rkmdogs

Excuse me! Cost more to design? Where did you get these facts?---- out of a Cheerios box? Your other "fact" that you HAVE to pay more for a diesel, has more to do with quantity manufactured more than componentry. Do a component by component comparison with a similarily dimensioned fuel-injected internal-combustion gasoline engine, designed for high performance. Then lets talk about why it should cost more for a diesel! More to manufacture? Why? Outside of maybe more mass, due to higher strength requirements, there should not be any tolerance differences that would increase manufacturing costs. Sales ploy? --- most definitely!!!! Don't shoot from the hip until you can back it up with facts.

The yeas and nays on this rebirth product are ultimately going to fall into the hands of the bean counters. If they price it overboard, like they did with the reborn GTO or the orphaned XUV, people will go back to looking at the overseas -owned products, and GM will just dig itself a deeper hole! For those who can swing some muscle on the pricing jerks, tell'um what Dr. Phil says about people who dig themselves into a hole, that is getting deeper......... STOP DIGGING!!!!

For your info capriceman, most anodizing is a "dipping" process, not a spray-on. As such you cannot contaminate the bath with other metals, such as the iron cylinder liners or tri-metal bearings, or the block plugs. That method of coloration on an engine block would be out of your budget. Speaking of that, you need to check your figures, unless you have some benevolent resources. An LS-2 engine, to get an all-aluminum, latest art one, will rum you over $6K at most authorized GM sources. Your custom paint job, unless it is being done by someone who owes you a favor, if done correctly will run damn close to $4k, depending on the color you pick, and if you want the car detail stripped and everything showing repainted. I don't recall what year your Caprice is, as far as computer compatibility. That can run you another $1K You have seen my Caprice in my signature. It cost me over $1800 just for a partial re-paint. I wanted to go to a pearl paint, but the material cost of the paint is over $600/gal. The cheapest quote that I got for a single color pearl paint was over $3000, and that was 3 years ago! Then you mentioned an airbag suspension. Try over $2700, just for the kit. and that requires major rework for the install! Nice dreams, but unless you won the lottery, recheck your costs before you start and have a thought-out plan. Nothing is worse than having to sell a half-finshed project car, that got screwed up!!!!!

You don't push it, because seals that have not been flexed can crack, causing leaks! Re: old gas, before you leave, add "Stabil" gas line stabilizer into you tank and run the engine to get it thru the fuel system. One bottle treats 20 gals. Once treated, the car can stand for months. For all you "experts", tires can "flat-out" overnight. It is due to the weight of the car sitting on one contact patch of the tire. Usually the tire "rounds-out" again as you drive it. However depending on the age of the tires and what kind of construction was used in the tire fabrication, some tires have a memory, and retain that flat spot for a long time. If the car is not going to be moved periodically, and it is not in the way in the spot where you are going to leave it, put it on jack stands, which are just above the ride position so that the car is not unstable, but all the weight of the car is off the tires. You should use 4, located at frame or jacking points of the car. And I don't mean leave it on a floor jack! You want to use stationary, adjustable jack stands. Oh yeah, don't try this if the spot you are leaving the car in is not level! Depending on when you changed oil last, from when you store the car, a fresh oil change is usually good, to remove any corrosive contaminants that collect in your oil. Lastly, disconnect the battery, and store it out of the car and indoors if you can. As someone else suggested, put it on a slow trickle-charger. This keeps the cells from breaking down. Make sure that it has the correct level of fluid in it, if it has removable cell caps. The use of a car cover, if outdoors is controversial. A poorly fitted one can do severe damage to the paint, due to rubbing as it moves around with a wind. If again, it is indoors these help prevent the normal dust settling from getting on the paint. And, as also mentioned, if you are in a climate where there are freezing temps, be sure that your antifreeze level is adequate by testing it. You are not looking for volume, but freezing temp point of your coolant mix. That should cover most of the points, unless you are considering longer periods of time.

Sorry about that pal, but 1970 Malibus came from the factory with 4 wheel DRUM brakes. You can get kits to change out the fronts, but they usually require a new spindle assembly, due to different mounting points. Rears are more complicated however. Since your parking brake operates on the rear drums manually, and you cannot do a manual actuation on a disc set-up, most rear discs incorporate a small drum assembly for the parking brakes. Best way here is to find a compatible (same-size) rear axle complete amd do an entire rear axle swap. The third way is to get an after-market kit designed for your specific car. These will include all the necessary components. Don't forget that you also need to swap out the master cylinder! Drum brakes vs. disc have different pressure requirements, and especially if you do a combination of front disc/rear drum, the proportioning pressures need to be revised. This can be accomplished with an adjustable proportioning valve, that would install right off of the master cylinder before the brakes lines going to each wheel assembly. The best way to convert and get the best safe brakes is buy a kit that has been engineered for your specific car. Parts swaps with used brake parts, whose condition is unknown is like playing Russian Roulette, with all the cylinders but one loaded!

Tell your friend to look again! Yes, blocks will work on any leaf-sprung truck however....... He was correct in telling you that you will have to get new, longer shackles, which are the U-bolts that go over the top of the axle and down thru the spring perch mounting plate. Since you will be increasing this distance with the addition of the lowering blocks, you need to add that amount to the length of the U-bolts that you will need. If you buy a lowering kit, they usually include the longer bolts with the lowering blocks. Most leaf-sprung trucks from the factory mount the springs under the axle. The bit about mounting the OVER the axle is a conversion done by the off-roaders for more clearance for bigger tires. Go to a bookstore and look in a Chiltons manual. It should have a picture to show you the set-up.

(Sigh) Some of you still don't get it! When you look in the mirror in the morning, do you know the person looking back at you? Sounds like a lot of you don't..............................

Boy did this guy nail the topic right on the head! Go read: http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/...192.A11746.html The only point he missed is the one about ego satisfaction. That is where some of the pundits who comment here are stuck!

Looks like they have followed the Chrysler minivan concept and dropped the voltmeter and oil pressure gauges from the instrumentation. Shades of the old "idiot" lights. Before they send a warning signal, the problem has gotten out of hand, and you can kiss some component good-bye! Gauges, even inaccurate ones give a snapshot of a condition that is occurring. If the driver is paying attention, serious problems can be averted. But not with this scenerio!!!! Re: the foglight placement---- GM's track record of good optical design for their lighting systems is very poor. I'd have to see what the beam pattern actually was before I could judge, but with the past performance as a benchmark.... GM needs to look for some new optical engineers to do the design development on their lights!

Well for one who doesn't want to pick on technicalities, it would be nice if you got your facts correct. My name is not rmkdogs, it is rkmdogs....... just to clear a point. AND, Toyotas and other manufacturers who have styled headlamp assemblies DO NOT have sealed headlights. You need to go check SAE definitions. That mandate was thrown out many years ago, after the creation of halogen lamps. The diagnostics you refer to did not come into being until 1996. And who says that manufacturers have to maintain a store of parts for ten years? That is a self-imposed business practice, to pacify customers. Your nit-picking is again a tip-off of the mentality of the people who have come to this site, for purposes other than the sharing of automotive knowledge. That is truly regretable. Have a nice new year and enjoy your rice-paper hot-rods!! Eat them while you look thru the help-wanted ads for a meaningful job, after yours gets shipped off-shore. In your locale tho, they might be in Spanish.

My thoughts too, but a "down-under" version. Or maybe the offspring of ZZ Top's Cadzilla and the Blackhawk??

It must be the ocean breezes, or the lack of salt on the roads to have such a vast difference of opinion on the perception of "quality" from the West Coast whiners to the East Coast beligerants. I wish that one or more of these opinionated armchair "experts" would define "quality". That seems to be the mystical "smoke in a bottle" myth. One says its the quality of the plastics. How is that defined, please? Others say it is the "fit" of components, or the "feel". How do you measure that one? Perceptions are wonderful things. They are like opinions, which are like assholes. Everybody has got one! Anybody out there ever heard of the American Society for Testing and Materials? (Commonly called ASTM) This is a prestigious standards-writing body composed of some of the best minds from many fields. They won't touch defining those terms with a ten-foot pole! Now we get to the issue of propaganda. That is another oldie too. The best line written on that subject was by a guy named Adolph Hitler, and his concept of the "big lie". In theory it says that if you say something long enough and loud enough, eventually you will get the majority of people to believe whatever B/S you tell them. Well, the automotive press has been doing that for years, for money and other favors, and now the great unwashed accept it as gospel. But they are not alone. The other side of that coin is actually two-faced. One of those faces was Detroit, who contemptuously felt that the public was too dumb to know, and what I give them is the best! The other face was a litigious one from Washington, D.C., who read chicken little and the sky is falling too many times and felt that THEY had to step in and by legislative decree TELL our domestic manufacturers how they had to build cars. The combination of these forces is what opened the door to foreign manufacturers coming here with anything that they could throw together, and saying we don't have to follow your orders, 'cause we don't make it here! Then the sooth-sayers wrote their revelations about how bad the domestic industry was, and how good the foreign makers were, because they listened to their people.......... and the crap went on and on.................. Now the chickens have come home to roost. I don't know the age or level of experience or exposure that all these critics have in this business, but the more I hear, the more it sounds like chicken little........ people yapping about things of which they have no expert knowledge or training! Keep it up, and you will make this forum a bigger laughing stock than it already has become!! ...........And that's the truth!!

You folks are all still looking at the big picture with horse blinders on! All the pitches that I have read so far are based on style, not functionality. That may be great if you are in the demographic majority, but you are not! Look at the actual statistics. Our population is getting older! What appeals to a 20-30year old, may not meet the needs of a 40-50 year old. And which age bracket is growing faster? Read the reports. As product diversity has expanded, more and more of the vehicles have become "niche" cars, to meet certain specific needs of certain groups of people. Now you can write off some of these groups if you are arrogant enough, or have enough money to do so, but I don't think that GM in its current status can do either! I am a mini-van owner, 5 times over, because station wagons were not available. I have even been in the full-sized van camp, when the needs were there. You people who have never had one or a use for one, talk like you are the only ones that the manufacturers should cater to. Wrong!! As an advocation, we show dogs...... and so do a lot of other people! Our vehicles of choice demand large bulk volume capability. Full-size and minivans are currently our main vehicles of choice. Just go to any show site for verification! Pick-ups don't hack it because of lack of weather cover, security and other-duty uses. Horse showing is an exception, cause the horses don't ride in the tow vehicle!! To presume that SUV's or CUVs will replace the van-needs of these folks is wishful thinking. Then there are the trades-people, who use these vehicles for their livelihood. They are certainly not going to buy SUV's or CUV's. Write them off too! People cry when they see a major US industry going off-shore, or to companies controlled off-shore. That's because the US-run companies have abandoned the people who put them up there!; either by ignoring their customer-base product needs, or by sacrificing quality to the bean-counters! Wake up Lutz! You have disappointed many of us, and been fooled bymany many more! Go back to your basic premise--- that GM is supposed to be a transportation vehicle company, not an art object!

Did you take your medication today? Call the nurse and maybe she'll give you another dose.

Answer to stupid question: Because down here, a lot of times in police investigations they have to go off-road into wet, boggy areas for searches. They truly need the 4WD. Last two missing child treks required off-road searches. BTW, you will notice that the police version DOES NOT have that air-drag roof-rack! Why can't you get a civilian Tahoe without it? Only the SS was the one available WITHOUT that damn roofrack! P.S. Oh yes, they also use them here for canine vehicles. Better than sedans for that purpose.

Besides your very feeble attempt at humor, you really need to get up-to-date. If you would like to learn what current technology is capable of achieving, read the latest issue of Popular Mechanics, Jan.2007 issue. Look at Tech Watch, p.30, 1st 3 paragraphs; and p.46- Vehicle Infrastructure Integration. These will give you a small clue of what is capable---- now! :AH-HA_wink:

Another perspective, but a coffin-nail just the same. No More Minivans GM to rely on crossovers for people moving duties By JAMIE LAREAU | RICK KRANZ | AUTOMOTIVE NEWS 8:11 am, November 27, 2006 General Motors plans to cancel its next-generation minivan and abandon that vehicle segment. Instead it will woo buyers with its mid-sized Lambda-based crossover vehicles, sources say. The minivans had been scheduled for the 2010 model year. Chevrolet is scheduled to receive a crossover on the Lambda architecture by the 2010 model year. It will replace the Uplander minivan. Other minivans being killed are the Buick Terraza and Saturn Relay. Crossovers off the front-drive Lambda architecture originally had been intended for more premium brands. The Lambda vehicles debut next month with the 2007 Saturn Outlook. The 2007 GMC Acadia follows early next year, and the 2008 Buick Enclave launches next summer. GM's product board has not approved cancellation of the minivan program. But those close to GM say it's a safe bet the board will do so, based on declining sales in the segment, the high cost for GM and a belief that crossover vehicles can fill the void. "The Lambda crossovers will do most anything a minivan can do - except for the sliding doors, which a lot of people don't like," says a source familiar with GM's product plans. Suppliers get word One GM supplier says it was awarded work on the GMT511 program, GM's internal code name for the new generation of minivans. But on Nov. 17, GM told suppliers it was canceling the program. Jim Hall, vice president of the consulting company AutoPacific in Southfield, Mich., estimates GM had planned to spend $750 million to $1 billion on the minivan program. "They are in capital conservation mode," says Hall. U.S. minivan sales have plummeted 19.0 percent since 2000, to 1,110,541 in 2005. That's a dramatic drop of 260,693 vehicles. The Chrysler group led the segment last year with 36.7 percent of the market, followed by Honda at 15.7 percent and GM at 14.9 percent. Last year GM sold 166,016 minivans. This year, minivan sales are off 10.9 percent through October. Hall expects the downward trend to continue as buyers switch to crossovers and other vehicles. Hall predicts minivan sales will continue to decline. "There are not enough Gen-Xers to backfill. And as for Gen Y, nobody knows if they will want to buy minivans," he says. The Lambda-based Chevrolet crossover will fill the slots vacated by the Chevrolet TrailBlazer SUV and Uplander minivan. The Chevrolet crossover's styling draws heavily from the Chevrolet Sequel concept, unveiled in September. GM plans to discontinue the TrailBlazer and GMC Envoy, although the timetable has not been announced. 7 or 8 seats The Lambda-based crossovers accommodate seven or eight people, depending on seating configuration. But Hall believes GM will lose hardcore minivan buyers who want seats that fold into the floor or are removable. The second-row seats in the Acadia, Enclave and Outlook are not removable and do not fold into the floor. The third-row seat folds flat. The Acadia and Outlook are assembled at GM's Delta Township plant near Lansing, Mich. The Enclave goes into production there next spring. GM's minivans are built in the Doraville, Ga., plant, which is scheduled to close in 2008. GM's new crossovers likely will resemble the Chevrolet Sequel concept.

Everybody touts automotive safety, and laments driver incompetence as a fact of life in the USA; mainly because the theme idea is that everybody has a right to a drivers license, and access to all the roads in the USA---- Freedom to travel, right? Well, what if we started to say, O.K., you can drive--- somewhere--- if you qualify! Instead of the drivers license that we all can get basically by fogging a mirror, what if you had to demonstrate your ability to handle a vehicle competently in several emergency reaction situations, and were graded on how well you avoided an accident? This would include performance handling as well. Then, this score value was placed in a bar code on your drivers license. In order to operate any car, you would have to place your drivers license in a reader in the vehicle, which would read your proficiency level, and only then then allow you to start the engine, or restrict the performance potential to the drivers capability rating. If you were qualified to handle the performance potential of that vehicle you would have no restrictions imposed by the cars computer! The license would stay in the holder as long as you were operating that car, and when you removed it, it would shut the car down. If you left the drivers seat, without removing the card, the vehicle would shut down and could not be restarted until a different card was presented. There could be a timed emergency override, in case of a need for departure, say from a car-jacking. Also, part of the bar-code would light a display in your window, so that observers, the police would know you were qualified to operate a vehicle with a specific performance level. Along with this, the lanes on a highway with 4 or more lanes would have an imbedded reader and would be graded with increasing speed limits, that could read your performance quotient, and if you tried to change lanes to a higher speed one than one that you were qualified for, an alarm signal would go off, both visually and audibly, inside and out, that you were exceeding your tested driving capabilities. Penalties could then ensue, either by tickets, or restricting the vehicle performance via an override code sent to the on-board computer. This would prevent little-old-ladies from driving 500hp behemoths, unless they could show that they knew how to handle them, or a blocker code, like a limp-home mode would only allow them a percentage of that vehicles potential. The same with inexperienced teen-agers, until they could demonstrate thru the testing that they had the know-how and ability to respond to emergency road situations. The proficiency testing read-outs on the licenses could be changed by re-testing after having shown some form of driver education tailored to the tasks. Drunk drivers could be prevented from operating a car by having a code entered onto their license with court-ordered restrictions. This would prevent their ability to start any car, but would not prevent their spouse from using the vehicle, since it would require a different license. Service facilities could be issued special code cards, but these would prevent parking lot speed jockeys from laying down strips with your high-performance ride. Now this would all take time, in vehicle design and smart electronics, plus some roadway work to install readers and transmitters, and some legislation cooperation, but if it was pursued with conviction, could be done in 2 decades, nationwide! Congress would have to get on the ball, and write some real legislation, without the usual loopholes. States would have to get on board also. Then we could enjoy a really fast, graded highway transportation system, and have a real system of highway safety.--- and enjoy your ride as was intended. Who needs autobahns?

One slight problem on your wish list Sly, Who is going to foot the 37Bil. bill to put hydrogen-refill stations across the USA? That is the estimated cost of added one additional fuel option to the existing gas stations now out there....... and then there is the issue of distribution & bulk transport.......

O.K., I couldn't get all the pics to attach in the last thread, so here are the other two pics.

Right on ZL-1. GM Opel has not been sleeping in the past 5 years, and I just found pics in the GM archives of 3 versions that they make for other markets! I'll try to attach the pics. They are the Movano, in 3 versions; the Combo Tour, which is also made in a cargo version, and the Vivaro which is also made in dual versions. Now, none of these may work as no-change transplants, but they sure-as-hell offer more than a running start. The Zafira, even the Chinese one, is still a CUV, not a mini-van!

....and it MAY snow in Hell someday too! Did you read on about the shutdowns, and no future product planned or announced for Spring Hill....????? Production wheels don't get turned off overnight....... nor turned back on that quick either! But then that would require you to have some manufacturing knowledge, which you have not shown to date. :AH-HA_wink:

Wednesday, November 22, 2006 Chevrolet The Chevrolet Uplander was part of GM's 15% slice of the minivan segment. GM kills plan for minivans Following Ford's lead, struggling automaker will focus on crossovers. Sharon Terlep / The Detroit News General Motors Corp. may be bowing out of the minivan business. Faced with a steep drop in demand for the family vehicles, GM confirmed Tuesday that it has scrapped plans to build new minivan models that would have debuted as early as 2009 under Chevrolet, Saturn and other nameplates. While GM declined to comment on future vehicle plans, company insiders told The Detroit News that the company has no immediate plans to build minivans after it closes its last minivan-producing plant. The Doraville, Ga., plant builds the slow-selling Chevrolet Uplander and Buick Terraza minivans. It recently stopped producing the Saturn Relay. It would mark the first time since 1985 that GM won't churn out the vehicles popularized in the 1980s by a generation of young baby boomer families. Instead, the automaker, which has always been a small player in the minivan market compared to Honda Motor Co. and the Chrysler Group, will focus on crossover vehicles that blend the characteristics of cars and sport utility vehicles. GM is preparing to launch a group of large crossovers that include the GMC Acadia, the Saturn Outlook and the Buick Enclave. "We do believe it is a declining segment," GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz told The News on Tuesday. "Our new crossovers, Acadia, Outlook and Enclave with their three rows of seats and economical V-6 engines, can meet the same customer needs, minus the 'Soccer Mom' stigma.." The Enclave hits showrooms next summer with the Acadia and Outlook on sale early next year; all three will be built in GM's new Delta Township plant near Lansing. A potential Chevrolet crossover may follow. Lutz cautioned that GM has made no official move to pull out of the minivan market. Ford Motor Co. did make such a decision earlier this year, abandoning minivans such as the Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey. The Monterey is out of production and Freestar production is expected to end early next year. Ford is planning to build a new-generation family hauler based on the Ford Fairlane concept. Minivan sales down 50% Word of GM's change came Tuesday when United Auto Workers leaders at the plant in Spring Hill, Tenn., learned that the factory is no longer in line to build minivans next year. GM likely will find new vehicles for that plant, which has been building Saturn cars and trucks since that brand's 1991 debut, company officials said. GM may decide down the road to build a new minivan line, though there are no immediate plans to do so. The minivans would have been built on the same chassis design as the Enclave, Acadia and Outlook. Design concepts had been completed and some work had been sourced to suppliers. But, in the end, GM determined its resources would be better spent elsewhere. GM's minivan sales have fallen nearly 50 percent since 2000. In 2005, GM sold 166,000 minivans compared with 323,000 in 2000. Sales industrywide have dropped about 20 percent in that time. GM's slice of the minivan segment was about 15 percent in 2005. Segment leader Chrysler had 37 percent of the market, followed by Toyota with 16 percent. Auto dealers and analysts have long criticized the styling and practicality of the GM minivans, saying they were too small and unattractive to compete with Chrysler, Honda and Toyota. "I don't think that GM ever got the minivan right," said Eric Merkle, forecasting director at IRN Inc., a consulting firm in Grand Rapids. The early Lumina APV, made from 1990-96, "looked like a Dust Buster," Merkle said. GM later came out with different designs, but in making those vehicles on a smaller platform designed to sell in Europe as well as the United States, those minivans were far too compact to compete here, he said. "It's about utility and functionality with a minivan," Merkle said. "GM has been much too willing to limp along with a product that wasn't up to par." GM restructuring under way GM is in the midst of a restructuring plan to cut annual spending by $9 billion. The company is looking to bring its manufacturing schedule more in line with demand for its vehicles and cutting off the minivan fits with that strategy. The company's lineup of new crossovers is considered a key piece of GM's plan to revive its North American auto business after losing $10.6 billion last year. "We're thinking differently about cost, and how we can knock out some big items," Troy Clarke, president of GM North America, said Tuesday during a speech in Detroit on GM's turnaround. Clarke said the automaker has managed to pare back costs and that early sales of its new Saturn Aura sedan have been strong, with the company on track to sell 6,000 of the vehicles in November. Down at the Spring Hill plant in Tennessee, union leaders vented frustration at the automaker's decision to cancel the minivan. GM has no concrete plans to build a new car or truck at the factory next year, when production of the Saturn Vue sport utility vehicle moves to Mexico, according to a union memo Tuesday. GM is also discontinuing production of the Saturn Ion sedan, the other vehicle built in Spring Hill. The plant has been somewhat of an anomaly within GM since Saturn was launched in 1990 to compete with low-cost imports like Toyota, Honda and Nissan. "Now with only four months left before we cease production of the Ion and Vue, we still have nothing tangible to call our own," UAW Local 1853 President Mike O'Rourke said in the newsletter to members. GM's Clarke said the company has no plans to stop using the factory and has other products that could potentially be built there. While crossovers are promising, the minivan market is not one GM can afford to abandon, said Jim Quinlan, a Chevy dealer from Knoxville, Tenn. GM may do well to take some time to retool their minivan concept, he said, but he hopes GM will return to the segment. "They've just missed it on the design side. But this is going to continue to be an important segment." Now you can call the Detroit News a liar! New Developments: Saturn Relay no longer in production. New Minivan project has been scrapped. Chevrolet "may" receive a version of the new crossovers. Saturn WAS SCHEDULED to get a version of the scrapped minivan. So WAS Chevrolet and quote "other divisions". Article quote: While GM declined to comment on future vehicle plans, company insiders told The Detroit News that the company has no immediate plans to build minivans after it closes its last minivan-producing plant. The Doraville, Ga., plant builds the slow-selling Chevrolet Uplander and Buick Terraza minivans. Article quote: Instead, the automaker, which has always been a small player in the minivan market compared to Honda Motor Co. and the Chrysler Group, will focus on crossover vehicles that blend the characteristics of cars and sport utility vehicles. GM is preparing to launch a group of large crossovers that include the GMC Acadia, the Saturn Outlook and the Buick Enclave. "We do believe it is a declining segment," GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz told The News on Tuesday. "Our new crossovers, Acadia, Outlook and Enclave with their three rows of seats and economical V-6 engines, can meet the same customer needs, minus the 'Soccer Mom' stigma.." Article quote: The Enclave hits showrooms next summer with the Acadia and Outlook on sale early next year; all three will be built in GM's new Delta Township plant near Lansing. A potential Chevrolet crossover may follow. Lutz cautioned that GM has made no official move to pull out of the minivan market.

Yeah, very funny..... oh yeah, the next knock on your door just might be from the cops........ they don't think your threat was very funny either! And that is fundamentally where it is at!!!!