balthazar

These mid- & hi-line bmws and infinitis cannot be cheap to maintain/ repair!

Obviously not a "letdown" to those who would seriously consider buying one OR those who already have.

Regardless of what you may think, yes it is a feature....So is a large wart on Heidi Klum's nose. My point was it is a functionless feature and therefore not worth mentioning as an advantage over another vehicle. The trend these days is away from spoilers, anyway.

This is a situation that should remedy itself in short order. Both companies have been spending huge amounts to sign talent recently, which of course affects the bottom line, but the volume of subscribers has been increasing exponentially. No mention of the rate of signing subscribers, nor of the 'vs. this period last year' numbers. Another thorough job by the media.

What is the objective truth then- that every toyota product is 'superior' and singularly class-leading? Even you cannot believe this.

>>"In an effort to help stop global warming, slow the depletion of our oil reserves, and protect our forests..."<< mitsu could help cut a boatload of greenhouse gases by shuttering all their plants. That would be greatly appreciated. Also- plant-based automotive materials are NOT new.

Cadillac should never follow the imports to the point of mimicking engine displacements. Homogenization has slowly been killing the aspirational automobile. Call it the 'NASCARification' if that works better for you. Also- increasing displacement to increase power has been a running practice of many of the imports- Cadillac has been increasing power & decreasing displacement for many years now. NorthStar just dropped .2 liters in it's recent redesign, what's the point in increasing it to 5.0 liters? That is NOT even remotely considered being competitive.

Article is fairly vauge & fractured. "a dozen factories" is mentioned as is 'GM is closing 12 plants", then a few paragraphs later it is finally clarified that there were recently only 2 GM facilities in Anderson- neither an assembly plant. What were the other 10 factories from other corporations that are no longer there? Ooops, must've been an oversight. And another thing. We've been getting, and will continue to get, a steady trickle of 'hard luck/boo-hoo' stories about plant closings and the good old days, yet at the very same time we have whiners & weepers bemoaning segregated parking lots. How blindingly stupid can some people be???

There are no more Red Tag prices on the lots- you cannot receive that incentive anymore. The only validity would be to compare two current prices, not 1 current price and 1 long-gone price. It's not much different than comparing 2006 prices to 1999 prices. Comparing 'before & after' pricing is irrelevant. Not unlike CR.

The flaw of this example is that no GM divison has even approached the badge-engineered degree that Plymouth was at the end. Neon, Breeze, Voyager, you had to get right up on top of them to know if they were Dodges or Plymouths. Everything Plymouth had with the exception of the Prowler was a true literal badge job.

No Montes in my family's past. In fact, Chevys in general are very very scarce. I like the 1st gen MC quite a bit (for a Chevy), but after that they don't 'speak' to me anymore. I would be interested in looking over a '73-75 generation tho; I haven't seen one of those in a number of years.

I guess the annual family vacation at the shore. I am able to actually relax there, untethered from my daily responsibilities.

rusty1- you mean like all the stunning engineering suzuki, mitsubishi and isuzu have provided the car market with? No thanks. GM built and helped establish the truck & SUV segment while that segment rose to a peak of 54% of the new car market, while the japanese makes ignored the trend and are only recently/now opening truck-dedicated plants & bringin out semi-competitive product... on the downside of the truck boom. Oops. Once again- too little, too late.

mkaresh = >>"Incorrect that Sloan's ladder ever really worked this way after the 1920s. It was never as perfect as the story suggests, and collapsed in the early 1930s when every brand needed a cheaper car to survive."<< Where does the linked article suggest that the Sloan Model was anything akin to "perfect"? It also plays it a bit loose with the facts to support it's point (for instance, it would have prudent to mention that all GM plants shut down beginning in Nov of '20, with the exception of Cadillac & Buick). The 'Sloan Model' was still working quite effectively thru the 1950s, but once the proliferation of 'non-standard' models within each division occured in the '60s, the pricing overlap was widespread and the Model was no longer followed. Still sales continued to increase thru the '60s and '70s. WRT "every brand needed a cheaper car to survive"- that is not supportable by the facts. Pontiac was created (for '26) at the corporate level to realize volume economies with Chevrolet. Pontiac was 'paired' with Oakland but Oakland had nothing to do with Pontiac's development beyond loaning a corner of their antiquated factory to PMD for a year. Oakland took a bath because it was poorly run & engineered. Buick's Marquette lasted little more than a year, introduced in '29. Olds' Viking was actually a higher-priced marque. It only lasted 2 model years. Both Viking & Marquette were too weakly established to survive the Crash of Oct '29 & the subsequent depressed market and were discontinued. LaSalle was quite successful even up to the discontinuance after '40. But it is perilous to make assumptions regarding the LaSalle's effect on Cadillac in the years around it's discontinuance due to the volatility of the war-time market. Also- Cadillac's 'essentially a LaSalle' (incorrect) Series 61 was never close to a sales leader. In '40 Cadillac & LaSalle's combined sales (of course- GM never reported their numbers as combined- further deconstructing the theory that the 'companion' makes were designed to bolster the core division's numbers OR business cases) were almost half of Cadillac's '41 sales. >>"If you look at old magazine articles, you'll find that journalists were claiming that all the cars were looking alike as far back as the 1930s..."<< I have encountered exactly the opposite. For proof- look no further than the whole hubbub over the '29 'pregnant' Buick, then look closely at '28 & '29 Buick pictures. In the context of the times, the differences were clear. >>"...when the move to steel bodies forced the use of common parts."<< Sharing rooflines in some instances hardly makes for "looking alike" IMO, but to each his own. >>"The real change was that foreign producers entered the market with much different products.... And at the same time, society fragmented such that many people began to want to set themselves apart from the mainstream. Import cars with obvious differences from Detroit iron were one way to do this."<< The only vehicle that truely fits this theory is the beetle. Other imports tried very hard to emulate American product, with precious little success until the fuel crisis of '73 put an undue focus on economy, a by product the imports had due to being uncompetitive with the market of the times (no V-8s, few 6-cyls, no sports or muscle cars, no full-size trucks, etc). >>"In sum, the big problem was not that GM changed, but that the context within which it operates did, and it didn't change with this context."<< It is ludicrious and unsupportable to allege that "GM didn't change". Everything changed, moreso than with most other manufacturers.

There hasn't been a "Big 3" since 1998.

I actually watched the race; I was at my sister's and it was on. Not that I was around then, but all it made me do is pine for 1962. I don't give a flying rat's ass about the drivers; I am not a driver enthusiast, I am a car enthusiast.

To answer an opening question- I had a '72 Riv for a short while. It had gotten slammed in the rear quarter hard. Tho I primarily bought it to liberate it's 455/TH400 for my '59, I did start to grow pretty fond of the car- even tho '70s vehicles as collectible/special interest vehicles are 'too new' for me. I sold a bunch of parts off it, got the motor/trans ad still sold the hulk for nearly what I spent. I would not be against picking up a clean on in the future...

I don't see the Blackhawk resulting in anything- it was a semi-outside project that could only lend to a full-on retro vehicle, but little else. That is... unless Buick discovered the tooling to the 455 in an old storage warehouse... I would like to see 'Super' versions of both the LaCrosse & Lucerne, but at the same time I hope that this performance car is something else entirely... and in addition to.

The titan represented a 1. brand new assembly plant, 2. a brand new platform & body, 3, a brand new engine & powertrain. This cost nissan billions and billions. No way in hell has the lackluster sales of the titan/armada/whathaveyou to date paid all those costs off yet.

Paint code will be 2 letters for a hardtop with no vinyl top, a letter & a number for one with a vinyl top. First character is always the body color, the 2nd the roof color. If you have a black hardtop with an "A2" paint code- it originally had a vinyl top. GM often stamped some option codes on the data plate (either on the cowl or firewall), but often these turn out to be less 'glamorous' options like wipers/washers and the like. I know only 2 of the 6 or so assembly plants building GTOs in '65 coded the data plate with a "5N" to signify that.

VIN should decode as 1st digit - "1" : Chevrolet, 2nd & 3rd digit - "23" : Camaro 6-cyl / "24" Camaro 8-cyl, 4th & 5th digit - "37" : 2-dr hardtop / "67" convertible 6th digit - "8" : 1968 7th digit - assembly plant: "U" is Lordstown OH. I believe there was one other plant producing the F-body, can't find it at the moment but I believe it was either "C" Southgate CA or "Z" Fremont CA. Someone here'll know. The remaining 6 numbers are the sequential production number for Camaros from that assembly plant. The car's data plate could possibly reveal certain equipment/options/packages, but these are not coded in the VIN. I do have all powertrain combinations & package production totals when you find out which it originally had.

Many people for many decades --to the point the U.S. Government made official inquiries numerous times-- questioned whether General Motors' market ascension & dominance would ever end. Never overestimate toyota's ability to handle long term business success.

Some good reprocussion points here. I know a few hardcore hunters and I just don't get what drives them. They're nuts, I tell you. Taking mad time off work to sit in a tree in freezing weather, spending mad money on gear & equipment & supplies (salt licks, corn spreaders, seed, etc) *shakes head*. They just don't seem 'all there' to me. Undoubtedly some would say the same of building a street/strip '59 Buick... I have no problem with a right/privilege to hunt and am not an animal rights nazi that advocates vegetarianism over hunting. But at the same time, I don't see hunting as a 'sport' and I do not advocate hunting to extinction. I guess the bottom line is: follow the law and don't send any bullets thru my property and you can do whatever floats your boat. And thanks for thinning down the deer population.

Sorry there: I'm still getting red Xs on my end. I have tended to ignore them since. :( Sure the U.S. consumes more in general- having the space & capital allows that luxury. But having the largest vehicles surely has nothing -even semi-seriously- to do with any other country's/ individual's opinion of the U.S..

How the hell did an accord get to base sticker at $33K??? This is honda right? Only 1 model below that? Are they going to match toyota and add another brand soon? The koreans are already eating Japan Inc's lunch. >>"It is faster than the gasoline-only model, and comes with more features."<< A spoiler is a chunk of functionless plastic; hardly a 'feature'.