RBB

He's really into muscle cars - he's having an expert restore a '78 TA right now. I'm sure if this idea takes off, it could be expanded to other types of cars. -RBB

Spotted this safe looking setup while stuck in traffic on the way home: -RBB

Full disclosure: this site is run by a friend of mine. http://musclecarrescue.com He's thinking of putting together a parody of the most recent ASPCA commercial, substituting rotting muscle cars for animals. Will post it here if he follows through. -RBB

That's why I took that one - thought it was funny. "One of these things is not like the other..." -RBB

Is that an IRS I see in pic 15? -RBB

Got new tires on the 6, and while they were being put on, walked over to the local Bentley/Rolls Royce/Mazerati/Lamborghini dealer and snapped a few crappy cell phone pics. They just happened to have a Veryon sitting outside a service bay: Man, the Quattroporte is still a looker after all these years... -RBB

payback -RBB

[off topic] [/off topic] -RBB

Did that hurt you to type that as much as it hurts me to read it? -RBB

++ Have a great time! -RBB

I'll be going with the in-laws to Rehoboth Beach, DE next month. We always make the trip south to OC to eat at Phillips while we're there. -RBB

When they ship styrofoam, what do they pack it in? -RBB

You know, I joke with my wife too about Toyota drivers, but I think there's at least the slightest measure of truth to this. A big reason there are a lot of bad Toyota drivers is simply that there are a lot of Toyotas on the road. It's just numbers. But think about it - by and large, the people who drive Toyotas are not driving enthusiasts. They're simply commuters, who view their cars as an efficient way of getting from point A to B, and nothing more. As such, many of this type of driver is not interested in driving well, just getting from place to place. It's my supposition that the type of vehicles Toyota produces (efficient and reliable, but uninspiring to look at and drive) attracts a type of person that's not as likely to pride themselves on driving prowess. Hence, a higher percentage of Toyota intenders are by their nature on the bottom-end of the driving-skill bell curve. -RBB

Seriously? I've not yet been in the new Malibu, but I've been in a couple of Impalas. The materials used (including a nasty misaligned mold seam that ran prominently across the dash in an Impala SS) and fit and finished both seemed substandard to me. The door panels were thinly padded cheap plastic - it honestly felt like a thickly textured plastic tarp covering 1/8" of foam over the door panel. Without putting hands on, the Malibu interiors I've seen in pictures (both reviews and dealer inventory pics) seem to use much better quality materials and and are better designed, even allowing for the cutlines. -RBB

@ Micah Pie. For comparison, the Invicta concept and the new Lacrosse: -RBB

I was thinking they're similar to the Sierra's wheel openings -RBB

Typical. European. Design. Seriously, European interiors typically have a lot of buttons. For example: Opel Antara Opel Vectra Ford Kuga Peugeot 207 Peugeot 308 SEAT Altea Mercedes C Class And so forth. The point is, those nutty Europeans like their buttons. I'd anticipate an Americanized version would have fewer buttons, but feedback from the buttonlicious new US-spec Accord could possibly affect whether any changes are made. -RBB

Why is Traction Control a deletion? Seems odd to delete a safety feature, especially one potentially so useful on a pickup. -RBB

-Camaro- can correct me if I'm wrong, but I assume he's speaking about styling, not necessarily the chassis. C4: C5: C6: Clearly evolutionary, underpinnings aside. This, by comparison , is a revolutionary styling change: C1: C2: -RBB

++ on the bold - not worth it. Thanks for the update, though - very much appreciated! -RBB

What about offering factory (dealer-installed) appearance upgrades - more agressive front/rear grill and bumpers, skirt kits, an array of spoilers, etc. Maybe even offer performance upgrades - suspension, larger intercoolers/turbos, perfomance chips, etc - sorta the way Scion does with their cars, only with a decent product as the base? -RBB

Now *that*'s a tastefully done Camaro. -RBB

-RBB

I don't know that a Turbo DI I-4 will get much better mileage than an OHC V6. The 2.976 lb. Solstice GXP gets 19/26 City/Highway MPGs with this engine, and the estimated 3000lb New Cobalt SS gets 22/30 (see - FWD saves gas!!!11!1). I'd assume the approximately 3600 lb Camaro would get worse than the Solstice/Sky. For comparison: The 3630 lb. Saturn Aura with the non-DI 3.6L V6 gets 17/26 MPG. The 2.3L DI Turbo I-4 powering the 3929 lb. Mazda CX-7 gets 18/24 MPG, and in the real world (not that it matters for CAFE), averages less than 20 MPG. None of these directly corrolate - different drivetrains, transmission gearing, cD, etc. But they give you a decent idea, and based on that I can't see that a DI turbo I-4 will give you noticably better gas mileage than a good V6. -RBB

Why so long? Isn't this thing essentially already on sale in Oz? -RBB