Hudson

Ford and GM are forced to employ TOO MANY people and this is keeping those companies from being more competitive. Honda and Toyota build fewer vehicles in North America than either Ford or GM, but they're increasing that number...and increasing the number of domestic suppliers, engineers, and assembly line workers. GM and Ford, on the other hand, are trying to decrease the number of assembly line workers they have (because the have to). And they are trying to INCREASE the number of foreign parts in their vehicles (because they want to please their stockholders and line the pockets of their overpaid executives). GM and Ford are trying to find ways NOT to support those retirees. So much for patriotism from the Big2.

That's a great idea in concept, but not in reality. I've heard of lawsuits where the estate of the deceased sued the CAR COMPANY when the deceased wasn't wearing a seatbelt. My current favorite had the deceased driving a 10-year-old car, not wearing the full seatbelt (it had automatic shoulder belts but manual lap belts which were not fastened), and with a 0.27 blood alcohol level...and still they sued.

I'm all for increased personal freedoms, unless it interferes with someone else. And increasing my taxes (due to uninsured motorists) or insurance premiums (due to insured motorists) is the most direct why I am impacted by someone else not wearing a seatbelt or helmet. I don't want to pay for your freedom to choose the least logical way to drive/ride.

"Years?" Name one. The Mazda-engined Probe was introduced the year before the SHO, and the Courier was a Mazda product (semantics, I know).

To each his own. I would rather drive my Town & Country than any GM minivan because of the better quality interior, better ride, and better safety. And I've had better luck with Chrysler reliability in the past than with GM's.

I really hate to correct you, but the helmet law in Pennsylvania was not repealed, it was revised. There is still a helmet law in Pennsylvania. In order to ride a motorcycle in Pennsylvania without a helmet, you must a) be over 21 years of age, b) have no less than 2 years experience riding a motorcycle, and c) have a motorcycle rider training course under your belt.The subject of this particular thread, Ben Rothlesberger, is 24 but does not (as far as the report from KDKA news stated) have a motorcycle drivers license which seems to conclude that b) and c) were not met. Not only was he stupidly (in my opinion) riding a motorcycle without a helmet, he seems to have been doing it illegally. And these laws that "try to protect me from myself" also protect everyone else from you. A point that was made on the radio yesterday (discussing this very debate) was that if you and I have an accident where I am not at fault and you, by not wearing a seatbelt or helmet, die, I have to live with the guilt that an accident in which I was involved in killed a person. Driving is a prviledge and not a right. Certain criteria should be met. Cars/motorcycles should meet certain safety and emissions levels. Drivers/riders should be trained to a certain level before being given a license. And drivers/riders should be required to protect themselves from accidents to prevent those drivers/riders from being a burden on my taxes and/or my insurance premiums. I'm all for freedom and fewer laws. But when it comes to holding people to a certain level of basic common sense, some laws are necessary. Too many people do not understand basic principles of physics which cannot be overcome by having their "freedom." Seatbelt use and helmet use should be just as mandatory as driving on the proper side of the road, obeying speed limits, and stopping at red lights and stop signs. If we're arguing about what freedom means, there are many other avenues that should be discussed well before we get to choosing whether or not a motorcyclist should wear his/her helmet.

The first-generation Windstar was actually competitive, if sales are any measure. But somehow the public didn't buy into the second-generation Windstar (and Ford must have just given up with the Freestar).The worst part about Ford not playing in the minivan segment (Aerostar and Astro/Safari are small vans, not minivans) is that the idea for the minivan was hatched at Ford in the 1970s. When Iacocca went to Chrysler, a few other Ford people went as well...and took the rejected minivan idea with them. Ford could have launched the minivan around 1980 or 1981 and cornered the market. But does anyone really think that Ford's version wouldn't have lost traction like the Taurus did?

Are these shows during the day or in the evening? If it's during the day, remind me in two weeks...if it's in the evening, remind me next month.I wonder if the prices of older cars will continue to slip as the people who remember them from their childhood age and die...will I be able to buy a Duesenberg or classic Bugatti in 20 years for a "reasonable" price?

I used to be a purist...cars should be restored, hot rods should have an engine the same brand (or at least manufacturer) as the body, etc. Then one day (oddly enough on a job interview years ago), another idea was floated my way. Cars are not "The Scream" or "Citizen Kane" or "War and Peace"....they're cars. The owner of any car should do what they want to it...whatever makes them happy. If modifying your 1953 Corvette (as the original idea had been presented) with a big block V8 makes you happier with your car, then do it. Yes, to someone who WANTS a 1953 Corvette or 1969 Firebird or 1982 Delorean, it may seem awful. But to the owner, it may be the ultimate high. It doesn't matter if it's a Toyota Tercel or a Chevrolet Camaro or a 1957 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz...it's still just a car.

One question, one point. Where's your Cruise Night...I'd like to see it. What's their ages....the cars and the buyers? Buyers are not all that young (and can't be with the price tags at the auction). And cars are getting YOUNGER; pre-war cars are getting cheaper while relatively new cars from the muscle-car era are getting more expensive. When a hand-crafted, one-of-a-kind car from the 1930s is cheaper than a mass-produced (albeit with a rare option or two) two-door sedan from the 1960s, Barrett-Jackson doesn't show much for the progress of automotive enthusiasm.

If you want cars as characters, "Christine" was absolutely missed from this list. If you want automotive action, "Blues Brothers" should be near (or at) the top. As "generic" automotive movies (somehow automotively related), not in any order in particular: The Betsy Corvette Summer Heart Like a Wheel La Carrera Panamerica Tucker Wheels (TV miniseries) The Wraith (one of the WORST movies ever, but interesting cars)

I don't think so...but I'm not sure. Southern, eastern, and southeastern Pennsylvania (along with western and southern New Jersey and north eastern Maryland) are prime areas for the automotive culture. We're stocked with museums, clubs, and cruise events. This seems like a perfect place to take the nation's pulse on automotive enthusiasm.

Nope, you're right. Renault owns about 44% of Nissan and Nissan, in turn, owns a chunk of Renault. But the two companies have not merged. Just like Ford and Mazda, and GM and the small portions of other companies that they own.

Couldn't be worse than ETC...would you name a car "etcetera?"

Some are...some aren't. This is a total of GM sales, which means that sales of GM brands are counted. Daewoo, for example, is not a GM brand since it is owned by GM DAT and GM DAT is only about half owned by GM. Chevrolet and Buick sell GM DAT vehicles in various countries of the world and THOSE vehicles would be counted as GM sales. This could be part of the discrepancy between GM"s numbers (they may be counting Daewoo sales) and the article's numbers.

GM is a global company...of course they count GM's overseas brands. Opel, Vauxhall, Holden, and Saab are 100% owned by GM and therefore counted in their global sales.

Geo was founded not to remove "lesser" products from the Chevrolet lineup but to lure younger, import-intenders to the Chevrolet dealerships. This the same reason why Scion was created.As a former car salesperson, I noticed that import buyers rarely step foot on a domestic dealer's lot. Geo was a good step toward luring these buyers to a Chevrolet dealership. i don't think Geo was successful in doing this, but the concept was good.

Eastern Pennsylvania. Let me know the next time you're roadtrippin'.

I feel that automotive enthusiasm is waning. Yes, there are more TV shows around dedicated to automotive pursuits, but that's mostly because of the growth of 24-hour cable TV channels with airtime to fill...and one dedicated "automotive" (read: NASCAR) channel. And yes, there are more automotive websites than ever, but there are more porn sites than ever...and more kid's sites...and women's sites...and....it's just part of the growth of the internet. And two movies based around automotive themes just join the long history of automobiles in Hollywood. The problem I see is that young people have many more interests to pursue. From the internet to video games to extreme sports to everything else, cars aren't the overwhelming interest to teenage boys anymore...and never has been a big draw to girls. As an automotive historian, I see fewer and fewer young people looking into old cars. You couldn't walk down the street 30 years ago without tripping over an old car freak...now you have to search them out. I've spent a few years trying to turn young people (under 30) onto old cars and automotive history. But the search for people who even find old cars intriguing has been tough. I would love to agree with the intial posting, but from my perspective, it doesn't seem to be the truth.

The later Monza Spyder didn't have a logo like that...just the painted one on the hood. This is from the Corvair Monza Spyder.

Toyota did use another brand name for the ist and the bB. Honda was thinking about doing the same thing with other models...and I'm not sure if the Fit wasn't part of that plan.

Geo products were not "crappy." The Metro was an excellent entry-level product, the Storm has a large following, the Tracker also has a large, devoted following, and the Prizm was one of the highest quality products sold by GM in its day.While I don't necessarily think that Chevrolet needs to revive Geo itself, GM could use one of its existing brands for first-time buyers or youth buyers. Chevrolet is becoming a global brand and could be extended to the US. Has anyone seen the Chevrolet India website...."An Indian Revolution."

I may have miscommunicated my point.Nissan and Toyota will grow in volume and market share. But the addition of these two brands will not substantially increase the market for full-sized pickups. It is expected that Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, and GMC (most likely the last two more than the first two) will lose market share. Nissan will grow with the introduction of their "3/4-ton" version and the 2nd generation of their "1/2-ton" version. Toyota will double (or more) their market share when San Antonio comes on line.

SixtyEight: If we ever met, I think you'd be surprised.

evok: The market is not expected to grow substantially with the addition of more Nissan and Toyota full-sized pickups.