balthazar

Words fail....

Well, you asked for it... what with posting 'Oakland & LaSalle'. :wink:

Interchangable parts Precision manufacturing Closed body Electric start Safety glass V-8 SLA suspension V-16 Development of the automatic trans Tailfins OHV high CR V-8 onboard computer interface

GMC is older than Chevy trucks, introduced 4WD first, and the V-6. I would believe diesel, too. Oh, and the V-12.

I do NOT consider myself "that" into Buicks. I greatly admire many of them, but there is usually some aspect that stops me from pursuing one to own. The only one I AM "that" into in truth is my '59, but there it's mad infatuation.

So... all of you have each owned a Viking, a Scripps-Booth, a Ewing, an Elmore, a Rainier, a Randolph and a Reliable ??? What the hell is the chance of THAT ? :wink: Personally have NOT owned a Cadillac, Oldsmobile, GMC, Saturn, Hummer or saab. HAVE owned multiple Chevys, Pontiacs & Buicks. Would LIKE to own a few Cadillacs at some point.

>>"In NJ, all junkyard cars have titles"<< You're talking about modern car junkyards. Most I've been in (tally is about 14 or so), which leans towards vintage and, as you prolly know full well, it's been a few years for that here -- hadn't wanted to sell whole cars, primarily because they had no titles.

>>"Do you think that we as Americans would have acted any differently if a Chinese ship was gathering information 75 nautical miles off our coast? "<< Do I think U.S. ships would've risked collision & dumped debris in front of a foreign ship legally in international waters? No, I do not think that they would.

Prediction: this is going to be but the start of a surprising degree of... action on the part of the Chinese military.

Junkyards, in my experience, generally refuse to sell whole cars. #1 : junked cars seldom come w/ titles, and technically titles are required for resale. But this is going to depend on the individual yard... and what exactly the state/junkyard considers to be a 'car' vs. --say-- 2000 parts bolted together. :wink:

My buddy is looking at picking one up. These aren't a 1-yr only option, are they ?? I always liked the notch because it was a refreshing change from the huge RR glass.

>>"...you need to know about the subject matter before you start to write about it. Is that not the first rule of journalism?"<< Not in the last 20 years or so; no.

There's a strong, hardcore fan base for the GSs. These guys are a gold mine of tech info for my 455 B-59. And (at least up thru a year ago), values of these cars in #1 had gotten sky high: 6-digits for Stage 1 converts/ GSXs.

Well, at least the 699 others still have their "hope".

>>"1970s S-class"<< An s-class is FAR from a "bread-n-butter" sedan. Try reading.... and look into a '60s mercedes 250. >>"Mercedes has always had a solid reputation for tank-like well engineered cars"<< Bull&#036;h&#33;. Maybe the top line was well-built, but the mainstream lines were run of the mill and no better. >>"But what does it matter what Mercedes built in the 60's and 70's when the Cimarron was an 80's car? "<< I dunno. What does it matter that the Cimarron was an '80s car and it's 2009 ?? The point is two-fold : we have yet to see the Cimarron laid to rest history- it's corpse is repeatedly dug up & poked & prodded... to what end ?? I'll tell you to what end- that it is STILL brought up in reviews of current/recent Cadillacs, and it continues to spread it's festering aroma over the current line. YOU'VE ALL read examples of this- anyone think it's fair or justified ?? Point 2 - If we can go back and dance around the corpse of the Ciamrron in 2009, we should also be willing, able & apparently eager to go back & dance around the corpse of laughably-uncompetitive distant-past models of other brands, esp luxury ones. However, that never happens. Why ? -- -- -- -- -- >>"It isn't meant to undermine Cadillac's regained reputation, that's an absurd accusation."<< But intentional or not, that's what ends up happening- esp when it permeates modern 'journalism'. Not that your piece will directly do that --(and I have no beef w/ you, YJ)-- it's just that after reading this same bashing for decades, it gets really, really tiring. -- -- -- -- -- >>"I'm so, so sorry GM isn't perfect and has sold a few less-than-optimal cars in its day. Heaven forbid we ever talk about it here."<< Ye-eeaahhh... that's what I am all right: a raving, blind loyalist who continually brags on GM's lifelong perfection. Nice summation, new here?

>>"You're telling me that in all your years on this earth you haven't gone to a place wanting ONE thing you think they do really well, they were "out," and you left with nothing?"<< Nope. If a place doesn't have what I'm craving, I get something else. It's 1 meal out of 85,000+ in your lifetime. What difference does it make & who has time to joyride around looking for that 1 item ??

>>"Early examples of this crap-mobile were branded as the “Cimarron by Cadillac”..."<< I wonder if any armchair historians remember that early examples of another crap-mobile were branded as the “Camaro by Chevrolet".... :rolleyes: -- -- -- -- -- This CONTINUAL periodic dredging up of the Cimarron still refuses to acknowledge the aclaim the car recieved when it debuted. >>"the car seemed to be initially doomed as the Titanic on its maiden voyage upon its debut."<< Uhhh- no; it wasn't, but no one should let research slow them down. We've been over this before, and more than once. Year 2 got a 5-spd manual and a V-6. Again- I'm no fan of this car; were I in the position to 'yea or Nay' it, I'd give it a NAY! in a split second. However... I think a lot of it has to do with the directions the top luxury car manufacturers came from. Merecedes' bread-n-butter sedans in the '60s & '70s could not crack 85 MPH, had no luxury features, tinny construction, cheaply-engineered hardware... they were typical eurojunk. I know these intimately- my Buick used to bunk with a circa '68 mercedes sedan. No wonder the brand made no headway in the U.S. until they adapted the American car building model in the '80s. Pure junk. Cadillacs were in contrast; aspirational, innovative, immensely powerful, cross-country saloons, oozing class & amenities. mercedes' came from the low end of the scale, Cadillac from the top. The magnitude of this perception cannot be overstated : note- there are no slamfests on the 84-MPH mercedes of the late '60s, cars with crank windows & coarse upholstery. They're 'quaint', and 'struggling in the aftermath of WWII' .... but the then-aclaimed Cimarron is nothing but the Elephant Man in the side show; whipped, beaten and maligned without mercy, all the while the detractors grin ear-to-ear, oblivious of their misery-inspired hard-on. You don't like it? Fine; that's your perogitive. Just STFU about the car already. It's almost 30 years old and enough is enough. Unless, of course, the goal is to irrrevocably tie the current Cadillac product with a 30-yr old entry-level try and sully whatever cred Cadillac has fought hard to regain in recent years. If so, then by all means- CARRY ON !

If only the folk who had transmission failures, cracked frames or engines sludged --or any number of other defects & shortcomings-- would stop recommending toyotas.

From a book I have handy :: Lagonda, 1906-1963, and 1978. Company apparently made tri-cars (3-wheelers) prior to the '07 advent of 4-wheeled cars. New model 11-1 in 1913 was "clearly inspired by the Ford Model T". 4.5L 6 car won LeMans in '35. Company went broke in same year. Purchased by private owner, WO Bentley brought in as engineer, new V-12 out for '37. Company sold again in '47 to the David Brown Group, whom also purcahsed Aston-Martin in the same year. Car got Bentley 2.6L 6 in '50. "The Lagonda marque name reappeared in 1961." Production ceased in '63. "'70s/80s" car in question is the Aston-Martin Lagonda of 1978. Not sure how many additional years, if any, the A-M L continued beyond '78, but it wasn't many. -- -- -- -- -- I was also unaware that 'Lagonda' was anything more than a model name for A-M and any older than '78. However, I see little in the brief history I read that warrants whispered reverence for Lagonda as an indepedant make, but we all have our admirations...

I would think/hope that video games are preparing kids for the near future's widespread civil unrest.

>>"Ahhhh Branson, the place for people who refuse to accept that the world has moved on. "<< If 'moving on' is camrys, accords and 40 BMW models all with the same tired face, I'm moving to Branson. -- -- -- -- -- Life-long dream : restore a vintage car carrier, load it with -say- '53 Cadillacs, get a snappy jacket/cap and drive cross-country to Cadillac dealers, stopping in & apologizing for 'getting lost for a while'....

Gleefully taking the 50% depreciation hit on ANYTHING new after only a few years is crazy-nuts. Unless mad disposable cash comes my way- nothing new again. No GM; I'm over at the Ford dealer. No foreign brands- no appeal to me. But I'd rather rebuild vintage for far less money than buy new.

'57 Adventurer: drooool. '57 Eldorado Biarritz: droool. '57 Bonneville: droooool. '57 Fury: drooool. Cool story.... why didn't it happen to me ?

That was FOG there, bud.

Peaked front fenders, esp in the rear 3/4-view. I see it, tho it did not spring to mind. The scallops on the C-pillars (and under the beltline) are pure gimmickery, but I like 'em all the same.