Sixty8panther

Yes indeed. Wouldn't it be great to go back in time and meet this guy? Easily THE most influential person in Automotive history in terms of Automotive design & styling. The "Art and Color" department was what bridged the gap between the spartan, function driven Model-T and the coachbuilt Duesenbergs, Parkards & Bugattis that were basically works of art on wheels. I personally would love to meet Harley more so than almost any living celebrity, be it an Athlete, Musician, Actor, Politician or whatever. Then again GM classics are No.1 obsession.

And let's remember Balthazar, that 469 horsepower output is coming from a motor that has been updated & gained forced induction but the meat-n-potatos of the motor, like the entire block & guts have been around in production form since fall of 1992. That's the most recent update of a 17 year old motor. Not that I'm trying to put down Hyundai but if we're going to draw comparisons there's one that nobody is making.

Well, in any case much of what he describes does jive with characteristics that I myself dislike strongly in most Hon-DUH/AcCura cars I've driven... Their AUTO transmissions are crappy, worse even than my 1997 Infiniti Q45's in sloppyness. Then again, if you buy a Honda product with an AUTO then you're a complete lost cause.

Guess who said this?

LoLz.

Ricer Civic: Well said. Your thoughts on charity reminded me of an interesting factoid: Republicans &/or conservatives are MORE willing to contribute to charity and DO put their money where their mouth is MORE often than Liberals. Liberals want to take all the responsibility (weather it be personal, corporate or otherwise) out of peoples lives.... so people are FORCED to "do the right thing" except the problem is (one anyway) these $hitbag politicians are, more often than not, hypocrites. Ted Kennedy wants to tell you how to live your life, but God forbid if the view in his vacation home on the Cape is tarnished by some windmills 4-miles away that would help the state of Mass produce green-power. Then there's Al Gore, he'll gladly burn 10,000 gallons of 120 octane at $12/gallon just so he can travel around the world telling people that driving an 8-passenger Cadillac Escalade that gets 14mpg is a sin. F**k 'em all I say!

I to found the "reverse beltline dip" to be ghastly at first, but with time I've grown to like it. Some slight similarities to the Solara are present, sadly... but mostly it's just that whole "every modern car is pretty generic" syndrome, for that we have the damn Japanese & Ralph Nader to thank.

Here's an idea: Cut 30% of the plants. With the other 70% produce only 5 models: Cadillac STS/CTS/CTS-V Chevrolet/GMC Trucks/SUVs Pontiac G8-GT (add a 2dr hardtop) Corvette/Z06/Zr1 Chevrolet Camaro & a Buick Riviera based on a stretched version of the same Zeta-platrorm Done. All the rest are useless.

Yup.... its true, we all make mistakes, and what sucks is that you cant control the dope in the Ryder truck or BMW wagon. As far s your rollcage question, Yes and no. The basic rollcage you posted is (of course) not going to do much to prevent the cruple zone (intentional or not) from... well, CRUMPLING into your legs or sternum . A really well engineered rollcage is more of an overall safety cell, it usually has higher beams protecting you fro side impact (most dangerous of all in ANY car) and there's piping that goes out of the passanger compartment and bolts to the front & rear of the car"s structure... think simplified NASCAr CAGE. Look closely at the photos above, esp. at the Karmann Ghia's engine compartment and the Austin Healey's under-hood front section & you will see what I'm talking about. A great starting point for a "safety cage" in a VW Beetle would be to look at a modern Porsche 911's safety cage. the 911 is THE most winning-est car model in racing history, and you can you tube crashes that would rip most car in half involving 911s and yet the driver emerges unscathed. Granted something this good involves serious time and money but I think in the long run it would be well worth it. Perfection has its price. I'd love to make a safety-cell for a '65-'69 Corvair 2-door hardtop & have a daily driver that gets 20 mpg but can take a hit from a Ford F350 and keep me and both my daughters 100% safe... way safer than any factory stock car that gets 20mpg, modern or not.

oh.... my bad, I guess it was 265 not 267. I think I got all the other stuff right. The wholesale car dealer who had this one is a wicked cool guy. He's owned many a hi-po Buick, his and his bro. are HARDCORE Buick guys, between them they've owned many a 1960s/early 1970s A-body GS, a few ragtops/rare option codes, a '70 GSX, '87 Grand National.... Now that Buicks are lame and lack any RWD product Kenny is a Chevy guy as far as his non-classics, back in spring of 2003 he bought a brand new Z06 and he was at New England Dragway one Wednesday night while I was drag racing my '68 Camaro. he had about 300 miles on the car at that point. Remember my '94 Buick Roadmaster Estate? I bought that off of Kenny. He's always got a few B-bodies kicking around for cheap $$$, he usually drives a Chevy pickup of some sort for a daily driver in bad weather/winter months.

Did you guys forget I mentioned it a few months back? My buddy (Buick collector and used car dealer) had a blue-green 100% stock 1996 Caprice Classic with the "267 LT1" in the engine bay... I considered buying it when I was selling the ('77 Cadillac) Banana Boat due to $4.59/gallon prices. I know I mentioned it... anyway, the motor displaced 4.3 liters, 267 cu.in. to be more precise, and it WAS indeed produced although ONLY in the Chevy sedan B-body, & IIRC never in any of the wagons or Buicks /Cadillacs B-bodys. Kenny had prob. one of the nicest, cleanest examples in existence. It had factory keyless & under 100K miles.

Moltar: I've seen many Genesis sedans, the first two being at a dealership in New Hampshire in early October. (2008) I agree, the big, bold grille of the black "concept render" is nicer. That being said this thing is HAWT, esp. for a Hyundai. God bless the Koreans. (well the ones to the South)

Does Cadillac need some new product & more inve$tment? YES! Is a new DOHC motor a magic bullet? HELL NO, way off the mark.

Just like XP715 & many other friends, I'm def. moving out of mASS in the near future, but my need to stay "locally" due to family & jobs means N.H. is my best choice, if only temporarily. Here's just a part of the reson WHY: ------- http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislatio...09/HCR0006.html A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles. Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 1, Article 7 declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled; and Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 2, Article 1 declares that the people inhabiting the territory formerly called the province of New Hampshire, do hereby solemnly and mutually agree with each other, to form themselves into a free, sovereign and independent body-politic, or State, by the name of The State of New Hampshire; and Whereas the State of New Hampshire when ratifying the Constitution for the United States of America recommended as a change, “First That it be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly & particularly Delegated by the aforesaid are reserved to the several States to be, by them Exercised;” and Whereas the other States that included recommendations, to wit Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Virginia, included an identical or similar recommended change; and Whereas these recommended changes were incorporated as the ninth amendment, the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, and the tenth amendment, the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people, to the Constitution for the United States of America; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring: That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory; and That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;” and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press:” thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; and That the construction applied by the General Government (as is evidenced by sundry of their proceedings) to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” and “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof,” goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to their power by the Constitution: that words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers, ought not to be so construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument: that the proceedings of the General Government under color of these articles, will be a fit and necessary subject of revisal and correction; and That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their federal compact, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation: that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this State is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis), to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them: that nevertheless, this State, from motives of regard and respect for its co-States, has wished to communicate with them on the subject: that with them alone it is proper to communicate, they alone being parties to the compact, and solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it, Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject as to its assumptions of power to the final judgment of those by whom, and for whose use itself and its powers were all created and modified: that if the acts before specified should stand, these conclusions would flow from them: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism -- free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go. In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. That this State does therefore call on its co-States for an expression of their sentiments on acts not authorized by the federal compact. And it doubts not that their sense will be so announced as to prove their attachment unaltered to limited government, whether general or particular. And that the rights and liberties of their co-States will be exposed to no dangers by remaining embarked in a common bottom with their own. That they will concur with this State in considering acts as so palpably against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States, of all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as seizing the rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government, with a power assumed to bind the States, not merely as the cases made federal, (casus foederis,) but in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent: that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories; and That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or personal conferences, at any times or places whatever, with any person or person who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings before the next session of the General Court; and That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to: I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State. II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law. III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law. IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government. V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press. VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government; and That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress, and the presiding officers of each State’s legislature.

California is both wicked awesome and super-LAME at the same time.

I would give my right testicle to own this car, yet it was built (at least mechanically) by company I'm not all that smitten with and frankly, I consider to be over rated. The car I'm thinking of is, in my opinion, NEAR perfect as any car can ever hope to get while retaining it's B-pillar. It was born as a ragtop, then a few years later rebodied in Belgium... as far as who commissioned the newer more exotic body, a fire destroyed any records of that info. Here's a short list of features that make it unique: 1. fastback roofline 2. tailfin 3. approx 18 feet long 4. in 1991 a Japanese car collector paid $1.5 million for it 5. elegant wheel skirts 6. bullet shaped headlights 7. very large and formal grille 8. its doors are almost perfectly circular in shape 9. steeply raked windshield 10. futuristic wheel covers 11. it was at one point, painted gold 12. red interior with matching red luggage 13. if you were to do a tune-up you'd need 12 spark plugs 14. no, it's NOT a Tatra

Hmmmm..... I'll have to google that.

As far as th DS3: It looks like Subaru's attempt at a Mini-Coop. (not really an insult.... just observation)

As far as th DS3: It looks like Subaru's attempt at a Mini-Coop. (not really an insult.... just observation)

I guess in my case it would be slightly less disgusting in person??? It's like a "101 Things To Never Do In Car Design" Poster Child.

I think it's funny how people will try to splice atoms about how a Cadillac is ALMOST not good enough to go head to head with cars 2, 3 or 4 times their price, so obviously GM fu&%ed up! Yeah.... Bentleys are nice, but they're an apples-to-oranges comparison even if they DO help out my point of Pushrod superiority. As far as the "if Cadillac is trying to be like them..." Who the hell said they ARE? God I hope Cadillac is not trying to "make a better Lexus GS or Jaguar". Sure the comparison will be made but last time I checked Cadillac has quite of bit of original product that the OTHERS can not match! If Cadillac needs something other than a pushrod V8 it's a pushrod V16!!!

Thanks for posting this Camino. Your 6-speed GTO was a fantastic car... I'll prob own one someday. If only the rear side window was a bit smaller so it could be made to drop into the rear 1/4-panel and therefore aid in B-pillar deletage. :wink: F*** anyone who is posing as a GM enthusiast but has some convoluted agenda based mostly on their hatred of Holden & love of Opel even if it means starving GM-NA or RWD product.

Curriosity did not kill the cat, Chuck Norris did. He roundhouse kicked it so hard it lost all nine lives in one fell swoop... but the cat had it coming, NOBODY eats Chuck's tuna sandwich!

It would be even funnier if he said that he infected all the high-class prostitutes in Washington D.C. with the 'Hiv. "Every time a Blackberry rings a politician gets AIDS!"