RaZor

I agree - I'd order/buy one today if I could get the Sport with a 6sp MT and if a 2.0L EB - I'd done it yesterday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fI446mXonu0&feature=player_embedded#!

Don't know if it has changed much in the last 10 yrs, but from the migration/demo stats that I saw back then (and confirmed by my extensive travels around the state back in the nineties), generally speaking the western portions of the Florida are inhabited by mid-western transplants, that came down I-75, and still use it to go back now and then. The eastern portions (especially South Florida from St Lucie county south) have large populations/concentrations of transplants from the Upper Mid-Atlantic states and especially from NJ & NY -- those that came down (and use) I-95 (to go back and forth). Not sure when it was, but I did see figures that over 5 million NY'ers had migrated to FL - with the vast majority of them residing in the 5 counties in the area noted above. There are pockets of concentrations, like Boynton Beach, Delray Beach, and Boca Raton (in lower Palm Beach county), that practically everyone that you meet/see, out socially or in restaurants, events, etc, are former New Yorkers. Of course, there are many exceptions (my cousin from WI just bought a condo in Coral Gables which is in the Miami-area), but the demographics of origin for transplants have been for the most part along the lines of those two interstate highways.

There is no doubt (at least in my mind) that MS is responsible for holding the business computerization back - right from the start. Back in the old days, I computerized my company with a network of Televideo workstations running on an OS produced by a company (Digital Research) called Turbo-Dos and it ran flawlessly. Now this was before IBM released that first PC. If the story was true, Digital Research was the company that was in that meeting with IBM and Gates (at the time he had purchased MS but did not even have working OS (WIN)) competing for the contract to produce the OS for their PC - and there was communication mistake about who the IBM execs were going to "go with" just about lunchtime: one was referring to who they were to lunch with, and one thought he meant "go with" in regards of contracting with to produce the OS for their PC (still not released). That mistake (if true), was a big one IMO as DR already had a network OS that ran flawlessly (I had 10 working stations in my company complete point of sale (POS) inventory reduction, ordering and complete job costing, estimating, and every business application that you can imagine -- all menu driven for the user (with passwords for access for different users - you don't want people that should not have access to payroll - to have access to it). We had it in 1979-80. It was a huge back-step in technology as when IBM went with Gates - he was starting from scratch and DR faded into the woodwork (along with Televideo etc). It was years before Netware (etc - ie, networking) was even available with MS and most early attempts at networking workstations were difficult to implement. Gates ruthlessly built a monopoly (squashing all competitors) and from there on out - the whole industry was held back (again IMO). AFAIC, we lost just about a decade when Windows took over the industry because it was close to 10 years later when we were just getting back to where we were with the Televideos' and DR's OS - back in 1979. DR's system was like Apple's OS in that it was extremely easy to use (for anyone), did not have any of the headaches and bluescreens etc, etc, etc. Then along came the WWW and there was a whole new problem with WIN --> vulnerability. Every once in a while, I wonder how far along we would be with computers - if DR had been awarded that contract - instead of Gates.

There are a few key points that are being overlooked here. After Carson, if you remember, Letterman had gone to CBS (because he wanted the TS - and didn't get it) and that first year or so, Leno and Letterman shows both were essentially NEW shows (TS with a new host). Of course, there was a up and down battle with Leno winning out fairly quickly. . . and then he built on that to win handily for around a decade and a half. That is a different situation than when Conan took over the TS. Even though he did well at first he soon dropped to third place behind Letterman and Nightline. The TS with Conan was on track to loose $20 million in its first year (after being a gold-mine for many decades). I know it is difficult for people who have never been in an decision-making executive position, to point the finger and blame them, but if you actually think about it for more than an emotional moment, they (NBC) were in a real predicament. Conan had demanded (or he would leave back in 2004) the TS - even though his brand of humor tends to be polarizing (Triumph the masturbating dog is funny once or twice to most - after that it gets rather old) - it is questionable whether he will ever prevail to the masses. If Leno had just said, "OK - I am out of here", then there is little doubt that he would have gone to another network and would have been heads-up against Conan & the TS (as he easily has at least another decade before he retires - he loves to work) in the same time slot. Within a matter of months, Conan's TS was obviously not working out as his ratings had dropped like a rock. If you look back at the ratings, he did pretty good to start with - but lost a major part of his audience to the competition - in short, he could not hold them. NBC was (duly) afraid that if that (Leno leave) happened, Conan (and the TS) would end up in last (4th) place and a real money-pit - - instead of a gold-mine. I assure you that NBC execs knew that Leno is not ready to retire yet and would just become the competition - after all Carson was in his 70's when he retired and Leno is just 60. What would YOU do as an executive - who has to make the decision? Remember this whole scenario was caused by Conan demanding that HE get the TS (or he would leave - back in 04). Very much like the proverbial "hot-shot" unproven young sales exec that demands that HE get the company's big accounts - only to loose those big accounts when he gets them. That is when the mistake was made -- back then. NBC should have told him "No" and he probably would have gone to Fox and they (Fox) would have ended up in 4th (last) place (based on his performance). But Conan fans - have no fear - we will see how this pans out as Conan is talking with Fox about a show right now and is putting together a road-tour to all the major Fox city markets to drum up support and boost his negotiating position with Fox. He will most likely end up in the same time slot this fall - against Leno, Letterman, Nightline, Kimmel and Lopez. So you Coco-fans will most likely get to watch him again. . . at least for a while, because if history is any indication, he is going to have a steep hill to climb to get (and hold) ratings (and make the show profitable). Remember he did poorly against just Letterman and Nightline last time out. Speaking of ratings -- Leno immediately resumed the top spot in ratings once back on the TS - even beating Nightline within less than 2 weeks. All this BS about "you gotta give him time" or the "lead-in" was bad and was the reason his show tanked is just that -- BS. Like people don't use their remotes and switch a channel to see a show that they want to watch . . . Give me a break. Excuses - not reasons. When all is said and done, that is what it's really all about -- ratings -- as they determine what the network can charge for ads (revenue) for a specific show. Conan tanked and if they had given him a whole year - or even 2 years - it would have just resulted in bigger loses for NBC. It will be interesting to see who prevails next fall. If Conan is smart (I think that he is), he will not try to get too much for himself, as that just makes it more difficult for the show to become profitable in a short time. Even Fox is not going to want a money-pit. Business is business - it's all about making a profit. I have never been a fan of his (I don't care for his brand of humor) - but I wish him well. When he was a writer for SNL - it was not the best of years for that show either. He will have a tough hill to climb in that time slot. Oh, and remember that is what he refused to accept a change in - the time slot -- even though his contract with NBC did not specify any time slot. . . let alone the 11:35 to 12:35 time slot. He obviously has a big ego - and that is most likely going to put on the line later this year. 'Should be interesting to see what happens.

. . . or they don't like the Commander-in-Chief. You're right, of course, but then we don't know (at least I don't) all that is NOT reported. Has anyone read anything about the father of said child? AFAIC she had plenty of time to come up with child-care plan (required by Army) and she didn't have a Plan B - which indicates to me that getting pg in the first place was a 'plan'. Our society gives women significant latitude on most every aspect of life (responsibility). For instance . . . you never hear about 'dead-beat' mothers, do you? And yet, I saw figures (a few years ago) where 40% of non-custodial mothers that are supposed to pay child-support are dead-beats . . . and a significant percentage are never even forced to pay ANY child-care support payments whatsoever. I know two guys that became the custodial parent in divorce and the courts never even suggested, let along demand, that the mother pay child-support. Neither one ever received a cent. Just the way things are. . .

With all of the contraception methods/information available to peeps these days, if a woman gets pg these days, she either is very irresponsible - or she has a 'plan'. I realize no method is fool-proof, but those that take the necessary precautions (if they do not want to get pg) . . . don't get pg. I wouldn't be surprised at all if she had a plan (as deployment looms closer and closer - it can be very overwhelming for many peeps - quite a bit different than one enlists with the knowledge that they will get deployed). I'll never forget that 27 hour flight in that old Tiger Airlines smelly/dirty 707 to Nam and the approach into Cam Ranh Bay at night and seeing incoming hitting on the airport. Probably was the best answer to the situation though - as she will not have a dishonorable - but looses all her benefits. It cost the Army (us taxpayers) a lot of money to train her to the point she was at - and then not get any return on the investment. She made her choices - now she needs to live with them.

This past Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5 to 4 decision to do away with any limitations to corporate funding of political campaigns. The vote was the five conservative judges vs the 4 non-conservative judges. The right wing have devoted endless attention to the rights of the "unborn," but now thanks to the decision of the 5 conservative SCOTUS judges, they are recognizing the rights of the never born. The question now arises: Have we taken a giant step toward Corporate Communism? Groups such as the right-leaning Tea Party (not mention the constant diatribes of every GOP politico in existence) have based much of their rhetoric on the fear of government takeover of our lives. And yet, the SCOTUS decision single-handedly puts us on the fast track of a complete corporate takeover, where corporations dominate and even dictate who our elected officials will be and how they will vote. There are over 16,000 formerly American owned corporations that are now owned by foreign companies (foreign interests). Could this be a big step towards that New World Order that Bush41 spoke of . . . only he did not make it clear that the Order would be ruled by Multi-national corps, did he? Well, it didn't take very long : Murray Hill for Congress

According to memory, since 1989, when Chevy wanted to use the FWD Lumina as their car. Chevy has always got everything they wanted with Nascar. Remember after Earnhardt died that M Helton stated that Dale called him EVERY morning at 7AM? Now he was in charge of the rules at the time and Helton has never exuded integrity IMO and it wasn't too difficult to see why changes, that were made when Mr E complained, played out on the track. In fact, a neighbor (who followed Nascar totally) put together an analysis sheet that kept track of rule changes, laps lead by each manuf, wins/finishing order . . . basically every aspect of analysis (he is an engineer) and he could prove without any doubt that Chevy got overwhelming preferential treatment in the rules (M Helton). Once the Lumina was shoe-horned in . . . the cars have not been "stock cars" ever since. While it is true that Nascar appears to have attempted to produce "parity" - that is an illusion in that, yes parity, but with an advantage to to certain teams (Hendricks). It shows in the results (laps lead etc) as it doesn't take much once you get 'parity' to provide an edge to specific entities - even something like additional testing given to just one team (Hendricks) can make the difference when changes are mandated (COT). As one friend pointed out, "In prof Bass fishing tournaments, they give polygraph test to all participants. In Nascar, they need to give them to the rules makers and Tech inspectors." Which brings up why they will never go back to what you (and most traditional fans) would like to see -- real "stock" cars which is, they (the Frances/Helton etc) do not want to give any control back to the manufacturers and they want to use their COT cars (esp if the can get the actual manuf's to still pony up sponsorship $ - even though there is no connection to the manuf' cars). Some think that they could foresee the day when all manuf's pull all of their sponsorship money out and that is why they came up with the COT - as they would not be harmed . . .in any way. . . as the COT's would have no ties the real cars anyway. But that is part of their arrogance. If all 4 (manuf's) pulled 100% of their $ support . . .Nascar would be in a real hurt. Actually, they already are in a steep decline. You are right and the rules changes (emphasis) that they are implementing for this year are right along those lines. It proves that they too are seeing the declining numbers and dissatisfaction with their fans and their "safety concerns" will be put on the backburner to stop the decline. Check this out Personally, I would like to see the D3 pull 100% of their $ support out of Nascar and let them go their own way . . .on their own. Put the $ toward production car development etc. . . something that they will continue to need to do to meet the future demands. Some highlights: In short . . .Nascar has just admitted what everyone (outside Nascar and its fans) have been saying: It really is NOT racing . . . it's racertainment. Looking forward to a good season with Grand AM (both Rolex and CTC series) and the ALMS and haven't watched a Nascar race in almost a decade.

You may be right . . . I was only going on what what stated in the release:

For more info on the 302R go HERE Entry lists for the CTC have not differentiated which teams will be using the 302R so far - just list them as Mustang GT. It is good to see that most, if not all, of the CTC will be televised this year. Should be interesting with the 'Maros, Challengers, M3's, S4, WRX and Porkers duking it out with the 'Stangs. As IMSA stated, info on whether the engines for DPs have been changed has not been released yet. Possibly more info will be available in the first televised show on the upcoming Rolex24 : DATE: Friday, January 22 TIME: 11:59 p.m. ET (plus additional 4 times) NETWORK: SPEED The hour-long special will be a 'behind the scenes' of the Rolex 24 at Daytona. The show is supposed to include team and driver interviews, race shop tours and rare event footage from 1962. Possibly there might be disclosure in those interviews, although most race teams tend to remain hush-mouthed about such things - for as as they can. I would suspect that most DP teams will be using the engines that they had for several months (last season and before December's testing) - for a 24Hr endurance race - as opposed to a brand new engine - so as to not have a repeat of last year's Bosch crank sensor problem at the 24Hr.

While I can understand the justification for a SRA for the straight-liners, I fail to see why Ford would not at least make an IRS available (at least on selected models) of the Stang. Correct me if I am wrong (I am not a suspension expert by any means), but . . .a Watt's Link (WLB) improves handling in a car with a SRA -- by controlling the lateral axle movement . . . essentially limiting the axle movements to only vertical movement. The panhard bar (PHB) and the watts link bar (WLB)essentially do the same thing. My understanding is that a PHB will allow the rear to shift laterally a small but predictable amount as it goes through its range if motion. While both will improve what happens during cornering . . . say, if your tires encounter a bump (or uneven surface), the tire has tendency to bounce into the air, and to lose contact with the pavement. When this happens mid-corner, the force is lateral, so the car moves laterally - responding to the cornering load and if power is being applied at the same time . . . the result is what most refer to as "the rear steps out". With a PHB, or a WLB, there is a marked improvement of a SRA in handling in the way the axle responds to cornering loads . . . in short, the way the axle loads and unloads the chassis. An experienced driver certainly can feel the difference of the . . . now limited vertical only movement of the roll center instead of the up and down and the side to side movement of the rear roll center. An important factor with both the PHB and a WLB is the stiffness of the bushings used. However, even though the FR500C and now the new Boss 302R's will probably continue to do well against other road racing cars with IRS, I fail to see why Ford should not make it available (selected models) in order to be able to be homologated for various sanctions. The PHB and WLB are almost as good as a proper IRS, but why not have the best axle setup available? Then, of course, there is the real advantage that a IRS can do -- that the PHB and WLB . . . cannot. A proper PHB or WLB provides better feedback to the driver during performance cornering . . . ie., is easier to read what it is doing and therefore increasing the confidence of the driver. You can get the car to "set" faster and better in cornering as a WLB (or a PHB) will improve your car's corner exit speeds and greatly improve the transitional handling under power-on and power-off (in cornering). But, a PHB or a WLB will NOT improve the overall ride of the car (even when not performing performance cornering maneuvers) . . . like a IRS. Hopefully, they will make it available . . . someday.

I will vouch for Flowmaster -- very good quality IMO. Put their cat-back on my son's ZX-3 2L 6 years ago, still sounds great and looks the same as the day we installed it. Put their system on the F150 and the thing that sold me was like Steven said above - sounds great but isn't aggravating at highway or cruise speeds. Magna and Borla tend to be a little too loud at those times (my bro' had Magna put on his truck and it just is plain too loud most of the time). Their systems are super easy to install yourself - if you are that sort of person. I certainly can afford it, but prefer to do what is practical myself. One of these days, they'll get so complicated that may end - but until then, I don't mind doing it myself. Might be worth seeing who locally installs Flowmaster - I imagine they'll be hungry (most are these days) if you'd rather have it done for you.

Or, did you all just get played by the Ruskies?

With the exception of during the NFL season, WWE & WWE Raw are, almost all of the time, the highest rated cable TV shows. Even then (during the NFL season), they come in second (such as last week with 5.7 million viewers of WWE on Monday night @9PM & another 5.4 million viewers For the 10PM show -- to 12 million for Monday Night Football). Many of those same people (that watch WWE and go to their events) call WWE/RAW a sport -- but that doesn't mean that it is. Look on any sports coverage (print/digital/otherwise) and you won't see it covered as a sport. It's entertainment. Very much like FOX in regards to "news". Probably many of the same viewers. Didn't I see it some where even FOX says that its news coverage ends at 5PM. The rest is commentary. However, they have been exposed countless times making commentary during their "news" coverage. That is not journalism. A true journalist will never let you know what their (or their employer's) opinions are . . . and do not make comments on the news - they just report it (which also means what they chose to report on). I remember reading an article last year that one news media reviewing organization said that Al Jazeera had more balanced coverage than Fox (during the period that they actually documented what was reported and commented on by each organization).

I agree. I have a neighbor that has a 911. Trades it in every 4 years. Current one is black and is his daily driver. He (they) also have a Class A RV that is custom and cost over 7 figures. He spent $80k on a special fence/gates to conceal it (city/neighborhood has deed restrictions on being able to see it from street etc). He or his wife never have taken it out to Palm Beach International Raceway for Porsche driver meets (Ferrari also has them there every year) which is 6 miles away - and gives you "track time" (to allow you to stretch its legs). Personally, I think he would be scared shitless. I know/have known dozens of people that own these kinds of cars. Almost all do it for the status. Like an attorney friend that has owned Porkers for 20+ years said, "It's really a chic magnet" To which his wife immediately responded (at a party), "And a "hunk" magnet too" I don't think that they are in an open marriage - they just both really love the attention that the car gets them - from the opposite sex. Most people that buy $100,000 plus cars do it because of status - that is what they want to be seen in - in their mind, it defines them. The Mustang will never fit the bill in their minds. The GT did for some - and if Ford ever desires to conquer some of that market - it would need to be along the lines of the GR1 - or something of that nature that costs the correct amount ($100k +) and has the appropriate amount of luxury and status. Status - how important is it? Look-up the percentage of people that lease luxury cars - instead of purchasing them. Leasing allows them to go higher than they can really afford - to get that status. Along a similar line is the "chic in the roadster" thingee. Why have chics always liked to buy roadsters (hence rendering most of these cars from Boxsters, to Miatas, to Soltices, way back to MGBs, etc - chick cars)? A big part of it is they want to be thought of "sporty", a "free spirit", "exciting" (etc) and they love to put the top down . . . to be seen. A very small percentage are avid sports car enthusiasts.

It is actually very simple. U.S. financial generosity to our (former enemies - but now) allies after WW II included giving them special trade advantages to help them speed up their post-war recovery. We agreed that they could rebate to their producers any "indirect" taxes they paid on goods they exported to us, and they could also impose an equal charge on any U.S. products they imported. Unfortunately, we have allowed this to continue - & even though their recovery happened long ago - it still is going on today. This is (still) how it works: A German manufacturer of a car exported to the United States gets a rebate from the German government equal to the indirect taxes paid in Germany, a type of tax called the Value Added Tax (VAT). Since the VAT rate in Germany is 19%, the German carmaker gets a 19% tax rebate on every vehicle exported to the United States. That's a significant subsidy to German auto manufacturers which enables them to sell cars in America for much less than they sell for in Germany. But what about American cars exported to Germany? A U.S. manufacturer exporting an auto to Germany must pay the German government a VAT equivalent tax of 19 percent of the price of the car plus 19 percent of all the costs of transportation, insurance, docking and duties involved in getting the car to Germany. The U.S. company gets no credit for corporate taxes it pays in the United States (BTW this applies to most products not just vehicles). The VAT advantage also creates a perverse incentive for U.S. companies to move their plants and jobs to other countries so they, too, can take advantage of the VAT subsidy. You would think that unions would have united against the continuance of this unfair trade policy long ago. Let's see, wasn't there something like 1.5 million UAW members around 1970? How many are there today? What 140-150,000? I wonder why . . . oh by the way, German (union) workers are the highest paid in the world. Maybe the UAW got target-fixated (on the wrong target).

As a person that has been in both levels of employment -- I did spend 3 years as a union operating engineer, worked one summer in a union foundry during college, and then spent the rest of my employed life in upper management -- when I read this, it really boggles my mind . . . and I wonder if if everyone doesn't get with reality . . . the only way that Michigan (and other union states) are ever going to come back (and I grew up -- well at least high school and college years in Michigan) . . . is if they change the laws to 'right-to-work'. Good lawd - talk about shooting yourself in the foot (pretty soon you become totally hobbled). BTW as a former business owner, I took such good care of my employees, I had no problem with getting the cream of the crop in my industry.

Oh there is much pollution here in the US and probably more to come/deal with. If you want to get up to speed on a little known problem, there is one show that deals with a little known situation that has pretty much destroyed many lives of people in NM and Colorado - with less than 5k "wells" so far and there are plans for more than 60k http://planetgreen.discovery.com/travel-ou...cking-land.html to come. It is estimated that 240,000 water mains break each year in the US. The most affected area is the so-called “Rust-belt” east of the Mississippi. Water mains leak 6 billion gallons of drinking water per day. NYC looses 10%, Atlanta 14%; Buffalo looses 40% - of their drinking water – due to leaks. Montgomery County, Maryland has the oldest and leakiest water pipes in the entire country. You might have seen coverage of the River Road water main break a couple years ago. They have experienced 4,000 breaks in the last two years alone (477 breaks in one month). One of the problems is a phenomenon called tubercles – which is a build up over time, trapping tiny solids including micro-biological growths, inside the pipe to the point that the pipe becomes completely clogged (even an 8” pipe in just 40 years). With all of these breaks there are is a danger that contaminants can get in – which is why “boil orders” are issued when breaks occur. Water borne disease will become a serious problem - if we don’t get it together and really correct these situations. You might recall an outbreak of crytosporidium (an organism that lives in the fecal matter of animals) in Milwaukee in 1993 created the largest water-borne disease outbreak in the history of the U.S. 400,00 (1/4 of the city) became sick. To think that we will not be faced with a growing number of these outbreaks is naïve. Then there’s our sewage system. St Louis is one of the worse examples. It’s sewage system is so bad, it is a disaster. The first problem is that St Louis has a combined sewer system that funnels rain water runoff and raw sewage – into the same pipes. They are easily over-whelmed and spew millions of gallons of raw sewage into local streams and rivers. Storm water and waste water in the same pipe – emptying into the Mississippi River (13 billion gallons dumped every year) and other waterways. The microbes and such are essentially put back into the eco-system as the waterways cannot handle such a great amount. Nationally, that translates to 900 billions gallons of sewage into our waterways every year – just about the same amount of water that spills over Niagara Falls every 21 days. More than 700 of our cities have this type of combined sewage/runoff pipe systems that pollute our waterways. We might have to look to the Ruskies for help somewhere down the line at the rate we are going . . . Link

Yeah, and the number one ranking in cable shows is most often WWE (typ only topped by the NFL during football season) - so what does that prove? Only that there are a core of a certain type of people. As far as 'bestsellers list' goes, I guess you are one of the uninformed that doesn't know that many bestseller lists now have had to adopt a notation (NYT, the most desired list to be on, uses a dagger next to the book title) that identifies which books have had bulk-buys reported by retailers. What that means (and it has been going on for years) is that RW sources (Scaife is one of the most prolific offenders) orders specific RW books in large numbers and then either gives them away, they end up on lists/sources like http://www.conservativebookclub.com/DefaultJoin.asp? for $1, or they are even recycled/reissued back to the retailer. It has been documented many, many times that retailers have received shipments from publishers of conservative books that still have the sticker on them from when they were sold before (bought in a bulk order) by the retailer . . . which if you cannot comprehend what that means, is that the numbers are not indicative of people actually buying these books - just that they are recycled through the retailers, often more than once. It's been going on for quite a long time and it includes Limbaugh's, Coulter's, and many other conservative books - many of which, never appeared on the list without the 'dagger'. For instance, go to this link You'll note the the so-called number one non-fiction is Beck's book Note the (†) Scroll down the page and you will see this BTW, most of these bestseller list report for a specific time frame (usually a week) and some weeks weeks show a dagger - others do not. Some books (like Coulter's) had a dagger in te listing week after week, after week. A better indicator of the popularity of a book is amazon.com, which does not seem as prone to the bulk-ordering scheme. When in doubt, I compare the NY Times list with the Amazon list. Some people can be fooled most of the time.

Be still my (rapidly) beating heart . . . I actually agree with many in this thread (even Ranger - holy crap, it's time to go make a stiff Vespers Martini!!!). As far as legalization of drugs, just ask yourself how effective Prohibition was . . . did it forestall the use of booze (no - actually increased its use) and because of the profit potential, the mob was created and in many Red States, moonshiners are still very prevalent . . . and in dry counties across the south, there are many corrupt local authorities that benefit ($$$) from its prohibition. The only way that it can be controlled is if it is regulated (legalized or at least decriminalized). User taxes can pay for all enforcement, rehab, and any other programs that will be necessary. People are going to use this stuff whether it's legal or not - it would be wiser to eliminate the potential high profits for the drug pushers (cartels)-- essentially putting them out of business overnight. BTW there have already been battles (automatic fire) with the cartels across the border. Mexico will never get out of the hole it is in until they have bona fide land reform (Wiki the history of it)

While I think that it is just wonderful that you have your fingers on the pulse of what the market wants and will buy, which after all determines whether there is a business case for a particular line, or individual vehicle, there really are a couple other factors involved here. The real determination whether a limited production vehicle should be made is, and should always be, whether it can be done profitably. That is why I stated that it will take some ingenuity within a (large) corporate structure to come up with a method to have limited production vehicles . . . and still make money on them. Of course, the product needs to be above-all-the-rest and class leading and meet the needs of those that desire this type of vehicle. While you are correct that 2-dr OR capable SUV's sales have certainly declined in recent years . . . but is that due to the execution of the vehicles available . . . or . . . just a complete collapse of desire for that type of vehicle by the masses? A few years back Yota came out with one that, at first, attracted a sizable number of customers and I started seeing them almost as soon as they hit the dealers. I disliked it from the get-go and would never even consider it (if someone gave me (a new) one - I would sell it before I would drive it). And yet, last I heard, even though sales have declined, Yota has no plans to discontinue it and instead, make some upgrades (or something - I really don't care) -- but it shows that they think that there still exists a market for this type of vehicle. Must be they have different information than you, eh? While I agree that revitalization of any Bronco would not be advisable at this time, and I am totally against Ford just throwing something together for a 'me-too' product - - somewhere down the line, I personally would like to see one done - if in the spirit of the original (even if they incorporated the styling cues of the concept), done in a class leading manner (which is why I suggested a small diesel - for efficiency and low end grunt, etc) leaving all others in the wake, and still be fairly affordable(the spirit of the original) and profitably (for Ford). Jeeps really never have been efficient (or at least for a long time). I have a neighbor that has one of the new 4dr Wranglers and I get about the same mileage (mpg) as he does -- in my extended cab, long bed F-150. That is what I am referring to in terms of execution. To use a poorly executed vehicle as the basis of whether or not its class is viable, may lead to inaccurate assumptions. Park my F150 next to his Wrangler - and realize the both get about the same mileage - is rather disturbing. It is interesting how many times I have read posts here that emphatically state that there is no market for 2 door coupes, roadsters, and all sorts of vehicles and yet other manuf's make them and sell them - I see them on the streets everyday - essentially can't go two miles on any main thoroughfare around here, without seeing several examples of those vehicles - and yet, according to most here BON, there isn't any market for them. Note: Affordability? I like Ford's idea with the Fiesta - make a small car, but slightly upscale so that it is profitable - instead of trying to make a 'me-too' small car, trying to sell it on price. IIRC the average price of new car in the US is somewhere around $25k. Anyone that cannot afford to buy a new car with terms not greater than 36 months (pay-off) -- should NOT be buying a new car IMO - they should be buying a used car until such time that they can afford a new one. New cars are not investments, they are expenses and people need to wise up to the fact that they need to reset their priorities if they are ever going to get to the place that they can afford large expenses (like new cars). . . no matter whether they emotionally 'want/need' a specific vehicle. But I repeat- if Ford had a Bronco (as I have described above -in the spirit and execution of the orig) available today, next year, or three years down the road . . . I'd write out a check for one. But there isn't any other vehicle in that class that I would consider buying - no matter what the price. (Oh, and that would include if Ford chose to make it like the big Broncos of the eighties and nineties - no cigar)

Personally, I hope that Ford can figure out a way to produce small market vehicles . . . at a profit. I know it's difficult for large corps to do so for various reason, but actually if done right, there must be a way to utilize all of the advantages that a large corp has and apply them to smaller market vehicles. In that light, what I would like to see is modern reincarnation of the original Bronco - but this time with a small diesel (yeah, I know the 4.4L isn't ready yet . . . but I am not talking right now anyway . . . maybe after a a couple years of producing them for LR) but with the same methodology and execution of the Raptor. Yeah, I know the big Bronco sold lots more than the original, but that was then and I don't think we'll ever go back to those days. I'd write a check out for one the day they hit the dealer. Sorta along this line would do Or like this (with modern - yet functional styling). . .