balthazar

Internally known as XP-200. Nice work! I do find it only minorly wonky that she sports '59 instruments & pedals, but I understand the limitation of recreating something (custom & complex) from nothing. http://www.motobullet.com/news.php?id=10448

'stang- I believe photographic has reflected some light into the grille cavities on the '62 GP, highlighting them in a different way than normally viewed. Kinda misleads on the contours a bit. Still such a beautiful car... Agreed on the early GM compacts- some of them are quite appealing... even tho obviously 'de-engineered' from the full-size lines.

Clam shell gate was some kick-ass engineering- I've heard they were very reliable. Friend's folks had a '76 Buick Estate wagon, while we had a '77 Safari. In truth, then I thought the '76 was rather bloated vs. the trim '77, but later this so-called 'measure of space efficiency' was revealed as meaningless as it is. Huge difference underhood tho- '76 455, still a TRQ monster, vs. a 135 HP Pontiac 301 2bbl.

Cool album- nice '66 Elky at 'work'! Also liked the '60 Pontiac contemplating squEEEzing back into the garage.

Will see if I can get a pic of the slumbering outside '71 by me, that's been slumbering for at least 18 years.

The brake system engineering is so off-the-wall for a pusher car- that's the really cool thing I learned. The thinking there, as far as I know, is very unique & interesting, even tho I'm not sure exactly how well it wold work. The descendant Pontiac 8-lug system worked GREAT, but was notably different.

Cubitar ~ >>"The '71 Buick front end reminds me a bit of the '70 Impala..similar grille placement, bumper shape, hood shape.."<< My pic link broke, but look at the '71 Impy- in twilight at 20 paces, you wouldn't be able to tell them apart. >>"It's amazing to think about how many bodystyles, models, etc were introduced for 1971 w/ the redesign of the B-, C- and E- bodies with distinct sheetmetal (other than some roofs (rooves?)..across 5 divisions with distinct engine choices, etc."<< Well, this is really no different that the years recently preceeding, but I'll stick to my impression that the stylistic distinctions become notably muddy starting in '71 or thereabouts. GM Styling thought they could spread some lightly-fuzzed Cadillac cues to Chevrolet because of the price differences (Chevy Chevy, it's always Chevy that screws with a good plan ), and Buick & Olds kind of averaged out between the 2. At least Pontiac retained clear stylistic independence... relatively. ocnblu ~ >>"Doesn't it stand to reason that it would be advantageous for a car maker to trim the number of platforms and make more variations on each platform? I'd be interested in knowing profit per unit in realtime dollars, GM 1959 v. GM 2010."<< Some (myself included) have advocated doing this, and in fact feel it's inevitable (contraction of models). The ever-increasing competition, the depressed economy... if they alone keep up over the next decade, you'll HAVE to see this happen. >>"In 1959 we had a B, C and probably D body that were all closely related. We had a pickup, medium-duty truck which probably shared a cab with the pickup and a Corvette. And the market was covered to great success."<< Note tho that there was but 1 D-Body, the Series 75 Cadillac limousine, but point made. Yes- light & medium-duty trucks shared the same cabs. It has to come full circle- ESP with the costs of bringing one model to market- the business case for making a profit on Car X, Platform Y has to be getting thinner & thinner.

Centurion was a decent continuation of the Century/ Invicta/ WIldcat spot in the Buick catalog, but my issue when you get into the early '70s is gross stylistic overlap: Cripes- just move the parking lights & change the grille texture, otherwise- same design !! In this, the car become generic to me because the lines begin to blurr so badly. It's not to say that they're ugly (they're certainly not)- but the soul began draining in '71... Riviera, of course, was fantastic.

Not my favorite Buick design result, no, but there's no arguing against that motor! Listen to it at .40 secs- does that sound like a anything you'd expect in a (now) old Buick ?? The 455 going in my '59 is a standard BC-code mill from a '72 Riviera. These are damn good, short-stroke big blocks- 510 TRQ in a '70 GS Stage 1- second only to Cadillac's 525 & 550. Great intake/exhaust balance and relatively straight exhaust ports helped make big power. The '73 & up A-Bodys never did anything for me. I don't care for the dual headlamps over quads (every year prior), the roofline doesn't work for me on a musclecar-type (tho it is a spiritual successor to the '59-60 coupe roofline!) : ...and overall, they seem so much larger & less aggressive than the '68-72s.

I stuck this in with Cadillac, tho I tend to shy away from such a 'dismissive' linking, and because I think this is significant enough to keep it public (the Lounge was my 2nd choice). Here are some new vids focusing on the rescued 1955 LaSalle II roadster Motorama show car, internally known as XP-34. This car, tho historically fell thru the cracks and garnered little attention from enthusiasts, was a technological tour de force. One of the most amazing things learnt here is the sheer towering mastery General Motors was regularly exercising in the 1950s, one of it's greatest decades of all time. Usually the term "pushmobile" is an automatic excuse to wave off a car as 'smoke & mirrors', a hastily spit-shined rock made to look pretty. These vids show that not only was the engineering extensive & unique, but very futuristic & predictive. Tho this car lack a few components that would have made it drivable (lack of time perhaps??), it certainly appears that being functional was intended at least somehwere along the process. Some background pics: Rescued circa 1988, and finally having it's turn come up for restoration, the owner Joe Bortz is going about enabling a small electric motor to drive the car, leaving the FI DOHC AL V-6 underhood for posterity & historical record. While I have some minor reservations about going this route, I think I can get behind it. But check out the detailing & engineering involved in a turntable car that never moved under it's own power. Wow, did GM ever kno how to do it right then : Part I ~ Part II ~ Brakes pre-date the Pontiac 8-lug concept (patented in 1959, produced for over-the-counter availability in late '60, RPO for '61). I'll assume the chains hanging down fore & aft were for securing the LaS II during transport by GM. Amazing close-up look at a true on-off show car. I for one am indescribably jealous. Enjoy!

Dodgefan ~ >>"because.............it's larger, it would probably cost a lot less, and the IS doesn't come as a true coupe yet, it's either a sedan or (somewhat awkward looking) hardtop convertible."<< That custom one-off 'yoyo above isn't a true coupe either. Precious few of them in any segment.

I have to agree with the basics of this, and especially the bolded part- because it's so typically & absolutely true. As far as the 'uselessness' of voting, I too have felt that way at times, but I rank the duty/ responsibility/ right of voting above the too frequent 'uselessness' of it in many cases, and will continue to do so.

Voted. Short ballot here in Jersey. Have voted in every presidential since I was eligible, and every state/local since becoming a homeowner. I understand FOG's general 'bleak' POV; my position is at the very least- my vote has the potential to uproot the entrenched and require the newcomers to scramble to build their snake oil stands all over.

Nick - No offense meant, I don't think I put words into your mouth and you clearly did acknowledge it was truthful. Your post is certainly within reason if the point was the topicality of putting it on the front page, it's just I reacted to your use of the term 'smear', and what that implies.

And absolutely nothing against Nick -we are all entitled to our own opinions- but the idea that speaking the truth about a situation is somehow a disservice at large likewise floors me. Will the playing field ever be leveled ???

^ Agreed WRT the tacoma. We still get occasional, non-automotive media mention of the Vega, yet 30 years later a major manufacturer's products are BREAKING IN HALF- they should be pop culture joke fodder by now.

^ Olds is right; it's news, it HASN'T been reported en total by the media, and it's hard fact (not a 'smear'). And to me, it's the media issue that's primary- the 'kid glove' treatment toward foreign automakers has been going on en mass for decades... hell, I became conscious of it in 1985. If one piece opens one 'journalists' eyes via professional embarrassment, maybe we can get media in general to improve their quality, too. As a bonus, the consumer is alerted to a real potential for a substandard product they'd prevfer to avoid if they knew. That's a win/ win/ win in my book.

^ Agreed, beyond the number, this is basically a PSA to warn consumers how crappy their vehicles are and to avoid them- things like that are an intangible, more legalese than a real problem. But some of the problems listed above; WHEW! that's some really bad, basic carbuilding 101 stuff.

i doff my cap to you, Drew; nice, shiny tabulation with a BIG FAT number at the end. Wow, what a tremendous fall from grace. Allow me to quote: 25,674,261 Now, to spread the word, spread the word, SPREAD THE WORD !

Let's get this clear; I didn't buy a Malibu, my wife did. Now technically-speaking..., since I clunkered my F-150 towards it, I believe it's in my name (or will be when the loan is paid)... but I certainly don't use it everyday- she does. Wait, did I just disprove my first statement? Camino is single- his only automotive criteria is to suit himself. If I was single, I'd still be in an early-mid-60s daily driver...

To tell the truth, I missed the tiny 'vote' circles to the left the first & second times I checked into this topic- I just voted now!

^ interesting! Lot of bad civic drivers, I guess... but then again, everything is expensive to insure anymore. hyundai must be cheaper to repair What say you, ocnblu?

I've yet to see an Avalanche up close, specifically- the ins & outs of the MidGate system. I live fine with 6.5'- gives me 7+' to the top of the tailgate (the angle), as I have had 10' ladders in & out of my truck this summer (also had a 16'er, but used a special rig I built to haul it). But the Avalanche bed length of (5'3") is too short. 'MidGate down' is not the answer, as the back seat is commonly going to be full of tools. Suburban is shorter (130/222 vs. 153/239 for the 2500HD CC/SB), might be doable. Will look into them further...

Insurance costs, assuming the general teenager has looked into them, are a factor, but no new car is cheap insurance-wise, and this still doesn't factor into what teenagers LIKE from the curb IMO. The post I reacted to here was 66stang's, regarding 'what kids aren't into'. Insurance is a financial factor mostly concerning the parents of said teenagers. While a given teenager may like a 3-series by itself, I don't imagine any who like the Mustang will default to a 3-series and be 'into it' because the insurance is cheaper. Unless they have little opinion of cars beyond transportation. Teenagers don't buy new cars anyway, ABA is now 50 or thereabouts, IIRC. Does a V6 Mustang really cost that much more to insure than a civic ?? ( i ask because I have no idea.)

regfootball ~ >>"first off, for GM to call a DOHC engine 'premium' is laughable since most of the rest of the competition had been making them and putting them in garden variety cars for quite awhile. For GM to say its premium was them putting their own band aid spin on..."<< Where did GM call one 'premium'? Isn't it labeled 'HF' for 'high feature' ?? This is a bad thing somehow? regfootball ~ >>"if it requires technology and manufacturing investment, it might as well be a whole new engine. you are talking about switching materials, finishing processes, specifications. generally in manufacturing engines, it sometimes is based on the bore centers and such. you mess with the metalurgy of an engine, and the cam drives / valvetrain, it pretty much is a new engine."<< Why on earth would you need to reinvent metallurgy or machining processes to offer new technology on an engine ??