(02-19-2009 04:33 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 04:03 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  I guess I'm too old to not have any amenities. When comparing the G37 to the Camaro, I don't see many 30 somethings buying the Camaro. I think of tight blue blue jeans, plaid shirts, and mustaches. Eww.

Just remember, the same way our parents may clamor for the good ol' days of the 50' and 60's, that many of us will clamor for the good ol' days of the 70's and 80's, one day our kids will clamor for the 90's and 00's.

Silly kids.

Those retro cars don't seem to do so well. ie. Ford Thunderbird, PT Cruiser. Although, the Challenger seems to be doing well.

When all the bad cars are gone, what will happen to all the people who like to buy bad cars?

(02-19-2009 04:42 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 04:33 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 04:03 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  I guess I'm too old to not have any amenities. When comparing the G37 to the Camaro, I don't see many 30 somethings buying the Camaro. I think of tight blue blue jeans, plaid shirts, and mustaches. Eww.

Just remember, the same way our parents may clamor for the good ol' days of the 50' and 60's, that many of us will clamor for the good ol' days of the 70's and 80's, one day our kids will clamor for the 90's and 00's.

Silly kids.

Those retro cars don't seem to do so well. ie. Ford Thunderbird, PT Cruiser. Although, the Challenger seems to be doing well.

Ford Thunderbird 02- 06 was an overpriced POS that had NO connection withthe consumer. Someone over 6' couldn't fit in it.

The PT Cruiser looked neat... but the "3 hamster" powered engine and the crappy transmission was the problem. That's why Enterprise,Budget etc. had a ton in their fleets.. they are only good for rentals... and then they ended up at auctions.

The current Mustang reminds me of the 68 Mustang my counsin had. It was hot. and it is really the only thing selling on Ford dealerships right now.

The new Camaro/Trans-Am/Firebird could be Motor Trend "Car of the Year" in 2010, if they design it right. Otherwise, it could be another Chevy Monza.

(02-20-2009 04:26 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  The PT Cruiser looked neat... but the "3 hamster" powered engine and the crappy transmission was the problem. That's why Enterprise,Budget etc. had a ton in their fleets.. they are only good for rentals... and then they ended up at auctions.

Now if someone is not a a car guy, they might snicker at this, but mark my words - of all the current vehicles on the market, and even of the last 10 years, one of the most collectible non-muscle cars of the future will be a:

Chrysler PT Cruiser.

If you really want to corner the market, get the convertible in GT Turbo trim level. If you can find one in red or with the Woody decals, you're sitting purdy.

So many people had a Cruiser, or had parents who had one, and since many Cruisers were simply disposable or in low trim levels, that a well equipped PT Cruiser will be the collectible '65 Mustang of 2020.

Ignore me at your peril.

(02-20-2009 04:51 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-20-2009 04:26 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  The PT Cruiser looked neat... but the "3 hamster" powered engine and the crappy transmission was the problem. That's why Enterprise,Budget etc. had a ton in their fleets.. they are only good for rentals... and then they ended up at auctions.

Now if someone is not a a car guy, they might snicker at this, but mark my words - of all the current vehicles on the market, and even of the last 10 years, one of the most collectible non-muscle cars of the future will be a:

Chrysler PT Cruiser.

If you really want to corner the market, get the convertible in GT Turbo trim level. If you can find one in red or with the Woody decals, you're sitting purdy.

So many people had a Cruiser, or had parents who had one, and since many Cruisers were simply disposable or in low trim levels, that a well equipped PT Cruiser will be the collectible '65 Mustang of 2020.

Ignore me at your peril.

How many did they make in the GT Turbo package?

You are right.. the wierdest cars are gold mines. A guy that works out at Lockheed Martin in Marietta has a mint condition 1977 AMC Pacer with 45,000 actual miles (his grandmother's car) and he has been offered $15,000.00 for it.

I've had to rent several PT Cruisers. Let's just say one will NEVER grace my garage.

GM killed the wrong Brand a few year ago. They saved the loss leader Saturn over Oldsmobile. Oldsmobile was a step below Cadillac but three steps above Saturn or Pontiac. I had an Olds Cutlass that I drove for 275,000 miles no major problems till it just quit. Saturn never made money and likely never will, it kills me they chose to save that brand over Oldsmobile 7 years ago. At least GM had the good sense to save Buick over Pontiac or Saturn.

Saturn is a good car now. They just messed up in the Aurora era.

(02-19-2009 12:50 PM)BGSUalum1987 Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 12:14 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  If car company "A" can build cars for X amount of dollars and another company can do it for less then that's proof car company "A" is over paying. Tell me, how much do you pay a guy to tighten lug nuts all day? Building a car is not skilled labor - management has engineered it so even a monkey or a democrat can do it.

Part 1 goes for any job. Part 2 is a bit mean-spirited, but, well, this is the Spin Room.

You know darn well that he would be VERY upset if someone told him he had to take a minimum 50% or more paycut and lose benefits because his company was charging more than the competition and that his job is so simple even a caveman(ie. republican) can do it so he shouldn't be paid as much.

(02-20-2009 10:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Saturn is a good car now. They just messed up in the Aurora era.

It was a good car, BUT a good business model turned bad. GM moved south to start a nonunion production facility with a nonunion southern workforce. In the end the bowed to UAW moved workers from Detroit at UAW scale a benefits making it an unprofitable line that could never turn the corner. The once again proof that Unions, the UAW specifically in this case KILL everything they touch.

(02-21-2009 02:00 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 12:50 PM)BGSUalum1987 Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 12:14 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  If car company "A" can build cars for X amount of dollars and another company can do it for less then that's proof car company "A" is over paying. Tell me, how much do you pay a guy to tighten lug nuts all day? Building a car is not skilled labor - management has engineered it so even a monkey or a democrat can do it.

Part 1 goes for any job. Part 2 is a bit mean-spirited, but, well, this is the Spin Room.

You know darn well that he would be VERY upset if someone told him he had to take a minimum 50% or more paycut and lose benefits because his company was charging more than the competition and that his job is so simple even a caveman(ie. republican) can do it so he shouldn't be paid as much.

Holy cow you're a freakin moron.

His company has to charge more than the competition cause it costs his company more to make because of his guaranteed salary, guaranteed raise every year and guaranteed benefits til he dies. Then add to that nearly a million people with the same life vest that 80% of other workers don't have in this country (yet somehow they survive) and you get why it's happening.

You've never understood economics, operating costs or supply and demand. You waste perfectly good bandwidth everytime you post and perfectly good oxygen with each breath you take.

(02-22-2009 08:24 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-21-2009 02:00 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 12:50 PM)BGSUalum1987 Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 12:14 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  If car company "A" can build cars for X amount of dollars and another company can do it for less then that's proof car company "A" is over paying. Tell me, how much do you pay a guy to tighten lug nuts all day? Building a car is not skilled labor - management has engineered it so even a monkey or a democrat can do it.

Part 1 goes for any job. Part 2 is a bit mean-spirited, but, well, this is the Spin Room.

You know darn well that he would be VERY upset if someone told him he had to take a minimum 50% or more paycut and lose benefits because his company was charging more than the competition and that his job is so simple even a caveman(ie. republican) can do it so he shouldn't be paid as much.

Holy cow you're a freakin moron.

His company has to charge more than the competition cause it costs his company more to make because of his guaranteed salary, guaranteed raise every year and guaranteed benefits til he dies. Then add to that nearly a million people with the same life vest that 80% of other workers don't have in this country (yet somehow they survive) and you get why it's happening.

You've never understood economics, operating costs or supply and demand. You waste perfectly good bandwidth everytime you post and perfectly good oxygen with each breath you take.

Yep...Union benefits and govt. mandated regulations are the reason they are not competitive. Our socialist friend loves both.

(02-21-2009 08:50 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(02-20-2009 10:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Saturn is a good car now. They just messed up in the Aurora era.

It was a good car, BUT a good business model turned bad. GM moved south to start a nonunion production facility with a nonunion southern workforce. In the end the bowed to UAW moved workers from Detroit at UAW scale a benefits making it an unprofitable line that could never turn the corner. The once again proof that Unions, the UAW specifically in this case KILL everything they touch.

BINGO ... WE HAVE THE WINNER ! ! !


I wonder what they will do with the Saturn plant in Spring Hill, TN ??? I still see, however very infrequently now, that semi going down the freeway with the Saturn label on the front side and the UAW thing on the back side. The kiss of death...UAW ! They deserve everything that happens to them.

Side note: I once had an Olds Diesel wagon. Drove the thing some 325,000 miles. Had an injector motor replaced once. Sure smoked on hard acceleration ! ! Used to do it just to aggravate some going up I-70 in the hogback of Golden, CO.

Have had many GM's over the years. All of them were very satisfactory. Ahhh, the memories.

I have a feeling that Tata Motors (India) will be buying either Saturn or Dodge Trucks.

Dodge Trucks would be a bargin coming out of a liquidating Chapter 11 Plan.

It will have to go Chapter 11 since you can dump retiree medical benefits under 11 USC 1114.

Chrysler will have to liquidate. GM has enough of a base to reorganize.

.

I will miss all those HUMMERS I used to get !!!!!!!

.

I'll be getting rid of my Hummer very soon. It's sad.

What I want to know is why the following fairly good brands aren't here:
- Renault
- Alfa Romeo
- Peugeuot
- Citroen
- Vauxhall
- Fiat

Or given the existence of Kia ... the following fairly crappy names:
- Daihatsu
- Skoda


I have never seen a dealership for any of the above ever. Of the above, I have only seen one Alfa Romeo ever.

Alfa Romeo had a suspension of direct services to the US for a while now. They start bringing them back in a year or so I think.

(02-22-2009 03:20 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I have never seen a dealership for any of the above ever. Of the above, I have only seen one Alfa Romeo ever.

There used to be an AR importer in Englewood Cliffs, NJ...I used to drive past it twice a day. I just checked AR's website and they seem to have left the USA completely. Too bad, they had nice cars.

(02-22-2009 09:48 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-22-2009 08:24 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-21-2009 02:00 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 12:50 PM)BGSUalum1987 Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 12:14 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  If car company "A" can build cars for X amount of dollars and another company can do it for less then that's proof car company "A" is over paying. Tell me, how much do you pay a guy to tighten lug nuts all day? Building a car is not skilled labor - management has engineered it so even a monkey or a democrat can do it.

Part 1 goes for any job. Part 2 is a bit mean-spirited, but, well, this is the Spin Room.

You know darn well that he would be VERY upset if someone told him he had to take a minimum 50% or more paycut and lose benefits because his company was charging more than the competition and that his job is so simple even a caveman(ie. republican) can do it so he shouldn't be paid as much.

Holy cow you're a freakin moron.

His company has to charge more than the competition cause it costs his company more to make because of his guaranteed salary, guaranteed raise every year and guaranteed benefits til he dies. Then add to that nearly a million people with the same life vest that 80% of other workers don't have in this country (yet somehow they survive) and you get why it's happening.

You've never understood economics, operating costs or supply and demand. You waste perfectly good bandwidth everytime you post and perfectly good oxygen with each breath you take.

Yep...Union benefits and govt. mandated regulations are the reason they are not competitive. Our socialist friend loves both.

So when do I become a communist? Morons.