Geeto67

You know it's interesting...when these conversations come up people never talk about the designers themselves or their body of work. It's really interesting that all the iconic cars in history were designed by a handful of people. So here is some fun juxtaposition facts. The Guy who designed the 1970 and 1971 'Cuda also designed the 1970s-80's Chrysler K-series line and the first gen Chrysler Mini-vans (John Herlitz). The guy who designed the Challenger, 1966-67 Charger, and 1967 Dart (Carl Cameron) was heavily influenced by the 1949 Cadillac fastback. The designer for the 1963 Corvette (as well as the 1968 vette) was also the designer for the 1969-1970 Boss Mustang and the Jeep Grand Cherokee (Larry Shinoda). The designer who created the 1940's bullet nose Studebaker (Virgil Exner) also designed the first Chrysler 300, Most of Mopar's 1950's line (including Desoto) and the 1970's revival of the Stutz Bearcat. The 1948 Buck tooth Buick, 1959 Cadillac, 1953 Corvette were all the same design group under Harley Earl. Earl also introduced planned obsolence and "dynamic obsolence" (fashion) to the auto industry. the corvette was inspired by a jaguar xk120 roadster his wife owned. Bill Mitchell headed up the design team that designed the Corevtte Stingray (Larry Shinoda did the original design for both the mako shark show car and the production car as part of the team) the Corvair, the first and second generation Camaro/Firebird, the first and generation Buick Riviera (by combining Rolls Royce and Ferrari styling cues), and the downsized 1977 cadillac fleetwood. The guy who designed the Edsel (Roy Brown Jr.) also designed the Ford Cortina (in england), the second generation Econoline van, and the batmobile (Lincoln Futura). hopefully as you have been reading this you have been picturing some of these cars in your head and seeing how diverse and flexible some of these designers really were.

One thing I like to see on C5 vettes is the roof bar painted black: http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t60/jj2186/IMG_1957.jpg two tone body vettes just bring back bad memories of the C3 vettes. Something else to consider - Black is a bitch to keep nice. If you are painting it to hide blemishes then guess what, unless it is a full pro repaint the blem is going to show through the top color. If you want to hide some blems, just vinyl wrap it a lighter color, that way if you don't like it or it starts to look dated you can just take it off.

the thing about design....is it tends to move in generational cycles as well, and often can be influenced by the surroundings. Some cars are beautiful on their own and can stand alone, others only made sense when you imagine the car on a street with other finned, chrome laden land yachts. I remember when I was young being around all these old timers who grew up in the 40's and they always went gaga for late 1940's packards. These packards: http://www.artvalue.com/image.aspx?PHOTO_ID=2077147 I don't know about you but they aren't really that pleasing to me, but something about the time and place in their memory, the nostalgia, the tie in with wealth and prestige, and god knows what else made they all gooey for these ugly torpedoes. However when you look at one next to a similar year Cadillac...you can kind of see how the surroundings of the time might have made them more beautiful: Another car I think about more than it is healthy is the Phantom Corsair from 1938. I can never make up my mind as to whether this car is pretty or not. http://cdn.silodrome.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Phantom-Corsair.jpg If you don't know this car it has a fascinating history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_Corsair There are plenty of cars that also got prettier as time went on. The Chrysler Airflow used to be considered an ugly car by the greatest generation but now it looks pretty beautiful to most people into old cars. switching to the "ugly" side for a second a car that I think only ever looks good in it's era is a Ladawri Daytona. I mean look at this thing: http://www.race-cardrivers.com/Images/lft%20frt%20qtr%20w.jpg http://13252-presscdn-0-94.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/d-10.jpg but in the right setting: http://lh6.ggpht.com/_Tsf-t_mqSxc/TDVdlTWbrDI/AAAAAAAAeHI/yHKqcb2AE10/La%20Dawri%20Conquest%20_1961_01.jpg well it doesn't get prettier but it doesn't stand out as glaringly ugly as it normally is: http://www.motorsportsmarketingresources.com/assets/images/2015/03/14amelia-700.jpg

I went back and read the exclusions, and they are complicated and not worded as clearly as they could be. My understanding is that if you purchase after sept 2015, and you transfer title before participating in the settlement you are ineligible, however, if you buy it and decide to participate in the buyback before you transfer title you should be ok. seems strange I know: https://www.vwcourtsettlement.com/en/ from the settlement document itself (emphasis mine): the claims period ends sept 2018.

those look great!!!! BTW, how was your trip to Iron Pony? did you get to check out the SR400?

things just keep getting interesting with Dieselgate: http://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-hoarders-say-theyre-making-huge-profits-off-1791341120 So it seems like arbitrage is in full effect with these things. It's interesting that people can still buy used VWs and meet the requirements of the buy back.

http://detroit.craigslist.org/mcb/ctd/5973831518.html Is this one of those mexican mustang notch backs? or is this just a regular capri with a hatch that the picture hides so it looks like a notch back? Seems off but that may be because I am used to seeing capri's with the 1983+ bubble back.

I don't think you understand the nuance that goes into a judges opinion. Morality is the underlying basis for a lot of the laws we have, ours is a system based on "moral universalism" (a base system of ethics applies to all) but struggles with the concept of moral absolutism (things being clearly ethically right or wrong) in application. Part of the importance of a judges opinion is to settle what the laws mean in terms of their enforcement so there is a clear behavior that the law targets consistent with the other laws that already exist and does not harm the population at large. If you have ever taken any kind of advanced writing class you would have learned that there are millions of ways to write something that captures the overall the same spirit but changes small subtle details, and that it is also possible to write two things almost the same but have their meanings be completely different due to a small change or even just a change in context outside the actual words written. That's what the judge does with their opinion - they look at it and say these words mean this in this context, this is the behavior eh are trying to prevent, and these are the defenses or excuses This isn't just at the supreme court level, this is every court. In every trial there is both a determination of fact (did the event happen or not) and a determination of law (does the law apply to the events that can be proven). Take a parking ticket for example. Say you parked a a meter and got a ticket for the meter because it was expired, but the meter was broken because when you put money in it it did not change its status. So you decide to fight it in court. The statute itself doesn't say "unless the meter is broken" because most statues wouldn't say that be she it is too difficult to anticipate all the excuses as to why it would be ok to park at an expired meter. Let's assume you are able to get s jury trial - the jury would be tasked with figuring out if you were telling the truth about the meter being broken because there were no witnesses but yourself who saw you put money in. The jury would also receive instruction from the judge on how to read the facts as it applies to the statute via jury instruction so that they can render a determination of guilt. If the judge were a textualist he would instruct the jury to read it so it's on the face what the law says and if there no excuse explicitly written then if should not matter if the meter was broken. If the judge subscribed to the living document theory of law where things interpret in the context of the situation, he might instruct the jury to consider whether it is fair to hold you responsible for a violation in light of s broken meter. After the jury renders the verdict it becomes the judges responsibility to write his opinion supporting the verdict and creating precedent for future enforcement. From a moral aspect he might say the meters are there to give everyone a chance at parking in the city and prevent people from treating the street as their own private driveway, but it is also not moral to hold people financially responsible for meters they don't own or service. Or if he is a textualist he might say there is strict liability and a broken meter is no excuse. Understand?

I'm not thrilled but he could have done a lot worse. I generally don't like conservative orginalists or textualists because they tend to read it politically rather than morally and often use it to exclude rather than include. Orginalism is not an exclusively conservative idea it's just less popular among democrats because of the underlying philosophy that the laws should be read in the context of the time they are being applied. if you want to read good originalist opinions judge Hugo Black is a good place to start (read them in contrast with Scalia and you'll understand what a bad jurist Scalia really was). Thomas Jefferson and James Madison argued about this when they were drafting the constitution: Jefferson a proponent of it as a living document, and Madison fearful that the base intent of the document would be forgotten. So this isnt a new struggle. However, judges like Scalia and Thomas take it too far where as the Warren court is probably the best example of striking a reasonable balance. In Gorsuch he gets a pretty good legal scholar who isn't the gigantic frat house bag of dicks and roofies Scalia was. Plus since Gorsuch was a clerk to Kennedy I'm hopeful that Kennedy can pull him more mainstream.

That buick is awesome. 401 nailhead right?

Can we clear something up. We are not fighting against Islam. We are fighting a political ideaology that is a reaction to our practice of colonialism in countries that have a high Islamic population and an Islamic based government. The combatants don't just fight us they fight other muslims in their own country as well, so you can't draw the combatant line along religious boundaries. I know this may be a lot of big words for some of you but to put it more simply: in fighting the cold way with Russia we as a nation monkeyed around with their governments installing our own leaders or supporting really bad ones who would agree to be our allies. We completely fucked over their people and political systems for decades with little regard to the people of those countries well being. In their own country they use the "war on Islam" rhetoric as a recruitment tool. If you are advocating that it really is a war against a religion, congratulations you are literally helping them by providing evidence that the bigoted narrative is true, despite it actually being false in practice. If you are wondering why people call Trump a bigoted asshole it is because he chose to break tradition with his predecessors and condemn middle eastern muslims, further alienating what few allies we have in the region and at home as well. Also, you guys know no-go zones are a fiction right? I mean when even Fox News has to publically apologize to a country for unfairly characterizing the situation by using that term you would think people would accept it as bullshit...but here we are.

Because American citizens could never be people from those countries that emigrated decades ago or American born citizens descended from those legal immigrants who are home visiting family or conducting business, or just on vacation. :dumb:

That's awesome!!!

Honestly we don't know how Hammond saw it because we didn't cross post it anywhere. He might have been looking for something about Seeley motorcycles, which my buddy owns one, and found his article. I don't think there is anything wrong with the main feed or one of the more popular groups picking up something you wrote, but those people that post their links in your articles drive me batshit.

The content searching is really a pain. Basically, internally the only way you learn about something is cross posting from something you follow. They send you emails about interesting channels but they could easily end up in a spam folder. I found cross posting with facebook helped me recruit members pretty fast, but it's still hard to get visible. If you can get in the admin's feed though...you are golden. We had a huge bump in members when Hammond responded to something my friend wrote in the channel. Doc....think of it like a constantly disappointing phone book. You look up your friends and it's all the people you like having the conversations you never want to have with them. ever.

I don't know if you are asking austin directly (as in giving him a suggestion) or just generally but... A lot of the early adopters were the glossy magazine feature types, however it is entirely possible to write a tech article if someone wanted to. On my channel I did a quick and dirty how to for painting a helmet with rattle cans using the app (which sucks to post stuff from) so it is completely possible. Just not a lot of people doing it.

Just curious, what vintage toyota racing colors were you thinking? The only old toyota race car paint schemes I remember are the red/orange/yellow stripes over white (white is japan's racing color by the way) and the castrol colors for the celica rally cars. http://japanesenostalgiccar.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/JCCS2010-037_ToyotaCelica_Racing.jpg http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5533/9256366375_9b7ed452f6_z.jpg http://www.redrc.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/HPIDesertTrophy-2.jpg I know this isn't helping but I just dig old racing paint schemes on stuff.

I don't know that they get special treatment so much as they might game the system better than other mfgs (if someone has a cite or a link that shows a law that GM gets special treatment post it I would love to read it). Many states do not have to physically brand the title a lemon - it just becomes a notation in the DMV system. So if the car is "branded" a lemon in say NY and it doesn't show on the title - an Ohio office looking at the NY title for the purposes of reissuing might not realize it's a lemon and issue a clean title. Some states only require disclosure on first resale, so if you lemon the car in Pennsylvania (who also doesn't brand titles), the dealer in Penn who sells it as a used car has to tell you. But if it gets repo'ed and the dealer sells it a second time - they don't have to tell you.

Still angry about that? good. Your rage makes me smile. :masturboy: P.S. in order to prove what you are saying you would have prove that the quote was not in the public domain (meaning the copyright has lapsed on it). Good luck with that.

one suggestion I read was that it was the finance payment, indicating about a $90K retail price. If so, that's a pretty good deal for a car that will be more powerful than a hellcat.

yeah because violence always breaks out on an internet forum...:dumb: I stole it from facebook...I think...I didn't bother to look it up but remembered it as best I could. I'm confused by this....you think he's a buffoon? When you talk about presidents with broken moral compasses, Nixon and Trump seem to top that list. I guess it's not really 1968 all over again, the protests were way more violent back then. Both wars dragged on for years, cost the taxpayers a lot of money, and had slow protracted exits. This is a fact they both share and doesn't speak to combat conditions or insult in anyway those who served. Don't be such a precious little snowflake about it. The country is always divided and more than two ways. However what does ebb and flow is the level of public discourse and activism. We happen to be in a time period where it has been visible and vocal for a longer period of time than in the past. 100% agree that we are right now in the best position that we have been than any time in previous history. However, we are now faced with another leader who seems to have flexible morality and that it looks that some measures might be set back significantly. We will just have to wait and see. maybe it's just his constituency then. Not sure what you are saying here. Drugs have been a political issue since the 1930's. Heck, part of the reason Marijuana is illegal stems back to political attempts to ostracize Mexican immigrants following the Mexican revolution. It's called progress and there is no point in resting on our laurels just because we are better than we were in the past. We need to look forward at the room for improvement. Many of the problems I have with conservative philosophies is that they discount the problems regulation was often put in place to solve. having a president who is willing to repeal stuff just because he doesn't like it or because he is placating a constituency means we become exposed to those problems again. Nothing is "simple" when it comes to political issues, every one is a constant balancing act between harm and benefit. If you don't have a plan to account for those then you don't have a plan. LOL Or Bush the younger....Our last true military president was H.W. Bush and he was WWII. The Navy used to be the track to politics, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter and H.W. Bush were all Navy. That is some really great company. but I guess my point is when it comes to presidents who come to power on the back of fear mongering at least Nixon had discipline and the courtesy and decency to attempt keep his nasty prejudices private and not empower people with shared beliefs.

I wonder how many people will get that reference. Bravo, sir. Bravo. He really is our Richard Nixon and this is 1968 all over again. We have a waning foreign war (Vietnam then, Iraq/Afganistan now), A highly divided country over civil rights, A narcissistic president who continues to foster the notion that the educated are all liberals and therefore communists/socialists, an increasing cold war with Russia, a massive illegal drug epidemic....I mean its almost like we learned nothing in the last 50 years. On a positive note (and since this is a car forum) we have the second muscle car era in full swing wiht things like the Hellcat, the ZL1 and the GT350...so at least we got one of the good parts of the 1960's. Now if we could only get the free love and groovy music to come back. At least Nixon was in the Navy and cared about the environment.

I don't know about you but I get really motivated seeing a vagina, esp in real life! yeah yeah...rioting...blah blah blah.... Look, anywhere you get a really large crowd of people you get some of those people acting like dickheads. It doesn't matter if it is a Women's rights march, A new years eve celebration, a rock and roll show, a Klan rally, or a Black fucking Friday line outside walmart. People are animals and sometimes a few of those animals get cagey and do stupid violent things. To denounce what was largely a peaceful protest and try to undermine the message because of a tiny minority of people who weren't raised right and may not have been affiliated with anything at all (because some of them were anarchists....get it?) misses the point. If you think that violent rioting is an exclusively liberal phenomenon, and you live in a state where the Ohio National Guard Once murdered unarmed college students during a protest, then man I don't know what to tell you. We are all ghosts driving a meat covered skeleton chained to a rock by invisible forces that is hurling through space....shit gets crazy sometimes for us. All of us.

And I thank you for taking time from your busy day watching cuckold porn on redtube to bring awareness to the illiteracy problem plaguing Ohio's car culture. It's noble work you do.

I understand disliking tight crops, a lot of car magazines take it way too far. Here though I am not suggesting you change the frame of the picture at all...just park the car a little closer to the camera, and keep the whole scene. I don't think it would destroy your narrative at all as you will still have all the elements, and the only thing you give up is a little dead space of the wall and brick behind it. That's very good for natural light. A shop light and a piece of cardboard wrapped in tin foil as a reflector would work wonders for lighting the car.