Re: GM: Kill Pontiac

----- Original Message ----- From: Newsgroups: alt.autos.pontiac,rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang,alt.autos.ford Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 3:06 PM Subject: Re: GM: Kill Pontiac

In terms of capability that pretty much sums it up. The Mark VIII was a reduced function Fairmont with a more expensive looking interior, an improved ride, and less interior noise.

Ed

No, the GM vehicles we are talking about are almost exactly the same underneath. Not talking about any ford product. Never mentioned Ford. That's a unibody car. We are talking about a vehicle with a real frame. The idea is that when someone uneducated in automotive construction techniques buys a Hummer and thinks they have some unstoppable military issued supertruck when in fact what they have is a rebodied Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon.

Ya right. LOL

mike hunt

"C. E. White" wrote:

That would be a MK VII (7). I usually joke that mine is a Cougar with a gland problem. I have also referred to it as a Fairmont in disguise. ;)

So exactly what can a Lincoln Mark VIII do that a Fairmont could not do? I am not talking about costing more, looking nicer, or riding better, I am talking about real capability

- hauling people and cargo, etc.....

Ed

snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

Did they do that good job of disguising the Mark VIII from the Fairmont by changing the outer body shell, interior, wheel base, microprocessor, engine, transmission, rear and the suspension?

mike hunt

Tom Adk>

I remember when Lee Iococca was speaking about one of the cars derived from a car that as derived from a car that was derived from a K-car platform is based on the K-car: It is like calling an ax "my grandfather's ax" after replacing the handle three times and the head twice.

Jeff

I don't believe the VIII is a Fox platform, Isn't it an MN12 platform? The VII is a Fox car. No, it's not just a warmed over Fairmont, but it is based on the same chassis. There's no denying that it's roots were the Fairmont/LTD/Mustang of the mid 80s. One could say they are siblings. The Cougar and Fairmont references are tongue in cheek references to it's lineage.

The VIII and VIII were both built off the old fox chassis but hardly can one call them the same chassis any more than to say the H2 is a Yukon underneath, as the poster chose to imply

mike hunt

Tom Adk>

platform? The

I say you're correct.

Patrick '93 Cobra

Partially correct the Mark VIII chassis, like the VII, was developed from the Fox.

mike hunt

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Nope, the Mark VIII is a version of the MN12 Chassis (1993-1998) and most suspension and drivetrain elements are shared with the THunderbirds and COugars of those years.

Ed

The Mark VIII is an MN12 variation, not a Fox relation at all.

Ed

The is technically correct, but the MN12 was it self a variation of the Fox ;)

mike hunt

"C. E. White" wrote:

They share nothing of consequence. You seem to think if they share a bolt, then they are variations. I suppose using your twisted logic, the new Mustang is a variation of the Corvette chassis (which is just about as true as some of your ridiculous claims).

Ed

The new caddy shares the Corvette chassis not the Mustang. The Volvo 90, Freestyle and 500 have little in common but they too share the same basic chassis as well

You are free to believe what ever you wish. In sure they must have some fasteners in common. I know my 2005 Mustang GT convertible has the same door handles as my 2005 Lincoln LS. But of course that has nothing to do with the basic chassis they share LOL

mike hunt

"C. E. White" wrote:

Sigh as you like it. But when they don't even share basic suspension designs, I still say it is wrong to claim they are variations of the same chassis. Just becasue at some point they thought about using the LS chassis, doesn't mean the Mustang chassis is a variations of that design. Over the past 4 years stories have claimed all sort of things. In the end almost nothing is shared (chassis wise). If you don't even share suspension locating points, you aren't sharing much. Sharing the door handles is probably more significant than the chassis parts they do actually share. If you could point to one shared suspension compoennt (not including fasteners) I might feel differently.

Ed

I have tried to explain to you on several occasions what a basic chassis is and its hard points. I told you why manufactures try to make as many vehicles off that chassis as possible. I told you how a vehicles based on that chassis can be so different, when used to build another vehicles. If you want to continue to believe what you wish that is your prerogative. I'll not try again.

mike hunt

"C. E. White" wrote:

Of course the fact that you are wrong never entered your mind. You keep repeating old information. I have no idea why.

Ed