balthazar

I don't think those are discs... Car is tight: sits purty on a relatively really big wheel/tire- looks great. Nice 'domestic' beltline going right into the backlight, and the backlight transitions smoothly into the deck. Not the norm for this vintage from this country. Front lights appear to be a retrofit, but they fit so well stylistically and keep the front from looking too spartan (which it doesn't at all). Would like to see the hood scoop a tiny bit larger. Portholes are delicious. Would love to see the ass on this one. Has it 'all going on' over a ferrari of the same vintage. Must be a Cisitalia, gonna say '48.

Interior volume is easily & often a misleading figure.

Russia is a very vast country, many russians are very large people, the ZIL and ZIS were large, chunky cars based on '50s Packard body dies, vast military (at one point), huge subs & ships, big trucks.... must be why the rest of the world hates Russia. Who wants to cover China next? Don't leave out the sumo wrestlers!

I saw one of these azeras this past weekend. It drove slowly past me in a parking lot; I saw it from the side then eventually from the rear. For a few moments I thought it was a mazda 929. How long since the 929 was new? Typically, it looks 'off' but nice enough to undermine nissan, toyota, etc. Whether or not it's a complete horror show to drive/operate is another matter.

Latch design also plays a role. My Buick's doors swing silently and 'clic-clic' shut tight (rotary latches). You don't have to 'swing & release', just push it shut. Same with the hood- lower it right onto the catch and give it a firm push down; clic-clic.

It's weird: MM has become this iconic visual- we see her picture/likeness everywhere but her movies are nowhere- it's almost like she's hard to relate to as a sex symbol because she's always so... wait for it..... 2-dimensional. She's hot IMO, tho many of those sex symbols from the '50s are a bit more zoftig than many of the hottest from today, a downer in my book. And that B&W pic above owes a great deal to underwire technology, it should be noted. Simpson, on the other hand is physically pretty awesome, IMO. If she had the same degree of real-time/public speaking publicity that MM had, I think opinions would be much more favorable regarding her. In other words- some beautiful women should just shut up and look beautiful/sexy.

Been reading CA for a number of years; didn't subscribe but bought my first issue in '85 and have been growing my collection over time. Same for SIA- of which I got a boxful from a co-worker who's father subscribed. Old Cars Weekly has some very interesting pieces in it, and it's nice to get something every handful of days instead of waiting (in some cases) 2 months. I used to pick up Car Craft, Hot Rod & PHrodding, but they cater so overwhelmingly to the Chevy crowd that I quickly got disgusted. Rod & Custom often has different tech ideas for the hands-on among us.

Link please.

The tundra, as a foreign truck in a domestic-dominated market segment, faces the very same, tall & wide obstacles that many proclaim the domestic cars face vs. the import cars: it must EXCEED the competition as opposed to merely benchmarking it and attempting to equal it, otherwise there is no reason to leave the popular makes for a brand with a poor track record and nothing new to offer. toyotanation posters are all slack-jawed that "300 plus HP" quotes from toyota literally means 400 HP. Apparently nothing was learned from the very recent across-town example provided by nissan, who's upcoming "300+ HP" titan came to market with.... 305 HP.

Stating that Dodge will 'resurrect the Hornet name' expressly inplies there was once a 'Dodge Hornet' vehicle. These ultra-chopped-down vehicles just don't appeal to me.

I prefer on the dash, but the keys should dangle as opposed to rubbing against the dash. I did not need a key to start my Buick (it had no starter button and the ingition was not worn, either). Best of both worlds, tho I have not retained that feature.

subarus have always struck my as generally overpriced for what you get in return. Lower prices and removing all that heavy dated cladding would likely really pump up volume.

>>"...'78 Plymouth Volaire (low miles!) for chump change."<< It was a good car at the time and I have some good memories with it & in it... but no thanks. >>"That must be south/central NJ because it looks too new..."<< Right you are: north Mercer County NJ. It was new then, doesn't look so new anymore... I haven't gotten over to Teaneck as of yet...

Lookin' tough with my junkyard sunglasses and my failed inspection sticker. Shortly after those Sears whitewalls became defective (belts shifted far enough to close some of the tread grooves)- I put fat blackwalls and 'cop caps' on the Plymouth. Looked every bit like an undercover cop car: when I first brought it to my regular junkyard haunt and walked into the office, it was strangely empty. 3-4 guys had ducked for cover thinking the feds had arrived.

Hey! Where'd the 'dash can' go? Pretty bad when you can actually see shoddy assembly work in the interior from a picture.

Why should the valve actuation of a car be held to different standards than a truck? You cannot say you haven't read volumes of criticism over GM pushrod car engines, right? FOG- damned great call on the 'double standard' issue regarding 'just have to be competitive'! I missed that one first time by.

Not too long ago I heard 2 separate radio shows where people called in from the food service industry to tell stories of what they did when people sent back food. Things... bad things. Overall show ratings: NC-17 for Gore, Bathroom Humor & Disturbing Imagery. I am now thoroughly frightened to send food back, even with a polite request to 'redo' it. I would instead never return for a good long while if at all. Years back my father & I ate at a steakhouse in Detroit. He sent back his entree and we both received free deserts. Almost 1 year later when we returned, ..... the staff remembered us! After hearing those radio shows, I shudder to think what I ate in my desert that night.

Been up to a bouncy, indicated 130+ in my buddy's (later mine) '65 Catalina- he was driving. Another time I had it up to around 120 (I wasn't studying the speedo- I was watching the Ford I was chasing). God that car would fly: Hi-comp 389 & 2.41 gears. Had my '64 Catalina up to 105. No OD on any of these bruisers, folks! '59 -according to the slide rule- will be good for 143 (again: no OD). Bad gears for it (3.73s) but plenty of HP to overcome that. My truck is supposed to only be good for 97- never took it over 85-90. Too populated anymore (vehicles & deer), plus I think the top end bug has stopped biting for me some years back. I never used to think of things at speed... like tires...

It's seldom a 'make or break' issue for me. Still; in way too many cars, stuffing a fat console & a floor shift in an already cramped & intrusive interior does nothing for 'sportiness' whatsoever. In a full-size truck, a column shifter not only frees up interior room for bulky items or an occasional 3rd (or 6th) passenger, but allows the treasured cat nap once in a blue moon. Nothing like putting yer feet up on the window sill and pulling yer cap down over your eyes. A console-shift auto in a truck is much like a wing spoiler on a truck- useless claptrap. On many cars tho, it can be a nice ego crutch for those daydreaming about driving a sports car. No harm in that. I have a console/ floor shift in my '64 GP and I love it there. I have the opportunity to choose either set-up for my '59 but am going to stick with the bench/ column, even tho this car is many times over in sportiness & performance. IMO, if it wasn't offered from the factory- it feels 'wrong' to me.

Of course: could very well have been intentional.

Let's see how the respective sales of each go, shall we?

I was parked next to one in the convinence store yesterday. All external body hardware is attached with think visible black rubber gaskets, and the side markers are dime store rectangles with exposed screws right thru the lense. I wonder if anyone thinks exposed door hinges are cute anymore. This thing is a total embarassment to mercedes, another anchor around their neck. It's at complete odds with everything else in their portfolio; it's their Aztek. Dump it.

GROAN.... >>"We don't need Saab to do a lot of volume."<< Congratulations- mission accomplished! >>"Saab has struggled since GM acquired it in 2000"<< saab has struggled since the late 1980s. >>"People think jets are cool"<< Maybe this will work, but I doubt it. A vague 1947 reference for another unrealted portion of the parent company shouldn't carry much weight in 2006. It's like Pontiac advertising the Corvette or something.

I think a chrome one in the rear should be matched by a chrome one in the front. I like a certain degree of cohesiveness in my vehicle's styling. How about you, son?

ellives= >>"1. You can sell just as many ADDITIONAL Chevy trucks instead of the GMC "version" and get even more good brand exposure for Chevy so why spend any more "minimal development funds?" This would be an easy and benign transition. Your theory goes to the idea of not telling the consumer that GMC is the same thing as Chevy because they're too stupid to figure it out themselves. Pure rubbish. Truck buyers ain't that dumb. But they are that particular. Such a move might gain Chevy 50% of GMC's customers- truck buyers are a loyal lot and a great quantity prefer one over the other to the point of refusal. But how can you justify shutting down a division that sells over 550,00 units annually all at a profit? Lemmee guess; you would advocate putting the money into saab instead- selling less than 40K units all at a loss. GMC makes near class-leading product... sabb never has. 2. They've also been saying Cadillac buyers are dying off too for 30 years. Guess what? They are! Look at how many are buying Lexus now. Haven't you noticed that the Toyota Avalon has become the new Buick? The baby boomers are now hitting "old people" status so they're just buying bigger Toyotas. Sorry- I've very seldom if ever encountered that sentiment as applied to Cadillac- it's always been the hallmark of Buick criticism. WRT sales- go look up Cadillac's sales since '98- you will be shocked. They're not. BTW- the avalon has repeatedly failed to conquer it's prime rival in sales after numerous years and generations: the better-built Buick LeSabre. By all accounts the Lucerne is many times what the LeSabre was. Will the gap narrow..... or widen? Surely you jest when you ask about the GTO? When I say "they have" I mean "something they have that sells in volume." Volume is what pays the overhead and we know GM is all about overhead. I don't see something that's overpriced and sells 10K units a year as anything to get excited about. This said, I think the GTO is a decent car but I'm not going to plunk down the kind of money they want for it. You may not care for it, but many many more than merely 10K buyers have signed the bottom line for a GTO. As for sales- make up your mind: you were talking about "excitement"... only a beancounter gets excited about sales numbers. Sales volumes are another discussion. Stand still and debate.