Cory Wolfe

I made no mention of needing a 'special' platform. As well, I made no mention of sharing visible cues, either. Needless to say, the G6 offered nothing but a different look over its Epsilon brethren. A look that got lost in translation, at that. What I'm saying is that they started with a great design that featured good proportions, stance, and detailing with a nicely tailored interior (all of which wasn't exactly far-fetched by any means). GM had the full ability to make the production version a closer adaptation of the concept than they managed. It was thoroughly half-assed with everything that was loved about the concept getting lost in translation. Even if GM chose to build a platform for it, they likely would have brought themselves better profitability and something far more flexible and sustainable than the unique platform they built for a low-cost, low production niche pair of roadsters everyone loves. This platform could have easily been spread among other brands and underpinned many different vehicles, hypothetically speaking. Again, though, limited to what GM currently had at its disposal, there is absolutely no reason the production vehicle couldn't have been truer to the concept.... While still producing your beloved coupe and convertible versions, as well. I'm not exactly thinking radically here, unlike some nominations in this thread.

I've never seen a Pinto explode, either... Or a Tacoma snap in half.... Let's just reiterate, say no to the U-van:

Oh, that was more in reference to the one in my driveway. The specs are fairly close.

I see alot of concepts that, while nice, wouldn't necessarily be successful after production. As Olds said, I think we need to see more reasoning behind the nominations and less random picture picking. Save for the Tucker, as Balthy said that one goes without explanation. My input: I would agree with the Pontiac G6. They needed that car to truly change Pontiac's mission and the resulting production version was just half-assed and pathetic. A de-cladded Grand Am based on a Malibu. A truer production version could have had a better chance at turning Pontiac around.

Fiesta vs. Golf?

Personally, I'd rather see a dual clutch transmission. It's one thing GM sorely lacks. Though... I'm a VAG guy. VAG loves the DSG.

VW Eurovan..

I would tend to agree, except for Foust. He certainly earns the spot... and any host is going to have preferences. Obviously, TG UK has their share of them.

Or, more specifically... Vista.

I generally use the viewfinder... but there are moments where being able to flip the screen to a certain angle, helps immensely. Such as holding the camera above your head or shooting directly from the ground, which I sometimes like to do.

Even with just my two cars, I drive one 90% of the time, notably due to the CRX's immensely better fuel economy over my Golf. However, with winter coming in full force, I may have to switch those percentages around.

Thank you, Sir. I'm not sure about this particular DSLR, but I've been looking at 60D's. Sure, you lose some specs, but one feature it has that I'm not sure I can live without is the flip out LCD. It's a feature present on my current SX10is and just makes certain photography that much easier and far more versatile. It's not something you can find on the more "professional" cameras Canon offers. I thought I would be out of luck finding a DSLR with it, until I stumbled upon this one. Plus, the 60D is a fair amount cheaper, as well. Regardless, though, I have enough money for.... neither.

The Buick that zigs.

Of this. Oh, how this picture paints a perfect portrait.

Just a question... Why all this animosity and snide attitude over Camino's opinion? He certainly has a right to it. As Olds said, some people seem to take this post-rating system way too seriously... and it's not Camino. I find it rather insulting to our community that he can be smothered with accusations after simply starting a conversation asking others opinions on a certain topic. I don't see how that correlates to him getting berated for simply bringing it up. Again, it's his opinion and the wrath of negative ratings in response to it is exactly his point. Some people obviously take it seriously enough to make a mockery of someone's thoughts. You disagree? That's fine; express it in the same respectful manner as he, without resorting to the pathetic comments made above. Personally, I could care less about the post rating system. I don't see the point in the having it, but I do use it since its there. However, this thread is full is nonsensical bickering brought on by someone's inability to cope with other's opinions. As dully noted by Oldsmoboi, this is the sort of commentary that drives away membership.

I've managed up to 4 cars at one time, but that meant half of them weren't on the road. Currently have 2, but I always find myself itching to add another.

I'm not sure how you managed that... my Cobalt's brake pads couldnt survive past 40k miles. My cars are at 211k and 201k.

I'll use it every now and then, but I think its a redundant feature. I can just as easilly ignore a post or combat it with a response, if need be.

Zee Audi ist uber gorgeousness.

I'll refrain from using the CRX since Honda tried... and fails at life. Though, technically, you would have had to open the question to include 20 year old vehicles. The last 10 years sort of limits my ability to answer since, in my opinion, the vehicles most deserving to be revived went out in the 90's. I'll keep with the Honda train, though, and go with the S2000. Besides the expensive NSX, it was Honda's truest sports car and leaves their line-up with a bunch of also-rans and failures.

First Look: 2011 Chrysler 300 Prepare for Glory: Our 2005 Car of the Year Returns With Sharper Duds and a lot More Swagger December 03, 2010 / By Ed Loh / Photography by Brian Vance The golden crest is gone, but the Chrysler name is still spelled out and surrounded by a pair of wings atop the front-grille frame. The eggcrate grille has been swapped for one composed of sculpted horizontal slats, as seen on the Chrysler 200 and Town & Country (and, unfortunately, the Hyundai Sonata). Projector-beam headlights have evolved to incorporate must-mean-it's-luxury LEDs. Although the windshield is more steeply raked, the upright proportions, boxy roofline, and purposeful stance clearly recall the car that nabbed our Golden Calipers back in 2005. But now it's more refined and less cartoonish. Gone are the slab sides and sharp creases that hint at Gotham City chase scenes and staccato tommy-gun fire. Though the muscular wheel arches remain, softer lines and smoother arcs shape the hood and trunklid, while chrome-trimmed taillights serve as a dramatic flourish to this top-hat-to-spats reformulation. The LED daytime running lights are arranged in the shape of a "C" in Chrysler's honor. The cabin receives as compelling a treatment as the Charger, including similar HVAC controls and the optional 8.4-inch infotainment screen backed by Garmin's navigation software. Additional available features include 20-inch wheels, heated and cooled seats and cupholders, and a dual-pane sunroof. The soft-touch dash and higher-quality plastics feel just as good as in the Charger, but are styled differently and trimmed with classy, handsome wood and, of course, that analog clock. To assist the cool, refined ride, engineers found it necessary to tune the interior cabin noise -- not just for overall sound level, but for sound quality as well. The 300 is fitted with two premium-composite underbody panels that are responsible for over 8 feet of acoustic insulation and smoothing lower airflow. Being a flagship has its perks, after all. Like its predecessor, the 2011 Chrysler 300 will be offered in rear and all-wheel drive; the latter system employs an active transfer case and seamless disconnecting front axle that Chrysler claims improves fuel economy by 5 percent. Touring and Limited models come with the corporate Pentastar V-6, which delivers 292 horsepower and 260 pound-feet of torque in full-size sedan guise. Chrysler's ubiquitous HEMI 5.7-liter V-8 with Fuel Saver Technology will continue to power the 300C and should deliver 360 horsepower and 390-pound-feet of torque. Suspension geometry was altered in the pursuit of better handling and the electro-hydraulic power steering is tweaked for the driver's touch. When it launched six years ago, the 300 was an immediate hit and went on to become one of the brand's most valuable players. While times (and parent companies) have changed in the intervening years, the importance of the 300 in the new lineup can't be overstated. Chrysler needs a grand performance from its flagship now more than ever. http://www.motortren...look/index.html

Best update... not the best redesign, such as the Charger and Grand Cherokee.

As I've said, this is the best update Chrysler has managed.

It's called an Accord. People will blindly buy one.

That new Nissan van... whatever it's called. It's big and its ugly.