What this cumbersome exercise did show us is that we need to focus on things we can control but haven't been paying enough attention to: aerodynamics, weight, packaging--sound familiar? Just as we're learning in other areas that have to do with energy, a good way to progress is to find the places where you're just losing it, or wasting it.
Thinking that the X-Prize would ever result in some magic car is pretty naive, but we (and automakers) should still pay attention to its one clear result: 'Re-examine the physics,' as one recent car rag noted. And I'm sure that the white coats who pasted those mules together learned a couple of other things that might be beneficial in the future. Not a total loss.
Is the titling/swapping story a little fishy? I thought all XR4Ti's had six-window greenhouses (to borrow some old Cadillac terminology) and the 4-window greenhouse was only available in Europe. Does anyone know?
@Lizard_King: In a windstorm like that, if your cargo box is empty, it's over. Leaving the Salt Lake airport one evening, I saw trucks flipped everywhere (maybe 15 of them) and others hiding under overpasses. Then there was an entire freight train on its side. #googlestreetview
Do you remember when Car and Driver took a first-gen Taurus SHO and a wagon, and then SHO-ized the wagon? These parts are largely interchangeable--they were designed that way. It can't be that much more expensive for car companies to offer models like the CTS-V in all body styles. Or in all trim levels. The economies of scale are already there. Not allowing customers to order outside of the options narrowly defined by the marketing people is silly. It makes me yearn for the days when every car could be ordered by the line-item in a cigarette-smoke-filled, paneling-lined dealership.
@nataku8_e30: I know what you mean. It reminds me of those first-grade economics lessons about producers and consumers and exactly where we, as six-year-olds, fit into the maelstrom. Or those beautifully typeset charts from the Fifties telling you where sugar comes from. #cardesign
@Jim-Bob: My first car was Mom's '83 sedan: white with Fern Gray full vinyl roof and seats just like yours, chrome wire wheel covers, and a 307 4bbl. I could fit the whole cross country team in it. It was fantastic. And fast for a car of its nature.
One word: skiing. If you're supposed to fly into Telluride, Co., you'll usually be diverted to Montrose. And if you're lucky, they'll pile you, your luggage, and your skis into one of these and drive you there. Scenic and surreal. And you ain't gonna get stuck.
My first car was a '92 SL2 5-speed. It was, perhaps, mid-pack among the Civics and Corollas of its day, but delightfully non-GM in design, quality, and performance (except for the Delco in the dash). It was the closest Saturn Corporation (and later GM) ever came to truly competing in the segment. Each successive generation got weirder instead of better. Crying shame. I would like to see a 2010 SL2 descended from continual development of the caliber Saturn showed in the development of the first car.
I should clarify....there is a two-letter plant code in the DOT numbering sequence on the inner ring of information stamped into the tire. The two letters immediately after "DOT" indicate the tire plant, which you can cross-reference to the Harriger list above. BTW, I bought Yokohama Avid TRZ's for my stick-shift 626 and they may be the best all-around tires I've ever had.