balthazar

>>"Toyota continuted to advertise the Avalon at this specious 270hp rating for quite some time though it had absolutely no reason to be using a clearly false figure."<< Today I heard a honda radio commercial where they were using the tired 'service station workers are the loneliest' when they watch all the hondas go by. Because they never stop in. Funny thing is, the legalese said the claim for the highest mileage was based on 2005 figures !! Working the dead Impact's numbers in, by chance ?

>>"But I have to think about the non buying Pontiac crowd and what their preception of the old names is. There memories are not the same as ours and they out number us too boot. "<< The non-buyers of every given make outnumber the enthusiasts. Pontiac does not have to convince those who have bad memories of a few long-past models, only those who have no bad associations, which far outnumber those with bad associations. Here they are: >>"About half the people are willing to give Pontiac a fair shake..."<< Aiming for those vehemently against Pontiac is a complete waste of time & money, yet the perception that it's neccesary somehow persists. >>"The turn around with Bunkie and Delorean started with sportier models and new names. If it worked in the late 50's and 60's why can't it work again?"<< Because the corporate structure is so completely different. There is no one at 'Pontiac' that has the same power as the guy who made sure Bunkie's coffee pot was brewing when he walked in in the AM.

I don't buy Chinese clothes, shop at Walmart or buy Chinese in general for the most part, esp those with moving parts. I will buy used American-made first. The American economy would have far more disposable income if they weren't continually replacing grotesquely short-lived Chinese goods. I say the economy would improve. >>"So what if the Chinese pants you bought at Walmart fall apart?"<< You enjoy flushing your money down the toilet, then? A hobby, perhaps? Today I plugged in a Made in USA GE 3-spd fan from my MIL's basement. I estimate it was built in the late 1940s. Works fantastically well, should be working just as well by it's 100th birthday. With a Chinese electric fan, you're lucky to get 2 years out of it if it isn't broken right out of the box.

If the sheetmetal is going to be shared on the same platforms, I do not see different names for the same 'model' (EX: Ventura >< Grand Prix)

Will people ever learn, or is that asking far too much? Close the ports to Chinese imports = we gain.

Doesn't MDS kick in in low-power situations, like steady-speed cruising... during which any car requires a minimum of power to propel ("added strain of carrying the car's weight").

Somebody jumped the gun, no?

C'mon you techno-geeks; buy 'em up! I'm looking for a fat stock bump!!

I know only 2 people who own camries- one aunt who is 57 and a guy 48-50 who hunts behind my property. Only person I knew who owned a corolla was my father-in-law, who owned it when he passed away at 79. I sold it to a guy about 45 who was buying it for his parents.

7 Pontiacs 4 Buicks 2 Chevys nothing else GM as of yet. Wife has owned 2 Pontiacs & 1 Olds

About 3 years ago (I did not mark my calendar), I believe saab sold right around 38,xxx in the U.S. If correct, 25K is a far slide from that... and I thought saab posted a profitable quarter not that long ago. This brand has been in rocky for 20 years.

Oi! NINETY EIGHT: Try pulling the body off the frame and every 2 pieces apart, re-engineering the powertrain then putting it all back together. Welding, fabricating, cross-referencing parts from other years.... all plumbing is custom (brake, fuel, exhaust, wiring) all with zero GM aftermarket support.

That '57(?) GMC must've been a treat! Any '38-47 Ford COEs there??

Yeah- learn the right way to hammer & dolly; you do not hit the dolly, nor do the hammer and dolly meet the fender from the same side. Front fender: either replace it, or weld in a new section from a good doner fender- you are going to have a hellve time getting at the backside of that dent even with the fender off. Rear quarter is tough because it's such a vast, low-crown area of damage; getting the thing visually straight is not easy. On the flip side, the quarter is not double-walled, but the rear wheelwell is going to get in the way of a bunch of it. Bottom line- this is minor damage without rust to contend with. Practice & learn how to fix it yourself, at your own pace. None of it effects the usage of the car- you have all the time in the world. The main factor is: NO rust.

>>"If it was a 1961 Belvedere, I would've left it in the ground. No, I would've buried it in MORE concrete. No, I would've taken the remains of it, rounded up every last surviving 1961 Plymouth, unloaded 20 gauge buckshot into each of them, dug a huge tomb, filled it with salt water and muriatic acid, dumped each and every car in there, and capped it with poorly-mixed concrete poured by drunk Honduran laborers and placed a rusty, leaky septic tank on top of it all...in a Mississippi bog. I would repeat the procedure exclusively for 1958 Lincolns. "<< All this ire, with the millions of toyotas and mitsus and volvos and nissans & bmws running around? Destroy an appreciating American classic made with a maximum of steel and iron and stainless and a minimum of sensors and plastics and electro-bull&#036;h&#33;? No thank you x infinity. In fact, replace every toyota on the road with a '58-60 Lincoln or a '61-62 Dodge or Plymouth and I'd die happy the day after.

The sword-making proceedure outlined above also involved hammer-welding, which hardens metal many times over what straight forging will accomplish. It's not an apples-2-apples comparison. Castings in IC engines --when well-engineered-- have a decisive advantage over forgings: they are more flexible, ie; less subseptible to vibration-based cracking/failures, whereas forgings are more brittle in addition to being somewhat heavier (and more expensive to produce).

If the lexus ls is some sort of benchmark for it's segment, and toyota sells gobs of sedans with safe, 'non-aspirational' design... AND we accept cumberford'a analysis as being largely 'correct', then Chevy did a bang-up job on the next 'bu- should post a big jump in the standings.

I am interested to learn how this turns out. Not familiar enough with Chevy at the parts-number level, but I can tell you that PMD changed casting numbers where you would be hard-pressed to tell what the differences were. I would HIGHLY doubt Chevy used the same casting number for 2 differently-balanced cranks.... in fact I would say it's IMpossible, but again; I don't deal with Chevys on a parts-number level. But Pontiac & Buick did not do that sort of thing.

>>"...Laughing at this is the same kind of mindset that got GM lagging in the sport compact market years ago..."<< Is it also the same kind of mindset that got toyota lagging in the pickup truck market years ago ?

The pick-ups (C1500, C2500, C3500-Series) used the 250 as the base 6. 8.5:1 compression, 155 HP, Carter 1-bbl model 3891593. That said, in the past 38 years, either the carb or the engine could've been changed. Check NAPA for carb rebuild kits, e-Baymotors after that. Should be readily available- I sold a period NOS Rochester 2bbl carb last year on e-Bay.

Or in this case; a 'toyota'...

Oh, let's all brush this right under the rug (mitsubishi'll keep them company) and welcome chinese cars with open wallets and arms; after all- everyone knows that more competition = we (as consumers) win!

>>"The GTO or what ever it ends up being needs to be modern adult performance coupe. It is a given it is going to be more expensive and bigger. The car needs to address a non retro crowd that can afford to spend more than a Camaro but still can't afford that M5. If GM can deliver on performance and a quality build and interior it may not surplant a M5 in the pecking order but it will sell to the many who pine for a M5 that just can't afford it. Lets face it there are more people who want and can't afford a BMW than those who have them. So let get GM to give them something to be proud of."<< Hi.

Agreed: Objectively, I never could see that Woods was a positive contributor, esp at the money paid. Subjectively, I thought the concept was a monsterous waste of time.

Just for the record, Tucker proposed central seating in his early proposals (1946).