TTQ B4U

Trey is a selling machine If I had Kirk's money, I'd have the RS7 for long trips and a P85D for local travels.

The reality is though cars today don't rust like they used to. Even looking in parking lot at my office, there are mid 90's cars there that don't have a spec of rust and are just typical daily drivers aka not cared for like we would care for ours. Headlights craze and fade and seats crack before rust seems to set in.

I'm not feeling the GTO conversion....not on this platform. Looks cartoonish. The above however, I think looks great.

I think most everyone has been there. Not sure if it changes with age/wisdom or just after kids enter the picture. The only time this really still pisses me off is if I clean the car and the weather shows rain for one freaking day. Usually the forecast updates as I'm drying it off and shows rain the day after That's when I keep it home and drive another car. Fuck mother nature at times.

I don't think the AWD will become sketchy. It will perform better than RWD or FWD in snow when driven responsibly. Nothing will save stupid. In terms of driving it in all weather......it's a freaking car. A Ford, not a summer only Lambo. Perhaps a generalization but the reality is if you buy a $40k+ car, and don't do so eating beans and rice, chances are there's no fucks given about weather related wear and tear.

I've not seen one in person. My gut tells me it will have a nicer interior though. Ford has stepped up in materials and design inside. Even the lessor focus models are pretty darn nice utilitarian daily drivers. Power and performance wise I think the RS will be a step or two up from the Evo's too. The main downside for me is that it's still a Ford. I really really enjoyed the Fusion Sport right up until about 40k when it started to have a few major issues. Tranny, Power Steering, Camshaft Phasers, etc. The interior looked amazing and brand new even at 70k miles though. In the end I LOL at any $40k Ford or main-stream GM. Buy 'em lightly used as they plummet in value.

I think the dual-clutch transmission is a great option. IMO the MR is a great car, but overpriced for todays market. 8 years ago, it was a different story. Today for that money there are better choices available. IMO they need more power, more sound deadening and nicer interior materials once you cross into that price range.

Thanks for all the feedback guys. I read through a lot, and am going to do the 77/95 trip. One of my labs is in Charlotte so I'm going to stop by and show the kids "how it's made" and grab some dinner with friends at a night fun spot. From there we'll head down to Jacksonville Beach for some ocean time. Then a short drive to Disney. I plan on doing the same thing in reverse on the way back Wish I could talk the wife into flying but she's never been a plane person. The times we've flown we had to drug her up pretty good.

Been down 75 south to Atlanta many times and that's one option. Little longer option at just under 15hrs. The other option is 77S to 95S through the Carolina's. It's only about 30 minutes shorter but not a route I've driven before. Which should we consider first? We'll be loaded up minivan dragging it's ass end. No fun involved.

Like this one? http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj84/crms3er/143643792.vMiJbmkd.xt29l8gj_zpso5fd9ezz.jpg

I'm getting that 17yr old engineering student to mount a 9mm on mine for just such instances :gabe:

josheph abboud has some nice designs and quality. I'd suggest getting a nice pair of lace ups for when you're more dress and slip-ons that work well in a dress environment and at night you can simply untuck the shirt, slip on some dress jeans and keep the same shoes.

I would think as the cops run your plates the notice of your tint would come up as permissible for you. Sorta like they know if you have CHL. Maybe I'm wrong I know I could get a note and still might so that I can simply go 35% up front. I thought I heard that the law might go to 35%? Again, I don't know for sure.

You said it yourself, a laser jammer is legal and not criminal to use but by using a legal device it's my integrity in question? I said it's a loophole but is it really? Good for you man. You stand up for your belief system. No different than anyone here really. I bet you even file to pay taxes on internet purchases made where it's not collected. Stand up dude. Relax man.....stop taking things so seriously...

So you don't feel that it in anyway is an obstruction of justice as a LEO goes about his duty serving and protecting us on the roads? So it's okay to do so simply because of some trivial loophole that still exists for the time being? Am I still not breaking the law by speeding, even if getting caught is prevented due to a loophole? So is my preventing being caught for taking out a drone flown by some dickhead that seems to think has the "right" to fly in my backyard, a self created loophole? I mean the proof is on him not me. Just like a cop has to prove I was breaking the speed limit...let' the games begin! You're right, I guess I'm going to continue having fun breaking the law on the road too.

Meh....we all have our quirks and odd beliefs. I actually don't mind the big brother cameras in NYC.

Different strokes for different folks. Now excuse me while I go test out my laser jammer to better my odds of not getting busted breaking the law on my drive home. :fa:

You know as well as I do that even in simple traffic stops you say little to nothing. Cops aren't there to "help" you.

can't say about the live streamed part. the one we use records on-board. I wouldn't really care, they'd have to prove they have me as the shooter or the one that destroyed it. In my case, I'd pop that fucker from a pretty hard to see spot. My pellet rifle is dialed in pretty tight too. Doubt I'd miss if they hovered for even a moment. Ask any beer can disguised as a squirrel in my area....oh wait, there are none. :gabe:

The one in the story I posted? Don't know, don't care. Again, he should have shot it, picked up the mess and moved on. Fuck talking to the four bastards in the truck. Let them prove their story. Why he did anything more is beyond me. Did they see him shoot it? Can they prove it was him that did? Did they have evidence? I'm sure there are details we don't have. Like most people, he got himself in more trouble by what he did after he took it down than he would have had he just STFU and went about his day.

I never said I wasn't into the coolness of them. I have some great video from one above our offices and labs I bought it but our IT Guy pilots it as he's good with them. What do the kiddies call it.....Rustling Jimmies?

Taking photos from public land is legal but you can't just walk into a random backyard and take photos of their house without permission as that's trespassing. The intent for what your doing it for will be taken into consideration too.

Seriously? You know as well as I do that calling the cops isn't going to do shit. Cops come out every single year for fireworks in the neighbor hood behind us around July 4 and for the weeks after. We see them most every time. Hasn't and won't stop a thing. Just like fireworks, calling them on a drone is just going to result in a conversation, a slap perhaps and no one changing anything. No different than a speeding ticket doesn't change anything here on this board. Correct. I really don't care why the drone is there. It's not a matter of I feel I'm threatened or my privacy is being breached, etc. It's not mine, I don't want it there I didn't give anyone permission to come into my backyard, etc. thus I will take it down as needed. I really don't it wrong. If I parked my car in your driveway you'd have it towed or if I put my lawnmower or wheel barrel in your shed or on the side of your house you'd take and dispose of it. Maybe you would call the cops. I won't waste the time. If I found a wheel barrel on the side of my house, it would be gone in a heartbeat and no fucks would be given. If you want to fly your personal property around, that's cool, just be sure you do it somewhere besides on my property...aka in my back yard. Pretty simple. I don't care what the "law" says. In fact the laws around this are too gray if they even exist anyway. Again, let's see if the owner 1/8th to 1/4mi away is going to be able to prove. If I lose, no fucks given, just like with a speeding ticket, I'll pay it....and I'll take it down every time.

for me it's not emotional at all. I don't have any emotional thought about what I would do to a drone hovering in my backyard peering into my home. I will take it down without one once of emotion, just a simple act of ridding my backyard of something I didn't place there. Kinda like the birdhouse that was there in the tree when we bought the place. It was ugly and I didn't want it. It's not even a matter of whether it's permissible to me. The owner is going to have to prove I destroyed their property and provide evidence for that to even begin to matter. An upset drone owner who's toy dropped out of the sky and is now missing can point at me all they want. Let's see what they can prove. In the end destruction of property isn't a big fucking deal. Regarding the guy in the story, I side with him and while I would have handled the matter differently, we all know he's not likely going to do time. So he fired bird shot in an area that says it's a crime. His lawyer will deal with it and I'm sure he won't regret doing it. He will probably just rethink how he did it and perhaps will learn what not to do and say next time. Believe me, I'm sure more than once there's been a gun fired in the suburbs of Columbus taking out a skunk, raccoon, etc. and no fucks were given.

Thus why I clearly noted that my points were in context to my argument. If we go back to the general arguments like the one in this article, we can debate if what he did was responsible. Again, don't know if this guy lives in a suburb or in an area where there are 2 acre lots. apparently we can assume he is not allowed to discharge a firearm in his area otherwise he wouldn't have been arrested for that. Although if it's a 2 acre lot I'd argue who gives a shit if he fired birdshot. I would argue the guy shouldn't have confronted the drone owner or engaged in any conversation with him or any of them about anything. Let them call the cops and prove what they claim happened actually did. Let the LEO responding or the individuals provide the evidence that a shot was fired taking down a drone. Otherwise, there's no compelling legal requirement to answer questions from anyone. If there's a bullet hole in my neighbors house, I might be compelled to answer a question, but if it's just that someone heard what they thought was a gunshot I'm not going to answer any questions until I'm arrested for a clearly crime that is proved to have happened and in the presence of my lawyer.