balthazar

What's wrong with posting a counter-opinion to their 'findings'? BTW- opening the eyes of the auto consumer to CR's secret practices & demonstrated biases by repeatedly pointing those out WILL change a damn thing- it will devalue & undermine the publication. At some point it could conceivably be rendered irrelevant. I wouldn't mind in the least.

Champ is a Lark-based pick-up: a compact/mid-size, but no full-size. There were a number of co-existing full-size Studie pick-ups (Transtar was one).

Erskine, 1928

Diamond T 'Doodlebug' tanker truck, 1934

Did renaming JDM hondas as 'acura's make those cars any better?

T100 may indeed be a completely different truck than the following tundra, but both were toyota's respective full-size truck entries and 'set the bit' for a great many truck shoppers. The new tundra has some heavy luggage to tote up Sales Hill.

I believe it without question.But of course, professional 'journalists' never have a shred of similar bias in their veins, oh no!

And honda sold the nsx as an acura and it flopped. The point is critical success, not whether it would be a sales success or not.

>>"AMC DeLorean"<< ???????????????????????????? Brockway

I do not see the dealer situation being the governing or critical factor here. The Divisions & vehicles must stand tall- whether there are Buicks & Pontiacs in the same showroom really makes no difference. Multi-line dealers have been with us since the '60s. Pride, individuality & accomplishment hasn't.

So was our '70 Cat. Crazy idea, I know: optional engines....

This was a post-'70 thing, a nod towards increasing fuel economy. Pontiac did it too after '70 (2bbls on the largest displacement V-8s), tho it was not common. Instead, smaller motors became standard- the '70 Cat had the 350 standard for the first time- a 'lil' motor instead of the usual 389/400.

Chrysler had a few concepts with the same 'lift-canopy' design back in the '60s. Those didn't see production either. I do like the stator-blade wheels, but those will also never see the light of day. This one is exciting overall for this 'class', which is why saab-philes will reject any major portion of it which reaches the showroom. But since that's an ever-dwindling group, perhaps it's a risk worth taking (may bring in a whole new customer base). Saturn Curve still looks a whole lot fresher. '61 Chrysler TurboFlite:

H A L L E L U J A H !!!! I have avocated this before and it makes absolute sense. It was one of the key factors in the long-running successes of GM's history: individuality & division pride. Hopefully this will lead to other sensible, well-thoughtout, long-overdue ideas, like Divisional Engineering Departments, authoritative Division general managers and the elimination of the "GM" badge on doors/ fenders [shudder]. I have watched in growing dismay as critics spread their fast-n-loose 'facts' over the entire Corporation like thick greasy butter, always gravitating towards "GM" rather than the division they were talking about. It never used to be that way; General Motors was an organizational & financial overseer, not a vehicle manufacturer. You never read or heard 'GM introduced the new Pontiac Bonneville...' it was only ever 'Pontiac introduced the new Bonneville...' Many of you will shrug, not realizing the significance of that slight difference, but it went (and goes) a LONG way toward feeding the perception that 'all GM vehicles are the same rebadges'. It did N O T H I N G but damage to perceptions & reputations. I fought it for a long time publically, but the mindset is strong and the media relentless. It is high time for the Divisions to reassert themselves! There cannot be success without this vital component- the Divisions MUST be (at least somewhat) autonomous and self-governing. A glimmer of hope is lit in my heart- someone up there in the Tubes has his head screwed on straight

Right: staggeringly, the CC got a 455 with a mere 2bbl on it. No maka no centz.

If you scroll all the way to the right, you can see the doghouse Sixty8 is going to be living in if he brings one GD more vehicle home!

With axles & driveshafts being a primary product, and (along with PACCAR & Int'n'l) Ford & GM trucks as primary customers, it would seem product sales would NOT be a major contributor, contrary to the article's acertation. Ford & GM truck sales are better in recent years than any other time historically.

I'd like to send the driver a thank you card- one less of those automotive Frankenstiens on the road does us all a favor.

LOL! I'd take the concept G6 interior first (in different colors, tho!) and the production (updated) G6 interior second. honda interior is too wacky & weird to be appealing. Hard to tell from the pic, but the 'top-line' honda looks like it has simply dreadful ergonomics. And could the console possibly be any more annoyingly un-centered? Awful, cubed.

The current Hemi has a shrouded chamber. An unshrouded head --or a true hemisphere for you geometry nuts- would 've produced less power. Personally, I have absolutely no problem with Chrysler/ Dodge using the term- they earned it in my book.

turbo -- Please explain how you "love the SRX" if the exterior is "just not right" and the the interior is "awful, obviously" What is it then that inspires such adoration; the lug nuts? The exhaust hangers?

Eliminating the few I own copies of (Christine, The Crow, Brazil, The Car)... 5 times or more (via TV/renting; I've never watched the same movie twice in a theater): House on Haunted Hill, Jaws, Dawn of the Dead 2004, As Good As It Gets, Lord of the Rings trilogy, Back to the Future trilogy, Alien/Aliens, Matrix, I'm sure a bunch more.... DOTD '04 is close to high art in my book. I need to buy a copy....

^^ nice. I had a '78 Volare sedan. It was in great shape when bought and was nothing but reliable. Only malady was a tendancy for 'run-on' at the end of my ownership. The Super Six (2bbl 225) had admirable power & economy for the '70s (the 360-equipped cars were tested in the low 7s to 60- manual trans 6s were tested at 23 MPG). No quality gripes on my car- interior was nicer & far less tacky than many in it's class and mine also had no exterior or assembly issues. It really was a comfortable, roomy car with decent spunk for a '70s 6. "Better use of (LESS) space" is still less space; K-cars were much more cramped. God- sounds like I almost miss it...

RIP Olds..... Olds Gas Engine Works ~ 1890 - 1899 Olds Motor Vehicle Company ~ 1897 - 1899 Olds Motor Works ~ 1899 - (1908?) Oldsmobile Motor Division ~ (1908?) - (1981?) Oldsmobile ~ (1981?) - 2004

He probably hates the fact that it will only dilute the market impact of the Solstice and is somewhat dismayed to see (at least informally here at C&G) that the majority of opinion favors the Sky over the Solstice, even tho the Sky's stylistic differences are much more homogenized with the mainstream than it's much more unique cousin's.