balthazar

Isn't this going to compete with mercedees other minivan?? Way to maintain/advance the luxury perception with all that unpainted black plastic. Downmarket, thy name is mercedees. "Mercedees- Can We Build One for You?" (Oops, that one already used before...)

That's the best angle. There were more of this one, no? The name of it is escaping me....

I burnt a crater into one knuckle welding a few weeks ago- definitely DO NOT weld naked. That said- I can't complain because I hate welding with gloves on, so I don't. Small price to pay for 'forging' steel in your own garage, I sezs.

'semi shag' carpeting sure sounds wrong in early '70s GMs (Fleetwood aside). I had a '72 with the DeLuxe interior and it had loop pile. ^ Agreed on the toned-down rear of the '73.

"Ram" is just semantics. Don't the Durango & GC share the same filthy greasy oily bits & a 'grille & badging' (and some other trivial stuff)? >>"I just don't see the point in keeping GMC around"<< Read the thread- it's all in here. Or keep burying your head, makes no difference.

The dealership competition scenario is a tiny, tangential subset of GMC's overall performance. If the 'marketing effort' wasn't successful, GMCs wouldn't sell and/or the division would lose money. Let me help you out with your obviously thorny GMC issue: think of it as a option on Chevy trucks- an extra-cost appearance option that allows broader customization/individualization vs. the much more common Chevy trucks. You know, like the trivial differences BMW installs on their M brand vs. the pedestrian 3-series. Now- who could argue against that?

The degree of 'triviality' is your opinion. On the big pick-ups, the differences are still more than just a grille & badge as you dismissively suggest- that's a fact. And obviously that works @ the consumer level. Irrelevant; the fact remains that whatever the opinion of how or why, the division is successful by every metric. That should be celebrated, not torn down.

^ Grilles, headlights, taillights, fenders, quarters, hoods, bumpers, rims.... all trivial stuff...

Charlie Brown ~ >>"GMC is competition for Chevy as it stands now."<< Where's your documentation to support this?? Any links, or just a gut feeling/ wishful thought? We've been over this numerous times- the same was said about Pontiac/Chevy, and Olds/Buick... but the bulk of those customers LEFT GM. As a long-time truck buyer, I can tell you I've seen uncountable testimonials that these are distinct consumer entities of considerable volume. I mean, if 'GMCs are rebadged Chevys'- then how the hell did GMC move so much damned volume??? Continually repeating the same ignorant untruths about GMC will not a 'problem' make. >>"Not being able to differentiate brands and having them compete with each other was part of what led GM to bankruptcy."<< Not in this case. And not everything you don't get 'led to GM's bankruptcy'. >>"GMC has volume now, but gas is rising."<< This country will ALWAYS need trucks. And GM trucks get the some of the best mileage out there. >>"And GMC is a useless brand outside of North America."<< It's not "useless"; it's "not exported". Huge difference, even bigger than ride vs. handling. -- -- -- Your entire post overlaps & competes with all your other GMC-centric posts, meanwhile, again, being completely irrelevant.

GMC is the second highest volume division at GM- both currently and prior the BK with 8 divisions. GMC is very profitable and has done nothing but trend upward in quality, choices, models, profit & transaction price. "overlap" is completely irrelevant.

You said they were the same thing; the fix for your issue here- allow the dealers to glue on whichever badge the buyer prefer. snik snik done.

Well for a long time, Chevy trucks were 4s and GMCs were 6s, then GMC had 8s and Chevy only had 6s. GMC also built heavier duty trucks from the start. In the '60s, GMC had the first mainstream V-6. I would say around the decade of the '70s is when they merged closer together- so the balance of the history here has been different entities moreso than the same/similar. I don't think the consumer is stupid or being tricked as you imply tho, but moreso it's a preference; akin to someone preferring a Sport model CTS vs. the base model. Choice is what has made GM (and Ford) undisputed leaders in the truck segment- something the japanese have been unable to duplicate. The problem as I see it is, Chevy kept hammering for more of what GMC had, blurring the distinction and mirroring the lines. But like you said- recently the differentiation has been returning. I would like to see Chevy HD trucks (3500 and above) disappear and GMC take up that sub-segment.

>>"Chevy trucks would be even more profitable than they are today GMC wasn't in the picture."<< Not sure how one could possibly verify this...

GM has been tearing down competitors vehicles since before anyone else ever did. I'll not make any further comment here WRT implementation, just pointing that fact out.

The GMC opposition needs to take a consistent stance for once. If Chevy & GMC trucks are 'the same thing' than engineering & design only costs a few bucks. Advertising is irrelevant because each ad is advertising the 'same truck' and all the buyers ravenously cross-shop the 2 brands. I acknowledge the ready testimonials on the Chevy vs. GMC buyer. Me- I don't take a side there, but a huge quantity does. Go for it. To my eye, these are even more variations of the same engineering, and more options is almost always better. If GMC somehow cost the bottom line with red ink, I would say otherwise, but the volume and the profit trump all opposition I've yet read. GM was mercilessly attacked with 8 brands, now it's HALF THAT and we're back on the same tired, old 'kill GMC' rant. Eye on the ball, people; fix what's broke. GMC isn't.

>>"There is more to the car market than the USA"<< Tell that to toyoyo, who has traditionally made 75% of their global profit in the U.S. market. That's why everyone comes here (or valiantly tries to), including total crap brands like most of the chinese ones; so far behind the curve they may never catch up.... but they gotta try to get in this market- cause that's where the money is. >>"General Motors would be more profitable without GMC because all those sales could go to Chevy and the GMC marketing and operations goes away..."<< Just like Saturn... and Olds... and Pontiac.... right??? Ever read any industry news there, bunky? >>"Chevy's biggest competitor, is GMC, why make a competitor for you most important brand."<< Spec-wise, sure, but not marketwise. The Chevy & GMC consumers have a markedly separate contingency.

Ride smoothness has a LOT more to do with suspension & rolling stock than which wheels are driven. Handling & ride are NOT the same thing.

smk : >>"But right now GMC is Mercury."<< Mercury made no money and had no sales. In 2008, GMC outsold BMW by 75% in the U.S. and it was massively profitable. Find another straw argument.

Nice going using one of the most uninspired El Caminos/Sprints to nudge the idea.

Fully dressed PMD 400 is right around 675 lbs- so yes- you'll shed the most weight there. C'mon- can we get a pic in here or what??

Oooo- 5.3 with AFM/6-spd sounds great. A buddy with that in a Silvie gets in the low 20s on the highway (He said 24 via the DIC, but not sure I find that credible, tho a 2nd guy with one confirmed the same). You could also drill a LOT of holes in the Cat; 1 thing you can put in and make it lighter. I've done quite a bit of drilling on the B-59 so far (mostly in the front end, in a car about 250 lbs heavier than the P-70), but not sure how much weight I've saved (maybe 10 lbs; it takes a LOT of holes to add up to anything).

what IS the average American porno cache size ??

Could you come up with a more flawed definition of 'ultra-luxury'? What about the product ??? Even if one goes solely by price, you might consider the EB being the most expensive car you could buy in '57-58 as satisfying your definition quite well.

My dad had a '70 Cat sedan. Pics, please- I have a weird affinity for these PMDs. Hardtop- sweet! Skirts aren't going to do bupkis under 70 MPH. You are primarily dealing with square footage frontal area and lots of rough edges. I personally don't think they'd stylistically fit. Couldn't hurt, of course. Smoothing the underbelly is going to take some kind of time; she's a big girl. -- -- -- -- -- I would agree that 2.56s are very likely. I don't believe a 3.73 SRX powertrain would be a mileage liability with the ratio spread and double overdrive.