC; the emphasis was on 4-valve heads for air flow, not DOHC. Duramax is an IBC 4-valve design- best of both worlds in some instances.

Hoo boy, I don't know I could list them all. Maybe I can break it into segments : Drilling ~ I have my first corded C-Man 3/8" drill, mid '90s- basement shop backup. Dremel & 72-piece acc. kit : I don't have much use for it (light duty). (2) Makita Li-Ion cordless 3/8" drills plus an impact driver. Drill #1 has driven thousands upon thousands of screws, quality piece. DeWalt 1/2" corded drill- I don't know the amps offhand but I always use it with 2 hands. Bosch Bulldog SDS hammer drill. Sprunger table-top 12" drill press, 4-speed, late '60s. Index Model 55 milling machine, 12-speed, 1940, weighs about 2000 lbs. Superior 'camelback' floor model, 20", circa 1880, resto candidate. killed : C-Man 14V cordless 3/8" drill. I have another small table-top drill press, never used it, I believe it's Taiwanese. Works fine, needs to go. Sold a small C-Man table drill press last fall, light duty. I really like Makita drills. Compact & relatively lightweight. Rigid feels a bit more powerful, but they're much heavier to work with- gets tiring. DeWalt falls between the 2. Cutting~ Makita chop saw, 10", cast iron base, maybe early '80s, I use it to cut scrap & firewood. Makita 2708 8.5" table saw, circa 1990, hand-me-down from my brother, still kicking ass. DeWalt DW715 12" chop saw, what a nice piece- love it. Friend just picked up a C-Man 10" chop saw- piece of junk (the laser is off about 1 degree and the fence is bowed). Useless for trim work. DeWalt circular saw Milwaukee Super SawZAll, 1990s Central Pneumatic angle air grinder. This cheap piece of crap is almost 20 years old, still slicing steel pretty well. Black & Decker jig saw, 1960s, works great (but doesn't like overly thick material). Just replaced my B&D grinder (worn out) with a Bosch. Bosch makes some smooth, powerful motors. Fien MultiMaster- the best in this field. Bosch Pony router, nice piece. Rockwell 14" band saw. Used regularly- indispensable.

Hungerford Rocket Car