balthazar

I've been spending far too much time this past week+ trying to get my DSL running- after running a new line/jack from the junction box, I believe either the phone co has the wrong wiring for my needs or the DSL modem is wrong. Sigh. There's a reason why I slogged along with DU for 8 years- doing so didn't cause me headaches.

I just cannot get into these late-model B-Bodies, growing up surrounded by old '60s Bs & Cs. Spent some scant moments in a '96 Brougham a few years ago, but could not warm up to it much, tho it was super comfortable. Good luck with it, S.

Paolino- in your opinion, if real wood feels like plastic, is it really any better than fake wood that feels like plastic? There's this Grand Canyon disparity of the feel of plastics, but never is the feel of wood ever discussed; undoubtedly a MUCH more rewarding experience than fondling injection-molded chemicals. Nope; if it's "real" wood (and in many instances, this needs to be spelled out by the manufacturer), it's fantastic, but just don't bother touching it. What gives?

Fun with gimmicks

Note that 66stang said "77-2000", SoCal. First gen Sevilles are excellent collectibility candidates, and I think the 2nd gen Sevilles would be too. Early Allante issues aside, they should also be strong collectibles in the future. I also always liked the '80s Eldorado ETCs, the basic '79-85 Es were beautifuld designs to begin with, but the ETCs were especially taseful, esp in black. Anyone for a Cimarron D-Oro, V-6 5-spd? :wink:

> I recall reading that the '05 V-Series/RWD redesign was around 75% brand new. > nissan VQ also dates as many years back, but for some reason I don't recall reading 'it's high time to dump it' very often... oh yes, because it's had frequent updates. Before the DI 3.6 V-6, did these same people who advocate dumping the NS advocate dumping the preceeding V-6? Or is this merely a case of reactionary perception: 'oil is high = no new V-8s'? >>"The article is written by Anita Lienert... 'nuff said."<< x 1,000,000. > Same or different block is immaterial to competitiveness/power numbers; block in & of itself has no real role in either HP or MPG. Note that the supposed cancellation was the same type as the NS already is; an all-aluminum DOHC V-8, as opposed to -say- an iron IBC V-8. Why not simply enact the same re-engineering of the 3.6 to the NS to feature DI & any other available MPG tech ?? The tooling is already paid for, it is 85% of the way to where it needs to be as it is- just keep improving it, regain top-teir status and save big over the clean sheet engine. Done.

>>"the Northstar may be replaced by GM's excellent 3.6L V6"<< One can either read this as the NS is gone & a V-6 will replace all, or another V-8 will. Considering the phrasing & the source, I'm going to file this one right next to 'the Firebird and Camaro are dead for '74!!' and 'Firebird to go FWD for '82!!' for now. I don't quite understand how the same tech (and more) applied to the 3.6 cannot be engineered into the NS to likewise improve this excellent engine.

>>"registers Scion sales for Toyota because the automaker insists they are part of its main brand."<< IF toyota insists this is true, we should never read independant figures for scion like average buyer age or MPG or profit or sales figures. Combine it all and be done with it- never separate it anywhere. But since toyopet is addicted to talking out both sides of it's mouth- no doubt this'll never happen.

Wow- I did not know the F-Series was down to 690K- that's a pretty big decline from the circa 900K is was not too any years ago. Wonder how much the knowledge the new F-150 (traditionally the largest % of F-Series sales) is on the way is dampening that total?

Having 1 model/trim that barely reaches 35 is world's away from a CAFE number of 35- even giving 12 years. Whole segments are going to have to die for many manufacturers to get an average of 35, and/or entire new segments are going to have to come online (sub-sub-micro-compacts?), because I just do not see the current mix of segments/sizes reaching these lofty averages on tech alone.

>>"Kaiser-Jeep bought the tooling for the Buick 225 V6 in the mid-1960s, as GM didn't feel it was worth spending development money on. "<< Not quite: #1. the 225 was an expensive engine to build, and #2. with gas @ 33 cents/gal, there simply never were a great quantity of takers for the engine, not when you could get a 155-HP 215 V-8 with a lot more power instead. Selling the tooling was a great way to get some return on the investment instead of just melting it all down. Many would say thank God they did (tho many others would take the opposite stance, and with gusto).

Some are pointing out that if the U.S. does go into a heavy downturn/recession (and the odds are falling on this just about daily), demand for oil drops accordingly, so that should counter the wild speculation that we've been seeing these last 2 quarters. The new construction housing market situation has to be freeing up X-amount of barrels just by itself. I've heard numerous analysts predict a major backcut by the summer of '08... I guess we'll see.

>>"Reason Chrysler didn't think of it sooner is there is still the outdated notion of 2 doors being 'sportier' by old time 'car guys' in Detroit. Many times not having a 4 door version of a product hurt since old prodcut planners think the 1960's and 70's were still going on, when 2 doors were the rage. "<< 2-doors ARE 'sportier' than 4-doors and always will be. Witness the decisive lack of 4-port Corvette, ferarri & porsche cars (I know: porsche is working on a 4-dr '911'). Just as 4-dr sedans will always be sportier than 5-door minivans. More doors = more people, which usually = more family, which usually = kids. Nothing buzzkills the image of freedom & individuality than a backseats full of kids, or the illusion of such. Jeeps are different, yet the same. Their image is rugged, outdoorsy off-roading, not the PC-recommended terrain for all those short back-seat passengers. This addage follows every decade of auto history from the '20s on up: coupes, roadsters, convertibles, 2-dr hardtops, sports cars always have been & always will be more sought-after and thusly more valuable than even the exact same vehicle with 2 more doors. Things changed not because of a change in consumer perception or a sudden awareness by the 'new time car guys' in the industry, what happened is that most all cars became more & more cramped and squeezed down, simply making them impractical... not because they were 2-drs but because they no longer worked well as 2-drs.

Why not save yourself a whole lot of headache and buy a BMW already? There are FAR too many issues -real & mostly perceived- for you to ever enjoy a Cadillac, so the incessant wailing about the marque is pointless to say the least- it will never match your demands... hell; no single brand does or can. Case in point: BMW can use much better interiors in design, ergonomics & materials, much better and much fresher exterior design (40 years with the same exact front end- c'mon!), more interior room, and shed the downmarket cars that can only have 1 effect- to dilute the brand's image. And where in the blues blazes is the CS concept car- that should have already replaced the stodgy & stale 7-series as the flagship. Is there a U.S.-market BMW diesel or hybrid yet ??- they are losing valuable time to Lexus on the latter & mercedes on the former- they 'do not compete'. Instead they are working on cannabalizing mini sales with a 1-series.... and isn't a minivan in the works, too? I-Drive is a flop that is overdue to be dropped. "I really want to see BMW succeed, but they have a LOT of ground to make up." Yeah.

And others continually overestimate them.

I still fail to see how a 181" long 'truck', even with a 'lifted' :wink: mid-gate, will swallow anything 8' long... unless it hangs 2' out the rear. That's one tiny-assed 'truck'.

Just read a thread yesterday on another board that the Ford flathead is reliably good for a .125 overbore... that was almost beyond belief. Guess that's not what you were referring to, tho.

>>"You seem to be forgetting the 500 hp M5 engine."<< Nope- merely 'forgot' it just like smk 'forgot' the STS-V's 469 HP engine. >>"In terms of mainstream engines (which BMW offers 3 choices, ranging from the 230 hp I6, to the 300 hp TT I6, to a 360 hp V8), I'd say BMW has the powertrain advantage..."<< I guess; if the lack of a low-200 HP engine in a $60K luxury car is a huge turn-on in the segment. >>"All these price discussions with the STS comparing horsepower numbers is irrelevant. "<< I agree- as it is with HP & $ RE bmw & m-b, but someone keeps bringing it back up....

Lessee... a pick-up the size of a bmw 3-series with a 4-cyl towing more than a Silverado. Uh-huh.

>>"You get... 360 in 2008 (407 in 2009) for BMW."<< The 5-series starts off with a measly 230 HP- hardly aspirational or competitive from a numbers standpoint; STS starts at 302 HP. Top 5-series HP rating is only 360, it's 469 in the STS. Next year's 407 HP is still far short, numbers-wise. >>"...for $60,000 in an STS you get 320 hp."<< STS V-8 MSRP starts @ $52K, to get the 360 HP in the beeemer, you need to ante up to $58K (no doubt that can push over $70K), otherwise you're at only 300 HP. >>"You get 382 in M-B..."<< Again, it'll cost you another $7K over the STS V-8, otherwise the e-class starts with a only 268 HP (at $8K over the STS's 302 HP). Only clear leader here numbers-wise is the 507-HP M-B- big-time bragging rights over the BMW... that is; if that's how you make you car-buying decisions.

>>"469 hp on one model, and that isn't their mainstream V8."<< And 443 HP on another model, and 400-hp on the outgoing/circa 500 HP on the incoming of yet another model. But the first two I referenced are indeed based on Cadillac's mainstream V-8, the Northstar. There is no reason to omit them in this discussion. >>"M-B has 612 hp and 724 lb-ft as their top engine."<< Not mainstream, not a V-8; it's a radically-boosted (22+ PSI) twin-turbocharged V-12 from a bought-out aftermarket tuner company.

>>"M-B, 382 hp, Lexus 380 hp, BMW will be 407 hp on some 09 models."<< Cadillac 469 HP on some models. When will lexus & BMW compete ?

>>"Yes, but the 396 wasn't available in '64."<< >>"So it's pointless, after all, since how many people in the target market for the new car were around in '64 and remember such trivia? "<< The guys who write for the magazine seemed to think 1964 was pertinent in an article on the 2008- maybe they have your answer. I wasn't around in '64 either; I learned it because history, esp of -ahem- General Motors, interests me. Ignoring history allows bias to pave over fact with wild abandon, in too many cases further sullying GM's reputation for the future. If everyone held past history in such light regard, I guess the upside could be that... for example; Chevelles would be worth all of $400 for basic transportation instead of trading hands in the 100s of thousands of dollars upon occasion. I can't imagine you think the '08 Malibu will ever reach even a notable fraction of that interest in the same timespan.

I dunno- I hit a full-grown deer at 100 with no seat belt/air bag and didn't even bump my elbow. Yeah- a concrete/stationary impact is no comparison, but hit a person or animal or smaller car and physics plays the starring role. IE: give me the Town Car over the thatSmarts!.

>>"If North Korean cars become available for sale in the United State, would you buy one?"<< There's no reason I can see to do so, either from North OR South Korea.