Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

balthazar

In Hibernation
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    40,855

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    583

 Content Type 

Everything posted by balthazar

  1. balthazar
    ^ How can drivers drive a self-driving car more aggressively?
  2. balthazar
    Speaking overall, I've long thought that if the automobile was invented in, say, the year 2000...; that a handful of inventors brought out these 4000 lb, 300 HP, 130 MPH personal conveyances, that the Gov't would quickly work to outlaw them as dangerous & a burden on society. I would not be surprised if a number of proponents of self-driving cars think the same way- that personal control over something as complex & fast as a car is a 'bad thing'... and thusly they support the SDC. After all, this is the common mindset, that an individual is incapable of personal responsibility, and must be 'looked after' by...... other individuals who "know better".
  3. balthazar
    Why? -- -- -- So the company that markets a product to ZERO.3 percent of the market, wants to pursue a even smaller segment?? Hoping to get in on the ground floor of the ZERO.0005 % slice of the pie?
  4. balthazar
    Silvie HD looks a bit over the top IMO, and a bit weird. RE the GMCs, I think of the 2 shots above -stylistically- I'd go with the 1500. Some aspects of the HDs are getting to heavy-looking.
  5. balthazar
    ^ Maybe not, but it's a small matter. You can option an e-class up to $94K, but the average buyer is actually only paying $50K. Don't believe anyone cares how a 2014 mercedes interior holds up in the year 2034- it's already changed hands numerous times on average, and the initial buyer is long gone. The design, however, is immediate and it's severely lacking.
  6. balthazar
    Looks dated, uninspired and unremarkable. Can't imagine anyone ponying up for this generica. And what's with the Buick VentiPorts (of sorts)?
  7. balthazar
    Yea; I didn't get that claim, either, and I've been hanging out here for 11 years now.
  8. balthazar
    '68 Olds 422 convert, med blue/ top down, factory stock, a stunner, rollin'.
  9. balthazar
  10. balthazar
    You need to check Cadillac's production figures thruout the '70s. They tell the facts vs. your account. Seville was a clean gut-check to mercedes, who thought they had Cadillac right where they wanted them. It was quite a strong contender and got very good press, but by that same year I mentioned above, the 2nd gen veered off in another direction. Fact of the matter is, mercedes changed up their game from the '60s to the '80s to become a LOT more like Cadillac than the other way around. Clearly, they benchmarked. But Roger Smith's '80s sure made things easier for the Germans... Anyway, it's an incredible time to watch Cadillac, the ATS & CTS sure go miles to restore the established tradition @ Cadillac. Meanwhile the german twins are working hard on FWD 'value' cars.
  11. balthazar
    You are right; styling is a matter of opinion... however, I was addressing market position, image & perception, esp vs. competition (like I stated), not merely my personal opinion of styling. RE valuation today- this is not an indication of Cadillac's product/image/etc, but a wider view of the eras in question. Look at a '55 mercedes S vs. a '65 S; the former is worth 5 times the latter. BMW is in the same boat- '50s stuff is just that highly valued. High retail for a '53 Eldorado is $225,000.
  12. balthazar
    Cadillac's image / perception decline started in the later 1970s, not the '60s, and even then it was slight. Around the time the Seville came out there was an beginning undercurrent where you'd see criticism of product, and IMO it was justified in a number of areas. Plus, you started to hear a beginning positive undercurrent WRT Daimler & BMW (but not much- as these were not luxury cars at the time, but spartan 'sports sedans', to a degree they had little in the way of performance, but they showed a decent step up in handling). Where Cadillac fell of the cliff, screaming, began right about 1980, with the triple whammy of the GM diesel, the V8-6-4 and the C-car. But in the 1960s, Cadillac was still very much at the pinnacle overall. You can pick at that to a limited degree (discontinuation of the Eldo Brougham, discontinuation of the unique-bodied Eldorado) but the '67 E pretty much restored at least the later of those. IMO, by circa '73-74, the senior cars were looking a bit behind where things were going, but the '77 downsize was a home run at the time. DD- looking forward to the C&G take on the CTS!
  13. balthazar
    Online bidding on a couple, BEFORE the auction even starts : '65 Impala 2-dr, 12 miles : $17,250 '64 Impala 2-dr, 0 miles : $22,500 '58 Chevy Cameo pickup, 1 mile : $26,000 '78 Corvette Indy Pace Car, 4 miles : $35,500
  14. balthazar
    If someone feels there is a lack of timely news, that someone, I'm sure, is more than welcome to start posting said breaking news, rather than dipping into unrelated topics to complain.
  15. balthazar
    Still pertinent news if one wanted to attend the auction, tho.
  16. balthazar
    ^ That's not my point, it's someone else's (see closing tag...)
  17. balthazar
    '68 Buick Skylark convert, tan over brown, great shape, rollin'. '67 Mustang hardtop, brown primer, decent shape, smoky burnout pulling onto 4-lane highway. '65 Olds 442 hardtop, aqua, great shape, rollin'. '64 LeMans 2-dr hardtop, white, great shape, rollin'.
  18. balthazar
    'I worry that those who are not rabid BMW fans will be confused by 'M Performance' and the true 'M' cars, and be disappointed at how the former cars fall short of the latter.' [/hyperV6]
  19. balthazar
    A surprising number of people, even those that frequent auto forums, ALSO strongly believe higher numbers equate to "better"....
  20. balthazar
    At farm auction today ~ '40 Ford HD with factory GarWood dump bed : '46-ish Ford with flat bed & factory Marmon-Harrington 4WD :
  21. balthazar
    This just another name shuffle to makes things consistent for the noobs; the 1-series was a 2-dr, so it 'needs' to move to "2-series". It's not a new model, just rebadged.
  22. balthazar
    ^ OK, so they're the most profitable according to you. Great; very admirable from a business perspective. Why, then, bother with minivans & cargo vans & FWD appliances? Why bookend your catalog with business-case failures (smart/ maybach)? Stick to the core lines and make them the best, always the best, and after that, work on miraculous economy, too. Stop whoring your nameplate and cheapening your image.
  23. balthazar
    I looked at the TC's specs on Ford's site (and they are small for me), but I really would like to check one out in person. I've driven an (extended, windowless, 2-seat) Econoline, and I could see how some would be turned away from such a large box. But IMO there's certainly a need for both.
  24. balthazar
    It's pretty common : I've heard it about all my life, seen many products so dubbed. Google 'item caddy' and 10 million hits are returned. Surprised you've found it otherwise. Regardless, the name won't fly here due to it being a generations-old nickname for Cadillac. Surprising to me these mini-commercial vans are on what seems like a notable upswing... they are very limited in capacity. Of course, 'regular' passenger vehicles (short of SUVs) are too, so...
  25. balthazar
    >>"Yes, like a carrier or container."<< Gee golly Mr Wizard, thanks for 'splainin' that termino-logdy. Many folk prolly never did done heard that wurd before; good 'splainin! >>"probably would need a different name for NA."<< really?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search