By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I had a rather colorful youth and I don't need any surprises. :shades:
Happy Fathers Day to the male persuasion among us!
You guessed it!!!
:shades:
TagMan
I quote that from post 2557, this forum.
Neither do I like the S-Type grille. Yet I find the grille of the Wiesmanns is intermediate between the S-type and the Alpha Romeo grilles. More elegant than any of them, however. Have another look to the S-type and the Wiesmann to see what I mean
http://www.wiesmann-mf.com/egtstart.html http://www.jaguarusa.com/us/en/s-type/gallery/photography_8E581B1A-99BB-4FE7-899B-089CAA0FBEF6_378x624.jpg
I agree these Wiesmanns have similarities with rounded, classic Jaguars. But the Wiesmann rear end conveys much more muscle than those Jags. It resembles the rear end of a fine horse/mare (which is the gender of a car in English, still feminine?
Regards,
Jose
Pardon my ignorance, but I have never heard of them before.
Looks like the Wiesmann cab. goes for about $140,000.
If I remember correctly, LG was one of the luckiest guys to own a classic Austin Healey when he was younger. I'll bet he wishes he still had that car as a collectors car.
BTW, do you agree with me that the center 7-gauge arrangement is awesome?
Thanks again.
TagMan
My 3000MkII was a great car to have in the '70s, it was not only quick in a straight line, but could go 'round corners as well. The tri-carb Healeys like mine are the enthusiast favorite, but the later MkIII BJ-8 Healeys are the most valuable. I think today mine might be worth maybe $40K.
While there was charm to its crudeness, and it had a starter button that is currently all the rage, (though I don't think we'll be seeing choke pulls again) I don't miss the bolt-on windows, or the 20-minute soft top (the hardtop required at least 2 people and maybe an hour). I wouldn't trade my XK for one. There just aren't enough opportunities to have fun on today's roads to make the double-clutch four-speed worth putting up with.
This '61 is a dead ringer for mine, it just lacks the original steering wheel.
Tagman, I fully agree with you. That center 7-gauge arrangement is awsome.
Jose
Back in 1991 I was in England. I borrowed a white Sunbeam Alpine from a friendly colleague. I went for a promising Sunday driving and I caught a big shower. I ended soaked, and quite ashamed when I gave the likely soaked car back to her owner.
Jose
Regards,
Jose
TagMan
Now if only LG would get that vintage vehicle away from the front of Casa Hpowders!
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Another time I could tell you a (cast) story about me, the owner, the Sunbeam and the Traffic Police in the midsty and freezing Oxfordshire night after that year Christmas Party.
Regards,
Jose
I found a nice pic of your 1967 Sunbeam Series V with Google. If I knew how, I would post a link. At some point around that time a company made a car that looked a lot like that and it could run on land or sea. I think it was made by Sunbeam but I am not sure. I think it was featured in a James Bond movie once. Anyone have pics?
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
As I said, I only drove that car occasionally. She belonged to a female colleague from the same Oxford University Department at which I was staying for a long while. (We made a good friendship, but we did not intimate. :confuse: My wife was also a visitor to other University Department there :P .)
I think I have kept some slides of that Sunbeam Alpine Series V, yet they are sank in a closet I have to arrange one of these years. After reading your post, I went to the web to look for pictures of similar cars. I post one of them below. (BTW, I have to thank LG for the cue he has posted to get web pictures straight in the posts. It does not work always for me, however. I cannot see the Img button in the message window; may be is it because I use an Apple Macintosh? :mad: )
http://www.gbclassiccars.co.uk/images/sunbeam_alpine_s5.jpg
Here there are also a couple of informative links about the car.
http://www.gbclassiccars.co.uk/sunbeam_alpine.html
http://www.rootes1725cc.info/alpine/index.htm
The item I drove was white. I had always thought that car was a "Series V" of 1964. Yet in one of the links I have read the production of the "Series V" started on 1965. I still have strong confidence in my brains, but At any event, the car was nice to drive, although I never pull her to her cornering limits on the narrow, unshouldered UK roads.
I am not sure, but was not Smart, the dumb agent of the TV series, who drove an amphibious Sunbeam?
I have to go now to the dental doctor. I left the misty, freezing night story for better occasion.
Regards,
Jose
Mercedes Dealer confronted by customer
Imagine if it was a Ferrari dealership. $$$$ :sick:
TagMan
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I must say, it sure makes a good, trustworthy private mechanic look like a very good alternative.
Hey... maybe Mercedes' poor reliability rating is partially due to service department fraud!! :surprise:
TagMan
Exclusive Spy Video: 2009 Lexus LF-A
Seems way too 'Japanese sports car' to be a $100k+ ego-ride.
Seems way too 'Japanese sports car' to be a $100k+ ego-ride.
I agree. I'll keep my Carrera S.
TagMan
By the way, it is a "Japanese sports car" you know...
:P
Exactly.
This is why, if I end up with a BMW, it'll go to independent shops for everything but warranty work.
I guess I could define my gripe a little better, it looks a little too narrow and does not seem to say super car to me. Of course judging it based on a somewhat disguised spy video is a little premature.
For the record, I am a fan of Lexus' design motif. The LS is a beautiful car that manages to look dynamic (whether or not it is) and 'stately' simultaneously.
Take Ford for example: Yes, they have gas-sippers like the Escape Hybrid, the 4-cyl. Fusion and Focus. But the Five-Hundred(err Taurus redux) gets a paltry 16mpg City against '08 standards of testing. And don't let me get on the trucks. The Expedition and F-150 has the lowest power ratings of their respective classes, yet they return the poorest fuel econ of 12mpg each. The Ford Mustang GT does have a hunking V8 and is great fun, but a quicker still BMW 335iC returns almost 30 mpg, a big leap.
GM is not with exception: They too have their work cut out for them, but to a lesser extent. You want to know why they've held on to those ancient 4L60 4-speed transmissions for 3 decades? Because the broad gearing of these dinosaurs enable the engines to run at much reduced engine speed, thus conserving fuel, especially at hwy speeds, where the 200 inch long Impala returns 32 mpg.
And Chrysler: Well, it's worth noting such advances as MDS and new 6-speed autoboxes, but there is still much to be desired. Although the Ram is due to be redesigned soon, the current one is not the best choice in fuel economy in it's class, although the bigger 345hp 5.7L HEMI returns better mileage than the smaller 300hp, 5.4L Ford engine, but GM trucks are best overall.
So it's safe to say the domestics have their work cut out for them, but what about import brands?
Toyota, for sure, is the leading pioneer right now in technologies for better fuel econonmy. Cars like the Toyota Prius, Hybrid Highlander, 40mpg Corolla manual, 40mpg Camry Hybrid, and the excellent Scion brand cars are for sure putting them in the captain's seat.
But the 4-Runner, Tundra, and Sequoia are just as bad as the Explorer/JGC/TrailBlazer, F-150/Silverado, and Tahoe/Expedition.
And the luxury liners are definitely going to have to get better. I know the average buyer that can afford a LS460, A8, 750i, or S550 could give two hoots about fuel economy. But wouldn't it be great if you could get 30 mpg hwy and 400hp? Not likely very soon, but a very real possibility. And it's not all about transmissions, variable cam phasing, and compression ratio as witnessed by the not-that-impressive 19 mpg of the LS460. Some of these rides are just down right heavy.
This all may sound very liberal of me, but why not come up with better ways to make vehicles more fuel efficient and have all the goodies at the same time?
What do you fellas think?
M6 is a car that is derived from a family car platform, the 5 series. I'd be mighty upset if I get something like that after spending $100k+.
The LF-A prototype has the clean trim of an exotic sportscar, like the Ferrari's. For what it's worth, both Celica and Eclipse have the trim looks of purpose-built sports cars, they just lack the muscle under the hood to match their looks. BMW on the other hand have a tradition of building sports-sedans, i.e. cars that supposedly deliver performance in spades despite their normal sedan looks. So matching a BMW in looks (as opposed to in performance) is the last thing that any exotic sportscar designer wants to do.
IMHO, if the new standard does not get relaxed by 2015 or 2020, more and more carmakers will follow in BMW's steps: pay up for the fines and forget about meeting them. It just becomes another tax on motorists. I think all that grand standing for 35mpg is just political theater . . . like the zero-emission requirement that CARB had in the early 90's.
- Simple engine technology such as direct injection, dynamic cylinder management, etc.
- more efficient hybrids, plug-in hybrids and diesel hybrids,
- upcoming mini-sized models, and popular smaller SUVs,
- lots more of our beloved diesels,
- new upcoming alternatives,
- the nation's rental fleets being tweaked more towards hybrids and smaller fuel-efficient cars, and
- major technological developments...
will all together bring the CAFE up to 35 mpg easily enough.
Hybrids and diesels alone would have a HUGE impact!!
Relax!!! There is no problem... just the auto makers looking for the path of least resistance, as usual.
Afterall, CAFE is an AVERAGE. For every 60 mpg hybrid, there can be a 10 mpg gas hog!
IMHO.
TagMan
I find it more interesting that BMW is one of only a few manufacturers that actually gets near or above the posted EPA mileage figures.
BMW also is one of the very few (if not only) carmaker, ouside the exotics, that have decided upon a strategy of to hell with CAFE requirement (BMW pays CAFE fines every year) . . . that IMHO is a wise decision given its own marketing theme, and one that more and more carmakers will follow if CAFE standards become unrealistic.
Neither of the two BMW's that I owned previously managed the published EPA figures.
Even with the dizzying array of all of the breakthrough technology that was named, the automakers, especially domestic, will be hard pressed to meet that AVERAGE.
Ford: with over 900k F-Series trucks sold, and with an avg. fuel econonmy of maybe 17mpg on a good day, Ford will have to sell twice as many Fusions and Focus' than Toyota sells Camry's and Corollas just to even get to the "mandated" 35mpg figure. Not even a remote possibility in Ford's current state of operation. (hint: Clean Diesel)
Brightness brought a good point about the automakers just taking the "hit" and paying the fine. Well, now more than ever, with automakers watching their bottomline and in sight of the ever harder to get profit/marketshare gain margin and factoring in that the fines will in effect quadruple by the time 2015 rolls around, it looks like investing in more technologies is a better fit.(hint: Clean Diesel)
It can be done with some of the current technology that is available. Your current Porsche Carrera gets excellent mileage for a performance car, any car for that matter that puts out over 300hp. The same with my Z06. At 28mpg, one has to wonder how this is able to happen with a 7.0L V-8 under the hood squirting out 505-hp in a 3500 pound car. Neither of these cars are "light" by any stretch of the imagination.
But OTOH, with the acceptance of our favorite "clean" diesels, automakers are finally able to cope with tough restrictions and regs. What the Europeans did with the BIN5/Tier 1, they cranked out more diesels than ever before. VW sells 10 TDI Jetta's for every one 2.5L gas-powered globally. GM is already tapping Isuzu-Duramax to build a light duty diesel for the next-gen RWD cars and crossover SUV's. A 4.5L V-6 Duramax TD in a GMC Acadia sounds more like it, doesn't it? Ford's on/off deal with Navistar to get small, clean, efficient diesels really needs a quick jolt into being a reality. And thanks Chrysler Holdings, formerly DCX, for making some of the MBZ super-modern diesels available in some of your models.
As usual, you know I appreciate your expert facts and opinions. But I brought this topic up because I think it is very important to know what role our country will play in helping make an impact on the energy crisis that's being felt globally. We can tout around all day about us being the number one car market. But that's all the more reason for us to be the pioneering market that sets the precedent for all others to follow. It only makes more sense that way.
To counter these large vehicles, we are hearing more and more about A-Class and B-Class vehicles, and 1-Series vehicles, and micro cars, and these will get outstanding mpg. As I showed, if a 60 mpg can be countered with a 10 mpg gas hog, then there is little to worry about.
The trucks will easily be rated in the low to mid twenties, and the sedans will be in the 20's to 40's. The mid sizes will get 30's to 40's and the small compacts will be in the 40's to 60's, leaving the micros and hybrids to easily get 50's to 80's, and even 90's.
As I recall, the new E-Class BlueTec averaged very close to 35 mpg in its recent China run. It's no lightweight, and it didn't need to pollute the air to do it.
It WILL all work out. You are doing an excellent job, however, of injecting a little life back in this forum, which has been on vacation of late.
BTW, your vette's mileage is quite outstanding, IMO, for that much HP!!
TagMan
Amen. I didn't want to skim over those important words you posted. We should set the example to the world.
We are the greatest country to ever exist. This isn't a time for American corporations to be whining like a bunch of babies. It is a time to rise to the occassion!
If a 35 mpg CAFE is what is takes in 7 - 8 years time, then America should be up to the task...
Failure is not an option!!
TagMan
The original CAFE requirements increased the vehicle fleet mpg albeit with many loop-holes.
Gas taxes in Europe pushed the 'market' to develop more gas efficient diesels.
The 'totalitarian mindset' created NASA with all the technological advances that has brought out.
The 'market' is not some magic panacea that solves all problems by itself. Left alone free market economics tends towards consolidation and ultimately no competition as big players buy up smaller players and control the means of production.
Without the impact of government we would have no national parks, every mountain in Pennsylvania would be topped and strip-mined, we would never had gone to the moon and on and on.
In the case of the new CAFE rules, if the manufacturers would actually take on the problem they would get closer to solving it. The requirement is for a 30% improvement over 13 years. Clean diesel in a variety of vehicles does that within 3, there is already a market trend towards smaller SUVs (Honda CRV now the best-selling SUV), the surge in small car sales....
It is ironic that the struggles of the U.S. big 2.5 in the last few years has been because they did not forecast gas prices rising and are left with trucks and SUVs on the lot while the manufacturers who continued with development in high-mileage vehicles reaped the benefit of producing good, reliable, higher mileage vehicles.
Sure, let the market do its thing. But the market should expect to do its thing at an average of 35mpg.
Alternatively we can just plan to spend the foreseeable future dependant on Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.
1. It's commonly repeated that NASA invented plastics; not true at all, Henry Ford was making plastic interior parts for his cars back in the 1920's;
2. It's commonly repeated that NASA invented nylon; again not true at all. Nylon, invented by DuPont, was already a popular consumer item as early as the 1920's.
What NASA has done is a huge waste of money and time. Space exploration would probably have proceeded much further along if not for NASA's government program driving all private investment in space into the ground. The settlement of the Americas took only three decades after Columbus' initial discovery. The government monopoly/non-recognition of private property in both space and Antarctica have placed both new frontiers in deep freeze for well over 50 years. The risk and casulty rate for exploring space and antarctica today is much lower than the risk and casulty rate for explorign the new world five hundred years ago.
Now back to fuel economy and CAFE. What the European "push" has done is forcing their citizenry to sniff particulates and suffer lung cancer for decades when they did not have to . . . especially in oil exporting countries like the UK. Why? just so that the government officials could get their "choicest lamb" (tax revenue) to spread among their own cronies.
Your own example regarding small cars' recent rise in popularity shows that the market place can economize quite well when a particular resource is truely in temporary supply shortage. All that political grandstanding and chauffering around in big stretch limos from meeting to meeting is quite unnecessary.
Market should not do any thing in particular just because you or I as single individuals think it should do, or any government official or small collection of individuals think it should do. Market is a place where every single participant vote every minute on how to allocate resources efficiently. Is 35mpg the most important issue bar none? Nope, individuals can calculate for him/herself quite well whether safety, space and performance is worth a few mpg reduction. Nothing is free lunch . . . every endeavor has its consequences, at least in terms of what other priorities are put on the back burner.
Alternatively we can just plan to spend the foreseeable future dependant on Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.
1. We import oil not because there isn't enough under our ground, but because it's cheaper to import than to produce domesticly. It's no different from importing cars and shutting down domestic plants at the same time.
2. Therefore, the lower the oil price in real terms (compared to what it would be if demand did not slow down), the higher the per centage of import will be . . . because the high cost domestic product gets shut down first.
3. The good news is that, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela all have to export oil whether they like us or not. Even Khomeini's everything-west-hating regime persisted in exporting oil to the west.
I thought it was because GM doesn't like to spend money on "new-fangled" technology. Wouldn't broad gearing make the engine revs go up rather than down? How can you cruise at 80mph at 2000rpm if you've only got four gears? The wife's old RX300 with its four-speed was into the 3500rpm range at just 75mph.
Space exploration would probably have proceeded much further along if not for NASA's government program driving all private investment in space into the ground. I guess I don't understand how a government program impacts private investment. Literally, how does investment get 'driven into the ground'? Investment is resources towards a goal, private investment is just now working towards the goal. Fortunately the risk has already been proven, paving the way for private interest.
The settlement of the Americas took only three decades after Columbus initial discovery' I am unclear on relevance, I will simply assume that you understand that the settlement of the United States was first managed by the native Americans and then by European monarchs- they were hardly the 'market'. The idea that this country was founded by those escaping religious persecution is a very small part of the total story which was more about power struggles in Europe.
1. We import oil not because there isn't enough under our ground, but because it's cheaper to import than to produce domestically. It's no different from importing cars and shutting down domestic plants at the same time.
Hmmm. 3/4 of the worlds oil resources are in the middle east. We do not have enough under our own ground to last past 2008.
As long as we continue to have an approach to oil consumption that pays no heed to conservation, we are hostage to those who have most of the resource. That is absolutely the market at work, supply and demand.
TagMan
Here is a link to additional information which still suggests to me that the pic I posted may not have been the HWA car, as I suggested at the time.
Take a look and tell me what you think about this.
link title
TagMan
Obviously, the front and rear lights are a big change.
TagMan
Regards,
Jose
I'm not sure, as these spy shots are a test mule with the current SL body on top. The AN report indicated that HWA was doing this car, though they have certainly been wrong before (Remember "Is GM buying Ford!?"). In any case, it will be interesting to see how M-B is able to adapt the SL, a heavy GT cruiser, into a 911 fighting sports car. Mercedes does big and loud very well, but lightness and handling finesse, not so much.
Is it just me, or is there a lot of Lexus, more specifically GS and LS, in this design?
Front: GS
Rear: LS
Right?
It's kind of funny that Lexus ripped E-class' dual-round headlight design, implemented into the last gen GS, Modified it and made it sleeker with the current gen GS, and MB took that design right back to put it on its new E-class.
So, whatever goes around, comes around...