trinacriabob

I like the way you think. :AH-HA_wink:

Really nice. So, this is coming here or it isn't? RWD? I hate wimpy spoiler lips...$h! or get off the pot. If it's that inconsequential, then don't put it on. I think the Royale is wonderful. It does not identify as a Chevy, though, with the front grille being very nice, but unidentifiable to the GM divisions. The grilled on the LTZ, though, is clearly Chevrolet? Again, I'd sure like to know if this is on its way. Also, any dashboard pix?

You don't miss much, do you, ponch? Right on, the lack of lighting on the console must have been decided by someone with an IQ of 59...that is an outright mistake! And none in the glovebox, either?It's this kind of mindless stupidity that gets people pissed off at GM's lack of sense, sometimes. And, about the (dark) blue interior, I couldn't agree with you more. At least 1 or 2 non-bland interior color choices should return and there's volume to justify it in lines such as Impala. I do disagree on the seats. The ones I've driven were ok....not great, but ok. I'm perfectly ok with the 3500 on this car because of the 31 to 32 mpg highway figure. What a package for the money.

Oh, brother, can't you do any better than that?

fighter

Tina Turner

Lots of Canadians on here! They're all pretty cool. (I'm from the States, though). Stick around and post some. There are a lot of CHARACTERS here, that's for sure.

blast

cervical cancer

pop-up

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

This is one of those cars that does not shout but does its job real well. It's ideal for someone who wants tasteful and reliable transportation but does not need to make a statement in the process. I think it's a nice car, having rented about a handful...and that 3.5 highway gas mileage...why on God's green earth would one buy a Cam-cord if you can have that much comfort with such fuel efficiency? However, from certain vantage points, the thickness of the "roof rail" disturbs me. It would need to be a little more svelte to work better with the rest of the car (I don't remember it being as thick on the immediately preceding model...just look to "scharm's" sig. for confirmation).

I give and get money, or the equivalent thereof...this means either the "greenbacks" themselves or gift certificates.

Howard Hughes

Hindenberg

Why don't you respond to the upper part of my post that speaks to your immaturity, instead?

whine

Agreed. Threads designed to incite a bash-fest against any specific member, past or present, are uncool, not to mention immature. When I've posted my slightly controversial threads (lesbians, etc.), they are both broad-brush and about a group that doesn't post here. I've also snapped back at a few who will "snipe and run away" at a comment or observation within a thread, but it was elicited by a remark I didn't care for. Uptight? I doubt it. Honest to the point you may not like it? Yes.

Except for the atheistic part (which doesn't work for me), that's a nice sig, BV.

sparkling

As with the others' observations, you probably know BM implies something else. Evidently, you put him in the same league. I'm in agreement with the question that was posed "Can't this guy put up these ads in his own town?" Buickman, I suppose, is taking advantage of the fact that he looks more like a newscaster or a church usher to entice Medicare Mabel into her next Buick. Admittedly, he does have a tinge of a "PeeWeeHerman on a collision course with a Pat Buchanan supporter" look, but, overall he looks like a 40-ish family man (both that age and that concept would be "gross" to the creator of the thread, as you've alluded to before). I'll tell you what. If the general population were polled as to which of two faces they would rather look at on their daily commute, they would probably opt for his clean-cut countenance rather than your pouty collagen-induced "niche" look. Get a life, please.

sick

Mutual

mo-jo potatoes

New Jersey, (YO)