balthazar

BV : "Catera Touring Sedan" moltar : "Cadillac Touring Sedan" bobo : "C-Series Touring Sedan" bobo makes the most sense here, that one I can believe.

>>"And what do you call the "doors" on the back of a Savana?"<< Since people can and do pass thru them and they are positioned & large enough for that, I would consider them doors. Same for the rear... portals on minivans, but the rear portal on the Astra is not meant, nor is it easy for a person to pass thru them. I can climb thru the windows in my house (and have once or twice), but I don't call them 'doors'. Enough- I'm done with this; not actually hoping to change anyone's mind here, just venting.

For lack of a more specifically-technical term... it's marketing spin to avoid the only other bodystyle name for it: hatchback... which picked up a 'cheap econobox' connotation in the '70s and '80s. And being politically correct reaches much farther than merely the behavior of a bigot.

Yeah, I was in the one. The one where someone confirmed what I posted that Cadillac never officially stated that CTS stood for either 'Catera Touring Sedan' or 'Cadillac Touring Sedan'. Must be the case; there's 2 consecutive posts just above disagreeing on what it 'means'. 'Cadillac Touring Sedan' makes no sense because that leaves every other Caddy alphanumeric outside the formula- what's an DTS, a 'Dodge Touring Sedan? >>"The XLR? That 'R' certainly can't stand for Roadster, can it? Nah... That's just illogical. The SRX and the upcoming BRX? There's no way it could stand for Recreational 'CROSS'over... They're all just random."<< So the 'R' in XLR stands for 'roadster', but for 'recreational' with the SRX. How do you know you don't have them reversed? God, as if X = Crossover made any fricking sense whatsoever. Many other brands use 'X' to indicate AWD- that must drive you guys absolutely nuts. Would love to see something from Cadillac stating that the CTS stands for something specific. Everything else is just conjecture. If someone has it, please post.

>>"Dude, hatchback bodystyles have been called 3dr and 5dr since at least the early '80s or longer...get used to it. It's nothing new. "<< It's not about it being new or getting used to it; I've heard it since it started. It's about calling it what it is and tossing the PC bullsh!t out the window. It's about being aware of what's going on; that a 'pre-owned' car is nothing different than a 'used' car (except that it just might possibly cost you more)... it's about not blindly accepting whatever marketing shoves down your throat and smiling & nodding at your choking neighbor over it. I think I'm going to now say my house has... 20 exterior doors and no windows, because it sounds mysterious.. or fortified.... or something ultimately ridiculous. Cool & exclusive, huh? You watch, it'll catch on in a jif. Whatever, I'm a dinosaur, ignore me.

>>"And the term 3-door probably is derived from the term 5-door, from when wagons actually had a rear-facing third row that you would access from the cargo door."<< Those were never called "5-drs"... but you're right: that would be more of a '5-dr' than anything on the market today. In my book, either you use this rear portal to physically enter the vehicle, or you don't. So it's a 'door' or it's no different that a trunklid, regardless of if it's directly connected to the passenger compartment or not. This exact same configuration was always called a hatchback, now none are. Think about it.

>>"That sort of contradicts the meaning of "CTS" then."<< 'CTS' does not stand for anything.

Giorgetto Giugiaro = turkey farmer

I know- wasn't addressing you directly, dude. Just ranting in general.

>>"...3-dr...5-dr"<< As with kids wearing their pants down around their thighs & hitching them up every other step like a chronic OCD victim, I wish this ridiculous crap would just go away. I really don't give a tin &#036;h&#33; if 'everyone is doing it', it still makes no sense- no one climbs thru the hatch; it's not a door... it's all automotive PC-ness to shield the image conscious from the horrors of driving a "hatchback". Why people at large buy into... never mind- I know why.

>>"side-impact door beams"<< GM began installing these in 1970, BTW.

A railroad, Packard & Chrysler man; one of the great American contributors of the last century. Prayers sent.

>>"Hillary vs. Obama vs. McAmnesty has to be the most pathetic lineup in recorded history; it's not even a two-party election anymore! Regardless of the outcome we end up with a Democrat in the White House at a time when it is least needed and most dangerous to have one. Fantastic."<< {shudder} Agreed 100%. On the face of it, we look to be going from the frying pan right into the fire.

>>"list what you'd just as soon not have"<< air bags traction control stability control active suspension anything-by-wire NAV FWD automatic lighting cramped interior power seats more than 100 lbs of visible plastic (int & ext combined) a hood you cannot see from inside the car a car where servicing it forces you to take it to the dealer

>>"Many consumers associate the Hyundai nameplate with economy cars..."<< Uh, that really should be "all"...

66stang- Buick was the #3 producer in the mid '50s; relatively speaking, they are not rare (tho of course, the passage of time makes everything more rare after 50-60 years). A '50 Special with antique plates appears daily right near me at a business since last week, I should snap a pic of it. Fire always concerns me- I unplug just about everything in my shop when I'm not in it.

>>"The 3-series is the standard bearer amongst performance coupes in the 40-50k range, so such a comparison is totally legit. "<< Such may be true from a consumer budget standpoint ('what can I get for what I have to spend), but to directly compare 2 very different vehicles in performance, handling, economy, room, etc merely because they're in a similar price range is not nearly so. Price dictates very little physically.

Here's a blown BBBuick: 8.88 @ 152... a bit quicker.

>>"...is that a supercharger I hear before and after he romps on it?"<< I believe that's the rollers bringing it up to 2500 RPM (the standard starting point for chassis dyno runs). That, and there's precious few SC BBBs out there, I only know of one... and I'm pretty sure this car would be quicker if SC'ed. Buick V-8 guys are near unanimously a N/A bunch; they don't "need" power adders. :wink: A guy I used to know built a "junkyard" Pontiac 455 he installed in a '71 Firebird for drag racing. That car did high 9s in the quarter (N/A, no NOSSSSS) and turned over 8500 RPM doing it. Still, multitudes will tell you IBC motors cannot rev worth their block's scrap value, because it's just not possible. :wink:

RE: rolls' center caps -- yeah- that's tractor trailer tech; they often have weighted guages in the center that always read right-side up, tire pressure perhaps? I do think that idea applied to keeping the logo upright is a neat, tho useless and complicated, idea.

According to the comments below, this 455 CI-based big block Buick goes from 2500 RPM to 7000 in 2nd on the rollers. Hope you're sitting down around the 18-sec mark... Now... picture 80% of that brawn in a car this angry:

Don't know if any of you have seen this in person- it's pretty disconcerting. Cap is very carefully spindle-mounted & the mounting tabs are cut off the back, rim needs to be perfectly straight. Tire turns, cap doesn't, weirdsville.

Yeah.

When or how common the features I mentioned are is irrelevant; the point was that some people will not buy a car without them. It's no different than someone else not buying a car that's not a hardtop bodystyle- it's an individual preference, end of story.

Voted.