balthazar

Disappointing- I was led to expect much more. Grille surround is ultra bulky tho I suppose it's somewhat in keeping with the bulbous grille surround on the tacoma, and the flat black plastic wrapping up below all that chrome seems very cheap in contrast. I especially dislike the manner that the headlights just end right at the grille- looks unfinished. Hood contour is nice, however. Everything else at this points just looks 'meh'.

Worked my ass off today, came home and crashed from about 7:30 to 10:00, which is enough charging to allow me to haunt this popsicle stand at 3:41 AM. Need to crash again because I have to be up by 6:30: nite.

I still cannot fathom the pulling/rotating of a small knob as being an inconvenience, but OK..... Razor- there was a very limted production run of a rain-sensing convertible top on the '58 Eldo. I believe you are right and one of the early '50s concepts had this feature- I'm thinking it's the LeSabre... but the Y-Job has to be too early for this.

Ummm... why am I reminded of a beefcake pic posted in a thread entitled "hot girls"??

I'll keep it short and simple: Absolutely.

>>"I said NOTHING about losing the lines. I think the concept is good overall, but not great. Keep the general lines, but lower the beltline. Don't put words in my mouth. No one wants a homogenized design. Nowhere was that stated. You made that up in your head. The Camaro should be a car, not a rolling bunker. With that high of a beltline and those narrow slits for windows, it is just a bit much."<< For you, you mean. Clearly this car is not for your tastes- so why advocate changing it for others? I didn't make anything up- I read between the lines. Once you raise the roof, lower the beltline, shrink the wheels and drop the trunk, you have much of what's already out there with a few different creases. What's the point? The concept undoubtedly will change in some details (derrrr), but it doesn't have to. The radical factory chopped look delivers exactly what so many have been harping on: the need to not merely match the competition, but to exceed them. It's high style stem to stern- watering it down is everything GM has been lambasted for doing in the past!!! This is a golden opportunity to silence the whiners! So you'd have to lift your bookbag another 12 inches higher to put it in the trunk- exercise is good for the lazy! >>"Don't even try to tell me the convertible aspect is not important to its success because I will have to laugh."<< I get it: you're being facetious: Percent of model years Camaro offered as a convertible: 27% Average percent of Camaro convertible vs. total production: 12% Why should the absence of a roof demand driving with one's arm on the sill all the time? Ludicrious. You should check out where most convertible's (and some non-conv'ts) beltlines are in modern cars: almost everyone is at the top of the the driver's shoulder and some are notably higher. Comfortable elbow-out driving position has the window sill below the armpit- good luck finding that in today's vehicles.

Imagine the media exposure if this was Ford or the General's SOP.

GM innovation gave nader his career.

Correct, ocnblu- '75 was the first year for the U.S.-sold Astre, had the more aerodynamic 4-port front fascia.

>>"those liberal college yuppies would not 'drive your father's oldsmobile' no matter how hard they reworked the cars."<< Average age of saab owners is undoubtedly in the late 40s to 50s: 'college yuppies' is an irrelevant statistic. The reference to Oldsmobile invites the counterpoint- how many Olds drivers would have any interest in driving a saab? >>"...take away Saab and they lost the very last bit of any cred as a world car company that GM has in the US public opinion right now."<< 'US-public opinion of General Motor's world cred'??? How do you come up with this stuff? Where did you see study results of this? saab would not lend 'world cred' to any international manufacturer- it's been on the downside of popular opinion for 15 years. A forgotten love child of the '80s. >>"Saab caters to the style and fashion crowd. No domestic brand has or ever will have a chance of doing that, except maybe cadillac, and caddies are too expensive."<< saab caters to a handful of loyalists who treasure the archaic over all else. Fledgling interest in advancement has crippled saab's image worldwide and it's product delivers neither fashion or style. #1 adjective used by far in the last 20 years: "quirky". Lots of real meaningful 'cred' there. >>"Buick and Pontiac would need serious makeovers to even approach the radar of these buyers."<< There aren't enough to bother going after. >>"it would mean, among all things, ditching the 'cost effetive' pushrod v6's...which any euro intender would thumb its nose at big time. "<< I suppose a primarily FWD lineup is readily embraced in the entry-lux segment in europe, eh? Damnit- when will mercedes & bmw get on the bandwagon here? There is a LOT of animosity and anger toward saab by enthusiasts because of the leeching and misdirection they've effected. Money wasted, lost time, no return. As much as taking huge loss would anger them even more, cut saab loose; it's heyday is long over and the venture will never pay off.

In 2000 when Olds' discontinuation was announced, Zarella stated Olds had been "losing money for years"... but who really knows if that was truth or spin. saab is a lost cause and canNOT be sold for a bottom line profit; not even remotely close. Without a doubt the entire saab experiment has been a failure and has only robbed from the core divisions' product.

I don't see this as primarily aimed at the Corvette. More than anything it seems to be in the aston-martin circle than that of the 'vette's. And with no heritage or demographic established and a decidedly upscale look, I think the Firepower would be much more international in appeal & competition. Whether it would be sold abroad is another matter.

A Camaro is (iconically) about aspirational presence & unique lines. It is not another formulaic homogenization with a 'minivan-cut' into the rear bumper or towering side glass ala the Ford Five Hundred or a blow-molded clutterF of a dash ala bmw. You obviously missed that heritage tidbit about the 'maro, eh? It's supposed to be a low-slung muscle car, it's supposed to have a striking design. You want homogenization & pasturization, there's always the milquetoast GTO. Don't get it? Don't get one. But stop watering down inspiration so it's weak enough for soccer moms. That's been the near universal damnation of GM for many long years running. Build the Camaro exactly as is- it's killer.

Sorry, but personal policy disallows the enabling of idiots. There are times I wish to turn the lights off before I park/turn the motor off. Luckily my '94 still entrusts me to control my own headlights, and I haven't let it down yet. Yes- I know there's an ever-increasing number of numb nuts with licenses, but I have no desire to share the road with them. With the roads getting more crowded every year, vehicle operators should be subjected to increased know-how & vehicular common sense tests. Make it tougher; weed 'em out. And where they are all coming from is worthy of a study grant, IMO...

Holy Jesus- how do these ideas even start? No way in hell there is any 'platform' sharing in the '50s or '60s full-size cars. Unique frames, suspension, engines, all of it division-engineered. The first example of 'platform' sharing is the '61-63 compacts (F-85/ Special/ Tempest)... also the first example of cross-divisional engine sharing. Damn those "early A-Bodies"!I've only seen 1 Astre in the last 5 years- it was a gutted race car and it was jammed in a storage trailer, missing it's front clip. No Vegas in years and years.

Auto headlamps are great! I hear they'll be grouped with automatic transmission, automatic wipers and automatic ash trays. Viva la Barco-Lounger, wake me when we get there!!

I would like to see a verified listing of other small 'under-deck' convertibles and what their truck access is like. Ironic- I just saw a pic yesterday: the C3 Corvette was the same way: top filled the well behind the seats and there was no trunk lid period; cover panel had to raised & top unfolded to access storage. Never seemed to hold the Corvette back, but consumers are bigger pus.... uhh- 'more demanding' these days. Seemingly cargo volume would be even more critical in a 2-seater than a car with a back seat.... but if the bulk of this class has trunk access- this is poor planning.

I watched the first season, then bailed partway thru Season 2. Getting pulled back in this year tho. Only other show I watch regularly is The Shield.

Good guess but no. Hate sugared soda- too sweet. Can't drink diet anymore- racks my joints. Those artificial sweetners are reprehensible chemically and they WILL bother your joints over time. Do an internet search about aspartame sometime- absolutely shocking. Never liked the taste of coffee.

Can't drink soda, can't drink coffee. 1% Milk 1% Milk Lipton Brisk ice tea OJ Lipton Brisk ice tea

If your evil twin whiteviper was here, he'd threaten you with a violent ass kicking for deviating from the topic at hand!!!

I'm with razor on this one, 100%. This is also something I made an informal study on for my own interests and I've reached the same conclusions & findings. Another take: 'headlights on' is supposed to draw more attention to another vehicle. I firmly believe the basis of this is that in the past only emergency/ fire/ police vehicles (and motorcycles) primarily had their lights on during the day for this simple reason. Sure it worked: it was different than the norm. Once every single vehicle on the road has lights a-blazing, the effectiveness will undoubtedly decrease tremendously. Know what this makes me think of- The Next Step: a light bar the encircles the vehicle 100% and it lit whenever the key is on. You never know- someone might miss a 16-foot motorcar in the next lane because he couldn't see any lights! :P. Mark my words people....

I owned a '72 Riv for a short while; it gave up it's 455/ THM400 & it's 4-note horns for my '59, but I was really getting smitten by that car. Too bad it was walloped hard in the rear quarter. My perfect Riv would be a '66 with a 455 StgII. '65 GS second, '72 GS 3rd, 79 S-Type 4th.

Tools really aren't all that expensive- and in even competant hands pay for themselves many times over (unless they're made in China!). I needed a 1.5" 3/4-socket & extension bar for the lug nuts on my '40; new they'd cost about $50 from Sears. Swap meet vintagte examples: $8. Even if I have $1500 in tools, they saved me $1000 in that brake job alone (only specialty parts: tubing bender: $4, flare kit: $50). I bought my 30-gal 5-HP compressor about 4 years ago for $269. I don't replicate hand tools with air tools, so I don't have a air ratchet, but my air-powered angle grinder cost me $39 about 10 years ago- still runs fine. I was brought up both to be thrifty and 'hands-on', and the two dovetail perfectly. My hobby is working on vintage iron and my time spent doing so is well earned & richly rewarded, IMO. I absolutely HATE being at the mercy of the stealership with a new car, being told something is broken yet never seeing the proof and forking over many car payments (whoops- haven't had any of those for over 6 years!) to have it repaired. I was this close to putting a new water pump on my I-6 when I realized there was this special wrench that was needed to pull the fan nut. I was NOT happy about that (local garage did it for $200). Perhaps I have been unduely fortunate, only non-maintenance task I did to my Ford below 110K was a steering box at 44K. Everyone is free to spend as much or as little as they wish on their cars (provided legal regulations/requirements are met). And I understand about living in a townhouse and having a family... still I pulled our apartment door knob to run an extension cord out thru the hole to the parking lot where I did all sorts of nighttime & weekend restification work on my old Charger Rallye 440 years back. And I must know 40 guys who also do all sorts of work on their vehicles too; welding, sheetmetal replacement, powertrain swaps, painting, etc, etc.... tho I won't argue your "99%" estimate all the same.

Right.... exc-eeeeept that far too many people confuse "opinion" with "fact" then claim others are ignoring what is in actuality... their opinion.'...were never built to handle' is something I've seen attributed to vintage A-Body GMs numerous times, and it has merit. Yet here in the revisionist New Millenium, we now have those who have seldom or never driven these vehicles claiming '...F-bodies were never built to handle' like it's so blatant & inarguable. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.