Blake Noble

If you're sure you don't want it. I mean, you're local, so you do get first dibs. But I will look into it a little more and figure out what it will cost me to obtain the car.

It appears to have a mostly solid body and a good engine, especially if it doesn't smoke or have a miss like the owner states (the '71 Cutlass S I wanted recently did/had both). The transmission is something I would go over with a fine-toothed comb: a test drive would be in order to make sure that there is some life left in the clutch and the gear changes are smooth. I would offer $3,800 for it and, at that price, it's worth every last penny. Why doesn't anything awesome like that pop up in my state?

Two problems with the Volt: 1.) It's going to be expensive. The price tag, while it might not turn many buyers away, will turn away a few buyers interested in the car, even with applicable tax breaks. 2.) It's an answer to the horrible Prius $h!box, which has been around since 1997. The Volt won't debut until next year. GM has even admitted its been behind in the game when it comes to alternative powertrains in mainstream vehicles. (Sure, there was the EV1, but you could only lease one and couldn't actually own one. GM owned all examples of the EV1 produced. That's not exactly what I'd consider as a mainsteam car.) As for BAS II, we haven't heard an update on its status in a while. Yeah, sure, it's coming, but not until the 2010 calendar date GM announced last year, provided it wasn't put on the back burner during the bailout talks. Like you said, it's all speculation. As for the Escape hybrid, I would expect Ford to answer the Equinox's non-hybrid mpg ratings in the near future with either a MCE of the current model or with the next-generation model. Okay, first off all, if you want to say the word "f@#k," just say the damn word. We're not in middle school anymore. Second of all, if you want to act like an ass and ignore what I told you, go right ahead. Yet, a Cobalt SS Turbo was faster around the Nurburgring than the Camaro SS and is faster to 60 than the V6 model. That's just not right. Yeah, I'm not selling my soul to the military and signing my death certificate just so I can buy a Corvette, no offense. HA! Now who is pretending to know who hmmmm ... ? :rotflmao: By the way, your little lesson on the blackboard was wrong. Dodgefan had to go back and correct it. Better go back and hit the books and sharpen your pencils. You couldn't teach a dog to blink. The Northstar will be no more soon. GM might want to think about bringing out that 350hp 3.6L V6 if it wants to keep its title as offering the best V6 pony car on the market.

Decontenting the LaCrosse for Chevrolet duty is still half-assing the job. This is invalid. Yes, it is technically classified as a "full-sized" car now, but the Accord's main competition is still identified as the Camry, Altima, Malibu, etc. Good for you. I've also put my money where my mouth is: I don't buy new GM cars. I'm sticking with old GM iron, cars that GM built back when it gave a $h!, and considering the few cars that GM built quite well back when it didn't (it still doesn't).

Know what? Screw it, I'm going to drive that Monte.

After I change my pants, could someone tell me how much is a plane ticket to Florida?

Who says the Impala has to sell in the millions or even the hundreds of thousands? That should be the Malibu's goal. The Impala is Chevrolet's top-tier sedan, or at least it should be. It should be a flagship car offering the best styling and driving dynamics and clear advantages over a comparable Malibu, positioned in a niche role with strictly limited fleet sales. (Speaking of fleet sales, that's where a good chunk of W-Body Impala sales are at.) It should bridge the gap between Chevrolet and Buick and do it correctly. I understand you have your opinion and I'm not going to convince you otherwise of it, but you have to admit that having two similarly sized front-wheel drive Camcord competitors in the same showroom with no clear advantage over the other and appealing to the same sort of buyer is redundant. It's overlap and it has no place at GM. Oh I don't and I'm not. But I know a fanboy when I spot one. :AH-HA_wink:

Oh! So that's the new logo GM was thinking about ...

Don't invest too much in the rear-drive Caddy becoming a reality at the moment, is all I'm going to say ... :AH-HA_wink: Chug-a-lug-lug on that GM Koolaid. I bet you thought that the Caprice was actually going to happen too, huh? :rotflmao: I warn you, you are going to be disappointed. Keep your mind open and take the rumors you hear about future GM products with a grain of salt. Don't invest too much hope in what you hear. I used to be a bigger GM fan than you were, then I started to wake up to the ugly reality that surrounds GM like stink on $h!.

There hasn't been much that much buzz about a BAS II Malibu making a debut. Maybe it will happen when the Epsilon II Malibu shows its face to the world, but that's still sometime away and a few years behind the competition. Laugh all day long boy. Where did I say Ford offered a variety of vehicles? Yeah, that's right, I didn't. You misunderstand me. I praise Ford because they have shown they are committed to making a quality product that is competitive, if not superior to the competition in at least one way. Okay, yeah. One is a two-ton, full-sized coupe passing itself off as a pony car and the other -- the Corvette -- is so expensive for the average middle-class buyer, it's moot to buy one unless you have money to burn. Oh, so you've bought into that line of delusional bull$h! too? For the 1,096,647,565,584,324th time: 2010 Buick Lacrosse CXS: FWD EPII Powertrain: 3.6L DI V6 280 hp w./ 6-speed automatic Curb Weight: 4065 lbs EPA Est: 17/27 2009 Cadillac CTS 3.6DI: RWD Sigma Powertrain: 3.6L DI V6 306 hp w./ 6-speed automatic Curb Weight: 3874 lbs EPA: 18/26 2010 Chevrolet Camaro 2LT: RWD Modified Zeta Powertrain: 3.6L DI V6 306 hp w./ 6-speed automatic Curb Weight: 3728 EPA: 17/29 2009 Chevrolet Malibu LTZ FWD EPI Powertrain: 3.6L DOHC V6 252 hp w./ 6-speed automatic Curb Weight: 3649 (This is for 4-cyl) EPA: 18/26 I believe your point against rear-drive cars does not hold water. I didn't need to be educated on the two automaker's mainstream offerings, thanks. Here's the thing: I don't have the money to pony up for a new V8 Camaro or Mustang, so I would therefore purchase a V6 model. And next year, the Mustang will be upgraded with a new V6 engine that will give it performance surpassing the V6 Camaro. Don't assume, ask.

Something that I realized: the '71 might have a cracked head. When the guy started it up, it spat white smoke out of the driver's side tailpipe. The passenger side exhaust was clear as air ...

One last thing: the '71 has factory cruise control and factory a/c.

BTW: There is another reason why it needs a two-barrel carb, can you guess why? This detail could brake the bank. :AH-HA_wink:

Ford has proven that it's committed to making vehicles that far exceed the competition. The Fusion Hybrid for example far surpasses the Prius and makes the Malibu Hybrid, for the record, look like a joke. GM sells one kind of car: boring front-drive sedans, with your choice of four-cylinder or V6 engines with automatic transmissions only and in sizes small, medium, and large. Sure, there's the Camaro, which is a rear-drive coupe, but it's completely wrong for a sports coupe like the Camaro should be, another example of GM screwing the pooch. It's almost as big and actually heavier than my 1972 Cutlass Supreme, a car that is full-sized by today's standards and built completely out of steel. I have proved that in previous posts and I don't care one bit to repost it. The G8 will soon be no more and, come on, I will never have the money to buy a new CTS for a long time. Even if I did, it doesn't completely appeal to me. There's nothing at GM for a guy like me to buy: I would love to purchase and own a lightweight, rear-drive coupe with a manual transmission with great styling and at least a V6 engine with decent power. I might would accept a sedan if it was just right. GM could build it, and even said they were going to at one time, but nope ... I'm left out in the rain. Maybe when the Alpha-based F6 Camaro makes it debut sometime in the far future somewhere over the rainbow I might reconsider GM, proved it doesn't weigh two tons and can be outran by a Cobalt SS Turbo. Ford has a car similar to what I want, though: it's called a Mustang.

Update: I looked at the '71 Cutty S today. The guy said he would take $3500 for it minus the dubs. I'm currently in the process of figuring out what to do next. If I do decide I want it, I want it in my possession by Tuesday or Wednesday. As for what it needs, it's going to need a paint job, of course. The previous owner that had it before the guy who has it now tried to do a polyurethane paintjob and completely screwed it up to hell when it came time to sand it. It's also going to need a new 2-barrel carburetor to replace the 4-barrel Holley that's on it right now because, well, that carb isn't much more reliable than the Edelbrock that was on the '72 when I got it. It will keep the car running better than the '72's Edelbrock did, sure, but I wouldn't trust it on a long trip. And since I want it without the wheels and tires, I'm going to need to mount some tires to the set of Rallys I have for the '72 to drive it home on. Also, the driver's side exhaust manifold has a leaky gasket that I'll have to replace. Other than that, it has a solid body, floor pans, and trunk pan with only minor surface rust. The interior is in excellent shape with a headliner that looks brand-spankin' new and there isn't a single crack in the dashboard. Honestly, it's in much better shape than the '72 was when I got it. It's also a number's matching car as well, just like the '72. The guy who has it now also bought a bunch of new parts for it, including a new rear bumper and new grilles. I'm going to need a stone shield, however, but there's a guy in town that I can ask to buy one off of. The car also comes with a spare Turbo 400 automatic transmission and extra valvetrain assemblies, not that I'll need them. It's well worth $3500 for the car and the extra parts. I'm also going to call about this car tomorrow, just to satisfy my curiosity. If they are not flexible at all on the price, then I know for sure what car I am going to buy: http://lexington.craigslist.org/ctd/1245645467.html

I guess you are what you advertise to. Pussies.

So the title should have been "Smells like Vegemite?" Or "Smells like a Poodle Hairdo?" See, this is why the '80s aren't my decade. I don't really understand it.

A green/gray/black primer Horizon TC3 (what the Duster was called in the late '70s) known as "The Frog" was our auto tech shop's mascot. What lovable pile of $h! it was.

Renault Megane.

Sorry. I forgot.

Hyuck, hyuck, hyuck, hyuck.

My problem with GM doesn't just lie with their lack of products which only offer one flavor to the consumer, but a good deal of their management, which makes promises only to fail to deliver on them. Fritz The Ditz Henderson is not and will not be the CEO that will be GM's savior like Alan Mually has been for Ford.

I wonder what part two could be ...

Just watched an ad for the new 2010 Equinox that bragged on its MPG ratings. Its an informative ad and all, but it's so ... boring. I hate the New GM.

I haven't been able to find it on YouTube, but tonight I noticed an ad for the Nissan Altima that opened up with acutal quotes from Motor Trend and Car and Driver reviews of the Toyota Camry. Both quotes directed insult to the Camry, with the Car and Driver quote saying the Camry was "dull as dishwater." You know who should be making an ad just like that for their mainstream sedan, right? Bravo to Nissan for doing what a certain car company never had the balls to do.