Drew Dowdell

You don't happen to have pictures to scan, would you? No scanner, but I could try and take a pic tonight. Considering the collection you have, I think it is high time that C&G take up a collection on your behalf.

Suzuki and Volvo did it in FWD vehicles right up until recently. Even an I6-Turboed-DI Camaro could be an interesting proposition if they can slant the engine. You know that such vehicles wouldn't really be my thing - But I see too much logic in the possibilities to ignore this idea. You could get your E-body back... You may have misunderstood me. Suzuki and Volvo did transverse I-6 FWD cars. Technically, so did VW, with a twist. In terms of packaging, the VR design is really the solution to the problem. 15 degree V, V6 makes it smooth like an inline, but not much longer than an I-4. Seems I may have. But then, FWD Suzukis and Volvos are in my "beneath notice" category. I do find it interesting the Chrysler's LH cars used a north-south configuration though. Those were some of the best-looking FWD designs of their time. A slightly taller hood, and they could have used an I-6. I agree. I've always wondered what an LH coupe, probably a Chrysler branded one, would look like. Given GM's stumble with the E-body starting in '86, Chrysler could have snatched that market away with something like that. Technically, the drive layout is an AMC/Renault derived design going back to the Monaco. Another interesting North/South arrangements. The 1996 - 2005 Passat. Available with 1.8 liter 4-cylinder, a 2.8 liter V6 or a 4.0 liter W8.... all longitudinal.

I can't wait to drive one of these.

The 2.5 is a dud because you have all the bulk and weight of the 3.7 (plus slightly more) without the performance that comes with the 3.7. It costs Nissan exactly the same amount of money to build the 2.5 as it does to build the 3.7. They'd be better off turboing a 4-cylinder.

Suzuki and Volvo did it in FWD vehicles right up until recently. Even an I6-Turboed-DI Camaro could be an interesting proposition if they can slant the engine. You know that such vehicles wouldn't really be my thing - But I see too much logic in the possibilities to ignore this idea. You could get your E-body back... You may have misunderstood me. Suzuki and Volvo did transverse I-6 FWD cars. Technically, so did VW, with a twist. In terms of packaging, the VR design is really the solution to the problem. 15 degree V, V6 makes it smooth like an inline, but not much longer than an I-4.

I'm the reverse. Prewar -> about 1960, then about 1965 - Mid-70s, then 1980 - 87, then 1992 - 96 for me. GM loses me completely from 1961 - 1965/66

Nobody saw GM heading to the troubles they had in 1992, much less BK in 2009. Indeed, if you told anybody in 1981 that GM would have those events happen in the next 30 years, you would have been laughed out of the room. By 1992, GM already had, in no particular order: The original Cavalier The X-bodies The 4100 The 350 Diesel The Cimmarron The less than successful initial launch of the W-body. The disastrous downsizing of the E-bodies. A 5 year lag on the Mini-van Chrysler just released the LH cars while GM was just filling out the rest of the W-body line. The Camry that made the Camry the Camry was released in 1991 and blew away what GM was putting out in comparison. If you couldn't see it coming in 1992... well... then you need better glasses.

Edsel Corsair making good time on I-81 in Virginia/Maryland

I am grumpy (exhaustion) but my opinion is still the same.

Suzuki and Volvo did it in FWD vehicles right up until recently. Even an I6-Turboed-DI Camaro could be an interesting proposition if they can slant the engine.

DI , full VVT, and a turbo or two would address those issues in the Atlas and make it more than a match for the Ecoboost.

Where's the 2.9 V6 diesel that was developed for Cadillac? That had 400 ft-lb of torque. The 3.0TT is coming to the cars wouldn't take much work to make a 3.6TT for the trucks. The hardware is basically the same but use lower boost numbers. I do think that Chevy needs a turbo V6 or Atlas I6 Turbo as an option. But mostly l would like to see Chevy do a broad spectrum diesel release. Cruze, 'Nox, Impala, Colorado, and Silverado should all be available with diesel and in the Silverado specifically, a diesel that isn't a $7,000, Heavy Duty upgrade.

Ugh... if you're talking just tail lights, ok.. but overall '57 goes to any division BUT Pontiac. I think their grills are terrible. The only '57s I dislike more than the Pontiac are the Mercury and Dodges.... but all three would be improved by a medium speed impact into a brick wall.

It is a feature available to premium members

When you're ready to do some online advertising :-) Yes, Once I get everything setup and my web site fully built, then I would love to put up some advertising here. We have a comprehensive and sophisticated ad server running here, we just aren't using it for private ad buys yet.

Why? Of the few journalists who got to drive one, everyone seemed to really like it except for the 4-cylinder models (not a problem here) and some cheap bits on the interior (addressed by a complete redesign by Cadillac)

NUMMI can't handle 20K a year? Granted, Tesla may still have labor or supply chain issues, but they have a capable factory. I was looking at the entire supply chain.

Do they actually have that sort of production capacity?

Nice Caddy and Sierra. The sad thing about the Caddy is that the 350 Diesel is still an improvement over the base engine in that car.

When you're ready to do some online advertising :-)

What is lower rent on the Eco over a similar equipped Cruze?

BS, because of price overlap??? There's plenty of overlap, for ex, between the c- & e-class, and they are much closer in purpose than the CTS & XTS.... Or are you admitting that FWD vs. RWD just doesn't matter that much after all??? There is $9,985 between a C350 and E350. There is $2,905 between the ATS 3.6 and the XTS 3.6, and they have to squeeze the CTS in between those two. Actually, a 3.6 CTS is cheaper than a 3.6 ATS that is supposed to be below it. Has pricing been announced for the 2013 CTS? The current CTS is only on the market another year.

The XTS is a Saab 9-5 that GM had an extra 2.5 years to work on the interior with.

The Executive series appears to not be out quite yet, but the main feature was the way the interior was trimmed. It comes with nicer leather and wood with actual grain and texture. It is the automotive old school country club with 200 year old wood and leather furniture.