Flybrian

Gee, our old LaSalle ran great.

Best comment... :lol:

That, and you've been huffing aerosols. Toyota's trying to get you, man. Look outside right now. I bet there's a black Avalon in your driveway. Quick!

Reg, dude, you're replying to yourself...twice.

Again, the drop/increase is not a result of actual power being lost, just the figure being changed. The impact comes when a non-standard measurement is used to make a car look more powerful than one measured with the standard. For example, a 268-hp Avalon isn't as 'powerful' as the 280-hp Avalon to the general public. Its like saying telling a Canadian you paid $35,000 for a CTS without specifying it was American dollars. BTW, Reg, are you like huffing aerosols tonight?

No, don't try that. They're changing them. I believe they're letting older models run out on the old standards just as Nissan and a few others are doing and intro'ing new cars on the new SAE ratings. As far as a Toyota lie, I can point out one Polish_Kris shared about the lower hp ratings as given by a Toyota representative - that Toyota is lowering horsepower in light of increased fuel prices, which is 100% BS on part of the rep, but not necessarily Toyota as a whole.

Aren't there a bunch of LSD trippers there?

Um...VW wasn't the only one to go grilleless...

For a car that costs upwards of $52,000-55,000 in today's money, I would sure hope there are many in good condition! A quick peak at eBay will garner you 75% higher-mileage (80-120k) Reattas - still in great condition - and 25% very low-mileage (10-50k) garage-kept, show-quality examples. People bought these knowing they'd be worth something. I really looked at an '88 with the CRT screen at Dick Norris B-P-GMC. It had ~65k on the clock but they wanted $9800. Sorry, but for 2/3 of that, I got my car. A two-seat roadster would not have suited my needs...for now, at least.

Maybe for '08/'09 if things go well. I'll have my B-O-P G-body trifecta then! :)

I can't wait to have that car with a V8.

No, its is. And I realize that, hence me saying 'hacked' the name from the coffee. I think Plymouth intended it to be a play on both words as espresso coffee would motivate you to get-up-and-go for your active 'express' lifestyle, hence the Plymouth Breeze Expresso would fit that lifestyle. Anyway, I've seen enough classified ad listings selling Plymouth Neon Espressos to conclude whatever the point was, it was lost on everyone but Chrysler marketeers. Also, at least on the Voyager minivan, Expresso replaced Rallye. Which sounds better?

I really think the column vs. floor shifter is something that really isn't a deal-breaker to the general fullsize SUV shopping public, only to magazine editors that thrash a vehicle around for a day and a half.

I've made a promise to myself that the first new car I buy will be paid for with a stainless steel briefcase of cash. I figure it would be a more motivating negotiating tool to lay $29,000 (or whatever) out on the salesman's desk for a $40,000 car, take a bundle of $1,000 out of my blazer and say, "This is for you on top of whatever they give you if I drive out of here for what's in here."

Ford and Mercury are the only ones that have clearly definited an alpha-based naming scheme, on which I agree. It really stifiles creativity. Alphanumeric names on American cars should stay dead with a few exceptions such as GTO and GT40. CTS is fine, but lets be honest, its had three different meanings and really still has no clear one. Cadillac is on the cusp of having a major naming issue because they have no defined structure as of yet. I much prefer the old way of a model name followed by a trim designation, i.e. DeVille DTS, Seville SLS, Eldorado ETC. Yes, taken together its semi-redundant (DeVille DeVille Touring Sedan), but in normal use, it works out logically being able to refer to a car line as Cadillac DeVille or an individual trim as Cadillac DTS. And, so sue me, but names have meaning. Pontiac's format is even worse with absolutely no definition. G6 stands alone against both older (Bonneville, Vibe) and newer (Solstice, Torrent) named models and looks very out of place. G6 itself has no meaning. Does it refer to the highest-output engine in cylinder count? If so, why the need for a 'G6 V6,' which appears especially foolish? Its such a shame to me as Pontiac has always had the most consistantly relevant nomenclature of all brands. Grand Prix, Grand Am, Trans Am, Can Am, Bonneville, GTO - all race-inspired for the performance nature of Pontiac. Even other names like Phoenix, Tempest, Firebird, and TranSport fit with the image, far more than 'G_' Anyway, back to the original point of names that should be scrapped - Sentra/Altima/Maxima - all meaningless, all very feminine names. Unfortunately, the latter two have far too much cache now to drop. Again, this is just based on my opinion of the name itself. Mazda3/Mazda6 - I don't think Mazda is even sure how these are supposed to work. The formatting is odd to me and I think Mazda needs to convey the concept of their unified name better to some publications which list the cars as Mazda Mazda6. Mazdaspeed - Why do we need to have the name of the company multiple times on the nameplate? Mazda6 Mazdaspeed? Mazdaspeed Mazda6? Too doofy. 300C - Chrysler needs to learn the alphabet as the letter N comes after M. The only explanation I've ever seen from Chrysler themselves has been something like, "The new 300C is more in line with the performance tradition of the past 300 letter-series." Uh, then why not continue appropriately with that tradition? If anything, the 300M was the odd-one-out (V6, FWD) compared to the present-day and historical letter cars. Really. for the sake of momentary historical significance, it throws real history into the wind as you know the next-generation 300 will retain the letter designation of 'C'. I'd call it 300S for 'shameful.' LaCrosse - I was never in love with the name to begin with on the 2000 concept car when its application made some sort of sense, as the vehicle was a [La]cross[e] between a luxury sedan and utility vehicle. On the current sedan, it makes no sense and due to immaturity, is known as the Allure in Canada. Allure would've made a better name in the States, too, thought it comes off more Oldsmobile than Buick. Better yet, Regal would've been a fine name as this car doesn't really offer a clean break from the Regal as its name is intended to show. Also, there was never anything wrong with the 'Regal' name. Besides, the way LaCrosse is formatted is more in relation with LeSabre, which is gone. So...yeah... Uplander - Do I really need to explain this one? The name sucks. And with Freelander, Highlander, Outlander, and Crosslander being used by various vehicles, it has no resonance whatsoever. Venture was a fine name and, damnit, it was a decent cheap van, just like the Uplander is today. Pilot - A very weak name not helped by a weak vehicle. Lincoln made a better choice with 'Aviator', which conveys an image of bravado, brashness, and daring adventure. 'Pilot' is a more plebian descriptor, much like naming a vehicle 'Manager' instead of 'Commander' or 'Representative' instead of 'Ambassador.' Touareg - Its cute that VW mocks its own unpronouncability, but it really is a sucky name. Hard to spell, harder to say, and has a meaning that no one is familiar with, which happens to be... What the f-? Plus, once you do learn to pronounce it, its harsh and ugly. Ethnic names are bad anyway because of multiple regional spellings, like Tureg. Scaglietti - I really don't care what it actually means in Italian, but it sounds like something I'd be more likely to find at Olive Garden than on the Autostrada. She'll have the Scaglietti & meatballs and I'll take my shrimp Maranello with a side of warm Barchetta rolls. And have the chef prepare some Stradale for dessert. Probe - Really, just a bad name all around. No one wants a probe, no matter how smooth and fun it looks. And, yes, Ford, I understand the hype over the space mission of the late 1980s and Chrysler debuting the Plymouth Voyager, but really...how about anything but Probe? Hombre - Maybe its funny just to me how Korean companies choose Italian names for their worst cars (Nubira) and Isuzu chooses Spanish names for their trucks. And unlike the Spanish-dervied American trucks whose names made very much sense - Chevy's El Camino (the road/way/path) and Ford's Ranchero (rancher) - if you said to your friends you just picked up an Hombre, you told them your just got a man. Ranger Splash - Naming a vehicle 'splash' guarantees its failure to the male market. Plymouth _____ Expresso - Hacking a style of coffee also has no relevance to any vehicle.

Lexus strikes me as 'Luxury sans character.' The perfect car, perhaps, but we all favor less than perfection - a little growl from the exhaust, a little road noise, a little styling some may call beautiful or ugly. I think that character, that panache, that presence is something Lexus has always lacked in its flagship. It doesn't say much besides "Hey, guys, I'm driving a Lexus." Choosing a Cadillac, BMW, Mercedes, Infiniti, or Audi makes more of a statement about yourself. Acura, well, they still haven't made a real 'flagship'. The Legend came close, but the succeeding very evolutionary RL was more Park Avenue than S500. In fact, I would argue the Buick had more flair than the RL. The current RL underwhelms the eyes to say the least. No presence, no flamboyance, just...an Acura. I like Infiniti. They need to work on a lot of little stuff - M45's down syndrome taillamps, poor center stack ergonomics across much of the line, the unnecessary pig of a QX56 - but they have alot going for them, mainly the style, the powertrains, and the innovation. All they need is to figure out what their big kahuna is - M or Q. Personally, I like the Q. To me, they're all luxury though, to varying degrees. I would also consider Buick and Lincoln to be luxury, too.

in RE to the interior, let's just say CHROMIUM_STEEL would be satisfied.

Unions no longer need to 'fight' the corporate structure; they have already and succeeded beyond most peoples' wildest dreams. For all the union-detractors, remember that our minimum wage, weekends, 40-hour work weeks, paid vacation, recognized holidays, child labor laws, OSHA standards, safety regulations, and employee benefits all came thanks to the blood, sweat, and tears of Union locals and their members over the course of the past 150 years. Don't look at specific greedy factions of the UAW or Teamsters and think the same graft and abuse of power applies to all Unions. It doesn't. Many locals manage and run their own pension funds and healthcare packages for members. When one Brother is sick or injured, the others help out of the local's coffers and their own pockets if need be. They provide training via apprenticeships and journeymen programs that produce skilled and qualified tradesmen in the fields of millwork, plumping, pipefitting, carpentry, sheetmetal work, and hundreds of other vital general trades and specialties that always go overlooked. They raise money for local charities and youth organizations, they contribute to the tax base of the local economy, and they care for their families through decent death benefits when the federal government doesn't. I believe Unions are still necessary today because we all know at least one place of employment around each of us that abuses their employees. They're not sending them into the coal pits anymore nor are they forcing them to live in racid corporate housing, but they are firing people for being black, Asian, homosexual, or Muslim. They're denying employees benefits they are entitled to. They're not providing them with adequate and safe equipment or working conditions. In other words, they're withholding the basic worker's rights the Union fought so hard for. Unions should work towards extending the rights they've won to all instead of bitching about $1 here or a $1 there. Unions can be a powerful voice for exploited workers of all 'collars' to stand together against certain businesses and their practices. Bitching and moaning as some factions of the UAW are doing ends up hurting all parties.

If things appear as they appeared, then no one will be complaining about the Trailblazer having a second-rate interior. And if the TB is anything to go by, there will be shock and awe at the Envoy

To all those bitching about the current CTS' interior and expecting merely more of the same, prepare to feast upon your hats.

Its for the radio and is actually useful.

$500 obo j/k $27.86

BV, cut down on the language, man. We all know what you mean. Sixty8, God, chill out. BV was merely following the lines of your original post by also lamenting that there is a car out there that he wants (a new Civic) but doesn't have the finances for it right now. No different than if he said he wish he had the money for a Fiero or Solstice or whatever. There's no need to respond with an attack against a car he likes in the manner you did. I really hate policing the forums like the old days, but apparently this is now necessary again...

We have appreciated your lack-of meaningful contributions over the past few weeks. Enjoy the rest of the Internet sans C&G.

Sorry, but late-80s/early-90s European designs were just as bad or totally worse than anything else.