🚀 go-pugleaf

Leif Erikson wrote:
> Nexus7 wrote:
> > themouthofsauron1960@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > Nexus7 wrote:
> > > > Correct. The Miata to the driving enthusiast, the 'vette to the
> > > > lard-assed geriatric.
> > >
> > > Driving enthusiast? Horseshit! There is nothing enthusiastic about the
> > > Miata's wheezy little 160hp engine.
> >
> > I see another larde butte has joined the thread who doesn't understand
> > power to weight either.
> >
> > > be seen in something cute. The Vette is a performance car that the
> > > average moron like your self has no business being behind the wheel of.
> >
> > The 'vette is a showcase of GM's 60s geriatric technology with ample
> > hip room for el lardos to go to Dennys; why on earth would I waste my
> > money on it?
> >
> > > Wrong. Where the fuck did you learn math? The five hundred has 53.75"
> > > compared to the cobalt's 49.5 that translates into 4.25" front hip
> > > room and there is an over 7.2" difference in rear hip room.
> >
> > The point still stands you diseased fuck, that 3" translates into a lot
> > of real estate for those burger-fry-cheese-HFCS gobblers.
> >
> > > shoulder and legroom in the five hundred is considerabley more than
> > > that of the Cobalt .
> >
> > That's the point goober, the post followed up to used hip room as the
> > defining measure.
> >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Then explain the Pontiac solstice and the Saturn sky.
> > > >
> > > > Explain what about these blah copycat autos? What is it, like 20 years,
> > > > since the Miata was first made?
> > >
> > > Exactly the miata has been around since 1990 and it has been virtually
> > > unchanged, talk about long in the tooth, that Jap piece is long over
> > > due for retirement.
> >
> > No need to change perfection.
> >
> > Still the best convertible out there, unless you don't fit in it.
> >
> >
> > > do you think are going to trade in the Buick's for a shitty little
> > > miata?
>
> Oh, christ.  The mouthofsawdust said "Buick".  Didn't he see the story
> in the L.A. Times a while ago about the GM exec who said that GM never
> bothered to do any serious marketing for Buick in the past, because "as
> Americans get older, their asses get fatter, and they'll always buy
> Buicks to sit them in."
>
>
Buick has a built-in elderly market share, so serious advertisement
really isn't necessary. Furthermore Buick has been considered an old
mans car since the early 60s and Americans weren't fat then. So that
shoots that theory in the ass.

BTW another reason for GM not spending advertising dollars on Buick
could be the same reason they didn't advertise Oldsmobile. Every so
often the rumor surfaces that Buick is the next division on the GM
chopping block.