rkmdogs

I don't know what you mean......settings? I have not changed anything and I am not that computer literate to even know how to change the "settings". As I said when I asked this question, all my other websites do not have this problem, there is no problem on the forums index page, it is on the front page and then the individual pages in a specific forum topic. The right side of the screen cuts off the screen format 20-30% in the normal mode. I see that two indexing arrows have been added at the top of some pages. If the screen picture was not too wide in the first place, these would not be necessary. Somebody called that shot! Why????? BTW: In the top bar of the topic screen, I noticed the 3 values: outline, standard, and linear +. Mine are set on standard.

READ MY LIPS!!!! Firefox, firebox, fire up your A--! The problem has nothing to do with pictures! The text bars are wider than the screen settings, and I did not change them! The only thing that fits the screen properly is the forum page index! This CHANGE came about with the new format, not any picture,smicture thing! THE TEXT GOES OFF SCREEN......... and it did not before!

Thanks but no thanks!I've heard about all sorts of problems with firefox. I've been using this foremat since 2003, and it works everywhere else...... and did here too, until CHANGES were made here! Guess who makes which one that is out of step?

Since nobody else has brought it up yet, I will! here is the gorilla in the bedroom, or the elephant in the refrigerator, which ever one you prefer. Comments: 1987 was the last year for the Regal and the Grand National, but Buick decided to go out with a bang (although the rear wheel drive G-body platform would last one more year until 1988). A whooping 26,555 Turbo Regals were sold, of which 20,193 were Grand Nationals. Buick made some changes to the powertrain and power increased to 245 bhp and 355 lb-ft. The grille was slightly revised, with the teeth set further apart and the Buick emblem siting on the left side. Chrome wheels also were new. But the big news for 1987 was the introduction of the limited edition GNX. Only available for 1987, the Buick GNX represents the height of Grand National performance. In a nod to the famous Buick GSXs of 1970-1972, the GNX logo featured a larger "X" than the other letters, just like the GSX logo. All GNXs began life as fully optioned Grand Nationals that immediately left the factory and were sent to ASC/McLaren Specialty Products in order to be extensively modified. The modifications included a more efficient Garrett air-to-air intercooler and a special pipe that connected the intercooler to the engine coated with CERMATEL (Ceramic/aluminum) for increased heat rejection and heat disipation. Front fender vents were installed to pull heat away from the engine while driving. The GNX also received a special Garrett "hybrid" T-s turbocharger that used a very lightweight ceramic impeller (as opposed to metal in standard Grand Nationals). The decreased weight allows the turbo charger to spin up much faster, thereby decreasing the turbo lag time inherent in turbo charged engines. Maximum boost was set at 15 psi and the turbo used an electric wastegate. The turbo also incorporated special low drag, dynamic turbine shaft seals, and a built in contamination trap. All of these modifications added up to 275 bhp and a whooping 360 lb-ft. To handle this extra power, the transmission was beefed up with firmer shifts and the rear axle received a longitudinal torque ladder bar with a panhard rod to help prevent wheel hop and torque twist. It also received a special rear axle housing cover made of aluminum (with GNX embossed on it) that serves as an additional strengthening element and point for the torque bar. For even more strengthening, the car body received special structural reinforcements in the form of "behind the back seat bracing" and special chassis (steel cross member between the chassis rails) bracing. The GNX was the only Regal to ever receive 16 inch wheels. The wheels were made of a lightweight alloy and the rear wheels were wider than the front. The GNX came with P245/50VR16 tires in front and P255/50VR16 tires in the rear. Special welded in fender flares were added to the wheel wells to make room for the larger wheels and tires. The standard transmission was a reprogrammed Turbo Hydra-matic 200-4R four speed hooked up to a custom torque converter. Inside, the dash had a special Steward Warner analog gauge package. All GNXs were black in color and the only exterior identification was small "GNX" badges placed on the front radiator grille and rear deck lid. Under the hood, a special turbocharger heat shield had "GNX" stamped on it, similar to the aluminum rear axle cover. All GNXs received a special numbered plaque mounted on the passenger side dash which identified the number of that particular car (1-547). Also, the Fisher body plate has "GNX" stamped on it. Special "GNX" decals were used on the intercooler and other locations and there were several hidden I.D. stampings to prevent fakes. But all of this came at a price. The cost of the GNX option was a whopping $10,995, which resulted in a final MSRP of $29,900. All out performance doesn't come cheap. Even more rare are the Buick Regal T-Type "Special T." These models had a Grand National exterior, but a Regal T-Type interior. Production: Grand Nationals: 20,193 GNX: 547 Engines: Grand National: 3.8L V6 Turbo 245 bhp @ 4400 rpm, 355 ft-lb @ 2000 rpm. GNX: 3.8L V6 Turbo 276 bhp @ 4400 rpm, 360 ft-lb @ 3000 rpm. Performance: Grand National: 1/4 mile in 14.23 seconds @ 98 mph. GNX: 0-60 in 5.5 seconds, 1/4 mile in 13.43 seconds @ 103 mph. Oh Yeah !!!!!!!!!!

The big problem with those models Harley, is that they truely were not Buicks, but merely a rebadge job on a Chevy. Yeah, they had their own grill, but that is about the same as whether your wife wears the red dress or the blue one to go to the country club tonight! The heart and soul of Buicks lastly became the evolvement of the 3800 V-6 engine, thru all its development...... and even up to the Indy car versions! My sons were hard on cars........ but they couldn't break a Buick! Cosmetically, they wound up looking like fugatives from the bone-yard, or multi-car accidents, all-in-one, but they always ran! The other name for Buick........ it was the twins, durability and dependability!!! I too liked the early seventies iterations, especially the Regals........ finally topped with the statement that no one has matched to date..... the GNX! Nobody has picced that model on this thread yet. Harley, step up to the plate, please! Picture time.

Yes, I use IE...... and I am not having this problem on any other website! And I have all the current Windows upgrades working & active.

AND................ IMO, One of the sexiest features that any GM model had was(is) the cut-down waist at the doors. They sure should bring that back! They did a good job of it on the concept LaCrosse!

Well, you'd have to fight me off, first 68, and.........(sob) I'd even give up my 9C1 to acquire one!

This came about long before the VE pics....... It started when we went to the new front page format! BTW, both of your answers were wider than my screen format..... and again I say, I HAVE NOT CHANGED ANYTHING!

It's a rumoured Dodge Magnum fighter that Chevy is considering. What it could be like...a rendition. I love it. Harley, Please bring back the pic of the Dodge Magnum fighter Chevy concept that you replaced with the '53 Buick ....... and any other views that you might have of it. To me it looks like a Nomad on steroids....... or should be! What is with this fear of bringing back a 2-dr. wagon/pickup? I would love to see a concept of this sort, your magnum fighter, with the sliding roof feature like the Envoy XUVs had! That would combine the best of an ElCamino and the Nomads in one helluva car/truck............. and sure would offer a choice! If it was labeled a Buick and had a turbocharged V-6....... WOW!!!!!!

HELP! I have not changed any of my settings, but the new front page is wider than my screen format, and to read it, I have to scroll across the page. Why???? It used to fit perfectly. I also notice this on some, not all the forum links, but not all the time. What is going on?

You musta just come out of diapers! In 1961-64 Buick made a car called the Special that was a compact, and had two sisters, the Oldsmobile Cutlass and the Pontiac Tiempo. I had one of the '62 models, and it was one of the best cars I ever owned! They killed it when they made it fatter and called it Regal!

Instead of being a ho-hum model, as it currently is, THIS is what Buick should have built to be called LaCrosse! Then they would have a vehicle that represents a choice---- not an echo!

Harley, What's the poop on that gorgous 2-dr wagon concept in your signature here? The pic title says that it is a Chevy, but I have never seen this pic or any like it before. What is it, please?

Youse guys left out my favorites; --- the 1961-63 Buick Specials, with the 3.5L All-Aluminum (215c.i.) V-8! Of course I'm partial, 'cause I owned one. Can't say that I liked the trannies tho! And then there is my dream favorite that you also did not mention---- the Blackhawk concept! Woo-wee!!!!

If it went dead, then why did you respond? The line and definition of car-based vs. truck based has definitely been blurred by the elimination of separate full-frames. The factories, including GM are calling unibody structures SUV's or in some cases "cross-overs" I want to know what did they "cross-over?" Reality??? It is more advertising B/S being propagated for people who don't know their gas tank from a can of beans--(they both give gas, don't they?) By your definition a BMW M5 or the Mercedes versions are station wagons, but they call them SUVs! Why muddy the waters and confuse people even more? To sell more vehicles, of course! Get real!!!!

I LOVE the '78-83 G bodies! I've had 2, and wish I had them both back. In fact, I'm looking right now at some '83-'87 El Caminos, cause I need a mid-size that can haul occassionaly. AND...... I like the front end appearance on the Brasilian S-10 way better than the Colorado. Then there is the matter of that 5 cyl. wanna-be engine........!!!!

Yellow Jacket, if you are serious about getting a 9C1, call me! You can see mine at the signing here, or go to www.gofasst.us and look at members cars: Bob Marks

Change your name to Jay Leno and convert it! He did it with a Toranado!

No, I'm not kidding. I think the Colorado looks like a "committe"-designed truck, and they could not agree! NOW i'M TALKING ABOUT WITH THE 4.3 V6 here, not the 4! Just think, one of these with an LS2 5.3V-8.......... wanna talk about Kick-Ass....!

While the General mulls over what he may do........ 5 years down the road, other people are MOVING! Check this one out! Family van busts out of the mold One of the first vehicles under new development process offers a bold minivan alternative. Bryce G. Hoffman / The Detroit News Flat roof: This vehicle won't have a minivan's gentle sloping silhouette. Menacing face: This family hauler will growl through trips around the neighborhood with its aggressive styling. Rear-passenger doors: Gone are the sliders, replaced with hinged doors. Rear door: Groceries will be easier to load with a rear door that opens to the left or the right, as well as a separate opening top half. Note: All details are based upon the concept version of the Ford Fairlane, not a production version. Fairlane concept car photo gallery Browse more concept car photo galleries Related Articles FORD RETOOLS AUTO DESIGN Ford Motor Co. has given the green light to the Fairlane, a new "people mover" designed to replace the company's poorly performing minivans, according to sources familiar with the project. The vehicle will be one of the first created with Ford's new Global Product Development System, and a production model is expected to be unveiled at an auto show next year, though likely not in Detroit, sources said. It is also expected to herald Ford's departure from the minivan segment. And not a moment too soon. Ford's minivan sales have been sinking fast in the face of stiff competition from rivals like DaimlerChrysler AG, whose Chrysler Group has long been regarded as the segment's leader, as well as Japanese manufacturers Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co. Ford's minivan sales have dropped from more than 250,000 units in 2000 to fewer than 85,000 units last year. Its Mercury Monterey and Ford Freestar account for just 7.5 percent of the segment. That segment is full of solid competitors and is unlikely to grow, according to analyst Jim Hall of AutoPacific, who praised Ford's decision to pull out. "Why do you want to be in a collapsing segment?" Hall asked. "GM should be doing it, too." The minivan market is becoming a victim of the same demographics that created it. Minivans were the baby boomer generation's answer to station wagons, offering more convenience and snazzier styling than the wood-paneled behemoths they had grown up with and were anxious to avoid. But the boomers' children have grown up. Some have even left home. And today's families are looking for something different. "It puts a lot of pressure on Chrysler," said Jim Sanfilippo, who follows the industry for AMCI Inc. "GM has to think about its next minivan, too." GM controlled 11.4 percent of the segment in 2005 with vehicles like the Chevrolet Uplander and Pontiac Montana. The company has already tried to distance itself from the minivan segment, choosing to refer to recent crops as "crossover sport vans." But outside its own marketing organization, few have noticed. DaimlerChrysler's Chrysler Group dominated the minivan market last year with 27.8 percent of the segment choosing the Dodge Caravan and Chrysler Town & Country. Ford would not officially confirm plans to produce the new vehicle, which is expected to be built on the same platform as its Five Hundred sedan and Freestyle crossover utility vehicle. And Ford sources say there is still an internal debate over whether to keep the Fairlane name, which was long associated with sedans. It is not known how close the new design will hew to the original concept, which debuted at the 2005 Detroit auto show to broad acclaim. Some analysts expect it to reflect the same tall, slab-sided aesthetic. Others see it as a larger, taller version of the Ford Edge, the company's newest crossover utility vehicle. Either way, it will likely incorporate key elements of Ford's new design language like the three-bar chrome grille. Company sources describe the Fairlane as a "people mover," and refer to it as a white-space vehicle that will carve out a new segment of the market. But analysts regard the Fairlane more as a blurring of the boundaries between sport utility vehicles and crossovers, minivans and wagons. "It's the postmodern Explorer," Hall said. "That's functionally what it is in their lineup." Sanfilippo sees the Fairlane as a direct competitor for the likes of General Motor Corp.'s Buick Enclave and its siblings in the emerging full-size crossover category. He expects Ford to aim the Fairlane at younger middle-class families, with pricing starting somewhere in the mid-$20,000 range. "Ford's got a pretty interesting idea in the Fairlane," Sanfilippo said. "I don't see anything out there that's really similar."

It is amazing that people don't want to call a duck a duck. SUV's, SUP's Burp's, Belches, whatever........... All of these vehicles represent...... STATION WAGONS! There! I said it! the dirty word that nobody dares to use anymore! That is what all of these utility-type vehicles represent. They are passenger-carrying, multi-purpose vehicles, that can function, sometimes, in less than ideal driving conditions, i.e., AWD, but they all serve a purpose. Who was the idiot who decreed that station wagon was a dirty word, or that minivans had to be for soccer moms? Ride them out of town on a rail, pole, spike, phallic symbol, call it what you will. Let's hear one for .......REALITY !!!!!

You guys are all digging at nits, when you should be looking for the main vein! GM has lost out in the minivan market because they lost their practicality! That was what the Astro had, but the top brass chose to milk it, until it could no longer compete in a more sophisticated market! The models that you are discussing are not minivans! They are wanna-be SUVs. A true mini to be current, must offer seating for 7-8 people, without having to become a contorsionist to get into the back seats, seats that fold and disappear in the blink of an eye, without having to remove anything, low side entry doors on both sides, a handy rear hatch, like the old Dutch doors, or the old station wagon door-gate, electronics for the kiddies entertainment(optional so that not everyone has topay for the gimmics), full power for everything, doors, windows(which all should open) steering & mirrors. Remote controls for doors, security. The ability to tow 5000 lbs. A torque-monster engine, that sips fuel like it would run on an all-day sucker. A diesel would be nice. So would AWD for the Yankee trade. The quality and durability to last over 200.000 miles with only routine maintainence, and a start price in the middle 20's. Is this a wet dream ----- it better not be, look over your shoulder, China is breathing down your backs, fellas! BTW: I owned 3 Astros before they went kaput! I LOVED the looks of the last generation. Just wished that it had a left-side door.

You guys are missing the most important factor! The old G bodied vehicles had full perimeter frames on them and were not unibodied vehicles! They had better flex resistance and durability!...... but they also cost more to make! It was bean-counter wins that made the change! Forget the style angle for once, and consider the technology changes that occurred! That was critical to the downslide.............

Not a nail for the General if he would bring in this truck! Don't know about the Montana, but this is the current offering in Brasil, one of 3 models. And you are right, it sure beats the hell out of the Colorado!