balthazar

>>"Even recently, last trip was just under 2 hours for me at Mays Landing."<< South Brunswick - last visit was maybe 10 minutes. Not a practical option for you distance-wise, granted... -- -- -- -- -- >>"My truck's current inspection us up tommorow... so what I want to kno is- can I scrape the sticker out of the window now??"<< >>"Still have emissions testing, so don't scrape that out too quickly..."<< Should've specified - I have a non-commercial diesel over 8501 lbs GVWR- exempt according to state. I should be able to remove the sticker... but I'll leave it in for now.

I haven't 'sat in lines for hours' for many years after learning the ins-n-outs of a local, rural state agency- so no complaints there. My truck's current inspection us up tommorow... so what I want to kno is- can I scrape the sticker out of the window now?? This gets me more mindful of getting the COE on the road.... If only they didn't implement this 20 yrs ago- the mayhem I could've caused.

Suddenly, it's 1985.

"If subaru wants to be taken seriously, they need to get of the cladding."

I have no complaints RE the wife's 2.4L / 6-spd 'bu out on the highway. Smooth & quiet, has reserve if you need it.

What- the air doesn't flow over the roof otherwise ?

The bad : possibly the worst factory rims, ever. I see the front overhang is exactly the same; ummm- yay tradition ?? The good : I always liked the red accent in the GTI grilles. Very nice shots. The question : why do the A-pillars extend past the windshield- can't be good for aero ??

Gosh; Numan looks so angry. Cool cover- love FF & both the cover & original.

Not bad outside today- keeping out of the sun there was a actual, fairly refreshing breeze. How far inland do the 'ocean breezes' blow- current job is relatively close...

g-wagon, the sprinter, the minivan, and the upcoming FWD models should not wear the mercedes caltrop- put the trucks under freightliner and the puddlejumpers under smart or create another brand. it's a steady downslope of downmarketing, all because mercedes is ravenously hungry for volume... at the expense of image.

And I have a feeling it's more like 'sell 1 million/yr retail and .4 million fleet'... or something like that. I watched as my Silverado sailed past a 'g-wagon' the other day on the highway. It's 2010, and this things still has giant, visible rubber gaskets where the lights screw to the body, black plastic moldings, black plastic door handles- it's easily the biggest anachronism in the auto industry. Last make to have such poor, outdated body hardware 'engineering' was jaguar- and that's YEARS ago by now. How anyone is supposed to 'drink in the aura' of a s-class on the same showroom floor as this WW2-era mail jeep is beyond me.

I am deathly afraid to get the next electric bill...

mercedes recently celebrated it's 25th million vehicle sold since 1945 (unusual starting point, what about since 1926 ??). The vehicle was an e-class sedan, sold in a fleet sale to a taxi company. That pretty much sweeps the BS froth off the top and gets right down to the murky gist of it, IMO.

>>"Cadillac's goal by 2014 seems to be to compete with the Lexus IS, ES, GS, RX and LX570, so basically the lower 2/3 of Lexus."<< Unfortunately, that is what lexus is concentrating on, for that is the brand's bread & butter. Like it or not, Lexus is primarily a truck brand- the RX carries the entire brand and the ES is about half that. The rest are niche-level volumes. 'flagship this' and 'supersnit that' aren't moving any other lexus models any because the brand is so muddled.

WRT smk4565 ~ Ahhh- you did not counter my faux quote of you, excellent to see a slight measure of consistancy (in a realistic way) creeping in! So we agree- toyoyo's heavier engines are due to poor engineering. Glad that's settled. smk4565 ~ >>"So aside from the very boring styling and unintended acceleration, their engineering is in front of GM's (or Ford's or Chrysler's) in many ways."<< Not in the way of metallurgy, body integrity, frame longevity, weld penetration, transmission quality, front suspension engineering, electrical issues, corrosion resistance... and the host of other reasons toyoyo has recalled nearly TWENTY MILLION vehicles in the last decade. Big difference between gushing PR prose and real world engineering quality. >>"The Lexus LS460 is 58-60 decibels at 70 mph (depending on the test), no GM car is close to that. The Lexus at full throttle has been measured at 65-70 DBA, so they must have gotten something right with that V8."<< Or the level of insulation in the car- those decibel measurements are made from INSIDE the passenger compartment. And no doubt there is hundreds of pounds of insulation & rubber seals in that near 5000 lb car.

What's 'good' and how much it costs are seldom on the same side of the scale is all I'm saying. And; that somewhere there's a bottom line to every scenario. I'm NOT saying tankless systems are inherantly bad- they sound good on paper, but supposedly tankless only post a 20-22% advatange over the the 'huge, wasteful, obsolete' tank systems. Sure- that sounds considerable, and everything else being equal (is it ever??)- no one can legitimately argue against it. But what is the cost and when do you break even against the tank system ?? IMO, cost per longevity are paramount to 'being green'. There's so much rampant 'green' hypocrisy that at times it's hard to take the cause seriously/consistantly. That said, I am rather environmentally conservative, I think (outside of what I drive/own).

dwightlooi ~ >>"GM 3.6L DOHC DI V6 = 194 kg GM 6.2L IBC V8 = 183 kg Ford 5.0L DOHC V8 = 195 kg BMW 4.0L DOHC V8 = 202 kg Lexus 5.0L DOHC DI V8 = 222 kg Lexus 3.5L DOHC DI V8 = 174 kg"<< :P

That's it: I asked my B-I-L about a unit for my house, slightly over 2000 sq ft. Going rate for HVA/C work is $175 to show up & $75/hr labor. Plus you kno they're doubling parts costs (AT LEAST). Don't forget- in an existing house, besides the new plumbing necc, they are taking out the OLD unit. New construction would be cheaper.

Well, of course they did... but many people have no issues calling 'the other 45%' "no competition", so I rolled with it.

I have never heard of electric heating in any capacity to be cheaper or even competitive with gas. houseneeds.com (random googling) claims electric tankless are NOT eligible for the tax credit. Taking the tax off the purchase/installation (gas tankless) helps, sure, but you are still looking at over a decade to 'get ahead' financially... if the unit lasts that long. Then, dedicated to the tankless system, you face another much-more-than-a-tank bill all over again- likely withOUT the tax credit then. It's just not abundantly clear if it works out to save you money or not. I like the idea of tankless, but the reliabilty/longevity is unknown to me, and I'm not switching over if the ante' stays anywhere in the neighborhood it's in.

As with everything, the 'bottom line' is worth consideration. 'Tankless' systems are comparitively extremely expensive to buy/install. This, from the oracle of truth Consumer Reports ~ >>"Gas tankless water heaters, which use high-powered burners to quickly heat water as it runs through a heat exchanger, were 22 percent more energy efficient on average than the gas-fired storage-tank models in our tests. That translates into a savings of around $70 to $80 per year, based on 2008 national energy costs. But because they cost much more than storage water heaters, it can take up to 22 years to break even— longer than the 20-year life of many models. Moreover, our online poll of 1,200 readers revealed wide variations in installation costs, energy savings, and satisfaction."<< My B-I-L is in the HVA/C / plumbing business, he said they are around $2500 installed. My last gas water heater (6 yrs ago) was about $300.

The fantasy as I see it is- less energy usage overall will eventually cause INCREASED cost per utilities. They have stockholders to satisfy. It's already been reported that water conservation/more efficient fixtures in some areas have forced rate increases. That individuals aren't/won't see much in the way of savings is no surprise to me. My elec rates are much higher year-over-year on the same usage.

And yet, "without significant competition" GM improved product exponentially during the time period they dominated marketshare, so; no.

I don't think the manufacturer 'group photo' would be much different than it was in the mid-60s. Certainly we would not have all the same dozens of foreign makes we have now, selling but a few hundred/thousand cars a year each... GM would not likely have deviated off to purchasing other 'oddball' makes like saab or portions of subaru- so could the core divisions be even stronger product-wise than they are today? I think so. Pretty open-ended question there, OB.

Don't forget: no aspirational product and a torpedo'd reputation for quality & corporate cover-ups about such.