balthazar

>>"The instrument panel is configured to make it easy for the drive and front passenger to reach both the audio and dual-zone climate controls."<< Meaning: they're both in the center of the dash, right? >>"There is also a dimmer that turns down the instrument panel lights at night to reduce driver fatigue."<< Dear God, hasn't every vehicle had this since about 1960? >>"The on-board computer automatically turns off warning lights when the driver’s workload is high: determined by heavy braking or use of the signal indicators. "<< This I am puzzled by: why is driving a saab with warning lights on so commonplace? Isn't the idea of a warning light to prompt timely servicing? Explain.

Those 2 buffoons still suck.

Damned straight! Electronic throttle- snort! WTF for? So the solenoid or microprocessor fails due to heat or vibration or an overworked sweatshop assembler in Bangladesh and takes a dealer service department & $600 to fix, when the previous throttle cable did the job as efficiently and cost $25 & a box wrench to repair? The one mercedes 2-seat roadster weighs 4500 freekin pounds, even festooned with plastic as it is! My buddy's Corvair weighs about 2600 lbs with less than 200 lbs of plastic- inconceivable!! I tell people my full-size truck weighs under 4000 and they don't believe me; everybody is so used to trucks & SUVs weighing 5000-6000 lbs nowadays. I don't want or need NAV or side curtain airbags or 6-disc CD changers or A/C seats or most of the other 300 baubles and trinkets everyone clamors for. I know- I am in the minority.... but I truely believe there is a market for the 'Minimalist Car', one where the average bill for even minor repairs isn't automatically $400 and it doesn't weigh 4000+ lbs. Where are all the environmentally-obsessed people yammering about getting lighter, more efficient cars?? Not that I enjoyed them but they went extinct in favor of cooled drink holders.

'60s T-birds & Cougars had them, 3 bulbs that blink in sequence from the inner side to the outer... reinforcing the 'I'm turning this way' directive. They were pretty cool then, tho I'm not aware any cars have them in recent times (??). Cadillac offers satellite TV in at least the Escalade- I saw an article about it over the summer. Ahhh; vindication: >>"Swoopier sheet metal? Nope. Regulations, litigation and fuel efficiency demands have put an end to really gorgeous cars. "<<

I've read M/T when had only 1 award issue... then they had 2... now they are stretching things thin & compromising their results to keep 3. Anyone think they are trying to come up with a 4th? Staying with their usual criteria of 'most significant' I supposed -compared to it's competition- the frigeline does fit that. Doesn't make it unique, aspirational or even anything more than mediocre, and it doesn't overwrite it's many shortcomings. TOTY would never sway my decision in a million years on any vehicle. This whole awards thing has gotten WAY out of hand to the point of devaluing everything (music, Hollywood, products, etc, etc, etc). What's the point for the consumer anymore?

Wouldn't you rather have a "more efficiently-packaged, safer, better handling car" AND have the rear windows roll down? I mean just in case you got the wild notion to roll (button) them down one day? Myself- I can easily make any vintage car handle better than even an above-average modern car... I do not care about safety features for the most part, and I would much rather have a more spacious vehicle than a more cramped one that is more efficiently packaged. Oh yes; and I generally have a wide array of both hardtops & sedans on my menu as opposed to merely sedans.

Didn't the old bmw 3-series 2-drs have either fixed or 'flip-out' quarter windows?? We went from hardtops in every marque to predominately fixed glass, or at best, rear door glass that only rolled down halfway. Real progress there...

{EDIT: double post}

Has he let off endlessly using 'notgonnahappen.com' then??

Ahhh, OK.... General Motors toyed around with a steam-powered '69 Grand Prix (and a '68 or 69 Malibu), enlisting the technical reverse-engineering of the very advanced Doble steam car of the '20s and one of it's engineers (IIRC). In an era of 50 cent gasolene tho, it hardly seemed worth the R&D...

By all means: lock down this thread and lets get one going with pics of dash plastic graining instead. I've only owned one 4-dr hardtop, a '65 Bonneville. For those who have not ridden in one with all the windows down on a warm spring day, you cannot imagine the tremendous difference.

You'd think the slogan would be on a tanker truck rather than a dump body. Speaking of which, I'd like to see an oil tanker with the slogan 'BURN GAS" on it.

Surprise!! Lincoln's last 4-dr hardtop was '60: all the '60s 4-dr non-convertible Lincolns (and all those afterwards thru at least '75) were 4-dr sedans. Weird lil' factoid from the very peak of the hardtop era.

Federal guidelines for any sort of steam/boiler-equipped vehicles are getting stricter regularly. I have seen them mentioned for the abandonment of restoration of both steam locomotives and steam tractors. I believe licensing to operate is required, along with (annual?) inspections. I can't imagine there's anything large enough in a 3-series to be recognized as a boiler, but it remains to be seen if something like this would pass federal regulations.

Buddy of mine has had Corvairs for many years. Currently has a real sweet 'Corsa-fied' Monza coupe, '65. Has a turbo set-up on the shelf for it, too. Beautiful designs, sweet road cars.

I don't want to start a Big Thing here, but no way can I call those fins. For the past few decades, everything I have ever read has always called the last year of Cadillac fins 1964. Why in 2005 that is challenged, I cannot fathom, but I do not agree. s'gotta have either an upward angle or a sheetmetal backcut somewhere (rearward or to the side). Don't see any of that here.

I have to disagree with you on one point- Razor. I love to see an expressive, funky wheel in a car. Unfortunately, I have to go back 35 years or more to see one! One thing I hate about modern wheels is it seems every generation gets thicker and thicker and thicker. And the tumescent buldges at 10:00 & 2:00 are often completely out of hand. Who the hell is driving- Bigfoot (Hand)?? Along with 'mitten handle' exterior door pulls and oversized, centrally-planted hazard switches, cars increasingly seem to be designed for toddlers-to-pre-teens rather than adults. Perhaps it's a subconscious effort to nail that youth demographic, IDK. ;)

Yeah; without checking I am pretty certain the turbo was available '62-66. I believe Chevrolet built on the order of 9,xxx turbo 'vairs. Engine is quite low in a very low car; I'm thinking it's noticalby lower than in a flat-6 porsche tho I haven't seen them side-by-side. I haven't seen the mounting per say, tho I believe those are pans as opposed to structural 'flooring' that you see.

"Fall" was the supposed release for the entire Solstice car originally, and that was pushed up to late summer. Why would anyone suspect something so relatively 'minor' as a turbo would be any different? "Looks alone"....? Why wouldn't 250 HP be counted as sizzle??

That Olds up top is awesome; look at that sucker mouth!!

MO: '64 is my favorite year for '60s full-size Olds. Love the 'convertible'-look top, the rear quarter peaked edges, the interesting taillight design. 98's had the coolest ribbed rockers, and of course the Starfire's textured metallic trim is really cool. Not nuts about the relatively simple front end: horizontal quad headlights within the height & plane of the grille always seem somehow... 'cheaper' isn't the right house, but it''s on the right street. Looks like it's wearing 18"s, which is too big.

>>"...definate proof there may be..."<< OK; I can live with that. ;) >>"When's the last time your favorite company felt the need to apologize for anything?"<< Not nearly my favorite, but I recall mitsubishi apologizing for the lies & cover-ups over their defects. BMW effectively apologized by sending Bangle into the dunce corner... ;) VW has mumbled something in passing, too. >>"...the entity you're defending ..."<< I am not in here to defend GM, and I do not believe that's been my primary emphasis at all. I am here to damn the media. And they've earned it in spades. There is a difference. BTW- tho I see the logic in the PR, indeed I groaned aloud when I first saw it. I knew many who enjoy pointing their finger would hold it aloft like the Stanley Cup and jeer long & loudly. Whatever; I believe their minds were already made up anyway. Thanks for the volley, enzl.

Damned fine choice, I love the '67-70s (this body style)!! Prices for nice drivers are pretty good in the States: around $5K, tho they are not what I would call 'easily found'. Repro parts are not plentiful, either.... for some reason I cannot figure, the collector market has not really warmed up to these fantastic cars yet. They got excellent road test/drivability feedback when new. Good luck in your search!

Ahhh, one of the truely fun facts about automobiles: in at least one vehicle ('69 Mustang), this was called "Rim-Blow DeLuxe". :D

See- there's a very notable value & collectibility difference between a GN and a GNX (the ultimate, limited-production, last-year GN). Sounds like you were seeing GN prices...