balthazar

Didn't open them all, but those that interested me enough to: Still can't figure out how ChryCo nailed the Durango exterior so HARD! Killer. Really like the Regal GS and the GMC Sierra- they'd make a GREAT driveway pair. The BMW X is ghastly, so is the bloated Bentley sedan. The other Bentley model still look like cheap influences from the old Integra to me. Good thorough job NOS!

>>"Relaying on the past is good for only so long and then you need to move on."<< Shhh! Don't let BMW hear you! And mercedes JUST re-released 1982's grilles! Yer gonna roont it! -- -- -- -- -- >>"The Lacrosse has done well to make people notice but it look too much like a Lexus to lead to future Buicks. I see it as only a short term fix. It got peoples attention and now it is time to give them a car everyone will like and would not be confused with some other brand. "<< Buick HAS DONE THIS. YOU may see the Lacrosse as a "short term fix", but after a good 25 years, Buick HAS seized on an iconic, heritage-linked visual distinction that both says 'Buick' AND separates them from the rest of the slab-sided generics out there. Forcing some sort of contrived surface-ripple, that has said nothing to no one and is there just to be 'different', THEN trying to make that somehow say 'Buick' is just spinning wheels & wasting time Buick doesn't have. The issues you seem to have ('Buick looks too much like lexus') is misrepresented; everything looks too much like everything else. Stop looking for things you can link to the past in order to damn-with-faint-praise the present. Take this from the 'junkyard perspective'; you used to be able to look out, visually, over a field of tightly spaced vehicles, and pull out the roofline of Corporate X. A GM roofline vs. a Ford roofline vs. a MoPar roofline vs. an AMC roofline. A component seldom thought of as 'signature', yet it was. A door laying on the ground- easily identifiable. You can't do that with current vehicles, for the vast majority of instances. No; brand ID is all tied up in headlights, tails & grilles, and little else... esp when considering how much of that 'little else' is copied brand-to-brand-to-brand.

^ If that's right (not saying it isn't), Buick is not gaining any lines ('baby Enclave' aside): Verano in, Lucerne out.

Hopefully it's more like mid-summer. When is the Lucerne projected to discontinue?

When is the Verano expected to be in showrooms?

GM as a whole left off the radical concept thing after the '61 Motorama (and there weren't many there, either). There were plenty of prototypes & internal concepts, and some shown mild trim/equipment cars, but they'll not pop to mind when thinking '60s/70s Buick concepts. The LaSalle/Riv above was not publically shown. The '63 Wildcat 445 car was tho: GM also began issuing 'GM' branded concepts in the '60s, for EX: '64 GM Runabout '64 GM -X Stiletto '69 GM XP 511 Commuter Car

I believe the strut/scissor hinge set-up doesn't raise the decklid as far as gooseneck hinges. They also narrow the opening considerably, as all that has to mount somewhere. -- -- -- -- -- This again seems to be a instance where an automotive execution has gotten much WORSE than it was already excellently engineered as:

Since I have again (and not without precedent) veered off on a historical tangent, here's the rest of the Riv ancestors: XP-715: Earlier proposal: Can't find an online pic of the clay that Cadillac turned down, also badged 'LaSalle'.

As originally released, the Silver Arrow I wore big blackwalls, knock-off wires and the Riviera eggcrate grille. -- -- -- -- -- At some point it gained retro concentric-ribbed hubcaps, wide whites and the thermostatically-operated grille 'doors' (something yet again that was before it's time). It was redone after '72, because I've seen the original-spec SA I photographed alongside the '72 SA III & Mitchell. -- -- -- -- -- Color is fine, and Mitchell was not known for offbeat concept colors.

Such a nice classy car. Good write-up. Those truck goosenecks are something; hard to believe there's not a better solution. If decks weren't so high, resulting is such tall RR fascias, the lids wouldn't have to open so incredibly far. I wonder if a 'flying strut' design would work: where the trunklid is connected to 2 arms alongside the RR window, and it actually hinged at or near the top of the RR glass. Like a hatchback but the RR glass stays put. That would eliminate the in-trunk hinges/ goosenecks/ scissors entirely.

IMO, the Buick absolutely has the capability to pull people out of an accord. Better, more harmonious & upscale design in the Buick.

Thanks 'bo. It certainly would be cool to see the orig join dates now...

I think last time this topic came up, I found I was here since Jun '02. Just now poking around on the archives, all I could find was me with 61 posts on 11-27-02, and I know I didn't post much early on. Anyone care to look me up, I'll write it down this time...

Silver Arrow II was a forgotten dud, a bare minimal trim car. I and III were tastefully modified production cars, primarily featuring a chopped top, so unfortunately -tho well-recieved then & now- neither was 'stylistically ground breaking'... as the designs were already released.

honda

Nothing earth-shattering. I see it's going to get that same lil useless triangle window the Verano has. Windshield nearly reaches the center of the front tire. The Podification of the automobile continues....

toyoyo is far from a 'safe' choice in more ways than one. What's more pertinent here is how many are going to shuffle away from the imports to this import.

room = bad I believe the comparison is how small the dash is. Either way- it's useless space- enlarging it to the max adds nothing to the interior, it's a byproduct of aerodynamic requirements. I am also thinking that these 'ventless vents' are another way to add roof crush reinforcement- another aspect of design now dictated by law.

^ It's almost like automakers are building cars around a interior volume number, or perception at least. What a 2-ft deep dash is supposed to offer the occupants, I don't know.

Looks sharp (tho I can't personally warm to the styling). Interesting that all this recent snow didn't persuade you to go for AWD, but it's really not (normally) necc in Jersey, as you undoubtedly kno. I'm sure it will serve you very well; looking forward to some in-progress reports (and a few more pics) on it.

^ Noted. Of course, with the doors closed, it's not a BD either way. Unfortunately, the increasingly steep angles on windshields is forcing them forward, and aerodynamic benchmarks are resulting in compromises like these. They really do zero towards visibility, unless looking at curbing is your hobby. Expect more of this down the road.

^ You forgot the original, full-size '53-54.

I don't find the 200C pics to be "fantastic". The 1st one is very good, the 2nd one it just gets lost in the monochrome, the 3rd is only 'fine' and the last one looks like a bad 'Shop (which it is). In general; I'd rather look at a dynamic, well designed car with a plain background than a 'jazzy' background diverting attention from a mediocre design.

^ good stuff, WMJ! Part of the problem is the 24-hr news cycle and the technology-laced reduction of the Attention Span, which is why labels resonate so well with most; they can catch a label and dismiss an entire POV and go back to streaming S&TC and stop critical thinking. I have tried to have conversations with others (here & elsewhere), but as soon as the labels are thrown down, they stop listening/thinking. I was really liking the idea put forth to mix up the seating in Congress and toss all that 'across the aisle' BS out the window. Minor thing, but it can't hurt. To hell with Congressional tradition. Clique politics doesn't work.

This new Chrysler face is not jelling with me....