Camino LS6

http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/cto/3661386453.html

http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/cto/3618176122.html

http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/cto/3608693905.html

Well, I guess we are a great argument for diversity then!

To each his own. I see those cars as ostentatious, over-gilt design disasters front to awful rear. They were the sad and misguided replacement for one of Cadillac's cleanest, most tasteful designs.

You and 68Panther have that in common. I see it as a very pale imitation.

Neat! SOURCE: http://artandcolourcars.blogspot.com/2012/12/cadillac-3-window-businesscoupe-for-2014.html

I would if I had any play money.

Even moreso because it is a GMC.

Sorry Drew, I've hated those things since their debut. They look like they were rear-ended by a bus.

Had to laugh at that too.

Sure hope someone preserves that one, not likely that you'd ever find another like it.

http://newjersey.craigslist.org/cto/3691568821.html

And yet they haven't put a diesel in the Suburban...

We have some common ground there - I never liked the "double-decker nostrils" on the WS6.

Sorry Camino, but I've never been a fan of bulbous plastic. I'm not really a fan of the 4th gens in general, what with their tiny looking wheelbase relative to the massive overhangs that would shame a W-Body, but at least the earlier ones didn't look like they suffered from cancerous swelling. While I much prefer the looks of a Formula over the T/A, I just can't imagine putting a 4th gen F-body on the ugly list.

Oh, that Seville would be on my Top 20 Ugliest list for sure... in fact it would make the Top 5 list. Hideous thing.

2001 Trans Am? Seriously?

Auto = no go Otherwise...

First impression? Too much for an orphaned brand.

Omega

Thanks for the feedback! I'm just getting the sense that the EPA's new system isn't all that great.

You have a pretty good perspective on this Drew - considering all of the cars you've had for review. Do you draw any conclusions about the accuracy vs. the old system? Any winners/losers generally under the new? Percentage wise, how much error would you say is average?

Lately I've been getting the impression that the EPA's numbers are very pessimistic vs. real-world numbers. I know they were attempting to improve the ratings vs. the old system, but have they? Or is it just as far off in the opposite direction?

Glad to see those ugly, bloated flares gone. "Active perfuming" ? Really?