It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
- Last Active
I thought they were really handsome as well, but unfortunately, they had a bit of a "corporate" look to them...>
Your recollection of details is remarkable, andre. You're the unchallenged collector Mopar guru on these discussions.
@texases said: Hmm...at least he has the dash, but I can't put 'ultimate MB' and 'velour seats' together.
Improbable as it may seem now, it's likely that velour, or some other textile material, will make a come-back. Once leather becomes not only common, but old, interior designers of luxury vehicles will want to promote a new, high-end textile material to differentiate their product. It's more a question of when than whether, in my opinion. Chances are it'll be called something other than velour, to convey newness, and to justify a premium price. Nothing stays the same forever.
@fintail said: Maybe he means 200 4-speed models? Cool that the car is local, and has year of manufacture dealer plates.
Speaking of Pintos, my paternal grandmother had one when I was little. I vaguely remember it - a hatchback model, I think with the large glass window. She'd later have multiple Cavaliers. In the late 80s, my dad somehow got an urge to buy a Pinto "Cruisin Wagon", and at the time, there were still a few around, I remember looking at them with him. I think my mother objected to it, and that was that.
I'd forgotten about the "Cruisin Wagon" until you mentioned it. It was a cool vehicle. I'm trying to imagine how a 2015 Focus variant of that would look. I'm thinking that if it were done right, it might draw a lot of attention to the Ford brand, even with limited sales. Maybe Ford should have done it with the previous generation Focus, when they offered a wagon version.
@MrShift@Edmunds said: Without a comprehensive service network, Tesla's plan is toast, IMO. Electric cars need service and maintenance just like any other car---and warranty claims, etc. So either Tesla funds all the dealers out of their own money (and I don't think they have enough to do that), or they'll have to authorize franchises. @MrShift@Edmunds said: Without a comprehensive service network, Tesla's plan is toast, IMO. Electric cars need service and maintenance just like any other car---and warranty claims, etc. So either Tesla funds all the dealers out of their own money (and I don't think they have enough to do that), or they'll have to authorize franchises.
The issue is whether a car company should have the legal right to choose its distribution model, not whether distributing through a traditional authorized dealer network is a wise business decision.
New Jersey joined Arizona, Colorado, Virginia and Texas in banning the direct sale of Tesla cars. I think this is just plain wrong. I don't think it's the government's role to decide how companies distribute their products. There may be exceptions that I can't think of at the moment, where safety is an issue, but this law doesn't protect the consumer. On the contrary. This is a case where the state has permitted the dealer lobby to protect its interests, at the expense of its constituents and fair business practices.
I know that money talks, and that this kind of thing happens all the time, but that doesn't make it right.