: Are Mercedes C class cars really ......?



orconn
10-25-10, 04:13 PM
Are Mercedes C Class cars really as terrible quality wise as some members here claim? Or are they just what you get for $35-40,000 in today's market. I recently was riding in my son's BMW 3 series sedan, and because I had recently been riding in a fried's C Class sedan I took special not of the interior appointments and compared both cars. I really couldn't see much difference in the quality of materials, nor the quality of assembly. They were both decent but certainly nothing the write home about. About on a par with the 2000 Catera we leased back then, certainly not what I would call "luxury" appointments in todays marketplace. What do you think?

Lord Cadillac
10-25-10, 04:26 PM
I don't find the BMW 3-Series luxurious at all. The quality of the materials is 100%, however. I haven't spent a lot of time in a C-Class but I came away unimpressed. I think interior design in both cars is subpar - especially in the BMW.

Stingroo
10-25-10, 05:21 PM
Sal don't you own a 3-series?

>_>

ryannel2003
10-25-10, 05:31 PM
I find the quality of both Mercedes latest C and E classes to be below par on what is offered in today's market. The latest CTS is a much nicer car inside than the Mercedes offerings, and the material quality is right on par if not higher than Mercedes and BMW's offerings. The CTS also beats the German's in interior design, where I think CTS reigns supreme in the class.

ben.gators
10-25-10, 07:32 PM
Well, C class= Cheap class!

Lord Cadillac
10-25-10, 11:27 PM
I don't want to sound like Mr. Knowitall but while you may feel the current CTS has either on par or higher quality than Mercedes or BMW offerings, you are incorrect. The CTS has, in my own opinion, a MUCH nicer design. However, these are only opinions. Quality, while not far behind, is not on par.


I find the quality of both Mercedes latest C and E classes to be below par on what is offered in today's market. The latest CTS is a much nicer car inside than the Mercedes offerings, and the material quality is right on par if not higher than Mercedes and BMW's offerings. The CTS also beats the German's in interior design, where I think CTS reigns supreme in the class.

Jesda
10-25-10, 11:51 PM
The current C-class has a lot of cheap, hard surfaces. Its most apparent at an auto show where you get in and out of several cars in a short period of time. This is why I believe an entry-luxury car, if its going to be smaller and cheaper, ought to at least be sporty. The C-class isn't as athletic as the BMW and offers nothing else to justify its asking price, unless you're loyal to the tri-star badge for some reason.

Neither of them feel really expensive inside, but the 3-series seems more livable and has a more pleasing, flowing dashboard and center stack.

gdwriter
10-26-10, 12:12 AM
I was thoroughly unimpressed with the C-Class I saw at the Chicago Auto Show this year. It didn't look like a luxury car — certainly not worthy of the vaunted 3-pointed star — even for an entry-level Benz. The steering wheel in particular was particularly ugly and cheap looking.

The 3-Series appears to use high quality materials, but I thought the leather felt very coarse and stiff (the 5-Series was the same way; you have to shell out for a 7-Series to get buttery soft, smooth leather like what's in the CTS). I also much prefer how the nav system slides down unobtrusively into the dash when not in use rather than having the fixed bulged in the middle of the dash on the 3-Series and C-Class.

ryannel2003
10-26-10, 12:24 AM
I don't want to sound like Mr. Knowitall but while you may feel the current CTS has either on par or higher quality than Mercedes or BMW offerings, you are incorrect. The CTS has, in my own opinion, a MUCH nicer design. However, these are only opinions. Quality, while not far behind, is not on par.

Mercedes sell on the 3-pointed star on the hood these days... not quality or design. The quality of the latest C-Class is unimpressive... as it was on the last generation. The BMW had nicer materials, but nothing that stands out. I've driven a dozen or so 2nd Gen CTS's, and they are all a nicer place to be than the current C and 3. I find the materials to be as high or even higher of a quality as the C-Class, and nearly as nice as the 3-Series. Both cars are extremely overrated because of the badges, especially the Mercedes. The 3 gets more points in my book because it is an extremely involving, beautiful sports sedan.

hueterm
10-26-10, 12:34 AM
The last C that mattered...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1999-MERCEDES-BENZ-C43-AMG-LOW-MILES-RARE-/380278002161?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item588a55d1f1

ben.gators
10-26-10, 01:24 AM
I don't want to sound like Mr. Knowitall but while you may feel the current CTS has either on par or higher quality than Mercedes or BMW offerings, you are incorrect. The CTS has, in my own opinion, a MUCH nicer design. However, these are only opinions. Quality, while not far behind, is not on par.

Yes, you are 100% correct about CTS. Take a look to a base model CTS! Interior is really boring and cheap looking... There is no way I can call it a luxury or even near to luxury car. That is a big myth that people say: "Well, spend more and buy a full option car" or "you get what you pay"... That is totally wrong in my opinion when it comes to a luxury or near to luxury car maker, like Cadillac! If you want to evaluate a car you need to go and evaluate the base model. A good car should still be good in its base level too... I really feel sorry for Cadillac when I see that interior of my 12 year old STS is much nicer, luxurious and elegant than interior of a brand new base CTS or STS....

blue07cts
10-26-10, 02:01 AM
Having owned an 07 cts and an 08 I can say that th latest CTS has possibly the best GM interior of late, it does however develop above average leves of squeaks and rattles however, my CTS had 45k on it when i got rid of it and it had WAY more squeaks,rattles (damn ultra view) and overall interior parts failures (lumbar support coming apart and knocking the sat back off for instance) than my moms A4 (witch by the way has been insanely reliable after 84 miles)the way I look at cars is, German cars are put together better but are obscenely more exspensive to repair when they DO have issues, american cars have less mechanical failures however all the details are where your headaches come from however it makes up for this by relatively low repair costs (and of course there are exceptions to this rule) so it's really a matter of "picking your poison"

Aron9000
10-26-10, 02:38 AM
Yeah, I can't stand the current or last gen C-class. Uber cheap interiors, tight back seats, boring to drive. Personally I think the 3 series optioned with the wood trim is a beautiful place to spend time, not so fond of the aluminum trim in some of them.

The 90's W202 has really grown on me in recent years. At first I didn't care for the "hey the shrunk my S-class" styling, but it is really clean and very formal. Interior appoinments feel WAY more upscale than the past two generations.

http://www.autoevolution.com/images/gallery/medium/MERCEDESBENZ190-W201--medium-936_2.jpg

Although nothing compares to old school 80's W201, or 190E. Those things are a little German mini tank, love the real solid thunk of the doors when you close them. Once again I feel the interior appointments are a definite cut above the last two generations in terms of quality. If you were to give me a brand new C-class or a really nice 190E, I'd take the old model any day of the week.

Playdrv4me
10-26-10, 04:30 AM
The C Class was born from the 190E of the 1980s, which began as a budget class Mercedes. In the mid-1990s the C Class was further cheapened after Mercedes decided to investigate the production efficiencies of the Japanese, and attempt to emulate them. While the 3 Series can't really be considered luxurious, it is certainly better assembled and with higher quality materials than the C ever was. At least, up until the E46 anyway. There are a few videos on Youtube showing E9x BMW interior components literally cracking or falling apart. While I'm certain this isn't the case in all of them, its obvious some quality has decreased even in the 3 Series interior.

Lord Cadillac
10-26-10, 01:07 PM
The 3-Series appears to use high quality materials, but I thought the leather felt very coarse and stiff (the 5-Series was the same way; you have to shell out for a 7-Series to get buttery soft, smooth leather like what's in the CTS). I also much prefer how the nav system slides down unobtrusively into the dash when not in use rather than having the fixed bulged in the middle of the dash on the 3-Series and C-Class.

The 3-Series is boring as hell inside - but quality/materials is high. With the 7-Series, you still get that same hard leather unless you order the "Individual" package. That's the soft leather...


Mercedes sell on the 3-pointed star on the hood these days... not quality or design. The quality of the latest C-Class is unimpressive... as it was on the last generation. The BMW had nicer materials, but nothing that stands out. I've driven a dozen or so 2nd Gen CTS's, and they are all a nicer place to be than the current C and 3. I find the materials to be as high or even higher of a quality as the C-Class, and nearly as nice as the 3-Series. Both cars are extremely overrated because of the badges, especially the Mercedes. The 3 gets more points in my book because it is an extremely involving, beautiful sports sedan.

I usually like updated appearances but I prefer the older C-Class as well (pictured below). They were much more classy looking. As for the CTS, to me, it's definitely the better place to be while inside. Even though the quality is not as high as the 3-Series, I prefer it. It's just a nicer place to be. If the quality is high enough to have people thinking it's better than the C-Class, than that's great..


Yeah, I can't stand the current or last gen C-class. Uber cheap interiors, tight back seats, boring to drive. Personally I think the 3 series optioned with the wood trim is a beautiful place to spend time, not so fond of the aluminum trim in some of them.

The 90's W202 has really grown on me in recent years. At first I didn't care for the "hey the shrunk my S-class" styling, but it is really clean and very formal. Interior appoinments feel WAY more upscale than the past two generations.

http://www.autoevolution.com/images/gallery/medium/MERCEDESBENZ190-W201--medium-936_2.jpg

It's not as easy to notice with the new models but they do still resemble the S-Class.

ben.gators
10-26-10, 05:10 PM
Having owned an 07 cts and an 08 I can say that th latest CTS has possibly the best GM interior of late, it does however develop above average leves of squeaks and rattles however, my CTS had 45k on it when i got rid of it and it had WAY more squeaks,rattles (damn ultra view) and overall interior parts failures (lumbar support coming apart and knocking the sat back off for instance) than my moms A4 (witch by the way has been insanely reliable after 84 miles)the way I look at cars is, German cars are put together better but are obscenely more exspensive to repair when they DO have issues, american cars have less mechanical failures however all the details are where your headaches come from however it makes up for this by relatively low repair costs (and of course there are exceptions to this rule) so it's really a matter of "picking your poison"

Well, there are some improvements in interior design of 2008 and newer CTSs, but the the base model of older CTSs is a big disappointment. Seriously, is this a Luxury or near to luxury car?

http://cdn.motosnap.com/AP/3522-2-5656734-15554130-0-0/15554130.jpg

http://images.v12soft.com/photos/noGJMSZ/533401/an16B_800600.jpg

Lord Cadillac
10-26-10, 05:34 PM
That's when Cadillac and GM were making Fisher Price baby interiors. Look at this one...

http://image.sporttruck.com/f/9149354+w750+st0/p146994_large+2002_Cadillac_Escalade+Interior_View .jpg

THAT'S luxury?! Are you F'ing SERIOUS?! It's a good thing that SUV had a sickly awesome exterior. It made up for the Lego visual experience you got from the inside.

But that's the real old GM. All of GMs new vehicles have very impressive designs..

Playdrv4me
10-27-10, 04:13 AM
That's when Cadillac and GM were making Fisher Price baby interiors. Look at this one...

http://image.sporttruck.com/f/9149354+w750+st0/p146994_large+2002_Cadillac_Escalade+Interior_View .jpg

THAT'S luxury?! Are you F'ing SERIOUS?! It's a good thing that SUV had a sickly awesome exterior. It made up for the Lego visual experience you got from the inside.

But that's the real old GM. All of GMs new vehicles have very impressive designs..

At first glance it would certainly seem that way. However I have to say that while the current Escalade has a more pleasing and appropriate design, the materials quality in the 2003-2006 was superb (2002 had that terrible steering wheel). It is difficult to explain, but when you pressed on or grabbed parts and pieces in that prior-gen Escalade interior, they felt as if there was substance to the part, EVEN if it was not soft to the touch. By contrast, the current Escalade looks good from 5 feet, but everything has that feel of an empty facade when you press on it. The leather was also nicer on the prior gen.

Aron9000
10-27-10, 04:36 AM
At first glance it would certainly seem that way. However I have to say that while the current Escalade has a more pleasing and appropriate design, the materials quality in the 2003-2006 was superb (2002 had that terrible steering wheel). It is difficult to explain, but when you pressed on or grabbed parts and pieces in that prior-gen Escalade interior, they felt as if there was substance to the part, EVEN if it was not soft to the touch. By contrast, the current Escalade looks good from 5 feet, but everything has that feel of an empty facade when you press on it. The leather was also nicer on the prior gen.

See I disagree completely with that assesment. 03-06 window buttons felt really cheap like they were going to break, after time the paint on various buttons wears off making the button clear and lets the backlight shine through it, and the center armrest sqeuaks when you put your arm on it.

The leather also wore like hell, especially the light beige leather. Something about that color and dye made every crease discolor from the rest of the leather. I saw seats on two year old Escalades that looked worse than the leather in 15-20 year old Benzes with 200k+ miles on them.

Anyways, the current CTS and Escalade interiors look 100x better than their predecessors, and the quality is better as well. I agree that there are cheap bits that still need improvement, but they do make you feel special.

Jesda
10-27-10, 05:01 AM
The interiors on all the GMT900s are hollow and cheap compared to GMT800. Whatever was bad in the layout of GMT800 was remedied in GMT900, but the materials got cheap. Lots of hollow plastics, thinner leather. GM rushed the GMT900s to market because they cost dramatically less to manufacture, and GM wanted to earn as much as they could from a declining market, thus the reason new mass market passenger cars like the Malibu and Aura were delayed until 2007.

[From the words of Bob Lutz himself.]

Playdrv4me
10-27-10, 05:40 AM
The leather also wore like hell, especially the light beige leather. Something about that color and dye made every crease discolor from the rest of the leather. I saw seats on two year old Escalades that looked worse than the leather in 15-20 year old Benzes with 200k+ miles on them.

I know the discoloration you speak of, and I can say that I typically only saw that discoloration on Escalades with heavier use. Case in point, my 2006 looked literally BRAND NEW inside when I bought it in 2008 with 76000 miles. Even when I got rid of it at 90, it was at most showing some "shininess" in the driver's seat. Thing is, that leather was significantly softer and smelled AMAZING compared to the leather in the new trucks. Even with discoloration, I also rarely saw all but the most beat up trucks with any penetration or complete splitting of the leather. So I will agree that the new leather may be "tougher", but its not nearly as pleasing to touch and smells like plastic, if there's any discernible smell at all (something that is important to me with Cadillac's trademark leather smell).

One thing that never made sense to me in the past is why there was never any BLACK leather interior option ever offered on the GMT800 trucks and below... it would seem that easy discoloration is probably the reason. Of course, black leather is popular in the new ones and EASILY hides most defects the leather accumulates over time. Compare a black leather interior Navigator to one with White leather, and the difference is astonishing after just a few years as well.

Aron9000
10-27-10, 06:44 AM
^ See I am convinced the reason GM never offered black leather on their older trucks was to make you buy a new one. Black/Navy Blue/Maroon/Red/Brown/Dark colored leather wears a lot nicer than the lighter colors that were in style at that time. Thus if your leather looked like crap after 2 years, you were much more inclined to buy a new car, IMO its planned obsolescence.

Jesda
10-27-10, 07:02 AM
Lighter colors have always been more popular on modern Cadillacs. Even on Sevilles and Devilles where black was an option, customers more frequently ordered new cars with shale/beige leather.

Aron9000
10-27-10, 07:12 AM
I guess I am just old school and totally out of sync with the current styles. I always want my interior to match my exterior color, and I love the dark colored interiors. Maroon, purple, white, black, brown, dark tan, navy blue, whore house red, those are the interior colors I like. I really hate the light grey and light beige colors in vogue right now. They look so bland and are terrible about showing dirt.

Jesda
10-27-10, 08:09 AM
I love beige because it feels like you're destroying something delicate and beautiful by sitting on it. :D I also like earth tones and airy colors. They make the interior feel spacious.

I also like the brown and black in Malibus:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2006/11/2008_malibu_interior.jpg

Lord Cadillac
10-27-10, 01:54 PM
That's a good looking interior. Cheap as death when you actually sit in it - but very visually pleasing. Compared to the Accord, Camry and Altima, it feels very cheap. I haven't really spent any time in a new Sonata - but I'm guessing it's not any worse than the Japanese models mentioned above. GM is definitely on the right track. I don't expect them to get everything 100% at this point in time. And I really expect the next Malibu to have a higher quality interior.


I love beige because it feels like you're destroying something delicate and beautiful by sitting on it. :D I also like earth tones and airy colors. They make the interior feel spacious.

I also like the brown and black in Malibus:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2006/11/2008_malibu_interior.jpg

ben.gators
10-27-10, 02:09 PM
That's when Cadillac and GM were making Fisher Price baby interiors. Look at this one...

http://image.sporttruck.com/f/9149354+w750+st0/p146994_large+2002_Cadillac_Escalade+Interior_View .jpg

THAT'S luxury?! Are you F'ing SERIOUS?! It's a good thing that SUV had a sickly awesome exterior. It made up for the Lego visual experience you got from the inside.

But that's the real old GM. All of GMs new vehicles have very impressive designs..

Well, it looks like to be a "Work Truck" that seats are replaced with leather ones and a wood kit purchased from Ebay is pasted around!

ryannel2003
10-27-10, 02:12 PM
Those Escalade interior's weren't visually pleasing... but built quite a bit better than the 98-04 Seville and 00-05 Deville's were. Those cars were assembled by drunk slobs I imagine. Same with the 03-07 CTS... material quality wasn't the best but built to a better standard than the older Cadillac's.

77CDV
10-27-10, 07:47 PM
C-class and 3 Series = German Toyota. Nice, but forgetable.

Lord Cadillac
10-27-10, 08:56 PM
Go drive a C63 AMG and let me know what you think afterwards. :p


C-class and 3 Series = German Toyota. Nice, but forgetable.

77CDV
10-27-10, 10:30 PM
C63 is a fabulous sports sedan. Not remotely what I'd ever look for in a car, but those who like that sort of thing will find it the sort of thing they like.

Lord Cadillac
10-27-10, 10:32 PM
You called it a German Toyota. :p


C63 is a fabulous sports sedan. Not remotely what I'd ever look for in a car, but those who like that sort of thing will find it the sort of thing they like.

gdwriter
10-27-10, 11:58 PM
A C63 AMG is hardly the garden-variety C-Class you find at a Mercedes-Benz dealership.

orconn
10-28-10, 12:26 AM
Oh please Sal, let's not go off the the deep end here! 77CDV was comparing the standard entry level BMW 3 series and the base Mercedes C class cars (both of which are the majority sales generating cars for their German makers) to Toyota's mass market offerings. And I would have to say their is some merit to that analogy.

To try and say that BMW's Ms and Mercedes AMGs, and for that matter Cadillac CTS_Vs, are analogous to those companies" mass market cars is ludicrous. The high performance versions of those companies cars are built on special lines with different components than the mass produced cars and are made to fill a very small niche demand market that desires and is willing to pay for the bragging rights to the "fastest best handling" sedans available. The base model Mercedes C Class and BMW 3 series certainly don't compete, at all with the special brethren.

In terms of quality of contruction and materials, and not in terms of driving dynamics, the entry level German cars are quite comparable to Toyota's better fitted out cars.

77CDV
10-28-10, 12:49 AM
^This.

Jesda
10-28-10, 01:35 AM
Well thats a good point, Orconn.

Playdrv4me
10-28-10, 03:13 AM
Except for the fact that you aren't driving you know... a Toyota.

Lord Cadillac
10-28-10, 11:12 AM
Okay. I'm wrong and you're right. Now tell me which Toyota the BMW 328i and Mercedes-Benz C300 compare to. This is going to be hilarious. After all these years I finally have a site with a discussion that no other site on the internet has. :p

drewsdeville
10-28-10, 12:31 PM
Well, since he compared to Toyota using the description "nice but forgettable", you should have no problem answering your own question. Pick any currently offered Toyota you can think of and it works. Don't be afraid, there is no wrong answer here.

Lord Cadillac
10-28-10, 12:45 PM
If we're talking about the C-Class and 3-Series in general, I don't see any comparison with Toyota. It's just a difference in opinion. To me, the blandest model I could find it still less forgettable than a Toyota. I'd find it funny to see people comparing a BMW or Mercedes to a Toyota on any site - except maybe a Toyota site...
http://photo.netcarshow.com/Mercedes-Benz-C-Class_2008_photo_07.jpg

Stingroo
10-28-10, 01:04 PM
Toy-who?

orconn
10-28-10, 01:35 PM
Let's face it Mercedes and BMW do produce some pretty exciting sedans ........ at a price of almost three times the cost of the best equipped Toyota Camry! The fully accessorized Camry certainly comes very close to the level supplied by the two Germans "entry Level" luxury sedans. It is true that the driving dynamics of the the three cars differs significantly; the Toyota offers an uninvolving, soft dynamic that doesn't trouble its' driver with what's actually going on in around the car; the Mercedes also cossets its' occupants and driver and eliminates a lot of environmental intrusions, to the point of being "boring" and just this side of bland, but more informative than the Toyota, base level BMWs give their drivers more of a connection with the road through more informative steering and perhaps a more confidence inspiring level of agility all the while maintaining the feel of an entry level European mid-level sedan. All three use the approximately the same level of quality materials and good quality assembly quality. When selecting which car to buy it really comes down to your taste in driving dynamic, styling and pride of ownership not some basic quality difference among the three vehicles. Each attempts to provide what its' manufacturer perceives as to what its' buyer wants in a car. Over the years, I personnaly cannot see that the 30% cost of the German product is justified in either assembly, engineering (of achieving what its' buyer wants in a car) or cost of materials. If longevity of useful life is a criteria, the American useful longevity verses cost of maintenance experience, with the three cars doesn't prove out a superiority of the higher priced German cars. The differences in the three cars can be seen as a function of personal buyer preference rather than a cost/value equation.

Would I prefer a base level BMW 3 series sedan over an equivalent Mercedes or Toyota in a given year? Probably, but then I would probably choose and Alfa Romeo over each of the three cars in question due to the what my personal taste in driving dynamic (handling, feel and comfort) that that brand delivers compared to the other brands. But my choice would not be based on some meaningful variable of actual quality.

Bro-Ham
10-28-10, 01:53 PM
Toyota Camry, BMW 3-series, Mercedes C-Class...all yawners and I wouldn't own any of them, regardless of what engine is shoehorned inside. :) Look, just for fun, you show up at the Ritz Carlton at cocktail hour in your C63 and I'll show up in my super clean colonial yellow 79 Cadillac Sedan deVille d'Elegance, we'll let the valets decide what is cool, they see interesting cars every day and they know. I wonder which car we'll see positioned right at the front door when we return from a few rounds of drinks. I guarantee you'll be waiting as your ubiquitous looking C63 is brought around from the deepest levels of the parking garage while we stand in front of my Cadillac jaw-boning about how nifty it is. :) Cadillac can, and should, build awesome cars again - the public is thirsting for them. :)

Lord Cadillac
10-28-10, 02:09 PM
It would definitely be more interesting to see the Caddy in the front spot at valet but I tend to think most young valeters would choose the AMG over the old Cadillac. Remember, most of these people are young kids. They don't know anything about what Cadillac was in the past like we do...
http://i41.tinypic.com/2ujt9o9.jpg
http://www.blacklisthunter.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Mercedes-Benz-C63-AMG.jpg

orconn
10-28-10, 02:12 PM
^^^ I agree with Bro-Ham that the ubiquitous design car would end up in the bowels of the Ritz! But there was a time when the Cadillac would have been just as common as a BMW a sight in "tony" environments. Cadillac can and should build a car which will garner the prestige that will again put it in the ranks of "luxury" cars!

Bro-Ham
10-28-10, 02:18 PM
It would definitely be more interesting to see the Caddy in the front spot at valet but I tend to think most young valeters would choose the AMG over the old Cadillac.
http://i41.tinypic.com/2ujt9o9.jpg
http://www.blacklisthunter.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Mercedes-Benz-C63-AMG.jpg

Let me show you a picture of a beat up C-class in a ghetto looking surrounding as you show above and I'm sure I'd make the case to the contrary. :) Where I cocktail the valets prefer my old car to the cars you mention.

It's time these boring european cars pay a price for their lack of distinction. Cadillac made cars that created awe not that many decades ago. What worries me is there is no luxury car maker in the "near" segment that truly tickles the body of the public to do their utmost best to achieve the satisfaction of owning one of the awesome cars someday.

The time is ripe. Defending the current mediocrity will bring about more of the same. I hope we will dare to dream and that a class leadingly bold luxury car results from all the current "near" luxury class indecency, and that a Cadillac name will be on an American luxury car motivator for everyone to aspire to. :)

gdwriter
10-28-10, 02:23 PM
It wouldn't surprise me if luxury buyers cross-shopped the C-Class with a Lexus ES, which we all know (although buyers may not) is just a gussied up Camry with a higher price tag. The 3-Series is likely cross-shopped against the Lexus IS. In the luxury class, a Lexus is generally considered the most isolated and least involving for the driver, which is also the case with Toyotas in the mass market. Obviously, a lot of people like that. Most of us here don't.

Bro-Ham
10-28-10, 02:32 PM
It wouldn't surprise me if luxury buyers cross-shopped the C-Class with a Lexus ES, which we all know (although buyers may not) is just a gussied up Camry with a higher price tag. The 3-Series is likely cross-shopped against the Lexus IS. In the luxury class, a Lexus is generally considered the most isolated and least involving for the driver, which is also the case with Toyotas in the mass market. Obviously, a lot of people like that. Most of us here don't.

The success of Lexus and its "isolation" and "least involving" dynamics is interesting to me. :) My parents are former Cadillac owners, then Mercedes-Benz drivers, and now they wouldn't dream of owning anything but a Lexus. The Lexus dealerships are palaces. The current Lexus cars are like the old Cadillacs they knew and loved, with all the prestige and coddling at the dealership.

Lexus does a good job with all age groups. But, Cadillac OWNED the luxury car segment not that many years (decades :) ) ago. I just don't see the current Cadillac model line capturing the hearts and minds of car buyers who either have the money to buy one or wish they did. This shouldn't be as hard as winning the lottery to figure out. :)

Lord Cadillac
10-28-10, 02:53 PM
It wouldn't surprise me if luxury buyers cross-shopped the C-Class with a Lexus ES, which we all know (although buyers may not) is just a gussied up Camry with a higher price tag. The 3-Series is likely cross-shopped against the Lexus IS. In the luxury class, a Lexus is generally considered the most isolated and least involving for the driver, which is also the case with Toyotas in the mass market. Obviously, a lot of people like that. Most of us here don't.

"Gussied up", yes - but ultimately, "up". And that's the point. Nicer leather and materials, better isolation (quiet), MUCH better stereo, more power, MUCH better service experience, etc, etc, etc...


The success of Lexus and its "isolation" and "least involving" dynamics is interesting to me. :) My parents are former Cadillac owners, then Mercedes-Benz drivers, and now they wouldn't dream of owning anything but a Lexus. The Lexus dealerships are palaces. The current Lexus cars are like the old Cadillacs they knew and loved, with all the prestige and coddling at the dealership.

Lexus does a good job with all age groups. But, Cadillac OWNED the luxury car segment not that many years (decades :) ) ago. I just don't see the current Cadillac model line capturing the hearts and minds of car buyers who either have the money to buy one or wish they did. This shouldn't be as hard as winning the lottery to figure out. :)

I say it all the time - Lexus replaced Cadillac. Lexus builds the cars Cadillac used to. Soft, comfortable and luxurious. I don't think it's a BAD idea for Cadillac to be running after BMW - but I'd prefer the ran after Mercedes. Anyway, after Cadillac started making cars that people didn't want anymore, Toyota started selling a lot of Lexus'...

Bro-Ham
10-28-10, 02:57 PM
The thread needs to be started that cultivates all the dreams and desires of Cadillac lovers who know the difference. GM had people on staff, seemingly centuries ago, who could create cars that were magic. These people are out there. When will the bean counters be replaced by the dream makers? This is the topic we need to discuss because it ain't happening now and trying to make the current Cadillacs likable is like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. :)

Lord Cadillac
10-28-10, 03:03 PM
Why don't you start the topic? :p I agree - it's all bean counters these days.. That's not going to do anything for Cadillac or GM. At least it hasn't in a long, long time...


The thread needs to be started that cultivates all the dreams and desires of Cadillac lovers who know the difference. GM had people on staff, seemingly centuries ago, who could create cars that were magic. These people are out there. When will the bean counters be replaced by the dream makers? This is the topic we need to discuss because it ain't happening now and trying to make the current Cadillacs likable is like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. :)

orconn
10-28-10, 03:04 PM
Back in the sixties and seventies and even the eighties, most performance car guys had no interest in Mercedes-Benz cars for good reason .... they were heavy, uninvolving dogs that delivered neither comfort or performance. The exception to this was the 300 SL of the fifties, but like today these cars were out of reach to all but the wealthiest. The racing guys I knew, like Dan Gurney, Phil Hill or Frank Monise all drove Cadillacs as their road cars (or if they were sponsored by a carmaker, the carmakers cars) nobody chose either Mercedes or BMWs to drive on American roads. Mercedes was very much a car of choice of status conscious upper middle class suburbanites who were "keeping up with the Joneses." Mercedes were acceptable in this role because the 250SEs etc. were considered to be on a "Buick/Oldsmobile level and not a Cadillac level. In the eighties, when Cadillac's prices were descending and Mercedes were ascending (due to changes in the dollars exchange rates) Cadillac began to be viewed as a car for the blue haired matron and the retired upper middle manager ..... Fleetwoods had become mere shadows of their former selves and few had chauffeurs and limousines anymore. The 450SE of the 1970's became ubiquitous on both coasts as those with money wanted something different to show they had made it. From there Mercedes price gradually increased while Cadillacs price declined as did its' uniqueness. All the while Jaguar had found a niche for itself among the "sophisticates" who enjoyed the sensual beauty of the cars and didn't realize Jags reliability problems or felt the problems were worth the hassle.

The present gibves cadillac a rare opportunity to again establish itself as a leader in the luxury car segment but they need a flagship model ... one which epidomises quality and luxury on an affordable level. The 4th generation Seville STS made headway for the mark, unfortunately the 5th generation Seville and the STS were steps backwards and all the while there was no real "Cadillac" in the lineup. The time has come for a "real Cadillac" to be re-introduced to the market place!

Bro-Ham
10-28-10, 03:54 PM
I don't think any STS stood out from the rest of the luxury cars of the era.

Orr, you'd have a star on the Hollywood walk of fame if you'd just try using spell-check. :)

I think the Koreans would love a novel idea like conquering the luxury car class - - who is going to call them and give them the idea?!? Cadillac sure continues to leave the door wiiiiiddde open. :)

Bro-Ham
10-28-10, 03:57 PM
Why don't you start the topic? :p I agree - it's all bean counters these days.. That's not going to do anything for Cadillac or GM. At least it hasn't in a long, long time...

I don't know where to start or how to start it. If I were on staff at GM and paid to "do whatever it takes to make it happen" then I'd invest the thought, time, effort, energy, blood, sweat, and tears to put my finger on not what the pulse of the buyer is now, but, rather, what the pulse of the buyer will be. :)

Lord Cadillac
10-28-10, 04:04 PM
That's a great idea because I think GM (more often than not) creates cars based on what's already available. In other words, they'll come to the party dressed with what was cool to wear LAST year.


I don't know where to start or how to start it. If I were on staff at GM and paid to "do whatever it takes to make it happen" then I'd invest the thought, time, effort, energy, blood, sweat, and tears to put my finger on not what the pulse of the buyer is now, but, rather, what the pulse of the buyer will be. :)

drewsdeville
10-28-10, 05:09 PM
LOL @ using valet preference as a gauge to how "cool" a car is.

Even at some of the nicest places, many valets are college kids working for minimum wage + tips. It's just a job to get the through school. I don't think they really give a rip about a car they will be in for 30 seconds at a max speed of 10mph....they just want your tip. Some of them very valets that you speak of are the people we hear about killing their Toyota Camry after driving for 2 years without an oil change, scratching their heads when the engine blows. Their opinion is probably the least justified you can get since is based on the minimalistic experience of PARKING your car only because it's their JOB and they have to.

So, I have to ask, what is valet preference proving?

drewsdeville
10-28-10, 05:46 PM
In the luxury class, a Lexus is generally considered the most isolated and least involving for the driver, which is also the case with Toyotas in the mass market. Obviously, a lot of people like that. Most of us here don't.

^^^YES

Not sure why everyone here assumes that a common CF opinion is what the rest of the world wants.

In the end, sales figures trump CF.com's opinion. That means that MB, BMW and Toyota know what people want more than CF.com does. Many of the designs used here as argument against Toyota were killed long ago due to poor sales. How can you possibly argue that? You think that if Cadillac introduced a modernized variant of the '77 Caddy that it'd shut Lexus down? Good lord... Look at what happened to the '96 Fleetwood. It surely didn't sweep the public off it's feet.

If Toyota executives were reading this thread, they'd probably ROFL till they passed out, tongue hanging out, drooling on all of the sales statistics they've built.

Jesda
10-28-10, 07:10 PM
Toyota execs went ahead and sent us the Avalon, a land yacht by modern standards. They seem to sell plenty of them. Whether GM should build a competitor to it is another question. The Park Avenue and Lesabre disappeared and Toyota quietly snuck in.

Aron9000
10-28-10, 08:47 PM
^ I gotta say Toyota did a good job with the 2000-2004 Avalon IMO. That car has as much space inside as my Brougham and almost as big of a trunk. It also feels a lot nicer inside than Buicks of that era, handles good, gets great gas mileage, and has been very reliable for us. I also like the slab sided styling, even if it does kind of mimic various Benzes.

They kind of lost me with the newer 2005+ models. More tech goodies, but they have a TON of that stupid cheap silver "boom box" type plastic all over the place.

Bro-Ham
10-28-10, 09:13 PM
Toyota execs went ahead and sent us the Avalon, a land yacht by modern standards. They seem to sell plenty of them. Whether GM should build a competitor to it is another question. The Park Avenue and Lesabre disappeared and Toyota quietly snuck in.

As domestic car dealerships disappear and consolidate replaced by HUGE new Toyota and Lexus dealerships, which are being erected all over the place, it should be sending a message to the American car makers, but apparently they have not hit rock bottom yet to decisively act to make awesome cars to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

Government intervention did not help.

Cadillac needs the modern equivalent of a 67 Eldorado to jolt the market, make jaws drop, create real excitement, and build from there. :)

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-28-10, 10:32 PM
The real irony of the situation is that the domestic companies need to follow the import companies because they followed our lead at first and stole sales.

Destroyer
10-28-10, 11:20 PM
The thread needs to be started that cultivates all the dreams and desires of Cadillac lovers who know the difference. GM had people on staff, seemingly centuries ago, who could create cars that were magic. These people are out there. When will the bean counters be replaced by the dream makers? This is the topic we need to discuss because it ain't happening now and trying to make the current Cadillacs likable is like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. :)Aside from the CTS-V, there isn't one car in Cadillac's line up that I like in the least. I only like the CTS-V for it's powerplant (Chevy) and it's four door configuration. I would take it over a comparable AMG or BMW products for it's sheer serviceability but still think it's fairly ugly. Cadillac hasn't been building Cadillac's for a very long time. Instead we've been getting shitty carbon copies of other cars. Cadillac needs to ignore what BMW, Mercedes and Lexus are doing then look to the past and start over. I'll bet even the mafia drives Lexus or Mercedes now. I'll also bet that Elvis would not be caught dead in a current Cadillac!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-28-10, 11:35 PM
I'll bet even the mafia drives Lexus or Mercedes now. I'll also bet that Elvis would not be caught dead in a current Cadillac!

Hahaha, ouch!

EChas3
10-29-10, 12:26 AM
I guess I am just old school and totally out of sync with the current styles. I always want my interior to match my exterior color, and I love the dark colored interiors. Maroon, purple, white, black, brown, dark tan, navy blue, whore house red, those are the interior colors I like. I really hate the light grey and light beige colors in vogue right now. They look so bland and are terrible about showing dirt.

I am wit' ju!

Bro-Ham
10-29-10, 12:31 AM
Aside from the CTS-V, there isn't one car in Cadillac's line up that I like in the least. I only like the CTS-V for it's powerplant (Chevy) and it's four door configuration. I would take it over a comparable AMG or BMW products for it's sheer serviceability but still think it's fairly ugly. Cadillac hasn't been building Cadillac's for a very long time. Instead we've been getting shitty carbon copies of other cars. Cadillac needs to ignore what BMW, Mercedes and Lexus are doing then look to the past and start over. I'll bet even the mafia drives Lexus or Mercedes now. I'll also bet that Elvis would not be caught dead in a current Cadillac!

Elvis would have kept Cadillac in line...once he went, Cadillac withered. :)

orconn
10-29-10, 12:45 AM
Yeah, Liberace just didn't have the same clout Elvis did!

Playdrv4me
10-29-10, 02:40 AM
This thread is much like the numerous posts I see every time a topic is brought up on any car enthusiast blog regarding the possible return of this hatchback or that hatchback to the United States market. There is always a frenzy of posts by hatchback die-hards talking about the way they'd buy up these hatches in droves if the manufacturers would just "bring them over". Yet on the rare occasion a manufacturer does just that, the things accumulate on dealer lots like dog turds in the park. Its unfortunate, but well, it is what it is.

Lord Cadillac
10-29-10, 12:26 PM
Cadillac doesn't necessarily need to follow anybody. They just need to build cars with attractive designs that are powerful, luxurious and comfortable. The DTS is comfortable and attractive, fairly luxurious but not powerful. The STS is comfortable, not very attractive, fairly luxurious and not powerful. The CTS is comfortable, attractive, fairly luxurious, and not powerful (forget about the V, hardly anyone buys a V), the SRX is comfortable, attractive, luxurious for what it is, and not powerful. The Escalade is comfortable, attractive, luxurious and powerful (excellent!). The XLR was comfortable, attractive, luxurious and not powerful.

Most of the current vehicles simply lack in power. Another company that does the same thing is Acura. How are they doing?

Stingroo
10-29-10, 12:30 PM
Acu-who?

77CDV
10-29-10, 02:14 PM
^Those tarted-up Honda thingies with mouth guards for grilles.

orconn
10-29-10, 02:15 PM
What is the image of the "powerful" Escalade? To me it brings to mind very tall, dark athletes who don't really have too many alternatives for transportation. They need a fancy truck to accommodate their size and egos.

77CDV
10-29-10, 02:17 PM
The Escalade is the closest thing Cadillac makes to a Cadillac. This is sad.

orconn
10-29-10, 02:26 PM
The Escalade is the closest thing Cadillac makes to a Cadillac. This is sad.

It's more than sad! It's repulsive! Almost makes me want to return to European products.

77CDV
10-29-10, 02:28 PM
No, it's sad, because it shows Cadillac (and GM in general) could build large, stylish, powerful CARS if they weren't frittering away resources on tarted up Tahoes.

Lord Cadillac
10-29-10, 02:32 PM
The Cadillac Escalade is currently our flagship.

Jesda
10-29-10, 02:39 PM
Acura has fallen so far. The Legend sedan and coupe and the NSX were outstanding cars.

gdwriter
10-29-10, 03:32 PM
Another company that does the same thing is Acura. How are they doing?One big difference: Acuras are hideous. They'd probably double their sales if they got rid of that buck-toothed grille.

I wouldn't say the DTS or the CTS (at least with the 3.6) aren't powerful. A 6.9 second 0-60 (http://www.zeroto60times.com/Cadillac-Caddy-0-60-mph-Times.html) for the DTS and 6.0 for a 3.6 DI CTS is nothing to sneeze at (and comparable to the C-Class). Maybe not the fastest cars in their class, but plenty of get-up-and-go for most drivers.

Lord Cadillac
10-29-10, 03:47 PM
Absolutely! I love all those cars.. The Legend was ahead of it's time.. Acura was the first of the three Japanese luxury brands in America. I think they beat Lexus by two years..


Acura has fallen so far. The Legend sedan and coupe and the NSX were outstanding cars.

I agree with you but luxury isn't about pleasing most drivers. It's about pleasing the most picky drivers.


One big difference: Acuras are hideous. They'd probably double their sales if they got rid of that buck-toothed grille.

I wouldn't say the DTS or the CTS (at least with the 3.6) aren't powerful. A 6.9 second 0-60 (http://www.zeroto60times.com/Cadillac-Caddy-0-60-mph-Times.html) for the DTS and 6.0 for a 3.6 DI CTS is nothing to sneeze at (and comparable to the C-Class). Maybe not the fastest cars in their class, but plenty of get-up-and-go for most drivers.

gdwriter
10-29-10, 03:57 PM
At my first job in the late 1980s, I worked in the Scottsdale office of a Chicago area ad agency. The owner drove a BMW 3-Series convertible, but since he spent a good part of the winter in Arizona, he bought a car to use there, which my boss used for company business the rest of the time. When I asked what he was sending us, he replied, "A beater." It turned out to be a brand-new Acura Legend coupe, which we promptly christened "The Beater."

http://www.blogcdn.com/automoviles.aol.com/media/2008/05/acura-legend-coupe-1988.jpg

I drove it a number of times, and it was the nicest car I had ever driven up to that point. Beautiful car. From what Acura was when it was first introduced to what it is today, it's really a shame to see such a steep decline.

Lord Cadillac
10-29-10, 03:58 PM
It IS a shame. I think Acura tried to copy BMW as well - and failed like everybody else.


At my first job in the late 1980s, I worked in the Scottsdale office of a Chicago area ad agency. The owner drove a BMW 3-Series convertible, but since he spent a good part of the winter in Arizona, he bought a car to use there, which my boss used for company business the rest of the time. When I asked what he was sending us, he replied, "A beater." It turned out to be a brand-new Acura Legend coupe, which we promptly christened "The Beater."

http://www.blogcdn.com/automoviles.aol.com/media/2008/05/acura-legend-coupe-1988.jpg

I drove it a number of times, and it was the nicest car I had ever driven up to that point. Beautiful car. From what Acura was when it was first introduced to what it is today, it's really a shame to see such a steep decline.

ben.gators
10-29-10, 04:28 PM
At my first job in the late 1980s, I worked in the Scottsdale office of a Chicago area ad agency. The owner drove a BMW 3-Series convertible, but since he spent a good part of the winter in Arizona, he bought a car to use there, which my boss used for company business the rest of the time. When I asked what he was sending us, he replied, "A beater." It turned out to be a brand-new Acura Legend coupe, which we promptly christened "The Beater."

http://www.blogcdn.com/automoviles.aol.com/media/2008/05/acura-legend-coupe-1988.jpg

I drove it a number of times, and it was the nicest car I had ever driven up to that point. Beautiful car. From what Acura was when it was first introduced to what it is today, it's really a shame to see such a steep decline.

Well, this Acura can handle and perform outstanding, as you are saying. But it does not stand out like a luxury or near to luxury car... It looks like to a late 80s, early 90s Japanese basic family sedans.... nothing especial in exterior...

and by the way, "Scottsdale office of a Chicago area ad agency" sounds funny! :D Something like University of California at Boston! :D

Aron9000
10-29-10, 04:29 PM
At my first job in the late 1980s, I worked in the Scottsdale office of a Chicago area ad agency. The owner drove a BMW 3-Series convertible, but since he spent a good part of the winter in Arizona, he bought a car to use there, which my boss used for company business the rest of the time. When I asked what he was sending us, he replied, "A beater." It turned out to be a brand-new Acura Legend coupe, which we promptly christened "The Beater."

http://www.blogcdn.com/automoviles.aol.com/media/2008/05/acura-legend-coupe-1988.jpg

I drove it a number of times, and it was the nicest car I had ever driven up to that point. Beautiful car. From what Acura was when it was first introduced to what it is today, it's really a shame to see such a steep decline.

Not a big fan of the 1st gen Legend's styling. Honda really kind of out-moded them when they made their 1990 Accord look way too similar. The 2nd gen cars were absolute stunners and still look great, esepcially in coupe form.

gary88
10-29-10, 04:36 PM
I really liked the Integra and RSX, they were fun little cars especially with a manual.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-29-10, 04:59 PM
Acura had some really good stuff in the '90s. Integra GSR/Type R, NSX, 2nd gen Legend, etc etc. Now it's all really ugly stuff that nobody is really hungering over anymore.

Aron9000
10-29-10, 06:17 PM
Acura had some really good stuff in the '90s. Integra GSR/Type R, NSX, 2nd gen Legend, etc etc. Now it's all really ugly stuff that nobody is really hungering over anymore.

I've had a lot of seat time behind an RSX, and that car is blast to drive. Its definetly boy racer and not luxury IMO. Interior is cheap, ride is stiff, noisy. Handles like a go-kart though, about the only FWD car that handles better is a Mini. Seats were awesome as well, feels kind of hard and well bolstered like a sport seat out of a Porsche or BMW. I drove the 160hp version and it wasn't blazingly fast, but a downshift did move the car around with a reasonable amount of thrust. Definetly required a different driving style compared to all the lazy torque v8's I'm used to.

Stingroo
10-29-10, 08:59 PM
I saw a 2nd gen Legend coupe today for probably the first time since becoming "aware" of them. It was a good looking car driven by a kid my age and in great shape too.

Lord Cadillac
10-29-10, 09:47 PM
The Acura Legend pictured in this thread is the ugliest one on Earth. Here's a nicer one. It was very well liked in the 90s. Very.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/2nd_Legend_Coupe.JPG

hueterm
10-29-10, 10:13 PM
A CL at 1/3 the price...

Jesda
10-29-10, 10:25 PM
Those first-gen Legends are well-kept used car secrets. They're lighter and crisper and arguably more fun to drive than the more "legendary" Legends that followed in 1990 (not counting the 6-speed coupe). Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find an 86-89 Legend that hasnt been beaten to within an inch of its life. Sad.

http://www.acura-legend.com/vbulletin/attachments/f2/5653d1220303768-n00b-here-got-my-first-legend-legend-interior.jpg

The interiors were very plain to look at but nicely laid out. The one quirk was the volume control switch just to the right of the steering wheel up on the dash. The volume knob on the radio itself was easier to use. It was maybe on par with the 88-91 Mazda 929 in terms of luxury, which was okay for the 80s compared to most of the other cars that were on the road, like the Chevy Celebrity and Ford Taurus.

People forget about these cars because they're not very pretty, but they're a lot of fun.

ga_etc
10-30-10, 02:53 AM
I've always been curious about driving a 1st gen Legend, sedan or coupe. The coolest feature on both gen Legend coupes is that the back side windows roll down, all the way. A feature I wish Cadillac had copied in the Eldorado. That would have been sweet as hell. I still really really like the Legends and wish I could find a nice one with a manual transmission. That's next to impossible though.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-30-10, 10:29 AM
Damn, those second generation Legend Coupes are sexy! Too bad they weren't as powerful as the Eldorado/Mark VIII/CL500/SC400.

hueterm
10-30-10, 10:38 AM
It doesn't matter to me, and I'd even give a V6 dispensation and rock one of those if I could find a low mileage one for under 20 grand...

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-30-10, 10:46 AM
Well, atleast with the Legend, you got the option of having a six speed manual. None of the other personal luxury coupes listed offered that, except for maybe the SC300, I can't remember if it did or not. But, it was FWD, whereas all of them aside from the Eldorado were RWD. I think the Legend Coupe is better looking than the Lexus SC too...

Stingroo
10-30-10, 12:14 PM
SC300 had a five speed. But they're INCREDIBLY rare. I've been scouring the nation to find one for a friend of mine because he's looking to turn it into a badass sleeper. It's got the same 2JZ as the Supra, only they're significantly cheaper. In searching for 3 months, I've found 2 manual SC's. One was a total piece of shit that had everything wrong with it you could imagine, and the other was ridiculously priced at like $10k. The SC400s, IIRC, were all automatics.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-30-10, 12:17 PM
Ya know, I bet the Legend would be the better driving car. Acuras were typically sharper to drive than a comparable Lexus.

Stingroo
10-30-10, 12:23 PM
Probably. I should introduce him to that, I had no idea it had a six-speed. Plus, I mean really, I think the only thing that's more modifiable than a Honda is a small block.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-30-10, 12:29 PM
I was wrong, they started off as a five speed manual, then went to a six later on.
_LxnrTeUvDc

Dang, now I really wanna read my Acura Legend brochures (1992-93), but they're back at my parent's house in a box somewhere. Maybe I'll grab them next time I'm there.

I like how simple the Legends are in design. On the exterior, you've got nice clean cut, subtle angles and a smoothly designed interior with all the niceties but none of the complexities of modern luxury cars. I still think the '90s were a great time for foreign luxury sedans. Everything had those nice, formal clean cut lines and squared off, yet aerodynamic rooflines. They weren't as rigid or as boxy as a Brougham or Town Car, but not as rounded as the mid '90s Auroras, Rivieras or big Chryslers. They were a great, great design that still looks timeless now, especially if they've been taken care of.

Aron9000
10-30-10, 08:56 PM
The Legend also had its V6 mounted in a rather novel manner. Yes its a longitudinal FWD V6, don't really know where the tranny goes on that type of setup. I know Chrysler used the same setup on its LH cab forward cars in the 90's, and the Eldorado from 67-85 had the same setup.
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/vehicle-pictures/1995/acura/legend/94801021000120-480.jpg
Legends are known to eat headgaskets as you pile the miles on(usually 150k+), but since you can get the heads off with the motor in the car its an easy job. Usually $500-$1000 to fix provided you didn't overheat the motor and bugger everything else up.

Bro-Ham
10-30-10, 10:30 PM
I loved my Legend I bought new in 92 when I was a wee lad of Chad's age. :) I never even considered owning any Cadillac of that model year. No one wanted Cadillacs in 92, except for old people and rental car companies who could buy them in bulk for cheap. :)

Playdrv4me
10-31-10, 12:07 AM
The Legend also had its V6 mounted in a rather novel manner. Yes its a longitudinal FWD V6, don't really know where the tranny goes on that type of setup.

Tranny ends up at the front. Jesda's Saab is like this also.

Stingroo
10-31-10, 12:40 AM
Explain? That's kind of interesting.

Jesda
10-31-10, 01:02 AM
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/2007/11/08-15/christina-aguilera-baby-shower-drag-queens.jpg
Tranny is in front.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-31-10, 02:57 AM
Yuck.

The torque converter is mounted near the radiator and the bell housing is mounted near the firewall.

hueterm
10-31-10, 11:07 AM
HAHA the choker is hiding her Adam's apple...clever birl....

EChas3
10-31-10, 09:38 PM
So the best looker is a man? Figures.

Aron9000
10-31-10, 11:19 PM
So the best looker is a man? Figures.

OKAY, pregnant chick is actually a beautiful woman under the ugly dress, horrible bleach blonde hair, and whore makeup. That damn drag queen could teach her a thing or two about fashion, hair, how to do her makeup, and how to hide bulges.

ga_etc
10-31-10, 11:27 PM
So the best looker is a man? Figures.

There's only one REAL woman in the picture. So unless you have a thing for pregnant women, yes.

gdwriter
11-01-10, 01:23 AM
I'm not that interested in women who do their shopping at Whores R Us.

Jesda
11-01-10, 01:32 AM
I'm not that interested in women who do their shopping at Whores R Us.

I wonder if they sell gift certificates?

ben.gators
11-01-10, 03:00 AM
What about student discount?:D

Lord Cadillac
11-01-10, 02:48 PM
Please get back on topic or start another thread about trannies.

Stingroo
11-01-10, 02:55 PM
http://www.enginesandgearboxes.co.uk/images/mercedes-gearbox.jpg

C-class tranny.

Jesda
11-01-10, 03:34 PM
Please get back on topic or start another thread about trannies.

There's nothing else to say about the C-class. Its a rolling trashcan for badge whores.

Now back to our regularly scheduled Ru Paul.

ga_etc
11-01-10, 05:44 PM
http://www.shadowandact.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/RuPaul.jpg

hueterm
11-01-10, 09:29 PM
Please get back on topic or start another thread about trannies.


"Poast" of the day....

You need to flag your market research threads as such, to possibly avoid that kind of tranny talk.... :-)

77CDV
11-02-10, 12:28 AM
http://www.shadowandact.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/RuPaul.jpg

The sad thing is, he looks waaayyy better as a woman.

Lord Cadillac
11-02-10, 02:49 PM
When a topic is finished, it doesn't mean we change it and move on to another topic in the same discussion. Please start a new discussion to talk about things not relevant to the subject title. This is the second time I'm asking nicely.

drewsdeville
11-02-10, 02:59 PM
I'm attracted to reptiles.

ga_etc
11-02-10, 03:08 PM
When a topic is finished, it doesn't mean we change it and move on to another topic in the same discussion. Please start a new discussion to talk about things not relevant to the subject title. This is the second time I'm asking nicely.

Not arguing, but somehow I don't see a thread on drag queens/transgendered people just springing up. Although, stranger things have happened.

Jesda
11-02-10, 03:11 PM
Also a forgotten gem:
http://www.electricsupercharger.com/images/install/Acura_Vigor_stock.jpg
The Acura Vigor

Inline-5.



When a topic is finished, it doesn't mean we change it and move on to another topic in the same discussion. Please start a new discussion to talk about things not relevant to the subject title. This is the second time I'm asking nicely.

Its your server, your forum, your property, but I think you're being completely unreasonable. Side discussions carry on in threads all the time. Its how a conversation naturally works. Not every side conversation needs its own thread. Not every thread needs strict adherence to the original subject, especially when interest in the opening topic has expired.

orconn
11-02-10, 04:06 PM
I didn't know the Acura Vigor was a five cylinder, I did know that Ru Paul drove an Escalade!

Jesda
11-02-10, 04:22 PM
LOL, I guess a Diva needs room for her (his?) entourage.

I didn't know until just now that the Vigor was a longitudinal I-5. I always assumed it was transverse like I-5 Volvos.

Lord Cadillac
11-02-10, 05:14 PM
Its your server, your forum, your property, but I think you're being completely unreasonable. Side discussions carry on in threads all the time. Its how a conversation naturally works. Not every side conversation needs its own thread. Not every thread needs strict adherence to the original subject, especially when interest in the opening topic has expired.

I'm more comfortable with our discussions going off-topic when they remain to be about automobiles. Now that we have topics that I feel are important and more geared towards the automotive world (especially Cadillac) in the Lounge, I suppose I'm on the fence about how this should be handled. I've never been a big fan of how discussions go off-topic on forums. And just because it happens anywhere or everywhere else, doesn't make it a good thing or the right way for things to be.

I normally like things to be uniform and when a new member comes along, does a search about the C-Class Mercedes-Benz and finds this discussion - and views the most recent posts first, I'm not sure I'm 100% comfortable with the fact that they're going to run into a topic about transvestites. Normally we say, "If you don't want to be involved with topics like <insert topic here>, don't view them". Well in this case, there's no warning - and if this type of conversation offends people - then they had no warning.

I understand where you're coming from. Do you understand where I'm coming from?

Jesda
11-02-10, 06:12 PM
The only time it matters if a topic goes in a different direction is if its technical in nature. A Northstar head gasket discussion where someone suddenly asks about suspension deserves its own separate thread in case someone is searching exclusively for thread titles. In that case, I typically move the divergent post to a new thread because it has a utilitarian purpose.

The Lounge has no technical purpose, and you're being needlessly uptight. Maybe now that GM is linking to this forum, you want to spruce the place up, mop the floors, and make it more appealing to advertisers and visitors. I get that. I'm only here because I enjoy helping folks with their cars and to make a few friends along the way (including you and several others). I'm not sure I like the direction the forum is going in -- my favorite watering hole for the past 7 years is turning into an upscale martini bar.

In the end, its your yard, not mine, so you're obliged to landscape it how you see fit.

Playdrv4me
11-02-10, 06:16 PM
I see the validity of both of your points, but this is a relatively meaningless discussion to begin with (as far as it relates in any possible way to Cadillac discussion). How much life does one actually think this thread could have had? I certainly can't imagine any possible scenario where someone's search would have terminated in this thread being what they were looking for. If a thread of this nature gets to the point where you have to ask to veer it back on topic, perhaps it would be best to just close the thread with a short explanation.

drewsdeville
11-02-10, 06:29 PM
In my opinion, it seems like it's becoming an upscale martini bar because of the low-grade topic and humor used when it comes to threads spiraling out of control.

Really, look back at this thread and tell me that the "secondary" topic in this thread isn't disappointing in the least.

Reminds me of a bunch of 10 year old boys giggling about a few dick and fart jokes that were being spread at recess. Discussion about trannies, "Vulva's", and prostitution aren't providing any benefit whether it's leisure or automotive. If I wanted to talk about that crap, I wouldn't go to a Cadillac board for it. I'm sure I could call up my 16 year old cousin and get a few whoppers out of him if I really wanted to hear it.

For those that DO find benefit, maybe you guys need take the car downtown with $20 in your pockets and get yourselves a hooker that will take care of you. Then maybe you can talk about more constructive and interesting topics.

Jesda
11-02-10, 06:41 PM
Then maybe you can talk about more constructive and interesting topics.

To understand humor, sarcasm, and hyperbole, you have to be able to pick up on subtleties. We've run into this problem before, not only with what you might consider "low brow" subjects, but with general automotive topics. You're unable to process the nuances of communication and take things far too literally because the art of language is not always strictly defined.

Thats fine. I understand you're an engineering student, so you're skilled at what you're skilled at and left-brained in nature, but you have a limitation. Likewise, I hate calculus.

Or maybe your dad beat you mercilessly.

drewsdeville
11-02-10, 06:45 PM
Oh no, believe me, I do pick up on the attempts at humorous sarcasm here. I just choose to ignore them as I don't find them worth paying attention to.

Sarcasm is generally a cheap attempt at being funny. Everyone can be sarcastic, but not everyone is good enough at it to be funny. For those that are easily amused, then I guess they can soak it up because there's lots of it here.

As far as the subtleties, that's part of the problem. There are none here. The sarcasm (oh, I mean HUMOR, my bad) is in-your-face obvious, which really wrecks the whole idea. Look at this thread...talking about "trannies" as in automotive transmissions, and you flip up a picture with trannies in it. Damn, that's funny stuff, huh? Where's the subtlety? Believe me, I got what you were trying to do. Am I automatically supposed to LOL?

That said, sarcasm does NOT automatically translate to humor. Judging by the first sentence of your last post, I think that's where you get confused. It's a popular misconception.

I guess I don't show my humorous side here because it's pretty clear that the majority here shows interest in the same humor described in post 126, which I'm not a fan of. Knowing that, I don't even open up. That's cool if you guys interested in that, but I just choose not to be a part of it. Doesn't mean I lack a sense of humor.

Jesda
11-02-10, 06:53 PM
No, Drew, when I say something like "Chrysler ranks below Suzuki" its called hyperbole, a way of illustrating the brand's damaged reputation by using an exaggerated comparison. Your inability to pick up on it prevents you from successfully communicating.

I believe I and others have wrongly accused you of being a troll only here to inflame and annoy. I was wrong and unfair in judging you -- you do not have malicious intent, you simply lack the ability to process the nuances of language. Yes, you did say you "laughed" at people here when you made certain inflammatory posts, which eventually got you banned, but I believe you were more comfortable with people calling you a troll than accusing you of having a communication disability.

So, I apologize.

drewsdeville
11-02-10, 06:58 PM
No, Drew, when I say something like "Chrysler ranks below Suzuki" its called hyperbole, a way of illustrating the brand's damaged reputation by using an exaggerated comparison. Your inability to pick up on it prevents you from successfully communicating.

Again, I understood the attempt at humor. You described it just as I saw it. I realized it was supposed to be funny. Did I find it funny? No.

It's just the same as one man finding a knock knock joke hilarious and another finding it annoying rather than funny. The intent of the joke is clear. It's funny to one man and not to the next.

I CAN understand the humor attempts and I do. I guess we just don't jive when it comes to the sense of humor. Not everyone's is the same.

ga_etc
11-02-10, 06:59 PM
You're right Drew. Sometimes the humor is rude, crude, and socially unacceptable. The catch is, you're not in a position to point out how undignified it is, Sal is and he has voiced his opinion. And so what if a few of us here like a little off color humor from time to time? I spend so much time on here because it's a good place to meet new people, a few friends, talk about cars and whatever else may come up. I'm sure you don't lack a sense of humor, however, you do lack personality and social grace, in my opinion. That's just my $.02 and I'll leave it at that. Have a nice day.

drewsdeville
11-02-10, 07:02 PM
You're right Drew. Sometimes the humor is rude, crude, and socially unacceptable. The catch is, you're not in a position to point out how undignified it is, Sal is and he has voiced his opinion.

I sure am, this is the internet forum. This is a public place, anyone on the internet has the capability to read and post here.

Everyone is in that position.

ga_etc
11-02-10, 07:06 PM
It's a public place, yes. At the end of the day though, it's Sal who owns and operates it. He is the one with the power to rule over us and make us follow his guidelines. His is the only say that ultimately matters.

Jesda
11-02-10, 07:08 PM
Again, I understood the attempt at humor. You described it just as I saw it. Did I find it funny? No.

I CAN understand the humor attempts and I do. I guess we just don't jive when it comes to the sense of humor. Not everyone's is the same.

I live with a guy, he's actually my mom's friend's kid, age 23, who was very sheltered and has difficulty understanding people. He might have some mild form of aspergers, I don't know. He's getting better, but he has to proactively remind himself to not say the wrong thing or to intentionally focus in order to pick up on subtleties.

He's gets easily offended at jokes directed at him, in part because of low self-esteem and in part because he has little experience dealing with the outside world. Self-deprecating humor is actually pretty advanced, as it requires one to be somewhat comfortable with who they are.

You can deflect and say "I'm just trolling haha" but I understand and empathize with you.

drewsdeville
11-02-10, 07:22 PM
See, now that's a little better. That's a hyperbole I can appreciate - I actually cracked a smile there. MUCH better than posting tranny pictures.

+1 :highfive:

Jesda
11-02-10, 07:35 PM
I really do live with him though. While the story sounds a bit off, its genuine, and I find him terribly frustrating and quite embarrassing, especially when I have guests over. Whatever he has, I can't fix it.

Because of this, I have nothing but warm biscuits and chocolate chips to give you from now on.

http://www.layoutlounge.com/Images/Thanks_For_The_Add/images/hug-it-out-bitch.gif

drewsdeville
11-02-10, 07:38 PM
http://www.layoutlounge.com/Images/Thanks_For_The_Add/images/hug-it-out-bitch.gif
http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/LOL/3/normal_LOL-lolz.jpg (http://www.funnyforumpics.com)

Lord Cadillac
11-02-10, 08:04 PM
The only time it matters if a topic goes in a different direction is if its technical in nature. A Northstar head gasket discussion where someone suddenly asks about suspension deserves its own separate thread in case someone is searching exclusively for thread titles. In that case, I typically move the divergent post to a new thread because it has a utilitarian purpose.

That's good - we entirely agree there because a technical discussion is normally serious and provides a service.


The Lounge has no technical purpose, and you're being needlessly uptight. Maybe now that GM is linking to this forum, you want to spruce the place up, mop the floors, and make it more appealing to advertisers and visitors. I get that. I'm only here because I enjoy helping folks with their cars and to make a few friends along the way (including you and several others). I'm not sure I like the direction the forum is going in -- my favorite watering hole for the past 7 years is turning into an upscale martini bar.

In the end, its your yard, not mine, so you're obliged to landscape it how you see fit.

I don't entirely disagree with you because when I made the first post about staying on topic, I FELT needlessly uptight. So I really do understand where you're coming from. This IS the "Lounge" and we should have the freedom to discuss whatever is not against the rules to discuss.

What causes some discomfort for me is the fact that we actually had to move serious discussions to the lounge because nobody paid them any attention where they belonged. Now we have these potentially important discussions where we normally lounge out and relax. So I'm on the fence about how we should go about handling this in the future.

To me, it's really not about GM and advertisers. I know you probably don't believe me but it's the truth. It's about the integrity of the community. I REALLY want "serious" discussion about Cadillac here - it's a shame that the only place this can happen is in the lounge.

Yes, you're right - in the end it's my place and I ultimately have the final say on rules. But I think you know me (online) long enough to realize that I don't like having the final say without feeling confident that our members are generally comfortable. And I have certainly set the final rule in opposition to my own feelings based on the thoughts and feelings of our members - especially those who's opinions I really respect.

So the bottom line is - I want what's best for the community as a whole. I don't always have the answers so I'm very happy to hear constructive criticism. The last thing I want is for people to become uncomfortable here. I don't want it to be too uptight (suits and ties) - and at the same time - I don't want it to be overly relaxed (underwear)...


I see the validity of both of your points, but this is a relatively meaningless discussion to begin with (as far as it relates in any possible way to Cadillac discussion). How much life does one actually think this thread could have had? I certainly can't imagine any possible scenario where someone's search would have terminated in this thread being what they were looking for. If a thread of this nature gets to the point where you have to ask to veer it back on topic, perhaps it would be best to just close the thread with a short explanation.

I wanted to close the thread. However, I'm not THAT uptight. :)

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-02-10, 08:27 PM
I find transvestites disgusting, but I see the humor in the thread. Lots of most famous comics have a really "blue" sense of humor, meaning it's just dirty, gross sexual innuendo. Ever hear Bob Saget on stage? Completely opposite of his persona on Full House. Jesda and I both share that dark, dirty, perverted sense of humor. Some won't get it, and there aren't always places for it. A lot of the places that I call on for work (dealerships and independent garages) have a few different guys that love to tell dirty jokes, and I'm always happy to hear new ones, but I'm not one to start telling jokes, because I don't really think thats something that goes along with the workplace, especially with people I don't really know, but I'm not offended to hear any.

When I was younger, I used to think that all those dirty jokes and pranks were kids play, but as I get out in the world more, I know that those will never go away, no matter where you go or what age you're dealing with. People love dirty jokes.

Jesda
11-02-10, 08:28 PM
Its all good Sal. When I come to Florida you can even the score by getting me a gin and tonic.













By "even" I'm excluding the free drinks you handed out back in Chicago. :cool: :D

Lord Cadillac
11-02-10, 08:32 PM
Definitely. I'm always up for a few drinks. Have you seen my Facebook page lately? :p


Its all good Sal. When I come to Florida you can even the score by getting me a gin and tonic.













By "even" I'm excluding the free drinks you handed out back in Chicago. :cool: :D

Stingroo
11-02-10, 08:36 PM
Bob Saget on stage is HILARIOUS, but holy shit is he crude. LOL

Jesda
11-02-10, 08:39 PM
When I was younger, I used to think that all those dirty jokes and pranks were kids play, but as I get out in the world more, I know that those will never go away, no matter where you go or what age you're dealing with. People love dirty jokes.

Its cathartic. The best thing in the world is the freedom of being so comfortable with yourself and your reputation that you can verbally "hang brain" without consequence. :cool2:

One of my favorite comedians is Eddie Izzard. He does his routine in makeup and a dress (seems like a naturally British thing to do), then goes on to tell off-color jokes and stories about world history, religion, and economics. Its crude while stealthily intelligent.

gdwriter
11-02-10, 08:42 PM
By "even" I'm excluding the free drinks you handed out back in Chicago. :cool: :DGood Lord, if I were to get even with whoever bought me all those vodka martinis in Chicago that led to :fallingover: I'd end up bankrupt.

As for the rest of the most recent discussion here :yawn:

Lord Cadillac
11-02-10, 08:49 PM
Haha! Hey, I didn't really buy THAT many drinks that night.. But everybody had a good time. Right? :p I wish more of the group was there at that point in the night...


Good Lord, if I were to get even with whoever bought me all those vodka martinis in Chicago that led to :fallingover: I'd end up bankrupt.

As for the rest of the most recent discussion here :yawn:

drewsdeville
11-02-10, 09:07 PM
I find transvestites disgusting, but I see the humor in the thread. Lots of most famous comics have a really "blue" sense of humor, meaning it's just dirty, gross sexual innuendo. Ever hear Bob Saget on stage? Completely opposite of his persona on Full House. Jesda and I both share that dark, dirty, perverted sense of humor. Some won't get it, and there aren't always places for it. A lot of the places that I call on for work (dealerships and independent garages) have a few different guys that love to tell dirty jokes, and I'm always happy to hear new ones, but I'm not one to start telling jokes, because I don't really think thats something that goes along with the workplace, especially with people I don't really know, but I'm not offended to hear any.

When I was younger, I used to think that all those dirty jokes and pranks were kids play, but as I get out in the world more, I know that those will never go away, no matter where you go or what age you're dealing with. People love dirty jokes.

This is pretty good, I can agree with most of this.

Earning most of my money through school in the trucking industry, I probably get the best of the best when it comes to dirty humor. Perhaps this is part of the reason for my immunity, because now that I think about it, I'm the complete opposite of you. I used to appreciate it more when I was younger, say middle school through high school graduation. After that, coincidentally when I started my trucking days, it seems that my appreciation slowly wore off. When you walk into the bathroom every morning at work and two guys in stalls across the bathroom are reciting today's juicy fart joke (take juicy as an adjective to fart or joke, whichever you prefer), it kind of gets old after a while.

My sense of humor has gotten particularly dry since then, which is why the blunt in-your-face humor we are talking about now really doesn't do much for me. Not as much wit involved in my humor preference, so it really clashes as we saw in this thread.

In stark contrast to Bob Saget, who I coincidentally despise, I love Bill Murray.

Aron9000
11-03-10, 02:24 AM
I have a really dirty/sophmoric sense of humor as well, and a lot of times I will just go WAY out there and say shit that people are thinking but probably think shouldn't be said. Sometimes it sticks and its hilarious, sometimes it tends to blow up in my face, but hey my friends admire me because I do speak my mind. That tranny joke was pretty funny, but I do have my limits, NO larry the cable guy.

drewsdeville
11-03-10, 11:01 AM
I have a really dirty/sophmoric sense of humor as well, and a lot of times I will just go WAY out there and say shit that people are thinking but probably think shouldn't be said. Sometimes it sticks and its hilarious, sometimes it tends to blow up in my face, but hey my friends admire me because I do speak my mind. That tranny joke was pretty funny, but I do have my limits, NO larry the cable guy.

Definitely.

In the end, what I'm taking away from this discussion is that Jesda can be relatively conceded. I learned something and will make adjustments in the future to compensate for that.

Here's how I sum up this discussion.

Drew: I didn't find the tranny picture funny.

Jesda: OMGZ d00d, that just 'cause u dont kno what humor is 'cause u r teh suk. My humor is teh pwnz. I rock. U just arent good enuff to understand it, noob.

Drew: Not really, I just don't care for that humor type - it doesn't make me laugh.

Jesda: If u dont like my humor then u probably suk at life. Owned.

Same theme as usual here. A disagreement of preferences results in defensive walls being thrown up. Really sounds similar to what Rick was noting every so often. By the way, did he decide he's done here?

Too many people here take differing opinions as a cut against themselves. It's not like that. Stop it. I know you enjoy that type humor, I'm not going to change that and I'm not going to try. I just voiced my opinion on it. I thought the tranny picture was stupid and anything but funny. Deal with it. I'm not asking for justification or reasoning behind anyone else's sense of humor. I just don't like it and voiced that, in this public forum.

Self respect and pride is important. But when you let it blur your vision and let it stop you from recognizing and appreciating opinions outside of your own, it can result in some serious social issues. Examples, on larger levels, are spread out all over history.

And on that note, I'm done with this thread.

gary88
11-03-10, 11:18 AM
http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/6936/2rgdrf4.gif

Jesda
11-03-10, 11:39 AM
Definitely.

In the end, what I'm taking away from this discussion is that Jesda can be relatively conceded. I learned something and will make adjustments in the future to compensate for that.

Here's how I sum up this discussion.

Drew: I didn't find the tranny picture funny.

Jesda: OMGZ d00d, that just 'cause u dont kno what humor is 'cause u r teh suk. My humor is teh pwnz. I rock. U just arent good enuff to understand it, noob.

Drew: Not really, I just don't care for that humor type - it doesn't make me laugh.

Jesda: If u dont like my humor then u probably suk at life. Owned.

Same theme as usual here. A disagreement of preferences results in defensive walls being thrown up. Really sounds similar to what Rick was noting every so often. By the way, did he decide he's done here?

Too many people here take differing opinions as a cut against themselves. It's not like that. Stop it. I know you enjoy that type humor, I'm not going to change that and I'm not going to try. I just voiced my opinion on it. I thought the tranny picture was stupid and anything but funny. Deal with it. I'm not asking for justification or reasoning behind anyone else's sense of humor. I just don't like it and voiced that, in this public forum.

Self respect and pride is important. But when you let it blur your vision and let it stop you from recognizing and appreciating opinions outside of your own, it can result in some serious social issues. Examples, on larger levels, are spread out all over history.

And on that note, I'm done with this thread.

There's no purpose in even pretending to be friendly anymore. You're a pompous douchebag of epic proportions.

Carradine yourself.

Lord Cadillac
11-03-10, 01:17 PM
I thought the disagreement between you guys (Drew and Jesda) was over. It appeared to come to a fairly friendly end with both of you agreeing to disagree. Now out of nowhere, fuel has been added to a fire that should have been almost out. I'm not sure why that happened. Please don't let it happen again.

Thank you.

ga_etc
11-03-10, 02:05 PM
Its cathartic. The best thing in the world is the freedom of being so comfortable with yourself and your reputation that you can verbally "hang brain" without consequence. :cool2:

One of my favorite comedians is Eddie Izzard. He does his routine in makeup and a dress (seems like a naturally British thing to do), then goes on to tell off-color jokes and stories about world history, religion, and economics. Its crude while stealthily intelligent.

Holy shit, someone else who likes Eddie Izzard! He is freaking hilarious. I think his best stand up is Dress to Kill. When I'm having a shitty day I can watch that and always smile, if not outright laugh.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAOLOGGftTY&feature=related

gdwriter
11-03-10, 02:37 PM
I'm only here because I enjoy helping folks with their cars and to make a few friends along the way (including you and several others). I'm not sure I like the direction the forum is going in -- my favorite watering hole for the past 7 years is turning into an upscale martini bar.What's wrong with martinis? :alchi:

I hang out here because I've made a number of good friends, several which I've met in person and who are just as much fun in real life as they are online. And I like vigorous discussions, about cars and otherwise.

I also enjoy the occasional, sometimes frequent, diversions from the original topic. Sometimes, they're pretty damn funny, other times not so much. But you shouldn't have to work hard to enjoy a good laugh; that's counterproductive. Humor is subjective, so there's no point in passing judgment on what others find funny — especially when done with such rancor.

ga_etc
11-03-10, 03:26 PM
:yeah:

ben.gators
11-03-10, 04:52 PM
Well, Sal, was not the initial side discussion about trannies more interesting and enjoyable than current discussions and disagreements? The both are out of scope of the thread, but the first one, trannies, was more interesting!:alchi: :D

Stingroo
11-03-10, 05:14 PM
Ben, my friend, I worry about you some times.

ben.gators
11-03-10, 05:57 PM
Ben, my friend, I worry about you some times.

why?:hmm:

Bro-Ham
11-03-10, 06:34 PM
Sometimes people take life too seriously, I'm busy that day. I don't suffer fools, and I'm happy a kind member assisted me a couple months ago with how the "ignore member" feature works, which has made this forum so much more enjoyable. :) With that said, I agree with Jesda, and may I suggest the utilization of the same feature. All this talk of cocktails is making my low liquor light come on...again, so cheers to all the team players and good sports who make this Cadillac forum such a ton of fun! :)

ben.gators
11-03-10, 07:22 PM
Sometimes people take life too seriously, I'm busy that day. I don't suffer fools, and I'm happy a kind member assisted me a couple months ago with how the "ignore member" feature works, which has made this forum so much more enjoyable. :) With that said, I agree with Jesda, and may I suggest the utilization of the same feature. All this talk of cocktails is making my low liquor light come on...again, so cheers to all the team players and good sports who make this Cadillac forum such a ton of fun! :)
:yeah:

:cycle:

gdwriter
11-03-10, 08:32 PM
I like your attitude, Dave.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-03-10, 08:37 PM
Dave is good shit. We all like Dave.

Playdrv4me
11-03-10, 08:49 PM
Dave 2012.

gary88
11-03-10, 10:44 PM
:insert positive Dave comment here:

ga_etc
11-04-10, 12:49 AM
Dave 2012.

Dave as a write in for 2012. Once in office, his first initiative should be a national cocktail hour. 11am to 3pm sound about right?

Stingroo
11-04-10, 12:54 AM
And don't forget - Roo 2028.

Bro-Ham
11-04-10, 01:29 AM
Thanks everyone. :)

gdwriter
11-04-10, 01:32 AM
Dave as a write in for 2012. Once in office, his first initiative should be a national cocktail hour. 11am to 3pm sound about right?Make that 11 a.m. to 3 a.m. :alchi:

ben.gators
11-04-10, 03:59 AM
Make that 11 a.m. to 3 a.m. :alchi:

Well, after drinking late till 3AM, waking up in the morning to restart from 11AM is hard! I suggest we make it from 1PM to 3AM. In this case we have enough time to rest and sleep till late noon! :D

Bro-Ham
11-04-10, 11:25 AM
I believe in freedom, and hate worrying about inconsequential details, so let's make cocktail hour 24/7. :)

ga_etc
11-04-10, 11:41 AM
I'll buy that, Dave. I know most work days would be made more tollerable with a drink in my hand. :D