balthazar

I day dream all the time about stumbling upon anything from Left Field of automobile history :

Interesting issue, Nov '79. Granatelli-built Turbine-powered Corvette road test, Turbo Trans Am, Citation vs. Omni vs. Fairmont, prediction on next gen Opel T-car (Chevette), and more. Clean issue with no damage, no musty smell. $5 (plus $3 shipping)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Chrysler-Dodge-Plymouth-Mitsubishi-3-0L-complete-tune-up-parts-1990s-/221363979125?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item338a524375

Hudson was in Buick price territory, but I believe it was much more for stylistic reasons; the Hudson was completely leading edge in '48. Even the production Cadillac still retained non-integrated rear fenders, Hudson was ahead here. As this video highlights approach & departure views, it's styling focused.

One Man's insane GM car collection : http://www.fleetwoodcountrycruizein.com/private_collection/private_collection.html#1953

In addition to the NOS Pacer side view mirror @ $113, I also sold an NOS center console for $162.50 and the aforementioned cruise control system for $99. Not bad for stuff pulled out of a dumpster. Yes Virginia, people ARE working on Pacers. -- -- -- -- I had seen this pic of the post-war Cadillac prototype years & years ago. It is commonly ID'ed as the "Interceptor", but clearly this is a clay, 'in-progress' design study. But I love learning new auto history, and here's today's reveal: the Interceptor was obviously strongly considered, as a functional model was built. : Boy, would THAT have taken Cadillac down a different stylistic road !

Interior volume ( ) or exterior dimension, Cadillac doesn't need to be in the 'cute ute' class. Trim a bit (6" or so) off the next SRX and call that the 'floor'. Fact remains the Buick already has a entry off this architecture/size and it just becomes redundant for a small segment. I'd prefer something unique, more along the lines of the ULC rather than the 'shrunken head' of a Gamma-sized SUV.

The main line HD / Lowes tool lines are either made in China / Taiwan, but some select items are USA made, such as Channellock, and Dasco, and these 2 are quality. You have to look around.

I also am NOT in favor of an Encore-sized Cadillac SUV. Too many in favor seem forgetful about their prior protestations over GM brand overlap. Fortunately, Cadillac is NOT in the same forced box BMW & MB are in, where they have to be in every single segment because (1. they're sales whores, and 2.) they cannot make a viable sub-brand to carry these types of vehicles.

You mean flops like the maybach, don't you?

Dodgefan ~ >>"I forgot the breaker bar, Oops!"<< No way to list even a 'basic' set of all inclusive tools. I am a strong proponent of 'the right tool for the job' philosophy, so as the job changes, the tool needs to also. Agreed on the sledge / hand sledge; only time I ever used either was the same scenario; fused rim. A good, weighty hammer does most of the duty here; once you get to the 'sledge zone' you should be using air at that point, and/or heat (be careful on the plastic fantastic of modern vehicles!) I have a bunch of breaker bars, but I also have a section of pipe, about 15", that's served me well in some instances. I'd rather hammer on a pipe than a breaker bar, for example. BTW, Drew- my Buick is rust-free! Wasn't when I got it but it is now.

Modern cars are extremely tight, hence the suggestion for a thinner ratchet. Breaker bar is still a simple, good thing to have. Couldn't get the rear calipers off my '04 SIlverado without one; GM used Locktite on the threads.

I want to like the 'roto-ratchet' but when I've held them in hand, they're very bulky. Seems that those spots where micro-angle adjustment would be handy, they'd be too thick. You could do the same thing with an offset flex-head that would be 1/3rd the thickness. Good to know RE the reversible GWers- having to flip a wrench over all the time (yea, I know; mathmatically it should only me 50%, but it's more like 80% ) is an annoyance. Another good piece to have alongside a socket set is a breaker bar.

My ramblings~ Like most industries, there has been a LOT of manufacturer shuffling thru the years; Craftsman may be currently built by Apex, but they've had numerous makers over the years. The quality range for non-moving part hand tools is much closer than that for ones that do move (like ratchets). Tool hounds are usually down on all 4 of the above brands. That said, the premium brands are overpriced, IMO, but they absolutely do have some specialty & unique pieces the mainstream brands do not. Only Snap-On stuff I own (maybe a dozen pieces), I didn't pay anything for. I would recommend buying used stuff at swap meets or local auctions, too- you can get stellar deals, and the stuff is usually vintage, which is already proven & often lasts longer than new. When I needed a 1.5-in socket for my Ford's lug nuts, Craftsman wanted $30 for 1 socket. Swap meet: got a Williams (VG brand) for $4. My MAC 3/8" ratchet set must date to the late '70s, I've used the crap out of it for a few decades (3 actually) and generally on rusted stuff- have not had to replace a single piece. I've broken Husky socket stuff tho (3 pieces actually, tho I don't use them much), but they will replace them. They're maybe 10 yrs old at this point; they're OK for the price. I would not buy one of the 'master' C-Man sets, IMO they stuff a lot of seldom-used bits in the large sets- who needs 4 or 5 sets of allen wrenches? C-Man is in transition- changing manufacturers around & shipping more & more offshore. Sometimes that's of no consequence, others times its the kiss of death. In fact, I would say that I came into possession of more than half of my hand tools (I have a good quantity) for nothing (no; I didn't steal any of them). That's just good fortune / 'right place,right time' karma. As a matter of practice, I buy tools when I need them (at this point, I don't need much of anything). SK is a very good quality brand, and the Co is bringing manufacturing back on-shore. Supposedly, it's a Corporate re-focus on product. If I were to buy a large socket set, I'd check them first. I really like the ratchet box wrenches (ALA: Gearwrench), tho I have an early Crafstman set. C-M has a small thumb lever, allowing you to switch direction, but Gearwrench you have to turn the wrench, see which way it turns, then usually flip it over to go the way you want. I don't think the CM pieces are still made, unfortunately.

Nice Merc :

I just CAN'T omit the AMX/2, here, even tho it was branded a '1969'... it's just such a killer mid-engined design, my favorite:

Where have you seen it took 4-6 years to develop a model?? Engineering something completely new is another matter, but 'standard' new models? Traditional lead times were always right about 24 months. The GM '59 program shifted gears during the program- the bodies as produced were first penned Mar '57, they had to be cranking off the assembly lines in August '58 for the Sept intros, so that's 17 months. Prior to that, up to Feb '57, the bodies (very early stages of development) were totally different, and extension of the '58s. GM Styling threw all that in the trash & started new.

Of course..... these were all penned in the 1960s.

Like any decade- there's good & bad. The swelling tide of plastics was one of the Very Bad, tho.

Size looks good, but it it's merely a 'larger sausage', vs. something with a killer proportional presence like the Ciel, I'm dubious.

Pffft: the standard so-called "LWB" adds like 2-3 measly inches to the WB. I'm talkin' 'bout a heritage wheelbased ATS : 144".

{plays right along} I'd like to see a stretch ATS limo with foot rests & fold down trays. Except FWD.

Anything that gets us away from nursery school naming conventions, AKA: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 Cadillac does not need a sub-ATS. They're in the same price segment as the CLA but they're ABOVE it in price & product. Great bottom line, now move upward while MB is busy moving DOWN. Cadillac also does not need to ape every move MB/BMW make.

LOL. - - - - This is marketing fallacy : naming a successful flagship after a just-shuttered failure of a brand. No one remembers either 'pullman' or 'grosser', so there's no cache' there, but dfelt is right; the latter is juvenile-sounding name. Daimler should just tack another alpha-numeric on it - that seems to resonate well with the typical MB buyer. Better yet; skip the marketing millions and just make the s-class better by having whatever left-over features from the maybach under the option list of the S. It needs a shot in the arm anymore.

An Italia; nice! a very rare bird. Nice mix of iron overall. Was it tough to get a good vantage point when shooting - a lot of the cars are unfortunately clipped at one end or another :