Hudson

I don't believe they've sold ANY "Studebaker XUVs" yet...although they talk like they do. And it hasn't been six years since they announced it. I think the question is referring to your first choice.I would, however, like to see how many Matra or Monteverdi SUVs were built.

Doesn't that picture look like a photoshopped amalgam of a BMW 3-Series, Lexus IS, Honda Accord, and Chevrolet Malibu?

1901 "Curved Dash" Olds

No Jeep model (or even the "Jeep," assuming all CJs and Wranglers) ever racked up huge life-long numbers. If you assume 100,000 units a year (which it currently doesn't reach) for nearly 60 years, you'd still only come up with 6,000,000, which is less than half of the Model T's 15 million, just about 1/4 of the "Beetle's" total, and less than 1/5 of the Corolla's total. I'm sure the F-Series beat is well above any total for the CJ/Wranglers.

Don't expect the Zeta-based Lucerne before the 2011 model year.

Yes, but GM has not confirmed them yet.

I have an article about that car. GM nicely removed the BMW badge from the middle of the engine.

Until recently, I had heard nothing on a Grand Prix replacement...there may be one. But the LaCrosse on Epsilon II has been planned for quite some time.

If it weren't for Ford, there would likely be no Corvette today.

I'm not going to argue about your opinions of 4-speed autos, 5-speed autos, the need for ABS, or your driving habits. But how would a manual Impala lower the price? They'd have to certify the powertrain with a stick shift and they would sell a handful...I'm guessing less than 1,000. They would have to spread the cost of certifying the stick over 1,000 units (unless you want them to raise the price of the automatic Impala as well), which would bring the price in line with or above that of the automatic, further reducing the demand for the car. And I can't imagine that Chevrolet is losing all that many sales of Impalas because potential buyers demand a stick. So sales wouldn't increase...cost would increase...other than you getting a stick-shift Impala, what's the benefit here?

True. I don't know what makes that transmission so different than modern 4-speeds other than the overdrive gear in a modern 4-speed, which I would have figured they could have done as well.

Not only that, but he's out nearly three years of interest on the $2,000.

Originally, Pontiac Grand Am, Oldsmobile Calais, and Buick Somerset Regal/Somerset/Skylark. The redesigned ones (1992) were the Grand Am, Oldsmobile Achieva, and Buick Skylark.

They actually did add them in the second generation. I don't have all of the specifics, but...Most 4-speed automatics are basically 3-speed automatics with a fourth gear added. Getting to a fifth gear, to my understanding, takes a whole redesign of the transmission. There's either not enough space in the package or the complexity is such that it is not easy to convert a 4-speed to a 5-speed. As for CVTs, once they have been perfected for wear (especially when it comes to high torque engines), they will be a better answer than a traditional stepped transmission. The CVTs that I've driven have been great, especially the 220hp Audi A4 and the 240hp Nissan Murano. They're getting there, but a CVT is still an expensive proposition.

And if closing redundant plants or brands...or making mass-market cars isn't the answer, what is?

Yes, Ford and GM launched 4-speed automatics about the same time (I seem to recall Ford and Mercury getting them in the 1979 models, but you've looked it up...I'm deferring to you).But when did the Cavalier get a 4-speed? How about the Corolla? And how many DTS competitors still have a 4-speed automatic today? That's more to the point.

What about the Malibu and El Camino? El Camino and Malibu wagon share share rear bumpers and taillights while the 2-door and 4-door Malibu share taillights.

Lincoln and Jensen had ABS prior to 1971.

A 60-degree V6 is not "naturally balanced," but it is closer than a 90-degree V6. In theory, a "naturally balanced" V6 would be 120-degrees, which makes it difficult to fit into many cars.

That would be Doc Hudson.I was Hudson before Newman played one on the big screen. But the animators did an amazing job on that car.

BMW M5. The E28 and E34 generations (only the E34 was offered in the US) had a six-cylinder (3.4L, 3.6L, or 3.8L), then the E39 was powered by a 4.9L V8, and the current E60 is powered by a 5.0L V10.

It's actually a Studebaker Lark Wagonaire, not AMC.

It's a brilliant business plan. Read a bunch of press releases, newspapers, magazines, and websites...summarize them...email them out. "Busy" executives pay for someone else to read to them. I wish I had thought of it.

Yes...and that's what they do, present other news reports and press releases. They're not doing additional research, they're simply presenting various news and PR reports in one package...and anyone who subscribes to it undestands this fact.I am the first person to step up and disagree with Mr. Flint's writings...and I have said so for many years, even told him myself. But he's spot on (for once) on this one. There have been times when magazine reports have shown numbers that didn't match the story being told and some times this has surprised me (the recent C&D comparison of the Z06/911/Ferrari for one), but I've also driven cars that, on paper, would lead you to believe one thing when the better car had the worst numbers. The whole story cannot be told in quarter mile times, skid pad numbers, and fuel economy. C&D's "gotta have it factor" doesn't cover it properly (and, to my thoughts, they get it wrong more than right), but the concept is there...there's something to seeing/feeling/hearing the car in person that cannot be listed in a fact sheet. It's funny that I've chosen C&D as a problem, because THEY pointed out this problem with their biggest competitor (Motor Trend) about 15 years ago in a great spoof called "Moto Rooter." Flint's report is spot on.

Tell the story anyway you want to. Go to GM and THEY will tell you that there's no Seville anymore. Yes, STS originally stood for Seville Touring Sedan, but today it's simply STS...not an acronym. Where did you ask for continuous production? There was no HINT of continuous production. You just said it was RWD then FWD then RWD...and both the Charger and 300 fit that bill.But, it's your question. I've made mistakes like this in creating trivia as well.