sciguy_0504

The most of any '06 car I've seen has to be a tie between the GS and Impala, both of which look good. I've seen a couple HRRs, Malibu's, a Torrent and DTS, a couple Eclipse's, a Civic coupe and a RR Sport. No Milan or Zephyr yet. Edit: Saw my first Fusion, Civic coupe and new Accord today. I also forgot to mention tons of new Explorers.

:o :booyah:

That IP sure is bland for an SS model. The chrome looks stuck on. On the other hand, the steering wheel is a HUGE improvement and looks nice. I wish GM would get rid of those weird center stack HVAC vents, though.

Everything about it is nasty, just like the normal Civic. Look at that steering wheel!

The R8 doesn't scream "supercar" to me like, for example, th Ford GT does. It doesn't look like a $100,000 sportscar.

Be safe, turbie!!! B)

[quote name='Croc' date='Nov 14 2005, 06:44 PM']Wow...I don't know why you started putting hot-button issues into my mouth!  I never spoke of such things.  If you think that about California, you have no idea what you are talkng about.  There is a lot of political diversity in Cali, only someone blind to reality would attempt to argue otherwise. The first red flag that you do not have any idea whatsoever about which you are talking is that you talk about California as if it is all homogenous.  Now ANYONE who has been to Cali knows that the state has virtually NO homogeny, ESPECIALLY political homogeny.  This is a very politically charged state.[/quote] I apologize for my misunderstanding California's political homogeny. [quote name='Croc' date='Nov 14 2005, 06:44 PM']Now, you want to start putting words into my mouth, let me make it clear to the board that you are an idiot for doing so:[/quote] I did not put words in your mouth. I said the majority of liberals in this country are quick to throw out the word "bigot," "racist," and "discriminatory" whenever someone comes out with opposing views on certain topics. I did not say you specifically do this, I said liberals as a group. [quote name='Croc' date='Nov 14 2005, 06:44 PM']I am against affirmative action.  It does nothing but hold Asians back, has little effect on Caucasions, and boosts Blacks and Hispanics.  That said, especially in college admissions, Blacks and Hispanics are put at a huge disadvantage because while they might get into certain prestigious colleges based on race, oftentimes the skills they have from HS (the ones that otherwise would NOT have gotten them into this prestigious college) are not adequate for these colleges and they end up on academic probation.  This is called the Mismatch Effect and is fairly widely publicized.[/quote] I agree 100% with all but the last sentence. It is not fairly publicized because anyone who comes out against affirmative action, no matter what their reasoning, is harrassed and has their name trashed. They're "racist." We cannot have discussions about race in this country because of the same reason. [quote name='Croc' date='Nov 14 2005, 06:44 PM']As for gay marriage, well show me a cogent argument AGAINST gay marriage that is not rooted in a bigotry against homosexuals.  I have tried to understand those who disagree with gay marriage, and all I hear is fearmongering and hatred regarding homosexuality, not a cogent, logic-driven argument with some actual reason not to allow it.  Because of this, I do tend to classify those against gay marriage as bigots, but maybe I just haven't heard that one, logical argument out there that is devoid of some inherent bigotry.  For the record, I am not homosexual, and therefore really do not have any emotional attachment to the issue.  So argue away.[/quote] Are you ready to allow all types of marriage? Man-woman, man-man, woman-woman, man-child, woman-animal, man-man-woman-man-woman? I don't see marriage as a right, I see it as a privilege between one man and one woman. I'm not religious so the Bible has nothing to do with my opinion. If marriage is a right, however, you need to extend that right to all parts of society. You cannot pick and choose what groups have that right and which ones do not because then you would be discriminating and we all know how wrong that is! [quote name='Croc' date='Nov 14 2005, 06:44 PM']There is a BIG difference between having religion and being a fanatic.  I am a Christian but I do not try to impose my views on everyone I come into contact with.  I have my views, and you have your views, and everything is copasetic as long as you don't try to interfere with my beliefs.  It's called tolerance and mutual respect.  I won't try to convince you of my beliefs and I expect the same courtesy unless one of us inquires the other in a "what would you do and why" kind of situation.[/quote] What about organizations like the ACLU and people like Michael Newdow (spelling?) who go around suing people, schools and other organizations who show even the slightest hint of Christianity in public? This is also what I meant by "public" Christians, sorry for the misunderstanding. People wonder why Christians vote the way they do and this is surely one good reason for it. [quote name='Croc' date='Nov 14 2005, 06:44 PM']As for "public" Christians...I do not know what you mean.  If you are referring to political Christians, yes, I believe in the separation of church and state as did our forefathers did (and yes, many were Christians but numerous quotes exist from them reaffirming the need for a separation of EVERY church and the state).  Hence, nominating Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court because she is an Evangelical Christian is NOT something that could be supported by me.[/quote] Would you support a Jew on the Supreme Court? How about a Muslim? An atheist? Hispanic? Italian? Asian? The list can go on and on but you're guilty of the same thing you are calling others out on and it's very hypocritical. Being an Evangelical Christian should have little, if anything, to do with whether or not you supported Miers. I did not support her because she was highly unqualified. [quote name='Croc' date='Nov 14 2005, 06:44 PM']People who voted for Bush are not dumb hillbillies.  I personally think many were uninformed, and recent poll data seems to support this.  The Bush campaign used scare tactics, and that got many swing voters suckered in.  Also, many people knew what Bush stood for, while Kerry was a complete unknown.  I think many people voted for what they knew than chance it on a wildcard.  Frankly, I think it is damn impressive that Kerry got 47% of the vote despite only giving a glimmer of his platform during the entire campaign!  He received 47% of the vote just by saying, essentially, that he was NOT BUSH.  That speaks volumes to me.  Volumes.[/quote] That's the fact that scares me. Many people would have voted for anyone other than Bush just because they weren't Bush. Very scary, indeed. Like you mentioned, we'll agree to disagree and leave each other at our own opinions. Thanks for being civil.

That makes zero sense, whatsoever.

Amazing what a difference of $1,140 can do, isn't it? :AH-HA_wink:

You have to admit, liberals vastly outnumber conservatives in Cali. Political diversity in CA (or Mass.) is like political diversity on college campuses: barely. I would rather say PA or OH (or any other battleground state) has more political diversity than CA. Not trying to start any war here but there are reasons other than "plain old hatred" why people are not totally color blind or supportive of gays. Listen to any Jesse Jackson speech or visit any gay pride parade to try to understand where I'm coming from. Croc, liberals call anyone who is against gay marriage or affirmative action a "bigot," no matter what they're reasons or opinions. They call people who don't mind having religion (or more specifically Christianity) in public life "religious nuts." Liberals called people who voted for Bush "dumb hillbillies." Name calling/railing against people really isn't the way to advance your cause, just like bombing abortion clinics doesn't, either. Edit: spelling

The Nav interior has a lot more style and looks cleaner than the new Escalade's, IMO. I know design is subjective, blah blah blah.

Bingo. They're the best of the GMT900's.

You can definately see the relationship now between the Camry and Avalon. They share enough design language to get the point across. I'm not a huge fan of the grille but the overall exterior design is nice and a hell of a lot better than the current gen. I hope the interior is nice and it drives a lot better than the current gen. It looks like it won't be as tall and perky, a good thing.

Liberals love all kinds of diversity except the idealogical-type. Who's being narrow minded now?

My Grand Prix chugged gas, too. I remember doing 90-100MPH and actually watching the gas needle drop. That's driving, for sure. I had to get rid of it because gas was killing me but I wasn't doing that speed constantly.

Empowah beat me to it. Anyway, there should be a "speechless" smiley because my post would only consist of that. I was neutral on giving Saab a Kappa vehicle but I'm definately not neutral on a ethanol 300HP 9-5 concept car. AN AWESOME, BRAND-NEW (OR MORE UPDATED) 9-5 COULD HAVE ATTRACTED A TON MORE PEOPLE TO THE BRAND THAN AN ETHANOL 9-5 CONCEPT COULD! :angry: :( :blink:

:rotflmao:

Thanks for posting the AutoSpies pictures. The center stack without the nav looks horrible. The buttons and knobs in the Tahoe/Yukon look a lot better, too, because they have a chrome surround. I like how the wood flows through the center console to the bottom of the 2nd row climate controls, though they look cheap, too. I was really impressed with the interior in the press pics but my excitement has gone down a bit. Turbie hit the nail on the head. The front is the closest thing to A&S and even that looks somewhat melted down, as with the rest of the car. The Tahoe is the biggest improvement of the GMT900s and, IMO, is the whole package.

Is that paint I see reflecting the camera flash when the rear doors are closed?

Have you seen the pictures, Paolino?

Hasn't anyone thought about the fact that Nissan just wants to be different? Like you've been saying, almost every car manufacturer has some sort of office in LA or California as a whole, so why stay there? Go somewhere else, attract new and different talent, care less about what the company next door is doing/designing. I think Nissan wants to get away from it all, get away from the typical location and start fresh. Change can be good.

Wow. :huh: :unsure: :ph34r:

As long as the interior does not drastically change, I won't have a problem with it. While the digital display was pretty cool, the interior doesn't loose much without it. The loss of the titanium accents is bad. It really cheapens the interior. How about some sort of aluminum or chrome? It's worth the extra $10 per car!

Based on what I've heard, the Vue's engine is a lot better than the Chinese one in the Torrent and 'Nox.

One of the stupidly hilarious posts on Autoblog: