balthazar

Fascinating that the calling card of the family-aimed SUV/CUV is "seats 7", yet cars have quietly dropped from 6 to 4/5 (and cramped, at that).

It's not like there are Great Forward Strides in greenhouse design. It's certainly not worth the cost to retool for a minutely-different greenhouse shape. 'Rearranging deck chairs', and all that.

A pick-up is pretty much a 'haul all' vehicle. I recently transported 21'-long steel framework in my CC/6.5' SIlverado. • • • Problem with the 'necessary evil' of cubic feet of interior volume is; a lot of it is commonly unusable. IE; you can't stack plastic grocery bags 3.5' high behind the rear seat. I also note in another thread that in measurements of the Lucerne vs. the LaCrosse, no accounting is made in front hip room for a console or not. Misleading, much?

Well, with mercedees & BMW proving to the world that FWD is 'aspirational', perhaps Acura can ride their marketing coattails.

All these 'looks like Car X' only points to the narrowing funnel of car styling within the constraints of so many restrictions, IMO.

All concepts are 'dead' until they aren't.

Thats just it; "relatively". The term by itself (lots) is misleading without 'relatively'. The term is also individually definable... But it's never going to equate to 'lots' generally-speaking.

I don't automatically buy the assumptive 'same size/type vehicle in same showroom means instant cannibalization'- if it was a straight rebadge; perhaps, but differentiated in marketing, features & intent enough and both can stand on their own (esp in a still-growing segment).

There's certainly not going to be "lots" of cargo space in a vehicle the size of a Sonic.

It's a.... 2-dr sedan, just like the other references (1-series, etc). The '30s & '40s 'coupes', as 5-windows, were by definition 2-dr sedans, it was the 3-window models that were 'close-coupled'. Corvette is a coupe by definition.

I don't get the point of it @ this size as a Buick. No thank you.

Not getting any 'Malibu' out of the ATS and we've got a red one in the driveway.

Maintains & extends the family design language well. Has a bit of flare in the front end (lights, lower fascia at the ends). Don't know what those saying 'not shocking' were expecting. I think Cadillac struck a very good balance here. Of course, with a marque as storied as Cadillac, the expectations/demands are all over the board. Others in this field, and here the IS250/350 comes readily to mind, look positively cheap & rebadged in comparison. 3-series also manages to look cheap & dated in comparison. Looking forward to comparison road tests (tho I normally hate that format).

CD is still in my truck's player today. When something sticks with me, I tend to wear it out. It is a great album. I listen to more of a variety sitting here @ the machine than driving around. No XM or iPod on the road, so...

...got a spare 4 or 5 hours? (hopefully this works...) http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=428585 • • • I really don't belong here......

Never cared for these personally. I support the concept here with the SS, and appreciate it & the following these have... but I could never get into the amorphous, rather plain envelope.

RHD is of little consequence circa 1912. I've certainly looked at a lot of stuff from this vintage (tho by no means am I as familiar as I am with post-war stuff), and this thing really says nothing to me. The details of the bodywork DO say- not OEM-built to me. These pics have gone viral, and are being discussed on numerous boards by names I know whom are very much moreso learned in brass-era stuff than me, and there's still no strong contender for an ID... yet. IMO, it's going to boil down to ID'ing pieces of it, which will only confirm it's home-built. I'm following this on a few boards with interest.

Dare accepted, and on the honor system, I did not laugh. Frankly, it looks like it was born that way.

Very clean, white, '70 Coronet hardtop, aftermarket shoes, parking in residential driveway. Nice red '70 Chevelle SS hardtop (clone), black stripes, 4-spd, BB crate motor, clean driver with some bubbling, owner has bad knees & the clutch is too stiff.

Have to disagree with that last bit somewhat. Even in the last year of production, the Formula was lighter than the T/A and they were always a cleaner look. My reference was vs. the '70; by '81, the Formula had the spoiler, steel Rally IIs, and exhaust splitters (prolly other equipment) standard- just like the T/A. It wasn't as stripped down as the '70 in the video above. Then again- there just wasn't as much of a performance range left, either, so IMO Pontiac gave it some more flash (esp considering it was slotted right below the T/A in price). Standard Formula motor for '81 was the 4.3L V8.

The 'old ralleys' were Rally I 's. I too like them a bunch- would've liked to see them continue alongside the Rally IIs. Better yet, I wish the GTO/LeMans 8-lugs had reached RPO status. Whole purpose of the Formula was T/A performance in a stripped-down car. As such I believe the steelies/dog dishes were lighter than the T/A Honeycombs. Also explains the lack of a spoiler (it was available). Later on, the Formula got bogged down with gingerbread.

Hey, it's the source of my user name! 1400 HP- must be a Chevy BB transplant.

I know the TX heat is rough on car interiors, but that's NOT the interior of a 16K mile car. Upholstery is not just split, there's chunks missing. Look at the wear on that gas pedal. Not buying the mileage claim on this one; IMO it's 116K. Still, for a S60S with A/C, I have to give it a Cheer (tho I'd very much so prefer either a CdV or an ES). The coupes with the Florentine roofline are just so dreamy.

Waitaminnit, did toyoyo/lexus just say they were competing with Buick??

From my ads, the Turbo was usually shown with the alloy rims; here the wires seem to clash. Super clean and yes; a very nice design. Cheers.