Flybrian

Are you referring to the launch vehicles? If so, yes, American rockets had excellent guidence system, they just couldn't get off the pad. This is opposed to Soviet rockets, which could lift-off, but typically came home rather quickly...

IMO, the Sixteen is far better proportioned thanks to the longer passenger cabin. Plus, the SLR's long hood has a real tacked-on photoshopped look to it. I mean, its a ~5.4l V8. Does it really need to be that long?

Of course we went to the moon; after years of Raplh Kramden trying to get send his wife there. Damnit, Alice, you must be proud.

Those silly EUROCAP standards wouldn't be necessary if people kept an open eye out for cars.

They should make an Element ice cream truck. It makes total sense!

Perhaps he was previously testing an locomotive. It kind of rapes you of credibility when you continuously misstate the car's trim name about 5 times in 3 minutes.

NASA to replace shuttle Yeah. No crap. Its called the Lockheed VentureStar and was well through development! Idiots.

Its a good song. Seriously.

I'll agree but say the criticism about the GP's rear seat is all too true. Its flat, benchy, and skimps on the headroom too much. I wouldn't care, though, since I'd be driving.

Its easier than self-promotion, isn't it? If he really cared about not selling out, he'd sue to stop the use of the song and not for financial recovery.

Yet GM can already claim that (and I believe has) it sells more trucks than anyone else. Chevrolet can't, but the fact that it came awful close to despite a brand-new F-150, Ram, Titan, and Tundra and also the duplication of GMC, it says something. There are many people who would readily take delivery of a GMC-badged vehicle over a Chevrolet and they aren't just the idiot rednecks everyone loves to think truck owners are; I'm talking upper-middle to upper-income families. Next time you drive through an upscale neighborhood, count how many GMC products you find compared to Chevy trucks. There's a noticable difference. Its likely due to the fact that, yes, Chevrolet is still cheap. Even if the products aren't, 75% of the dealerships are. GMC has already cultivated that image of being more upscale cuncurrent with being more 'professional' than Chevy trucks; the laborers have the Chevies while the superintendent has the GMC, that sort of thing. Call it silly, but its a minimal investment netting a pretty substantail payout. And especially in light of GM's obvious move to creating three core classes of products - entry Chevrolet, luxury Cadillac, and premium Buick/Pontiac/GMC - the time to have axed GMC is certainly not today. 12 years ago, maybe, but not today. I expect to see continual differentiation between GMC and Chevy from this point on. Trevor and others really just don't get it. It's not about a grade-school numbers game about what nameplate sells the most; its about cultivating the GMC image. Most people who know a little about trucks I find always place Chevy/Ford/Dodge in one group and GMC on a slightly higher plane. I know people who have bought GMCs consistantly and haven't really considered Chevy trucks, not in the "I'd never buy one" sense, but more the "Nah, I'd rather have a GMC" sense. You hear people rattle off "Oh, its a BMW thing" or "Oh, its a Jeep thing," but really, its truly a "GMC thing," and no one really does understand it.

No, I ain't missing you is by John Waite. I've never heard of this guy either, but apparently he likes to sue:

Hey, Reg, isn't your wife bisexual? If you don't buy her things, she doesn't get sexual?

We sort of have that with Supplier News under The Other Guys, but I mean, Delphi, Lear, and Siemens really aren't 'other guys'. I'll make the changes.

Actually, thanks to all the hype and excitement (and unnecessary rabidness), it'll be very hard for GM to get it perfectly right. Look at all the disagreements and arguments people get into right here over the shape of the taillamp clusters much less the overall styling, interior layout, and powertrain options. I just hope that, unlike what happened with the GTO, all the people who don't like the new Camaro if/when it ever comes will just deal with it. If its not retro, deal with it. If it is retro, deal with it. And just be glad you have not one but three affordable high-performance cars - the Corvette, GTO, and Camaro - being made for you. Because I still believe GM has far better things to do like giving Buick a flagship car and giving Pontiac some decent passenger cars than listen to enthusiast-du-jour whine and have a period because the positioning of the parking lamps "ain't like I thought that 'Maro should be."

Its hard to tell, but the passenger cabin looks to be relatively intact given the severity and abnormal point of impact of the collision. No doubt, the G-body frame is very crush-resistant and incredibly strong, so strong in fact it not only exceeds FMVSS tolerences by almost two-fold, but that it broke GM's own testing equipment for passenger cars and forced them to continue testing with crushers designed for heavy-duty truck frames. And I won't exaggerate in saying the G-body's design probably saved my father's life during his accident. That's why I would happily recommend any of the fullsize G-bods because at the end of the day, shiny plastics and exposed screws don't mean jack.

That's an SE which, for the record, had no cladding.

Dude. Do I even [b]want[/i] to take a blacklight to the backseat of your Diamante?

I still consider many PC terms to be misnomers. Challenged vs. Handicapped is one of them. We're all challenged in some way. I'm challenged in playing the piano, Josh is challenged in being sober, 68 is challenged in not posting Camaro burnouts...hell, Ocn is heterosexually-challenged. However, it doesn't mean anything. Petite, IMO, is a completely different descriptor than short. Petite as I take it to mean describes someone (mostly female) as being not only small in stature, but in physical makeup - thinner figure and the like. Short is just lacking in height. For example, a 5"1' 98lb woman can be either short or petite while a 5"1' 298lb woman is simply short. Anyway, political correctness is fine in certain situations and should always be exercised wisely in formal settings and around people you don't know. In that way, it doesn't differ from any other manner of conduct. However, among friends, who cares? I'm part Chinese and my girlfriend is Mexican and if you hear us rib on each other, you'd think we not only hate one another but are the biggest racists this side of the Mason-Dixon Line (and since I'm in Florida, that means something). But its simply us being fun with each other. And if nosy outsiders feel the need to 'correct' myself and my friends when we're being friends, then they can simply have the respect to keep their opinions to themselves.

My point is that you can readily dish and out but cannot take it in return. Think about how needlessly defensive you're getting about Pontiac merely because someone's opinion is that Buick deserves more attention right now. Count how many times you go on a rambling bitchfest because someone said the Fiero sucks or Grand Ams suck or even just "The Pontiac ____ isn't as good as ____, IMO." Then, count how many times fans of other divisions go on a rambling bitchfest because you said a Chevy was bland or Buicks were for people on the verge of dying or the like. Its very unbalanced in your direction. Again, if you want to criticize, fine. Just don't expect to be immune from 'your' brand being criticized in return. I say this seriously with no malice: I really hope you only act this way on C&G and not in real life because if you do, you're going to get an ass-kicking by someone, somewhere, at some point in time.

Another shameless plug for my car also serves as a testement to how cutting-edge Oldsmobile still was in the 1990s: This is the 1995 Aurora show car, of which the production Aurora was mostly the same. Note the deep-tinted glass roof and also the presence of a fully-integrated satellite navigation system complete with a concealed cursor interface in the center console just fore of the armrest. Looks similar to something we see now, doesn't it? Only this layout had more plain and logical cursor functions with a select button and four general menu buttons. Plus, you could adjust the a/c the traditional way. People don't realize that Olds was really the first with a production in-car GPS-based navigation system. Called Guidestar, it debuted in 1995 and was a cigarette-adaptor-powered option that cost about $2500. Needless to say, few were sold.

Yeah, that's true though. The Vel Satis honestly has some strange appeal to me. Granted, the interior layout is pretty odd and dated, but its about the only attractive Renault I've ever seen. Plus, they have balls to try and make a hatchback an 'executive saloon.' The Trafic is not only a victim of bad spelling, but just bad. Flair is one thing, but damnit, its still a van. The most handsome vans, IMO, are vans that look like vans - Ram wagon, Astro van. I can respect all of them for not being trying to be hip and failing (Quest), but just being honest-to-goodness vans. I think that's the most times the word 'van' has been used in one post. Wait. Martin Van Buren wore his Vans while rocking out to the Vans in his Caravan minivan. I'm done.

The last 4-cyl Buicks were budget models of the Skylark and A-bod Century...and even they had optional sixes. Following Ehaase's reasoning, Buick will be fine with a lineup of nice midsize+/V6+ sedans while Pontiac takes the lower-end of the premium market. In other words, why make a premium sport compact Skylark when you can make a premium sport compact G6?

I will gladly break down that argument by picking and choosing selectively to bolster my point. For every... or... there are too many... and...

Pontiacs as of late have lacked the rear headroom of their platform mates due to the more rakish sweep of the C-pillar and backlight. Grand Am vs. Malibu, G6 vs. new 'Bu, '97 GP vs. Regal/Intrigue, '04 GP vs. LaCrosse, even Bonneville vs. Park Avenue and LeSabre - though headroom is fairly ample, entry and exit is noticably different due to the roof's arc.