Drew Dowdell

Given the condition of Pittsburgh (and NJ/NYC for that matter) roads, true off-road tires would be the most appropriate. ? But yea, if I had the R nineT Original I'd have gone with a typical street tire. I've just really liked the Scrambler style from any manufacturer. While I'll never take this true off-roading because it's too heavy for that, I like that I can take it down some dirt/gravel trails that are well compacted.

Matches the look and intent of the Scrambler style. These are very much "for the looks" rather than being true adventure tires. I'm quite happy with them. The rear tire of the original set was very much gone and I had a couple of scares on it.

When did you all move into your nursing homes? Can't sit down in a car now? Too hard to stand up? Do you all need artificial knees? Oh look... your apple sauce is here for dinner.

Top Picture: Hoboken, NJ across the river from Manhattan - taken a week ago today Bottom Picture: Key Largo, FL at Gilbert's Resort - taken over the winter holidays Below, got some new shoes.

GV60 went on sale (as “available to order”) yesterday. It’s likely very few if any dealer have them.

With regards to the size, while it is similar exterior dimensions to the ICEs, the interior is likely to feel substantially larger, potentially like a low-roof Tahoe in size. Yesterday I drove the Genesis GV60, my review will be coming, but this externally pretty small crossover felt very roomy inside... and @David, you'd probably fit in the back seat.

Linux is far more reliable than windows, faster too.

Gonna disagree with you, but only on the Sonic/Sonic Hatch. The Spark was abysmal to drive, but the Sonic in RS form was very fun for no significant money over a regular Sonic LT/LTZ. They put a shorter final drive ratio in it so the 1.4T + Manual was really in its prime. It was no Fiesta ST, but it was a good $3k - $4k less and more roomy to boot. You know my penchant for large vehicles, but there was a time when the RS was new that I had seriously considered one.

I can't buy a vehicle with enough of a lower curb weight that still does what I need it to do. But the AFM in my Avalanche doesn't bother me at all. Never even notice it. It is most effective on a highway cruise from 55 - 65 mph. I can be in 4-cylinder mode and get into the upper mid-20s. Not too bad for something Suburban sized.

That’s mostly important in high rpm engines. In 5 or 6 liter V8s there’s no real benefit on that part.

Why bother with the camo when I can wander to nearly any Chevy dealer in the US to see what it looks like? There may be a new vent or filler door here or there, but it largely looks the same. Still exciting though.

We're talking SUVs.

He'd be right on Benz. Not on BMW or Audi. The GLS has a really old-school transmission hump in the 2nd row.

Even my '13 Avalanche has just a very minor hump in the center. Nothing an adult sitting there would complain about.

Well... no one here has compensation vehicles... so I'm sure we're all above average in that department too. But I was referring to how we take care of our cars.

Huh? no they don't, not on the larger ones. Canyonado has a small one. 2021 Tahoe. 2021 Blazer Or are we talking a different location? But even the third rows and cargo areas are flat.

If anything, the advancements of modern synthetics has been one of the largest enablers of turbos in mundane consumer vehicles. Prior to that they were only put into vehicles with performance characteristics that would be attractive to the demographic that actually takes care of their vehicles. GM and Ford took a big risk when they started putting the turbo-4s into their mundane cars like the Cobalt, Cruze, Fusion, and Fiesta (turbo-3). But they simultaneously had started requiring full-synthetic on their oil fills.

All of us here at C&G are well above average.

The AFM in Chevy V8s does not take well to deferred maintenance, but if changed on time with proper spec oil (that means full synthetic) they run fine. The Turbos should have shorter oil change intervals but GM has kept them about the same when using the oil life monitor. And that’s where the difference is. You can run a 5.3 down to 0% but I wouldn’t run a 2.7 below 20% Even the older 5.3 in my Avalanche is plenty sufficient for me. I wouldn’t mine the extra litre, but it isn’t necessary.

You look at the 1995 5-series picture and *dont* see acres of plastic and cheap Casio keyboard buttons to go with the hard plastic cable operated manual hvac?

I know you’re directing your question at @David but here’s my take. I’m not fearful of the 2.7T, but I’m not buying one either. There is just more durability in a V6 or V8 of similar output. Generally though, larger diameter turbos spin slower and are less oil hungry. A larger turbo on a small engine can produce a lot of boost, but it would feel laggy. There are sweet spots for any displacement engine. Little engines like this new 3 cylinder that are pushing huge hp/liter numbers are likely running smallish turbos close to max capacity. That’s going to need very good oil. GMs 2.7T is likely in that same boat. In an effort to make it a 5.3 replacement they’re running a lot of boost. Dollars to Donuts the average 5.3 will outlast the average 2.7T even with identical maintenance schedules simply because the turbo is harder on the oil. I’m not going to be able to avoid turbos going forward in any ICE vehicle I might buy, but I’m very on top of keeping my oil changed, so I’ll be okay.

I guess the point I was trying to make (and failed) was that these are all different classes... or at least different niches. I know @balthazar has started agreeing with @smk4565 lately in that two different cars in the same price bracket compete directly with each other even if they have vastly different purposes.... so he'd likely agree with you that this: Was intended to compete with this: Just because they were both in the mid-$30k range. But even back in the early 90s, there were two very distinct classes of luxury cars. There was the big, floaty, posh stuff that I like.... this would include stuff like the Seville/Deville, Park Ave, XJ, S-Class/E-Class, and Lexus ES/GS/LS. This is where the woodgrain would be found. And then there would be the stark, sports oriented luxury cars like the 3/5/7 Series, the Integra/Vigor/Legend, Infiniti J/M/Q. I'm loathe to include the A4 here because all I see is a B-series Passat.... but I guess I have to... and the A6 to go with it. Somehow... this 1995 5-series... manual rotary dials and all... became the benchmark of a luxury car when Buick not only was doing duel-zone automatic climate control, but had single zone automatic climate control for a decade and even had touch screens. Cadillac had been doing automatic digital climate as early as 1980... but here we are looking at a 1995 BMW with cable operated dials that is somehow superior. To my mind, these are distinct classes of luxury car... one is Luxury the other was once called Luxury Sport (remember the time 10-15 years ago where EVERY sedan was a luxury sport sedan?... even ones that had no business trying to claim it?). Unfortunately, the purist luxury car segment is mostly gone except for the extreme ends of the S-class line and, oddly, the G90. The Aurora was probably GM's best initial effort at going after the new luxury-sport imports. Yes it was larger than a Legend or ES, but it was every bit as luxury as those and wore the new minimalist styling well. Plus you got a 250 hp / 260 lb-ft V8 instead of a mediocre 188 hp from the ES or 200 hp from the Legend. Of course because it was a $31k car the rags compared it to the 328 and C-class even though it was so much more car than them.

The upper end of Buick at the time was trying to be an American Jaguar in their styling... hamstrung entirely by the GM bean counters. It was Cadillac with their ill-conceived Catera that was to aim for the A4. They tried and failed... but that was Cadillac's problem, not Buick's. Also... A4 and Legend were fairly different segments. A4 was Catera's job, Legend was Aurora's job. When you consider that this would have been their benchmark, the full width wood, it makes a lot more sense why the dashboard of the last Riviera looks empty without the wood. And those woodkits look tacked on because they are... had they been from the factory, they would have looked better. But this is really hard to deny what the goal was... and this... Even the LeSabre got in on the fun...even down to similar wheel styles... And it goes both ways because look what Jaguar came up with style wise 4 years after the final Riviera debuted.... Now, I will fully concede that Buick was pretty restricted due to platform and powertrain constraints and also was making cars that were "American sized"... but when you consider that the LeSabre was also being shared with the Eighty-Eight and Bonneville, and the Park Ave was being shared with the Aurora, Deville, and Riviera.... I think Buick did a pretty darn good job from a styling perspective of trying to be an American Jaguar on a budget. You just don't get much closer than these without being in the same brand. Buick wasn't aiming for Audi/Acura buyers at all. GM wasn't even playing in that market from any brand outside of the Catera and Aurora.... possibly... maybe... the Intrigue if it hadn't been tuned to drive like a grandma car with severely overboosted steering. They got the exterior styling on it right for the Audi/Acura set, but the interior, powertrain, suspension, and steering were all wrong. CTS didn't show up until 2003 as the first serious attempt.

Those 90's Riv interiors look substantially better with the full-width wood treatment. Even going back to the 80s

Love that Eldorado in Palm Springs pic. The XJ... something? is neat too.