balthazar

Let's head-on a '65 Newport into a honda fit and take pictures.

Mmm; tongue pics- thanks! She's not bad, tho not as smoking as I was led to believe. Why is it I'm never at these parties?? Oh that's right- I don't party anymore. Why is that, again?

How did I know that the thread headline referred to mercedes, not Chrysler?

The '90s B-Bodies were anachronistic when they debuted. I have no problem with them and appreciated that those options were available, esp having lived thru the mid-'80s when the full-size consumer had almost nothing to chose from. I drove a '96 Brougham once- I enjoyed the cruise. But they couldn't last as they were for much longer, and I think even the fans of the Last B-Bodies knew this. Primarily it was the size, IMO- that time has passed, in general. No; it was not the BOF aspect that had anything to do with it. As for crash results- no reason in the world they couldn't be made to meet whatever standards were in place with no inordinate amount of $- the trucks do it.

How is it that david sedgewick's editor allowed him to pen an article while in a heavily-medicated, post brain surgery state?? Or was he still jazzed from the spiked eggnog? How all-over-the-place can you get? Just about every single paragraph is either heavily slanted, irrelevant or erroneous. I could breakdown the whole piece, but I'll refrain. Here's one, tho: >>"Cadillac's old something-for-everyone strategy is obsolete."<< This has NEVER been Cadillac's strategy. It is, however, mercedes's; witness 2 (or is it 3) different 2-seat roadsters, how many SUV lines, a econo-hatch and a minivan. Should I waste my time looking for this writer's piece tearing up (or even his passing mention) of mercedes' 'old strategy'? What is happening in journalism schools these days? IMO, a study of that 'industry' would be much more dramatic than any of the automotive industry.

That is really atrocious looking. Hope they don't change a thing.

>>"Nissan North America is based in Nashville, Tennessee."<< Nissan North America is an division of Nissan, headquartered/ based in Japan. It is not a separate, autonomous entity. It it not an American company, nor is it a manufacturer- it is merely an administrative figurehead overseeing an American-based assembly plant for a japanese manufacturer. Calling it anything else is buying into the PR spin. There cannot actually be confusion or even discussion on this point, can there??

NETCO (New England Truck Co, Fitchburg MA, 1914-1938)

He's barely famous for a near universally-ridiculed TV show from the '80s. Next. Carmen Electra and the '51 LeSabre at least have something in common: great front bumpers.

Yeah- I would never (and it's never recommended to my knowledge) to change the fluid without changing the filter- no reason not to- it's cheap insurance. I would, without question & ASAP, drop the pan on the trans, let it drain/drip for a good while, and change the filter/fluid. Then I'd do it again in another 100 miles- the converter & passages are going to hold a bunch of the old mix, wha with 9.5 qrts of engine oil in there. I would not want to subject my trans to operating temps with engine oil in there. What's a R&R on a minivan trans cost? I too am surprised a honda transmission holds 12 qrts- I don't believe it. That's as much as a DynaFlow Buick and more than my Alison 1000 (I just changed my fluid filter last weekend: 7.4 qrts). Is this verified?

Me too: it has a number of nice details, but they don't work together. The rest could stand, but the front clip needs refinement/clean-up. And yes; nothing about it says 'Jaguar'.

The point is: design a bench with a comfortable center section, design an airbag to cover that middle passenger, design a dash that is more impact-friendly, and stuff it in a full-sized sedan. No one is advocating simply putting a bench in a knob-festooned, no-center-airbag, existing model! And the trucks do a bench very well: My Silverado has a flip-up center storage/armrest, and below is a relatively comfortable seat- not just a 'rest for the armrest'. The '07 goes one step further with yet another storage compartment concealed under the center bottom- I don't how comfortable that one is. Trucks have more vertical height for springs & padding, but sedans today are no lower than cars of the '60s & '70s, who's center seat were easily as comfortable as the outer positions. thedriver makes the crucial point, tho: modern cars are --with a very finite number of exceptions-- too narrow for true 3-abreast comfort.

Variance- what rag was that story in- I can't make out the text.

Well now, not so fast. It does have a few stylistic features I admire and find very refreshing: > the absence of any sort of front bumper, > a break away from the '3-rectangle' front treatment: (headlight, grille, headlight all in the same horizontal plane: BO-ring!!), > a defined windsplit with a cleverly-integrated emblem. >also like the edge that comes down the A-pillar & onto the front fenders. The grilles are tough to get used to (size-wise) when the vast majority out today are all so homogenized- I think eliminating the horizontal bar would improve the look and yeah; mabe trimming 2-3 inches off the bottom. But I'd take it as it is, too. Also- the front fender arch & the gentle radius of the rear haunch don't seem to match- tho it very well could just be the angle/sketch. Gosh, I'm going to have to say that overall I really like this one. I already know I'll be going back to check out this pic on my HD over the next few weeks. What a freak. Pics are gone from Leftlanenews- anyone snag any other angle/interior sketches??

New is tough for me: affordable (define 'affordable'!): '06 Silverado 2500HD LT CC/SB Duramax. not affordable: I really don't know. To 'waste' this wish on a new vehicle would only anger me. Vintage: affordable: a chopped '50 Merc coupe not affordable: one of the original '53 Cadillac LeMans fiberglas roadsters or the '55 Eldorado Brougham concept car

It's reDONKulous (thanks MM!), but what is posted here time & time again?? 'Does it have NAV?' 'Where's the NAV screen going to be?' 'It doesn't compete unless it has NAV!' 'I'd have front-seat sex with my NAV!' I have no desire whatsoever to pay for (or receive as a gift) and 'electronic talking map' for my car. Remember the robot taxi driver in Total Recall?- I heard that's on deck for the 2010 BMW 7-series. And people will still find a way to drive into rivers.

I guess you're right, but he doesn't work for me & I've never heard anyone 'buzzing' about him WRT their car purchase. My father has golfed for decades and bought a Lucerne this year- Woods had nothing to do with it. I also doubt the veracity of a study that 'measures' a spokesmodel's effectiveness, but if they say it's working, OK.

Are you going to be posting any more pics of your mom, NOS? Give me a number.... :wink: Congrats- this is yet another vehicle GM builds that answers the charge 'domestics just don't build vehicles consumers want' [/whine].

Woods is not in anyway a draw beyond serious golf fans, IMO, and I don't find him to be especially creditable. He has never been worth the extreme cost. Frankly, that hot chick Merc uses is more believable- just hire a spokesmodel, give him a golf club and save $12M (or is it $20M?). To expand him to other divisions..... only if it doesn't cost another dollar. On second thought- just dump him.

>>"....theres next to no cargo room to begin with in the rear"<< if true, hm-mmm: Sky or '4-2'. Seriously, most of the detracting comments on the Solstice / Sky were cargo-related; this lil' deathtrap should suffer from the same judgement.... Not that the regular model is any beauty, but the convertible is a rolling joke. And so much for the 'safety band-aid' feature....

Umm, wow, BV; a true first. I was thinking about this thing when I walked past a CLS today in a parking lot. The CLS is the logical next step, design-wise, for mercedes- it's very sleek and slippery, it looks somewhat futuristic & sporty at the same time. I was lukewarm on it when the pics broke, bt after seeing a few- it does grow on you. But this concept 4-dr convert is a throwback to the old thick stodgy upright mercedes. It's a big step backwards. Why not a 4-dr convert CLS??

"torch & sawzall" inplies there's metal getting cut. On a honda? Have you ever seen a civic up close after an impact? What little 'sheetmetal' there is is thinner than the paint. The body shop couldn't fix it if they even wanted to try; they just cut to the nearest seam and glue on another pressed tinfoil panel.

The 'grille' in the rear is going to start that whole '51 Studebaker 'is-it-coming-or-going?' debacle all over again. The lines overall look interesting, but 'productionizing' will result in major (dulling) proportion changes, of course.

I don't get the title anymore than I get the trend. Some would say that makes me old. Allow me please to embrace 'old' and kiss it full on the mouth, with tongue. Disis so stoopit, yo.

After reading what is the hands-down most overblown & overwrought press release ever written in the history of.... writing ("exceptionally charismatic, effortless superiority"- F-ing please)- the pics are a superior letdown. It looks fat, bloated and anemic to me, besides the fact it's nothing more than a milquetoast reskin of a last-gen s-class with the roof lopped off. The same elements over and over and over again gets awfully tiresome after a few decades. And the wheels are absolutely horrifying. Can the mercedes brand of DCX ever branch out stylistically, or is the one-trick pony show all we can ever expect? Look; the car is clean and pleasant overall and defiantely upscale but 'exceptionally charismatic'? The concept is, but the execution was played so close to the vest the outcome is mediocre as a concept car. In fact- it should've just been brought out as a production car without all the dripping self-congratulatory snobbery. I will compliment DCX highly for building bodystyles (so far: the 2-dr hardtop) that noone else will anymore. BTW: "design trendsetter"- the only thing coming to mind right now is ribbed bodyside cladding... someone help me here.