balthazar

I don't have figures handy and I cannot seem to find them online anywhere. VW's Rabbit/Golf has handily outsold the Beetle --the previous historical volume leader-- to the tune of something like 22 million by 1998, but again; I cannot find any hard numbers. Rabbits sold like crazy on Gary Busey in the '70s and '80s; they were everywhere. Which way would you care to spin the stats: higher percentage of FWD within each brand? Higher percentage of marketshare? Higher straight volumes in a given year?? We can twiddle these a dozen ways, no doubt.Again, IMHO volume is not the question at hand- the initial inspiration/push is. And that push came to the U.S. market primarily in big barges from across the pond(s).

fiat stradas were awful, horrible quality cars that pounded more than a few nails in fiat's U.S.-market coffin, but they were around; I remember seeing them. Lots of renaults also- wasn't it the first Car of the Year as an import (or was it another renault?)? Then there was this little FWD thing you may have heard of- the VW rabbit..... and the hondas... and the datsuns.... and toyota made a terrific stink over the tercel.... most all of these were far from niche or limited production. Point being: there were numerous affordable FWD choices from the import column, whereas there was only 1 affordable offering from the domestics and a trio of high ticket luxury coupes. It's clear that the 'inspiration' for mass mainstream FWD came from the imports, not the domestics.

No; not high beams vs. low beams-- low beams that are too bright. They're out there, I've seen 'the light' on this. Thankfully I primarily drive a truck and am well above them, but when driving my wife's car; some are far too bright. Utmost light may be fine for the driver, but it's not fine for oncoming traffic. High beams are completely counter-productive in the fog, which is why fogs only light with low beams. In this case it's not how much, but where.

In 1979 (and earlier) there were many incredibly dull and mediocre (awful in numerous instances) FWD cars.... from japan and elsewhere abroad. All foreign imports:audi fox audi 4000 audi 5000 datsun F10 datsun 310 fiat strada honda civic honda accord honda prelude mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Omni 024/Horizon TC3 mitsubishi (Dodge/Plymouth) Colt/Champ renault 5 renault lecar saab 99 saab 900 subaru DL/GF/FE volkswagon rabbit volkswagon scirocco There were other, less mainstream foreign FWD models imported. This same year the only domestic FWD cars were the Eldorado/ Riviera/ Toronado, all on the E-Body platform and the Dodge Omni/Plymouth Horizon on the same ChryCo platform. All the rest of ChryCo's offerings (aside from the mitsu imports) were RWD, all of Ford's '79 offerings --with the exception of the German-built Fiesta-- were RWD, all the rest of GM's product were RWD. In 1980, GM introduced the X-Body 4-some and the Seville in FWD, ChryCo & FoMoCo were in holding patterns. To say GM 'made FWD popular' is to ignore the reality of the market prior to 1981.

Vauxhalls have not been sold in the U.S. since circa 1960, Opels since circa 1974. This is a solid enough track record to recommend bringing "Holden" to the U.S.??Moltar is correct- if nothing else the cost to launch a brand with zero identity would be disasterous to GM.

Saturn growing & advancing it's image and earning new sales & profits is not specifically razor's objection (if I may be so bold). His objction, to put it simply, is that to accomplish the above, the funding & product was therefore denied to Pontiac & Buick. In that, I agree wholeheartedly: Pontiac & Buick have, at least up thru the foreseeable future, more potential for both (sales & profit). Can Pontiac & Buick still get what they've so richly earned? Will there be enough cash, or is Holden rebadges the primary future?? If Saturn can pull import buyers into GM ownership, I have to support it. But if it comes at Pontiac & Buick's expense, I'm with razor. Tough situation. Saw 3 Auras yesterday, one an XE on display at a local fall festival. Nice car at a great price. Saturn rep there said the car is flying off the lot. He mentioned the hynd-end azera in comparison: I've only see ONE in all the time it's been out.

Yeah- I personally don't care for referring to Nailheads by torque ratings- it IS confusing. '59-66 4bbl 325 hp 401 = "Wildcat 445" '63-66 4bbl 340 hp 425 = "Wildcat 465" '64-66 8bbl 360 hp 425 = "Super Wildcat 465" The 2x4bbl 425 did not have any air cleaner designation (it came with a chromed AC and polished aluminum finned valve covers, and Buick did not raise the TRQ rating over the 4bbl 425 for some curious reason. I guess Buick was too stately to get embroiled in the HP war (forgetting the dual quads for a second. ). There were 'lesser' motor designations, also: '62-63 2bbl 260 hp 401 = "Wildcat 375" '62-63 2bbl 280 hp 401 = "Wildcat 410" There's still a nice selection of aftermarket nailhead appearance parts: finned valve & valley covers & air cleaners. Motor is a mainstay in the hot rod/custom world. Here's just one: My Invicta had the 325/401 (standard & only motor available). I sold it to a guy in Florida who put it in his '64 Riviera. The trans & rear went to a guy in NY who has a fire-damaged '59 he's slowly rebuilding. Due to chassis modifications, even if I wanted to, the car could not be returned to stock powertrain (tho they say 'nothing is impossible') and at the time I started the build, the car was worth 1/3rd in #1 what it's worth today.

Yeah; it's my senior year HS pic. I was tired that day- couldn't hold my head up.

Nice Regal.

razor- the T/A Performance block is brand new; pretty sure it came out for '06. I think you're right: the 276 is a Stage II block. Not up to speed on this stuff; too new for me.Of course, a pre-'65 Buick could also rightly be powered by a Wildcat 465, no?I had all sorts of allusions about building a SC 401, until I looked into the costs, which would be astronomical. 455 has to be it, I'm afriad.

To be technically correct regarding the body style term, one of the earliest would be the '42 Cadillac/ Flxible Innovation.mercedes does not build anything close to a "4-door coupe"; the Ion is much closer to the concept than the mercedes, but it's still not one.

yeah; the 276 is a 4.1, but it's not RPO. This is the baby for all-out: the T/A Performance V3800 block. All aluminum (weighs less than 100 lb), 6-bolt cross-bolted mains, 14 head bolts. Said to be capable of between 2000-3000 HP. I am not in any way casting dispersions on the RPO 3800, just showcasing how far 3800 fans have pushed the envelope. It's one well-loved engine family. Sixty8: no,no,no,No,No,NO! A car that angry needs 8 angry pistons, not merely 6.

In no way, shape or form was the '63 GP "plain"! The car won allocades, set trends and has become a historical marking point in styling; plain is one thing it absolutely was not! Clean; yes... plain, no.

This 'coddling of the idiot' (my term) is really getting out of hand. Why is it no one can turn their own headlights on? Why am I forced to turn my headlights off everyday (during the day) on my '04 with AHs? Is this really 'progress' or just catering to the lazy?

12 1966 Chevrolet Corvair 14 1967 Cadillac Sedan Deville 3 1969 Chevrolet Camaro 9 1965 AMC Rambler Ambasador 18 1967 Pontiac GTO 15 1963 Buick Riviera 1 1964 Plymouth Belvedere 6 1967 Cadillac Eldorado 10 1969 Ford Torino 13 1963 Chevrolet Impala 20 1969 Pontiac Parisienne 8 1966 Dodge Monaco 5 1966 VW Microbus 2 1967 Buick Riviera 16 1962 Buick Skylark 4 1961 Cadillac Sedan Deville 19 1969 Mercury Cougar 11 1963 Chevrolet Corvette 7 1963 Studebaker Avanti 17 1960 Dodge Pioneer EDIT: I left the close paraens in- guess what a number 8 and a closed parens comes up as:

The Buick GN guys have been in that neighborhood of boost for decades- some with stock blocks, some with race blocks (276CI). Now there's some incredible aftermarket blocks, can handle way more than anyone would want on the street.

For something that's not a 'big issue', sure are a lot of you harping on LED taillights. Are you saying the bulb in the taillight lessens the entire rest of the vehicle? Not everyone cares, wants or even likes them. For me, unless their 'veiled' (ala the '00 Deville)- they look stupid.

Agreed 100%.

blackviper8891= >>"Ofcourse, but my Millenia is far from crap and it's certainly comparable to the Lucerne."<< In your opinion. >>"I wasn't entirely degrading, since it's not entirely an excellent vehicle."<< In your opinion. >>"I'll give you good, but the Lucerne has more cons thans pros, IMO."<< In your opinion. >>"I'm sorry that it does make the Lucerne look laughable."<< In your opinion. You don't mind a few reminder/disclaimers here, right? >>"It's not my fault... It's not my fault... It's not my fault... It's not my fault... It's not my fault... "<< Was it also not your fault you were lot-walking the Buick dealership looking at a car you already knew you did not care for and had no earthly intention of buying? Was it also not your fault you created a lengthy list of attributes of both that showed the Buick to be the 'better', higher content, more advanced vehicle, and then declared the deficient mazda the 'winner'? Pointless.

Pointless- esp when so many comparisons put the Buick handily ahead of the mazda and so many of the mazda's attributes are completely meaningless.

1899 sounds correct to me. Don't know where. I know Cadillac was at the NY show in Jan 1903, but there were earlier shows than that.

I hope the front end spreads to all other honda models, it's deliciously hideous.

What... it's automatically a chick?

I have also been upping my hours over the last few months, thru both increased time on Job #1 and taking on partime Job #2... tho not yet to the level of hours you're pulling, z. I hate sitting around and I already spend a lot of time with the family.

As popular as the CTS has become, it sure has aged gracefully and beautifully. Congrats!