balthazar

turbo -- Please explain how you "love the SRX" if the exterior is "just not right" and the the interior is "awful, obviously" What is it then that inspires such adoration; the lug nuts? The exhaust hangers?

Eliminating the few I own copies of (Christine, The Crow, Brazil, The Car)... 5 times or more (via TV/renting; I've never watched the same movie twice in a theater): House on Haunted Hill, Jaws, Dawn of the Dead 2004, As Good As It Gets, Lord of the Rings trilogy, Back to the Future trilogy, Alien/Aliens, Matrix, I'm sure a bunch more.... DOTD '04 is close to high art in my book. I need to buy a copy....

^^ nice. I had a '78 Volare sedan. It was in great shape when bought and was nothing but reliable. Only malady was a tendancy for 'run-on' at the end of my ownership. The Super Six (2bbl 225) had admirable power & economy for the '70s (the 360-equipped cars were tested in the low 7s to 60- manual trans 6s were tested at 23 MPG). No quality gripes on my car- interior was nicer & far less tacky than many in it's class and mine also had no exterior or assembly issues. It really was a comfortable, roomy car with decent spunk for a '70s 6. "Better use of (LESS) space" is still less space; K-cars were much more cramped. God- sounds like I almost miss it...

RIP Olds..... Olds Gas Engine Works ~ 1890 - 1899 Olds Motor Vehicle Company ~ 1897 - 1899 Olds Motor Works ~ 1899 - (1908?) Oldsmobile Motor Division ~ (1908?) - (1981?) Oldsmobile ~ (1981?) - 2004

He probably hates the fact that it will only dilute the market impact of the Solstice and is somewhat dismayed to see (at least informally here at C&G) that the majority of opinion favors the Sky over the Solstice, even tho the Sky's stylistic differences are much more homogenized with the mainstream than it's much more unique cousin's.

I hate the fact that this car is coming.

The core divisions NEED presidents with power & authority, then they need their own Engineering departments & budgets. What does anyone expect when all divisions generate product from a handful of pitri dishes?? Other statements are misleading and innacurate. 'how many G6 & Solstice versions can they do?' There's 2 of each. For many years there were 4 or 5 different Firebirds. Point?? But the general jist is on track. Admirable for Duhlorenzo. Even if he offers absolutely zero suggestion for 'fixing' the problem.

CR filters surveys of 810,000 vehicles over 8 years. That's 101,000 vehicles per year... in a circa 16,500,000 unit year. That's a statistical sampling of 0.6%. Undobtedly, some vehicles are not reported on as plentifully as others. CR published reliabilty scores on --for example-- the infiniti q45. That car sells in the neightborhood of 450 units per year. 0.6% of 450 is less than 3 cars. Why doesn't CR publish the number of vehicles their 'results' are based on? Popular Mechanics used to publish the number of owner-driven miles in their long-term reviews of vehciles in the 1960s. Can there be any other reason than because it would devalue their 'findings' due to insignificantly low samplings??? Add to that the fact that CR has never and will never reveal the formulas for how these surveys are tabulated into half-black or half-red circles, among a number of other cryptic proceedures, and you are left with NOT an "influential and respected" publication but a great case study for self-promotion and public manipulation. At least the talks & open allegations of bias are spreading to the point that unrelated press conferances by CR are now prompted to address this very issue. Hopefully either full disclosure or outright reputation damnation will follow. The consumer is growing too smart/well informed for CR's charade to continue much longer.

The Aspen/Volares of the late '70s were not bad cars at all. I agree: most consumers (whom are not "true car fans") will not remember the Dodge/Plymouth versions at all.

You couldn't get any closer:

Available

NOS: why would I be doubtful that GM founded anything in the 1800s? Think about it... Sixty8: No... but it's ironic you should mention porsche...

In looking at a wide variety of automotive personalites, it surprised me that I only came across 1 marker that had a visual reference to the deceased's fame. In other words: What automotive pioneer has a likeness of one of his vehicles on his stone?

Gdammit; you're right, ocn! I am such a maroon! Waitaminnit... you're not referencing a recent board question, are you :?:

With due respect CARBIZ- in studying post-war Pontiacs dealers, the -vast majority built up in the '50s & '60s had changed locations/ names and/or owners by the close of the '80s. This was revealed via a compilation of dealer codes, which will change when any of those 3 change (possibly exception: short-distance location change). You are right tho- 'handed-down' dealerships can stagnate over time, tho they also occasionally elevate customer service to a higher level...

Likely it's immaterial: it was pronounced 'cray-po'.

Ahh, the ol' pop-culture favorite... with a twist: David Dunbar Buick, 9/17/1854 - 3/5/1929. Founder: Buick Auto-Vim & Power Company, 1899. Buried: Woodmere Cemetery, Detroit MI. Henry Martin Leland, 2/16/1843 - 3/26/1932. Founder: Cadillac Automobile Company, 1902. Buried: Woodmere Cemetery, Detroit MI. Louis Chevrolet, 12/25/1878 - 6/6/1941. Founder: Chevrolet Motor Company, 1911. Buried: Holy Cross & St Joseph Cemetery, Indianapolis IN. Ransom Eli Olds, 6/3/1854 - 7/26/1950. Founder: Olds Gas Engine Works, 1890. Buried: Mount Hope Cemetery, Lansing MI. William Crapo Durant, 12/8/1861 - 3/18/1947. Founder, General Motors, 1908. Buried: Woodlawn Cemetery, Bronx NY. Edward M Murphy, unknown - 1909. Founder: Oakland Motor Car Company, 1907. Buried: unknown. No image available.

Winton

Quadray

Nadig

The 'luxury sport' coupe buyers must not be well informed at all if they think an introduced-in-'04 nameplate has absolutely anything to do with a previously produced version from the 1960s.

2-hp, variable speed, professional grade, nice router.

Agreed. It's subjective, but it should be fact-based opinion, not wild, inaccurate opinion. Variance gave a tidy overview of a solid approach. But just like I said: watch the 'best choice compared to others' segment. No one vehicle is an absolute class leader and here is where many 'journalists' go overboard by glossing over what's unimportant to them and unduly weighing what is. Right then they proclaim 'its the best' meanwhile omitting any reference to the tiny phrase "for me"... and the article is wrapped up as 'case closed'. Most journalists today fall into this trap.

word that! Vehemently avoid using stereotypes and cliche's; not so much in general but automotively-speaking. Also avoid making constant comparisons to other cars: saying 'the radio power knob takes more effort to turn than a _____' tells us nothing- there is no comparison vehicle that is a universal common ground (I've never even been inside a camry). Other than that- have at it. I would be more than happy to copyproof it (spelling/grammar) for you, if you'd like. (Not saying there's anything wrong with your skills, TC- but it's usually beneficial to have a 2nd pair of eyes on it and you clearly want to present a piece of quality).

Well here we go- another forced mandate coming down the pike like a loaded tri-axle Peterbilt with no brakes. I can hear the rumble and rush- can you? Repeatedly- 'not based on any research' is quoted, yet watch it become an inspection & ticketable offense by 2016. Tire degredation is a result of UV exposure, chemical exposure, proper inflation, useage, material composition and time. And undoubtedly a few other factors. This only seeks to address the time factor. Unilaterally. It's baseless. In protest, I may merely replace the tubes on my 1960s Atlas PlyCord 10-ply 7.00x20s on my COE and drive it.