balthazar

Associated Press reported in a piece last weekend that the '06 Escalade has the industry's first satellite TV system. It's KVH TracVision, dealer installed. 'Antenna' is a 3-foot wide, 5-in tall disc fitted on the vehicle's roof. Article also stated GM was considerig pre-wiring all their SUVs for satellite TV in '07.

I hesitated to click on it; it's late and I don't feel the need to get angry, but I did. Amazingly, she knew SO LITTLE about this subject she couldn't actually formulate yet another mind-numbingly stupid observation. Thankfully.

All that junk sounds wonderfully familiar except the TV shows, which were 'after my time'.

We made the same comment about two different car brands. I used your words. Big deal- it's all opinion. For someone who frequently satirizes in this manner, I would think this was pretty straightforward. I have never addressed you personally, emp. Never told you where to go, what you are, to be quiet or that you're wrong for liking what you like. I'm not here for that shit. But should I likewise ask you to 'quit it' if I find many of your comments indirectly annoying? BTW; Pontiac General Managers Alfred Glancy '26-30 Irving Reuter '30-32 William Knudsen '32-33 Harry Klinger '33-51 Arnold Lenz '51-52 Robert Critchfield '52-56 Semon Knudsen '56-61 Elliot Estes '61-65 John DeLorean '65-69 James MacDonald '69-72 Martin Caserio '72-75 Alex Mair '75-78 Robert Stempel '78-80 William Hogland '80-84 Micheal Losh '84-89 John Middlebrook '89-96 Roy Roberts '96-98 Lynn Myers '98-03 Roger Adams '03-04 CJ Fraleigh '04-04 John Larson '04-present

If the bmw "scientists" have so much free time they're fretting over the cars of 2030, you'd think they could get their SUV quality up to snuff and develop a graceful way to back away from idrive. My favorite bit was "BMW managing director." Uh huh... you mean brand manager?

Wh....wha....WHAT?? :( :angry: :( :angry: :( :angry: :( :angry:

Nah Sixty8- I think his point was within the definition of the question. It was a factory engine in a factory car that could've had that engine originally. And I took no offense; I usually don;t make such assumptive statements, but a '63 GP SD is one of 3 cars built- all missing as of the late '80s.

:wacko: what?? If I understand the question, yes: calling a convertible a "hardtop" is dumb. If the roof is hard & detactable, ala a '60 Corvette, it's a convertible with a DH. But I can see calling a retractable hardtop as such, I guess mainly because the feature is so undeniably prominent. Technically it's a convertible, of course. Did I answer your question? In more recent years (as opposed to the '40s examples of my earlier post), these terms become less rigid because of a greatly increased variation of vehicles. No longer is a marque one basic body with different door/greenhouse configurations. But in this example it's still clear in my mind: the red 2-dr is a 2-dr sedan. Their decklids are the same length (aren't they?) and the C-pillar ends in the same spot: not enough difference to define it as 'close-coupled'. Proportionally, it does not appear 'close-coupled' either. I'm not surprised that Buick called it a 'coupe' however. My '64 GP was called a "Sport Coupe" by Pontiac, tho it is undeniably a 2-dr hardtop. To me, flat-out calling it a "coupe" because it merely has 2-drs is like calling an SUV a 'car'. But that's the State of the Union these days, where marketing defines way too much ("NEW & IMPROVED!!")

A 2-dr hardtop is a '66 Riviera, for example. No B-pillar between the side windows. You may be familiar with these... ;) There is no such thing as a 'pillared hardtop'. "Coupe" is somewhat argueable. The term is derived from 'close-coupled' and is often relative to other models within a given marque. Examples are best shown from the '40s IMO, because all were plentiful and marketing BS had yet to rear it's sniveling, snot-nosed face. 2-door coupe (also referred to as a "3-window coupe"): Another (note: still 'close-coupled', this one is also referred to as a "5-window coupe"): 2-door sedan (note relative size of passenger compartment/greenhouse to the above 2): Also note how a "sedan delivery" supports that term with it's lengthy passenger/(cargo) space: I truely believe '70s & '80s TV & movies did a lot to promote the 'dumbing down' of "coupe" to mean a 2-door and "sedan" to mean a 4-door. All those cheesy cop dramas and the like. In the post-war years a coupe is moreso a car without rear side windows such as a Corvette, because few (none??) manufacturers offer different length passenger compartments on one body shell. There are numerous people who will argue this (Hi Croc!) quizzically pointing to such Shining Sources of Leadership & Truth as the Environmental Protection Agency :wacko:, as if they should have anything to do with the terminology of the automobile business. But the 'true' definitions are supported by the majority of production models (there have been numerous 'stretches' of these terms by various marketing departments over the years)- the sheer volume of which defines the definitions.... I am terribly sleepy, so if this still doesn't make sense..........

Take a picture of it while it's still together...

Pesonally, I dunno on the Malibus. They are very plain (tho certainly not displeasing). As is, it has a smattering of attitude, but yank those fat Goodyears & the Rallyes off and it's in trouble.

Is someone humping the center grille in it?

I simply must weigh in on the hardtop issue (I tried to shush myself but I wouldn't listen). By time-honored definitions (and no; that does not mean wikipedia- the TwiddleDickTionary Site) the SSR --covered bed aside-- is a coupe. It cannot be a hardtop as it only has one side window per side. A hardtop is a variant of a sedan (which means B-pillars). A hardtop has no B-pillar between the side windows. The SSR has no side windowS. It's a truck first & foremost, but 'cabin-wise' it's a coupe, just like the Corvette or Viper. Note: Wikipedia lists "pillared hardtop" which is a bastardized misnomer.

Got my very own Lincoln SP-125 Plus (had it almost 10 years now), have welded many things on my Buick, many odds & ends plus welded up a pair of 4' x 8' custom design steel balaconies for a house I was working on 2 years back. I haven't TIG'd as of yet but MIG has done everything I've asked it to so far. I would like to get the attachment & give welding aluminum a shot- the Buick has a lot of aluminum pieces on it.

Exactly right. Very tiresome. And I guarantee that I'm not the only one who feels this way by a long shot...

Didn't we just read of a production boost back to the original estimate of 100K last week? This 2nd increase should not have been publizied' it's puts the HHR in the 'watchdog' column for the 'doom media'. I do happen to think the goal is reachable, but still...

I find it difficult to justify paying any new car price with depreciation being so steep.

Really. Then of what relevence is the fact that where he drove both was at a ?

Those 2 already don't have the same power of reputation they had 10 years ago!. 10 years from now things are really going to be bleak. You know bmw's minivan is on the boards right now... :lol:

Now you're talkin'. You really don't care for the Chargers, eh? They've grown on me the more I see them (tho the Daytonas are a bit over the top).

For the record, Sixty8 posted: 3 Chevrolets 2 Dodges 1 Merc 1 Olds 1 Pontiac 1 DeSoto 1 Buick 1 Lincoln and 2 Cadillacs, (plus the little partial tailfins pic- both Cadillacs). The only relatively expensive cars are the Caddys and the 1 Lincoln. Chrysler was on Buick's level in the '50s; it was Imperial on Cadillac's level. Still and all- nothing remotely like an Aston Martin or other high buck auto posted there. Toss in the Eldorado Brougham or Mark II and we would actually be in an apples-to-apples comparison with what Croc posted. Naturally I get his point well. Tho I'm not positive I would be as appreciative of the '40s -'60s as I am if I hadn't been 'beaten down' by the '80s and '90s. '50s and '60s cars are much more individualistic than modern cars are.

When you say "'63 GP SD" you insinuate it's an actual GP SD car. Sorry I stomped on your toes but to a vintage Pontiac enthusiast- you're terminology is a bit too loose for such an extremely rare & valuable icon. It's not you, it's me. Would love to hear more about the car. 4bbl or 2x4 car? SD end up blowing, I assume? What Pontiac dealership were you guys hanging at? Smokey was a crafty devil for sure (ever read about his '66 Chevelle?- wow!) but he was not the only Pontiac tuner who won races and he was not always the fastest, either. Remember, this was an era of true stock car racing, where Pontiac couldn't even run a hood scoop in NHRA without a factory part number on it. Not a whole hellva lot of room for tricks. Yeah, for an unsubstantiated guess, I would stick with 90% factory on the SD motors. Got any details to counter that?

Chargers don't have "fins". Some do have "spoilers" tho. ;)

hyperV6- you did not ride to school in a '63 GP SD. The SD engines were not "far from stock" because they were factory-built street-legal engines. It's like saying a low-compression 2bbl 389 is 'far from stock' because it's different than a 4bbl hi-comp motor. That's the key here: these motors are all different, but they're all factory. NASCAR ran SD motors within 90% of exact factory spec; where you gonna go from a 12:1 long-branch-manifold 4bbl 4-bolt mill?? '69 GPs have 140 MPH speedos, not 130. Finally, of course gearing limits a car's top end, but dealers were doing gear swaps cheaply & often back then, not to mention a long-list of ratios was easily available in any Pontiac to tailor the car towards that if desired (as opposed to many other makes that offered 2 or 3 ratios.

Oh Ven- that's obviously completely irrelevant.