balthazar

Camino ~ >>"Have to part company with you on the MCs, Balthazar."<< You kno what- I have to revise my earlier statement. These cars just don't stick in my memory! After reading your post I looked at some pics & ads- the dual headlight '79, the quad HL '80, the 'streamlined' '81... blech. Well, the '81 mostly fixes the 'charicature' design of the -yes- awful '78-80, but all these ('78-8whatever) have lost that planted, brawny, broad-shouldered look of the '73 gen. Now that my memory is refreshed, I could own a '73 gen (greatly prefer the circular headlight look), but no way would I consider a '78-80. Thanks for making me go look. ocnblu ~ >>"If we met Balthy, would he be in black & white?"<< That's not just an avatar- that's a pic of me. Yep; the color faded out of my parched, dried skin decades ago; I'm black & white all right! (grey... to be accurate).

iiiiiiiiiiiIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTT'SSSSSS.......... JANUARY !!!

Of the MCs, I like the 1st gen best, but the '73-77s for me; the sweep of the pontoons always makes the car look like it's riding too high to my eye. I'd like to see a tasteful mild custom that's dropped a good 3 inches. But I actually like the '78-up MCs better- same flare as Gen2 but not as wild. Of the GPs, I LOVE the '69-72s, but Pontiac dropped the ball on the '73-77s- I never cared for the front end treatment and the Olds-esque split waterfall grilles. GP was always head&shoulders in aspiration above the f/s same-yr Ponchos, but for me- not after '73. Again tho- the '78 redesign was an improvement IMO. I never gravitated towards Olds, I like a handful from the early-late '60s, but the Toro after '69- just weird, the Cutlasses- too common, the rest, don't like. Then again, with in-person exposure to any vintage... anyone with an open mind can gain appreciation for most any car, in some measureable way. See, tho I grew up with '70s & '80s cars all around, I have very very few sentimental attactments to this era. The cars usually didn't 'speak' to me. In the years before I started owning my own cars, I spent countless hours drawing, reading & studying ALL vintages and my appreciation for the '50s-60s is based on --IMO-- merit and fact rather than emotion. Hope that doesn't sound too 'looking down on' anyone's else's opinion, --I'm not!!-- everyone is free to like whatever they like !

>>"riding in his third gen would convert even balthazar to a little 80's GM love"<< It's not necc the decade it was built in that determines what it is able to lay down on the road, esp when talking about a prepped car. I appreciate performance as much as anyone, regardless of what it comes out of... but that's not likely to make me show any more love for the actual car ... when the same performance can be wrung out of just about anything. But I hear you... -- -- -- -- -- The 3 commercials above are quite intersting & effective, esp like the Intrique one, but the GXP is good, too. Yet all I ever read opinion of, is, 'GM marketing is the worst in the world and has been for all time'.

An hour before midnight, I was outside in the snow (sans shoes) extinguishing a dumpster fire in my backyard. Melted/burned a 95-gal container to the ground and melted some siding. I managed to NOT burn my hands dragging it away from the house. Even tho I'm still up @ 2:40 AM, still mildly rattled, 2010 is already better than 2009. Wishing everyone a healthy, happy & lucrative New Year.

1985: shudder. {...waits patiently for thread entitled 'Remember the old "GREAT" GM days?'...}

I got your (period) Pontiac right here : May have been a bit much as a base-line LeMans, but something in between would've carried the torch better than the RPO LeMans. And I believe the rear was 'fixed' in that the extreme pointiness was blunted with an angled fascade- a solid improvement.

If going "downmarket" doesn't help an image, what do you think the 1-series is doing ?? >>"And customers don't care about the company's struggles..."<< They absolutely do. A buddy of mine is a chronic Chevy nut, currently owns 4 personal-use plus about 25 commercial, and he says because of the 'loan', his next truck may well be a Ford (replacing an '08 Silverado). I have heard a LOT of people say this (tho personally I don't see the validity of it). >>"Cadillac have to find a way to build a better car than the Germans"<< Cadillac does - the CTS & CTS-V. >>"If you measure success by profit, GM is pretty terrible."<< No argument there, but it is a better indicator of success than sheer volume in my book. Your book seems to imply mercedes would be better off selling -what- 300,000 units in the U.S. ? 400,000 ?? >>"The 1-series which you always say is a flop, outsells the STS."<< 1-series is far more affordable than the STS; it should be selling in volume numbers because of the 'downmarket' price. But it is unquestionably a flop as a car, and a failure as an entry-level 'step' to the brand. It's so close to the 3-series in looks & size it's only cannabalizing sales from it, and even that take rate is pathetic. BTW, the STS, which you always say is a flop, outsells the 6-series. >>"CTS Wagon and Coupe on the way isn't enough, BMW and Merc have had multiple body styles on multiple cars for years. Even Infiniti and Lexus have sedan/coupe/convertible on the IS and G37."<< First off, I had no idea there were converts on the IS & g37- I have seen neither an article, ad, online pic or actual version of these. I had to go look them up to be sure you weren't making them up. Must not be very appealing. Have already seen 4 CTS Sportwagons, tho, and that's only been out a few months vs. a few years. However, in bringing up lexus, note that out of 9 models, only 1 has more than 1 bodystyle (the aforementioned invisible convert). I KNOW you think lexus is 'doing things right', yet it doesn't fit your definition of that here. Likewise, infiniti, assumedly another 'doing it right', has 5 models, but only 1 with more than 1 bodystyle. Cadillac already has 2 and the 3rd is coming- they're AHEAD of lexus & infiniti now in your book.

Not trying to compete, just sayin: I don't rate that situation as tough for something proven like a Grand Marquis. It's always good when a 'sleeping' car is shocked back awake again. I should do something like that someday, when instead I smacked myself for forgetting to scrap the COE's 6-volt battery when I took 5 others the other day. >>"...most of the cars you deal with are older than my cars' ages combined. "<< Oh, nice.

RE '76 LeMans' in link : Nose looks like a block plane was run across the front, then a small piece of molding was added in the center, along with a 300-lb bumper. Rear end tapers down to an undignified droopy point- where's the typical Pontiac aggressiveness ?? All shaved off. These paved the way for what followed. Just my 2 cents.

If the point is RE the battery, a month's time of sitting/ firing up is a non-event (unless it's a complete roach). I remember firing up a 20-yr old Grand Prix after it had been sitting a year, in the dead of winter (the radiator was full of ice & snow was on the ground). Then again, that was a PMD Pontiac, not a GM Pontiac.

1-series is selling at a rate of 500/mnth. In other words, it's flopping, and badly. >>"will be lucky to top 23,000 this year"<< So what- corporation is coming out of a bankruptcy this year. >>"what does Cadillac have left?"<< CTS sportwagon & CTS coupe, in the immediate future. SRX doing very well from what I've heard (have not checked the numbers). For me, and anyone with sense, success is not measured by sheer volume. Ask toyoyo where that's gotten them, or mercedes when their warranty costs tripled in 1 year's time. I believe that was 2007, in fact. If Cadillac is profitable, I'd prefer more exclusivity (which means lower sales volume).

^^ That's why I laugh @ wiki- uncontrolled & unreliable. The only reason it got as big as it has is cause people like to 'hear' themselves 'talk'. Interesting: from '07 to '09, the 3-series lost 60,493 units, for a 43% decrease. CTS lost 22,392 units from '07 to '09, for a 39% decrease.

Yet I'm reading multiple 'facts' that the CTS has been "trending down" this year. Does seem weird that wiki lists 2009 totals when this week is still '09 and Dec #s shouldn't out til sometime in Jan. From all accounts, the wagon won't do much in the way of #s, but I expect the coupe to make a major volume contribution...

Took me a bit to get used to: the Malibu has the trunk release button on the driver's door. If it had none, tho, the fob is always right there (in pocket or ignition); I certainly would adapt. Is unusual, tho (RE LaCrosse).

Thanks Satster - that was actually helpful! CTS has been amazingly consistant volume-wise- I had seen other loose allegations it was horribly down. I am still interested in seeing it's segment marketshare since '02, esp vs. the 3-series (US sales only- not the massive European fleet sales). But relative to my opening paragraph- I went to 3-series on wiki yet no production figures there. Like I said- as a GM site- 'we' should have -at least- all GM figures listed for ready reference.... but of course without everything else- there's nothing to compare the numbers to. From the sales ticker archives: BMW 5-series YTD thru Nov 2006 : 107,016. CTS: 54,846.

Trying to find production volumes for either current or past model years on the 'net is near impossible. I have gone to the sales ticker archives here numerous times, and the archived info is not good, IMO. Links to full sales charts are often broken (I was just in '06 & '07) and as a GM site, there should be cumulative posts to round up the year for each make, so this data is readily at hand. Instead, I often feel like the Nick Cage in National Treasure trying to find this info. Was looking for CTS production history since year 1- and there's almost nothing here. In that it's as hard or harder to find it 'out there', having it here would really bring the site up a notch. My 2 cents.

I would assume with little doubt that geothermal in urban areas is impractical due to the footprint required- it's a suburban/rural tech for the most part. >>"they tell you its from buildings so they can fuel their own leftist agenda to remodel and make sustainable a bunch of decrepit old buildings....because they never figured out how to make any kind of living from designing new buildings to meet typical market demand. they can't make it doing what they should be doing..."<< Market was hit very hard (even here in NJ), so I have little doubt many are looking to create 'new demand' however possible to keep businesses from closing/ radically downsizing. Again: the theory sounds reasonable given honest education & market-driven demand... but pushing to legislate based largely on falsified data & junk science....

^ I guess not ('cool' is pretty subjective), but both were marketed as 'something different' and 'not your father's X-brand' tho both were from mega-monster conglomerates who had no idea how to accomplish either.

Saturn was just as 'cool' as scion 'was' when it debuted. Which is to say- neither was. But it's the wording that strikes me as amazingly similar.

Paolino- since you have heard about this Bonne so often, you should be able to quote me the year & body style, no? Seriously- would love to hear about it. Camino- my take is illustrated exactly by 2 cars you mention above: the Healey & the '53-55 Corvette. I see the 2 as opposite ends of the same spectrum- the Healey lacks cohesiveness to my eye, while the Corvette does not. It's mostly technical : body envelope, flow-thru, body tumblehome, wheel-to-fender placement, stance, etc. We could get into a whole 'nuther design-analysis thread on it with some pics- I'd take to that and maybe open my eye more... tho I've looked at these cars (the Corvette here) for so long I don't believe I missed anything.

Aaaaaaaaand toyoyo continues to fast-track GM's history: >>"Scion promised to sell a new kind of car in a new way. The cars would be small, inexpensive and above all, cool. They’d win a new generation of buyers who dismissed Toyota as their parents’ car."<< Saturn 2.0.

See- the current board's inability to go back & edit can leave these missing pics in place. Needs to be changed if possible, IMO. Arnolt-Bristol is here: http://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/1956_Arnolt_Bristol_Deluxe_Roadster_For_Sale_Front_1.jpg

I LOVE cars 'outside my time' because they're so different from the mainstream, ie; my experience. Doesn't hurt that they have far better design, either. The '55 Austin-Healey above doesn't do anything for me because the design stops at the basic shape; there's no detailing. Most all the 'sports cars' in this genre fall into this category: lacking in design, some of them at fundamental levels. Body tumblehome, wheel shrouding, enveloping, things of this nature. There were a number of minor makes in this genre / era; few catch my eye. Here's one: a '56 Arnolt-Bristol- neat aggressive nose :

Nearly Nirvana : The overall shape is unmatched in fluidity, IMO.