SAmadei

Disclaimer: I'm not a pro at how this works, but I've researched it somewhat. Hopefully someone will fill what I get wrong or leave out. I have gone to the NJ MVS so many times to talk about antique plates, its crazy... and every time I get very little info back, except a small printout and a phone number to call the NJMVS Historic registration line. There is very little on the MVS webpage. In fact I've filled out the application, but I never sent it in due to the photos of the car that need to be sent in. So here's the deal, in NJ ANY car 25 years old or older can be registered historic. With this, you get cheaper registration and an exemption from vehicle inspection... however, you can only drive it 2500 (might have changed now) miles a year. You get the application, take two 3/4 view photos of the car including both sides and the front/back and mail it to Trenton. Trenton checks their magic 8 ball and decides to grant you plates or not. I've heard various comments about what the photos are for... looking for serious damage or a seriously altered vehicle. I don't know for sure, or if its just record keeping. Hopefully you get plates in the mail and you're set. I believe you still need to go to the MVS inspection, but they just check your odometer and give you a little triangle sticker, but most cars I see seem to ignore that. If your car is less than 25 years old, but is somehow of cultural significance, you can get classic plates. Classic plates work the same as Historic, but the application requires some sort of proof that the car is special. At 25 years of age, a classic becomes a historic. I know classics must get the mileage checked at the MVS, as I've seem the cars there... but I question how much actual proof is needed to get the plates... as the last time I was at the MVS inspection, the dude in front of me had a Classic-plated early '90s Sable station wagon roadster... like with NO roof. How on earth something not factory like that qualifies is beyond me. The MVS inspection was giving him a hard time for the mileage sticker, as he knew the MVS had been bamboozled. As far as insurance goes, as far as I can tell, its not related to the registration at all, unless something has changed. I have friends with historic insurance on normal plated cars... but then the insurance company puts a limit on the mileage... which you negotiate with them. I even asked the NJMVS about what kind of insurance historically registered cars needed, and the verbal reply was that any usual insurance would do. One other thing I seem to recall... I believe the MVS requires you have a primary, standard registrated automobile before you can start getting historic cars. But this might have been the insurance company I talked to. I've talked to so many people about this stuff... and its been a while since I did because of life's twists and turns, its hard to remember. I remember one of my hurtles was that several of my cars were being restored be me and it was an issue as the insurance companies didn't want to be bothered with any car valued less than $3000 or so (10 years ago), but I know several companies (Hagarty comes to mind) now offer coverage for cars in the process of restoration... how this affects the MVS's opinion to give you plates might be different, as they are expecting a complete car. So thats about all I know of it. One day I'm going to start running my cars through this system, since I find the no inspection so enticing... most of my cars are creeping beyond 25 years old. I'm sure, that shortly thereafter I will run into other issues... like the fact that some towns ignorantly codify it that any car parked in their town must be inspected... ignoring that historic registration even exists. Edit: typo

And I still contend they are a good future candidate as an engine for extended range electric cars, as they are so much more efficient than conventional internal combustion engines.

LOL, yeah, noticed that too... mostly because it was majorly slowing page loads today.

Don't be so sure on that one. Do we need to replay the crash tests of the Brilliance BS4? What Chinese homegrown cars top the ones being imported there?

No, its not. He's NOT looking for a DD. If his "toy" is broken, he don't need it to go to work. That is a MAJOR difference between what he is proposing and our WK teasings.

If I had this car, I'd probably leave the outside appearance stock... for sleeper appeal. Leave most of the interior vintage, as well. But imbue the drivetrain and suspension with modern tech. A aftermarket aluminum 455... Holley FI... TCI 6x with the paddle shifters... but with numerically lower gears, so it still gets good mileage. Lots of Performance Engineering parts, since so much is shared with the F-bodies. Aftermarket AC and a completely hidden stereo. So there is nothing to distract you from driving it once you tune the FI and tranny with your laptop.

Awww, come on... Today we have SatNav! Makes your trips longer! And better fuel economy! That old Ventura with a 6 and economy gears likely got about 24 mpg... today the Impala is the same size and gets... about 25. Both seat five... as long as you don't have to use the back seat of the Impala for your luggage. Yeah, I still wish we still lived in that time. Or else, I just want a garage-sized time machine.

Oh, yeah. definitely the 3rd gens, as well. They are a poster child for the "don't buy a first year GM". I just figured you were sticking to the last 20 years, not 30. And, of course, I have to defend my beloved 1st gens. No. But normally any drives that require people using the back seat were done in the Bonneville. I can attest the seat is hard as a rock. Perhaps it will get a later, softer one when these start turning up in the junkyards... as the seat got some newsprint transferred to it. :-( I don't. Predominately, my mother drives it. Remember, I barely fit in it enough to drive it. Sure, it can be fun to drive, but I really can't cope with it, as the Bonne is SOO much more comfortable. Even the '99 GP GPX is much more comfortable than the '04. But, hey, my mother loves the car. Part of the reason I didn't do the headlight TSB immediately was that the car was in heavy usage and I read that the TSB doesn't eliminate the bounce completely. Same reason I haven't fixed the spring on the HUD. Maybe when the Bonne is mobile again, I'll catch up on the GP's quirks.

Its in orbit near Jupiter. You must mean the first 4th gen F-body. The first F-body was perfectly fine for its time. Ours is a earlier one. So I've done most of the fixes myself. That reminds me, I still have to dig the parts out of the garage and fix the bouncing headlights.

Emerging markets? China has emerged... it ain't going to get much bigger with its teething problems... and I thought Cadillac was already there. I think its too early to sell Cadillacs in India, except as a niche. Emerging markets are for inexpensive brands... but could Chevy compete with the Nano? Where else is there a truly emerging market for Cadillac to go to? Speaking of niche... this is how I feel Cadillac's presence in Europe should be. Sell the best of the best (CTS-V, ZTS, etc.) and in limited numbers. There are people in Europe who like things imported from Detroit. Make it rare and desirable and play that angle to grow the business. Mercedes didn't start here selling garbage trucks and microcars. Studebaker gave Mercedes a hand up and marketed them as quality over quantity.

I'm glad to see that GM is using some of the space wasted by making the rear so high to hide the retracted top... it looks good, even without the cover. How is the headroom with respect to the structural parts of the top? Is most of the area above the driver's head cloth? Or is there any pesky bars that will make themselves evident as soon as you drive over a bump? I assume the side window height it the same, so getting under the roof is the same limbo as the hardtop.

How can dealers only be marking up 25%? Is GM sticking it to the dealers for parts cost as well? For example, I don't understand how GM dealers sell the little X-mas tree retainers that hold the inner car doors in place for $3 a piece. Yet everytime that same dealer works on a problem inside the door, they damage about 10-15 of them. Thats $30-$45 in retainers. Does the dealer just eat this? Pass it on to the warranty? Pass it on to the customer? Or do they go up to Advanced Auto and buy a box of 20 not-exactly-right retainers for $3.99? Dealership pricing has never made sense to me... I've walked in there and spent $60 on a handful of plastic pieces and sometimes walk out with a huge box for $8. Sway bar for the Grand Prix was cheaper at the dealership then any of the parts retailers!

C pillar needs a redo. Looks like 3 designers had different ideas and they all met in that spot with a big band-aid.

I can imagine it being able to lock if the power is removed while it is engaged, but not having a parking brake that will engage without a power source would seem to me to run afoul of some state laws. And how would it be disengaged if power is not present?

That would jive with what I'm seeing on the road... a lot of CTS coupes.

You cannot have true geo-diversity without globalism. Case in point... Sure GM used to build the same car are multiple plants... but since both are in the same country, a UAW strike could quickly stop the whole line at both plants. Now part of the problem here is that the term globalism can be warped several ways. I define it in its broadest sense... "refers to any description and explanation of a world which is characterized by networks of connection that span multi-continental distances". Granted, the US is large enough that many would consider different parts to be geographically diverse, but only from disasters of a certain size. People now have the power to create non-natural disasters that can be just as crippling to a particular business, which could affect the entire US. Also getting lost in the shuffle here is that the problem is not always as simple as a car line. Every time you create parts in a particular location, that becomes a new point of failure. So building a complete car from scratch at plant A might have a risk of 1%... but now that GM is creating Engines at plant A and car bodys at plant B, the risk doubles to 2%... Now look at the diversity of parts in the typical domestic car today... many domestic cars struggle to contain 50% US content. So if each car has 50 parts that are each built in one plant somewhere, your risk soars to 50%... half the time, you are down due to at least one part. Granted, things go more smoothly than this example, but the manufacturer owes it to the investors to have business continuity measures in place. In theory, GM can move around body production... but in practice, GM seems quite limited... needing to discontinue lines (1996 B-body, 2011ish G-body) in order to maintain factory capacity, while other factories remain underutilized. Also, the risks created by having parts made in 50 plants can be minimized by using more common commodity parts. But GM don't seem to like that... as it seems they like having a tight grip on replacement parts. One last thing, is that people here might think I'm championing globalization. I'm not. But the genie has been left out of the bottle... its here and is not likely going anywhere. GM needs to leverage globalism to protect its production. You can't sell what you can't build.

I assume it still has a normal parking brake pedal, then. All the electric is doing is automating a manual device. I ask, as I'm wondering how a completely electric parking brake would work... the fail-safe, essentially... you don't want the car rolling down a hill if the battery is disconnected.

Globalism or JIT inventory management? I would argue that Chrysler and Ford have handled this better by not running on the JIT razor's edge. If anything globalism is the solution to this problem. Toyota, in a perfect world, would still be able to move much of their production to other plants, such as NUMMI. Of course, with Toyota being in the middle of this disaster, I think its telling that they are already starting to ramp back up. It shows that they are in tune, so far, with their keiretsu. GM should have spec'd out electronics parts that can be made in either Japan or Korea... this is good for the bottom line, as being locked into one vendor always results in the buyer paying more. But I fear that GM is probably hopelessly locked into one vendor and is stuck until they start producing again... or until some hack in engineering finds a suitable replacement. Sure, this will affect all companies for some time, but when GM seems to be the first to be affected, it tells me that this is "old GM" still at work, thinking this is the '80s.

A good air wrench will get it off... but is no good to put it back on. Edit: Put on with an accurate torque. I would get a length of pipe to put over the torque wrench. This will help your mechanical advantage without damaging the tool (assuming you aren't putting 1000+ ft-lbs on it.)

Because that's relevant. Why not ask how many Monte Carlo owners know where Monte Carlo is? Monte Carlo was just a name. Denali is an obvious metaphor for that the vehicle trim level is. Perhaps I should alter my question to "...what the Denali is". But to your point, I'd say a good deal of people knew in the early days what Monte Carlo is, even if they can't exactly pinpoint it on a map. Monte Carlo was much more promenant in popular culture in the '50s~'80s. I have nothing good to say about post-'88 Monte Carlos, so I'd have to assume their owners don't even know THEIR addresses, let alone where Monte Carlo is. ;-) They only know that #3 Dale Sr. drove it to glory.

Maybe Kia will be a place for some Pontiac folk to go afterall... It would be nice to see Kia mirror the Zeta in styling... because while the Genesis sounded great on paper, I really thought the exterior still looked like it was trying to be a Mercedes. Kia has been building some reasonably attractive cars of late... and even built a coupe. I shutter at buying a Korean car... but then again, the US gov helped shut down my favorite make, and therefore must not want my money. This is a cheaper way to go than a BMW.

I'd like to know what percentage of Denali owners know where the Denali is.

Well, keep in mind that threadlockers are essentially glue, and many cure anaerobically... so as soon as enough oxygen is mashed out of the threads, the compound cures... and further tightening is going to weaken the bond. Even with threadlockers that don't cure anaerobically, it can take some time to get some fasteners torqued up to 200+ ft/lbs... and the time and heat generated make it a race to bonding time. So in either case, I'm sure this results in the lower than expected torque values.

Have to disagree with that. After seeing many of them, its probably the ugliest, more ungraceful thing GM has ever designed. Sure, its got machismo, but like a ugly dumptruck. When I saw that the ugly fender bulges actually cut INTO the quarters, I wanted to cry. Looks for looks, I'd rather have an Aztek. I don't think this GMC "look" will age well. No need to rebut, I realize most of you guys are gaga over these. Unfortunately, not all of us are.

I have my doubts. $2700 obo is awfully low for a 25K mile car. Makes me think it will look a bit more ragged in person... like 125K ragged. Remember, these odos only went up to 99,999... so its real easy for one of these to turn over, especially if their were few opportunities for the mileage to be documented... like title changes. Edit: Yeah, they do look like Olds wheels... also makes me doubt the mileage more. Also, you didn't realize Tamaqua was near Allentown by the Allentown.craigslist.org advert? ;-)