balthazar

My fear is the people appointed will be politicians first & foremost, people who's relative intelligence is highly in doubt, and such that it is, in areas that have nothing to do with the needs of the auto industry. Are there any names floating around in public of potential panel members yet??

Right- and how is having neither a plus, again?

Likewise- given the way the government has been run in the past (and present), I would vote for a few who have at least a basic understanding of how a business works, as opposed to those who have no earthly idea.

>>"Discussion of policy is fine. Discussion of execution of policy is fine."<< How about the discussion of the people executing the policy ?? I can follow this to the best I understand it, but not sure how far I do. It seems to me as long as one doesn't invoke generalized partisan sterotypes, mostly everything else is OK. I've seen 'back it up' stated, but anyone can make an argument about anything and 'back it up' via the internet- doesn't make it true... but if that's a requirement, none of these sources should be discounted merely because one disagreeing individual "knows" it isn't true. See... as soon as one tries to create a 'line' in the cybersand, all the fun goes out & unpleasantness washes in. I still vote for the manner in which it was run prior to the election, which got abrasive at times but was much more spontaneous & honest. Since there is acknowledged confusion regarding the 'line' here, I would ask in return for some lienency and accomodation until the 'line' becomes more clear.... as opposed to -say- the editing of member's posts for something deemed "political hackery" at the first or 2nd 'instance'. And the enforcement of the line had better likewise be devoid of 'partisan hackery', or WTH is the point of any of this?

Never mind that- how many, if any, have any experience to speak of in running a business ????

No: arguing about perception - a really really old one.

>>""The average consumer trades in a vehicle after two or three years""<< I don't believe it; not on purchased (vs. leased) anyway. Modern cars don't change enough in 2 years to warrant this...

Here, IMO, is how you get objective about customizing. Your personal opinion may be that you hate both aesthetically, but as far as calling them to be 'on the same scale'- I cannot see how you can equate the 2.... even from a guy who regularly spots front fender-to-wheel spacing differences in FWD & RWD sedans : Typical '70s custom van: > different grille, some molded fender flares, different side/rear windows, sky's-the-limit paint. Except for the fiberglas'd-in flares, the body is stock. One could build this in a few weeks... and in the moonlight, you prolly wouldn't pick it out from stock. japanese custom van : This is thousands of hours of fabricating work, and hundreds of hours of paintwork. Months & months of full-time, full-crew work. In the pitch-black, you'd think it was extra-terrestrial. These 2 fads are light-years apart in how far they take the factory piece, and how far they depart from a recognizable vehicle. Both may be tacky, but 1 you can no longer take thru a drive-thru, into a garage, under a low overpass or put into a legal parking spot.

At least you've seen them. I haven't- nothing close. Was hoping to learn something new. BTW, doesn't 'subjectivity' at some point become objectivity ?? Say, calling something black "white" ? Or calling a loud paint-jobbed, stock-bodied van w/ side pipes & one with the surface area DOUBLED by 2 dozen 6-foot fin & blade & dorsal extensions and 5' foot overhang additions 'the same scale'.... or does it REALLY take "expert eyes" to see the difference there? C'mon, man, get real .....

You made the statement, dude, so you've seen the proof. I questioned it because I haven't. You know way more than I do on this one. Again- would love to see some pics 'on the same scale'...

>>"yes, but you noticed the separate linear scales for torque and hp, right? "<< Obviously.... no.

Sooo... a gullwing door = 7 foot tall roof 'blades'. OooooooooK. >>"the US van craze in the '70s definitely had some monstrosities of this scale..."<< Would LOVE to see some pics....

Yea.... thanks, but this has been covered here more than once (not to mention readily google-able); I think we all know the poop on these. And you're missing the point of this thread as you get all & rush in to get the thousandth retalitory dig at the domestics. FWIW, the '70s U.S. van craze produced nothing remotely close to these monstrosities, but as a 'child of the '80s' you already know that. I know, I know; I just don't.... 'understand' the 'culture'. Yup, this & double shag carpet & a teardrop side window = virtual tie.

Just an FYI- Since HP is a mathmatical calculation derived from TRQ, the 2 curves always intersect at 5252 RPM. As soon as I read OHV, what flashed thru my mind was the inevitable reaction by far too many: EPIC FAIL. BTW- you should start calling this what it is relative to OHC- it may fool some of the bench racers for a good while : IBC - In Block Cam. It'll sound like something new- plenty of people are easily swayed by just that. Interesting proposal overall from a business standpoint, but you have to consider the media's reaction when all GM V-8s are 'the same engine' - further upping the clamor that a 'Cadillac is a rebadged Chevy'.

Clad-tastic !!

Glue-on, unpainted scoops go faster!

Biz-Zaro-World : Pull out onto the 3-lane highway at a light, a few vehicles follow. A mid-sized SUV pulls into the left lane (I'm in the center), and slowly creeps up. I glance, don't recognize it... something's definately wrong. Have a hunch, let it slide past me and there's the proof- 'Sorento' on the rear; a bottom-feeder kia. So what didn't I recognize ?? It had a manufactured 'halloween mask', a plastic.... thing that mounted over the grille & partially up onto the hood, with twin chrome-edged BMW nostrils on it. Fake BMW grilles, with a kia badge above them.

>>"Right now, no. But if Pontiac were axed 5 years ago, the Solstice and G8 would, right now, be on Chevy lots."<< And if Chevy were axed 5 years ago, the Corvette and Camaro would, right now/soon, be on B-P-GMC lots. Or the entire Corporation can shut down & just live off licensing fees for repro parts, posters & t-shirts. They'd sure as sh!t be profitable then. This line of thinking continues to ignore the fact that a huge, unknown quantity of people will not buy X-brand because they don't like whatever aspects of this. I could see if we had NO EVIDENCE of this phenomenom {cough-Oldsmobile-cough}.... BUT, ummm, WE DO. >>"Are you flippin kidding us? Were you even around in the 80s? "<< So in hindsight (which this thread is), you are here to say you are currently EXCITED!!! over '80s toyotas. Fantastic- more power to you. BTW- I have NOT defended '80s cars here from any country, you might trouble yourself to note. And yes : I lived thru the '80s. Whether or not that's 'fortunate' depends on the context.

>>"I was born in '84, I dont remember an entire decade of anything. "<< Yet you 'remembered' to post a 6000 wagon from roughly a year you were (legitimately) in diapers...

>>"Yeah, but I dont recall Toyota, Kia, or Ford ever using any form of the word "exciting" or any synonyms for the word "exciting" in their advertising. "<< You don't recall a decade of toyota ads picturing some of the most horrific designs ever pedaled, and people next to the POS jumping high in the air, arms overhead, fists clenched, ear-to-ear grin of total joy, enraptured over their 84-hp tin se-cans?? "OH, WHAT A FEELING!!" ring a bell? That's a visual synonym & a textual implication, without question. Then again, with the flatline level of excitment those cars brought, I can see how that decade of advertising would be forgotten.

My G3 is running behind me as I type. It's 10 yrs old this yr- good for a few games & graphics programs & PageMaker (which I still use for business).

Well this absolutely SUCKS (tho I understand completely). If you pop back in, shoot me a PM, HE. If not, anyways; thanks for some great conversation from the Same Page.

>>"They're an everyman brand, 1/2 a step up from Chevy and you could buy a couple of them with really big motors that the Chevy's didn't get. With the exception of some varieties of F-body and the Fiero, there was nothing at Pontiac that you couldn't buy at your local Chevy/Olds/Buick dealer with the same or better performance."<< This has been true at a certain time (like recent memory fading back into the mists of time), and completely false at another. Since you mentioned 'big motors Chevy didn't get', it sure sounds like you are referring to a time when there was divisional engineering & proprietory engines, which would indicate the latter for the most part. The Beginning of the End for Pontiac was, really, 1979.

>>"but rather questioning that liberal radio has failed for the reason you gave."<< Ahh. Like I said- it was another's theory, not mine (at this point, I disremember who said it). Not sure of the validity, but beyond ratings/sales, it is true that it's pretty difficult to give disapproving feedback to your TV or newspaper... When Air America started up, it had some names, Al Franken among them, and ratings initially were not great but decent, but they quickly nosedived to a best of the low single digits. 2 years later the network filed for bankruptcy. Of course- there could well be a host of reasons behind that, and it takes time for ANY new format to grow, but given the 'support' of the other venues, plus the groundswell of hatred for Bush, it's surprising to me it failed so quickly. >>"People listen to the radio? Seriously? Have we time-warped back to 1943? "<< Surprisingly, not many jobs or vehicles at all are that condusive to watching TV while doing it / operating them. Unless your a congressman...

>>"...could you provide an argument for how it is... true?"<< How what is true- that a form of the 'fairness doctrine' is coming? Because the clamor for it's return (discontinued circa '82) is gaining in volume. Why are liberal voices rising? Why are they concerned? - after all- they currently control politics. Because they want to continue to control politics and they're in the position to do something about it. 'Fairness Doctrine' (or whatever it ends up being called) is NOT and will not be aimed at television or newspapers, only radio; the single place where 'conservative' opinion outpaces 'liberal' opinion. With 'talk radio', the market has spoken, and soundly, yet that's not good enough.