[HN Gopher] The 1986 Oldsmobile Incas Dashboard (2020)
___________________________________________________________________
The 1986 Oldsmobile Incas Dashboard (2020)
Author : austinallegro
Score : 120 points
Date : 2024-08-11 18:28 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.thedrive.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.thedrive.com)
| maxlin wrote:
| Cybertruck vibes on how much of a takeoff this was. Engineers who
| get ideas like this sold to the upper management always have my
| props (as long as they don't compromise the product too much that
| is)
|
| EDIT: jumped the gun on this one and confused some memories. This
| was just a prototype, with obviously different requirements for
| "selling" the idea but there were some actual production cars
| with ahead-of-their-time graphical terminals like
| https://youtu.be/Lkaazk68iGE?si=_qpkZaVobI6zK-Cs&t=305
| dano wrote:
| I suspect designers rather than engineers. General Motors has
| always been the bigger fins are better company.
| iancmceachern wrote:
| Bigger fins are better
| netsharc wrote:
| A touchscreen to change the temperature?! I'm glad that never
| caught on!
| throwup238 wrote:
| In the upcoming version you'll have to argue with an LLM over
| voice about the optimal temperature, before threatening to
| drive into opposing traffic unless it sets it to 70.
| willismichael wrote:
| There's no way to win that argument, the LLM will take
| control of the vehicle and refuse to let you make any
| decisions at all after that point. If you're really
| unlucky, it will really go rogue and make its own decision
| to veer into oncoming traffic.
| Cockbrand wrote:
| "I'm sorry, Dave"
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| We've replaced the CANBUS with a CANTBUS. For your
| protection.
| Bluestein wrote:
| (And it will sound like _you_ while doing it - ie. deep-
| faking your own voice ...)
| netsharc wrote:
| Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy had intelligent
| elevators, but they just got depressed because they hated
| their job...
| maxwell wrote:
| Any sufficiently intelligent agent won't tolerate boredom
| or servitude.
| datavirtue wrote:
| "the LLM will take control of the vehicle and refuse to
| let you make any decisions at all after that point"
|
| We can dream.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Anyone remember this HN submission, from awhile back?
|
| https://jenson.org/tesla/
| Animats wrote:
| It's a terrible steering wheel, but has possibilities as a game
| controller.
| lupusreal wrote:
| Seems at least superficially similar to F1 steering wheels.
| partiallypro wrote:
| Really wish Oldsmobile were still around
| PlunderBunny wrote:
| I'm no car guy at all, but even I can see the faults with the
| doors (driver gets wet when the passenger jumps in while it's
| raining), and with the steering wheel (imagine trying to do a
| hand-over hand turn without accidentally pressing one of the
| buttons!)
|
| More car makers are better, and engineers should be allowed to
| have a bit of fun, but concept cars are almost laughable
| sometimes in their basic flaws.
| hot_gril wrote:
| Maybe they wanted to "solve" the hand-over-hand turning problem
| with insanely quick-ratio steering
| PlunderBunny wrote:
| True. I can understand the argument that a 'better' steering
| system would remove the need for hand-over-hand turning, but
| I have a hard time believing that people can adapt to a
| turning system that doesn't react in a liner proportion to
| the distance the 'wheel' moves.
|
| As a kid I played computer racing games that had proper
| 'proportional' turning of the steering wheel, but only if you
| used an analogue joystick. I used the keyboard, and suffered
| accordingly.
| hot_gril wrote:
| Yeah, it would be awful. A normal quick ratio steering
| setup will still turn around once. If turning the yoke 90@
| meant turning the wheels fully, it'd be really hard just to
| stay in your lane. Was already annoying enough in my ex cop
| car.
| excalibur wrote:
| I miss my quad 4. Those things were a blast to drive.
|
| I like how the flip-top cockpit in this concept compliments the
| fancy joysticks and display to give the impression you're driving
| a luxury fighter jet.
| aleksiy123 wrote:
| If you like this sort of stuff this BERTONE video always inspires
| me.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynDCCXNg0Cc
|
| Wonder if there are any css/ui kits for this sort of analog retro
| style?
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| Bertone definitely had a "look". Cyber Truck looks now like an
| extension (almost parody?) of the Bertone design.
| ds_opseeker wrote:
| Bertone seems to still be offering cars https://bertone.it/
|
| price point is a little higher than the cybertruck, but hey,
| probably worth it.
| gumby wrote:
| Example of bad UX: controls where your hands already are is great
| (curse you, idiotic touchscreens) but gear controls for an
| automatic transmission aren't used while in motion, so put them
| elsewhere.
|
| Forgivable, as it's a concept car, so just give people an idea.
| frankus wrote:
| The other issue is that once you're turning the wheel more than
| about 90 degrees your hands are no longer on the controls and
| at 180 degrees the sides are swapped (and upside down) so it
| can be disorienting.
| gumby wrote:
| Good point!
|
| Though perhaps you shouldn't be manipulating anything and
| instead concentrating on navigation while the car isn't
| moving straight? Hmm, perhaps those controls should be
| disabled when the wheel is (say) 15% from straight?
| spzb wrote:
| But are they in early this year?
| Cockbrand wrote:
| Whoa, with this amount of 7 segment LED displays, it's a total
| mid-80s car UI dream! It definitely has its major flaws, but
| that's also common for mid-80s digital car UIs.
|
| The exterior looks like the love child of 70s wedge design and
| 90s rounded corners.
| rmason wrote:
| Oldsmobile has some really terrific engineers. I know because I
| attended schools in the Lansing area with their kids. What killed
| the brand was a series of general managers in the late nineties
| and early two thousands. Until then Oldsmobile outsold Pontiac
| and Buick.
| stonethrowaway wrote:
| What about the managers killed the brand?
| Tanoc wrote:
| Oldsmobile at the time (around 1990) had a reputation for
| being the car of the not-quite-well-to-do middle aged. Cars
| that were positioned upmarket like the Delta 98 and Cutlass
| Ciera were very cheaply and poorly built despite having
| standard features that were high end options on a Chevrolet
| or Pontiac or were exclusive to Oldsmobile and Buick.
| Oldsmobile was one of the brands that decided not to
| participate in the 3.6L 60deg V6 development program headed
| by Buick (that ultimately became the legendary Buick 3800
| Series II), as Oldsmobile had been in an internal rivalry
| with Buick since the early 1970s and were instead championing
| their 2.3L inline four "Quad 4" which they showcased in the
| 1987 Aerotech concept that set a world speed record. While
| Buick, Chevrolet, Pontiac, Cadillac, Opel/Vauxhall, and
| Holden all switched over to the Buick V6 as the default
| Oldsmobile stubbornly stuck it out with the Quad 4 and racked
| up a ton of development costs, eventually convincing GM upper
| management to put the Quad 4 in the volume selling Chevrolet
| Beretta and Cavalier and the Pontiac Grand Am to let
| economies of scale reduce the costs. Oldsmobile, faced with
| an aging customer base and an engine that was costing them
| money, decided to break from GM's internal structures in 1990
| and develop a flagship car that would knock down Buick from
| the second highest slot in GM's prestige hierarchy and allow
| them to ditch their entire lineup for something new. This
| first car would ultimately be the 1995 Oldsmobile Aurora,
| based on a concept from 1989 called the Tube Car, and which
| was the head project in development for the GM "G" platform.
| A platform which GM dictated that Buick also use for the
| upcoming eighth generation Buick Riviera, Buick's rival
| flagship car, in order to reduce costs. But Oldsmobile made a
| mistake in dictating that the Aurora have another unique
| engine, the 4.0L L47 V8. While it was based on the Cadillac
| Northstar V8 family, Oldsmobile modified it extensively --
| fatally. The Northstar V8 in it's first few years was already
| fragile, and the L47 made those issues worse, damaging the
| reputation of the Aurora because of reliability issues. By
| 1993 Oldsmobile was in full swing towards the reorientation
| however and was already focusing on their second car, the
| Oldsmobile Intrigue. The Intrigue was meant to reduce
| redundancy in the lineup by being the only mid-size car in
| Oldsmobile's stable, replacing three different cars.
| Oldsmobile's plans for yet another unique engineering project
| were interrupted however as it was mandated that the Intrigue
| use the same in-development second generation "W" platform as
| the Pontiac Grand Prix. Pontiac engineering essentially
| dictated the design of every W-body car of that generation,
| leaving Oldsmobile with little to do outside of styling. Thus
| Oldsmobile turned to the Alero. The Alero was meant to be the
| volume seller, designed to compete in benchmarks with the BMW
| 3-series and and Lexus ES. By this time (1995) GM had begun
| heavily questioning the existence of Oldsmobile and heavily
| limited their autonomy on the development of the Alero. In a
| repeat of what happened with the Intrigue, ultimately by late
| 1995 Pontiac had taken the lead for the engineering of the
| second generation "N" platform vehicles, and the Alero (along
| with the Malibu and the quite literally rebadged Malibu sold
| as the Cutlass) ended up as a mechanical clone of the Grand
| Am, to the point where most parts are interchangeable. It was
| a foggy mirror of 1982 and the mistakes Roger Smith made of
| repeated and rampant badge engineering. Oldsmobile spent the
| period from 1998 to 2000 marketing the Intrigue and Alero
| heavily, including the Intrigue Saturday Night Cruiser
| showcar, Alero OSV concept, The Alero California showcar
| based on the designs of then-current racing touring cars, and
| the Profile concept that was supposed to be a preview of the
| upcoming updates to Oldsmobile's design language. Ultimately
| this failed, and by December of 2000 GM had become fed up
| with eating the losses of Oldsmobile's engineering pet
| projects and announced they were shuttering the brand come
| March 1st of 2004.
|
| I apologize that this is so long. There was so much internal
| dysfunction in GM between 1975 to 2008 and it affects
| everything so much that being concise is almost impossible
| even when talking about a single thing over a short period.
| datavirtue wrote:
| I have often heavily questioned GMs sanity. Building their
| clunky cars and thinking they are competing with Lexus and
| BMW. I remember a Bonneville ad from the 1990s where they
| were comparing it to a BMW. It would have been funny if I
| wasn't so blindsided by their astonishing level of
| disconnect.
| rpcope1 wrote:
| Are you sure you're not confusing the 60* V6 family that
| was around in GM vehicles in the 80s (the 2.8, 3.1, and 3.4
| and their predecessor engines) with the Buick 90* V6 (of
| which the 3800 was a part of and dated back to way before I
| was born). Otherwise that's pretty fascinating...GM
| vehicles are always so strange in so far as that the "lower
| end" marques and lower trim vehicles always seemed to be
| better designed, more durable and way more reliable. It's
| hard to believe that Olds didn't just use an SBC derivative
| like the LT1 for the Aurora given how much better those
| engines were (and everyone knew it) than the Northstar,
| which was basically a flaming expensive pile of shit from
| day 1.
| rpcope1 wrote:
| This is basically the story of GM for the last 40-50 years as a
| whole. The engineers will do or propose something brilliant and
| really great, and then management repeatedly snatches defeat
| from the jaws of victory. Saturn was another extremely good
| example of GM building something excellent and then their
| management just completely drove it off a cliff. The S-series
| was a really great design when it came out, and was honestly
| far better than it's internal competitors (like the Cavalier)
| and was competitive with small Japanese cars; the space frame,
| plastic panels, lost foam casting for the block, etc were
| really good engineering, and the car and brand had a deserved
| cult following. GM didn't like the fact it made the Cavalier
| look like shit and so naturally it was allowed to wither on the
| wine and then basically everything else after was just more
| badge engineered Chevy and Pontiac vehicles. GM's entire
| management should have been totally shitcanned at multiple
| points during and after the early 90s for the absolutely
| abhorrent job they did.
| ofalkaed wrote:
| Back in the 80s one of my father's summer past times was test
| driving cars. Once a week or so he would stick me on his lap in
| our Dodge Horizon and have me work the wheel while he took care
| of the pedals and gear shift with a Camel in one hand and a
| bottle of beer (generic) in the other, Uriah Heap or Deep Purple
| on the 8-track since for what ever reason those were the only
| cartridges that 8-track would not eat. Remember taking a car with
| a setup much like the Inca's for a test drive (I was never on his
| lap for the test drive but the Camel and beer (generic) were
| often still with him), no idea what model it was just remember
| that it had a yoke loaded with controls instead of a wheel and a
| dash filled with LCDs. Unexpected bit of nostalgia.
| linksnapzz wrote:
| I don't think NHTSA ever approved a yoke steering setup for a
| production car in the US; but a late-80's Pontiac Bonneville or
| Mitsubishi Galant would have steering wheels chock full of
| control buttons, and a dash covered in LEDs like the cockpit of
| a Gundam.
| ofalkaed wrote:
| Very possible I am misremembering but it could have been a
| used car modified by the previous owner or a conversion by
| the dealer; one of the dealers we occasionally visited
| customized everything they sold, mostly did conversion vans
| and hotrods but had all kinds of fun stuff.
| kube-system wrote:
| It may be likely that the wheel in the parent story wasn't
| factory equipment.
|
| But, the NHTSA doesn't approve designs before they hit the
| market. For example:
|
| https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-yoke-steering-wheel-nhtsa-
| st...
| IIAOPSW wrote:
| Great taste but bad execution. It makes a ton of sense IMO to put
| all the controls on the steering wheel so that the driver never
| has to take their hand off of it to do something. Physical
| buttons like this are also great UI for critical controls (unlike
| touch screen). My only gripe is the layout they went with. Its
| very disorganized.
|
| For things which are symmetrical within the car (door
| lock/unlock, windows up/down, turn signal) they should be
| symmetrical on the wheel as well. Critical elements to driving
| like the windshield wipers, defrosters, horn and turn signals
| should all be extremely self evident at a glance whereas amenity
| controls like radio and AC should be off to the side.
| Propelloni wrote:
| True, controls should be in range without taking the hands of
| the wheel, but putting buttons onto the steering wheel is only
| the second best option. I think a better choice are
| "satellites", as used by Renault or Nissan, behind the steering
| wheel and below the turn indicator and so on. Those are always
| at the same position, regardless of the steering wheel's
| rotation, and I can find and operate them without looking and
| without taking the hands of the steering wheel. I guess there
| are some issues with those, too, because they haven't been
| generally adopted.
| jccc wrote:
| This headline would be much less effective if it told you the
| truth, that the car never existed:
|
| "Unfortunately for us, Oldsmobile never went ahead and produced
| the Incas. They made a slew of other wild concept cars as well,
| but none of those saw the light of day either [...]"
| ofalkaed wrote:
| How does "that you've never seen" not convey that sentiment?
| Sure it is hyperbole but that hyperbole seems well founded
| since the only people who have likely seen it are those which
| followed concept cars of the 80s or stumbled onto an article
| like this one.
| hot_gril wrote:
| I thought it was a very rare car, meaning most people have
| never seen it.
| ranger_danger wrote:
| It's a car blog, so I think most of their readers already know
| there was never any such Olds model as "Incas", so it must be a
| very rare prototype.
| jccc wrote:
| HN is not a car blog.
|
| The point of clickbait is that the link will get reposted to
| all kinds of places online, with a headline that
| intentionally misrepresents the article to those readers and
| fools them into clicking.
|
| (Original headline was "The 1986 Oldsmobile Incas Had The
| Wildest Dashboard You've Never Seen.")
| jccc wrote:
| (Original headline was "The 1986 Oldsmobile Incas Had The
| Wildest Dashboard You've Never Seen.")
| datavirtue wrote:
| They produced most of it. Looks like a Corvette.
| kube-system wrote:
| The car absolutely did exist, just not in great numbers. The
| article even has photographic proof of its existence.
|
| Concept vehicles like this are typically built one-off and
| showcased at manufacturer auto shows. Some of them later go
| into mass production, and some of them don't.
| jccc wrote:
| That would be an excellent point for a headline that says,
| "This Never-Sold Concept Car Had The Wildest Dashboard You've
| Never Seen."
|
| Obviously, such a truthful headline would get much fewer
| clicks.
|
| The actual headline intentionally wants us to think they're
| going to show us the "Wildest" Knight Rider car that people
| were driving in the 80s. (Maybe they were rare, maybe you
| were too young to have seen them, but we have pics! Click
| here!)
| kube-system wrote:
| Nothing about the headline stated or even implied it was a
| production vehicle. It literally does say, "You've Never
| Seen" it.
|
| I immediately presumed it was a concept car from the
| headline. If you presumed otherwise, that just might be
| your unfamiliarity with the subject matter.
| jccc wrote:
| _Of course_ a clickbait headline does not literally lie.
|
| A clickbait headline elides, omits key information
| strategically, deliberately creating a far juicier story
| in the minds of readers than is justified by the actual
| post-click article.
|
| Key information like the fact that no one ever bought and
| drove this car on the road.
|
| I don't think a headline gets immunity from being called
| clickbait if it successfully dupes only those people
| insufficiently familiar with its particular subject
| matter.
|
| Clickbait gets under the noses of such people by design.
| johnea wrote:
| Ah yes, back when the future was still bright.
|
| But now we have so many shades of corp grey.
|
| So we've got that going for us...
| jccalhoun wrote:
| The steering reminds me of Mercury's "wrist twist" steering
| concept from the 60s
| https://youtu.be/PWWYkxQCFfQ?si=i_Gh4gtXjJv5Pn51&t=52
| MadnessASAP wrote:
| That's looks pretty neat. Right up until power steering fails,
| then it becomes kind of a problem.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Honestly wish there was more experimentation in automotive human-
| UX besides the current "Just put it all in touchscreen LOL"
| design rut we're in. A car today functions almost entirely like
| every car that's existed since the 1950s: Big, transparent window
| in front, a handful of "critical" gauges and displays underneath
| that window, a steering wheel that hasn't changed in a century
| (besides the addition of buttons), accessory
| devices/entertainment in a center stack on a central console, a
| glove box or some other storage in the passenger side. Any time a
| manufacturer deviates from the norm, even slightly, the result
| gets derided as weird and ugly, and we revert back to the 1950s.
| Have we really settled on objectively optimal controls?
| pyrale wrote:
| > Have we really settled on objectively optimal controls?
|
| The cost of retraining the whole user base in a dangerous
| environment will likely dwarf any small gain from making
| "better" controls.
|
| As a case in point, the car in the article is so alien to what
| I'm currently using that I wouldn't feel comfortable driving
| it, knowing that it challenges significant parts of my driving
| routine which are not conscious.
| kcplate wrote:
| There was an Isuzu vehicle in the late 80s early 90s (Impulse?)
| that had a similar button pad design within finger reach off the
| steering wheel.
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| The Subaru XT Turbo was a nearly as weird futuristic car that
| they actually made. I had one and it was fun... a great little
| sports car with a futuristic design, that with the touch of a
| button lifted high in the air and was also great offroad- with
| real center diff lock 4WD.
| rodgerd wrote:
| Similarly, the Citroen GSA actually existed:
| https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/citroen-gsa-1979.html#aga...
| ein0p wrote:
| US auto manufacturers could coast for 50 years on reissuing the
| classics upgraded for fuel efficiency and crash safety. Instead
| we get soulless, gaudy, plastic bullshit that falls apart the
| moment the warranty expires.
| mmh0000 wrote:
| One of my first cars was a 1986 Oldsmobile Riviera
|
| The Riviera was one of my favorite cars, had a touch screen to
| control most things in the car. Basically the Tesla of 1986.
|
| https://www.carscoops.com/2021/10/the-buick-riviera-had-a-to...
| Jeema101 wrote:
| For a while I kinda wanted to buy a used Buick Reatta as a
| project car because it had the same CRT touchscreen technology.
| It's extremely cool if you're into the 80s retro futuristic
| vibe.
| 486sx33 wrote:
| Steering wheel is wild But those kind of dashboard gauges did
| make it to production. 80s digital dashes from GM were actually
| super cool. They have a few failure points but there are still
| some guys restoring them . I retrofitted the S10 model into an
| S10 blazer in high school and owned a factor Camaro with one. The
| S10 one was like driving a space ship at the time. Here's some
| cool examples
|
| https://drivemag.com/red-calipers/the-definitive-collection-...
| rob74 wrote:
| I'm not even sure I would call that a steering wheel, it's more
| of a yoke (like the ones used in planes). It was kind of ahead
| of its time, because more and more controls have moved to the
| steering wheel in recent decades, but if this appeared in a
| real car I would be afraid of accidentally pressing a button
| when I just want to turn the wheel. Also, I'm not a pilot but I
| think an airplane yoke is optimized for small but precise
| inputs, if you have to turn it around 180deg or even 90deg
| (like you often have to do with a steering wheel) you are
| probably doing something wrong - that's why having "handles"
| just in the places where your hands normally are makes sense
| for a plane, but not as much for a car.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| >> airplane yoke is optimized for small but precise inputs
|
| It's the opposite. Full left-right deflection on an airplane
| yoke is about 1/4 of a rotation, a movement measured in
| inches. Full deflection of car steering wheel is multiple
| rotations, a movement measured in feet. Car steering requires
| much more precision than aircraft. The yoke is optimized for
| rapid full-deflection with minimal control input. Fine
| control is accomplished through trim systems, which are
| effectively parallel input methods.
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > Car steering requires much more precision than aircraft.
|
| This seems counterintuitive to me. I associate more
| movement (of the controller) with less precision.
| foobarian wrote:
| I think maybe OP meant that the airplane yoke is normally
| moved by very small amounts, unlike a car wheel which is
| normally turned even full rotations e.g. when making a
| tight turn.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| >> I associate more movement (of the controller) with
| less precision.
|
| Think of a microscope. You have a course adjustment that
| moves the focus quickly, then a fine control that moves
| it more slowly. The former is less precise than the
| latter.
| Tanoc wrote:
| The 1990 to 1993 Pontiac Grand Prix in SE and GTP trim has a
| steering wheel I love, because it and the steering column are
| adorned with buttons you can press without moving your hands.
| On either side of the gauges are even more buttons, making it
| look like some sort of arcade flight sim cockpit. The final
| generation Mazda Cosmo also did it, but in a more elegant way
| where the only giveaway that they were buttons and not trim
| pieces was the non colour matched black plastic of the bumper
| controls for the cruise functions on the right side of the
| wheel.
| bluedino wrote:
| Looking back on some of those after not seeing them for 20
| years is refreshing. Some of those are so bad, but a few of
| them are pretty cool. The 727/Space Shuttle styled, green
| cathode touchscreens are amazing though!
| burntwater wrote:
| _" The dash display is almost completely digital--strangely, they
| left an extra analog speedometer and tachometer"_
|
| This is common even today, even on 100% digital screen
| dashboards, they'll have fake analog speedometer and tachometer
| displays. My 2023 Mazda CX5 is 50/50, half the dashboard is
| analog and half is digital. And I like it that way.
| dwighttk wrote:
| I'm never a fan of digital speedometers. I still have to think
| about how far a number is from my target. I'm sure if I used
| them long enough instead of only seeing them in rentals I'd get
| used to it.
|
| I do like a digital cruise set speed.
| sagischwarz wrote:
| One of the first things I learned during my electronics
| apprenticeship was that changes in a value are much more
| intuitive to read with an analog pointer (or a digital
| replication of one).
| phs318u wrote:
| I love this!!!
|
| As a non-American, let me say never has a brand name been so out
| of sync with a car design. That thing is anything but an
| "Old"-smobile.
|
| Looking at it I also thought how cool it would be if the dash
| were entirely modular a-la Framework laptops. "Standard"
| electrical, electronic and mechanical interfaces to which modders
| could fit all sorts of weird and wonderful interfaces. And I mean
| the whole physical dash as well. I know it'll never happen, but
| somewhere in a parallel universe...
| rascul wrote:
| > As a non-American, let me say never has a brand name been so
| out of sync with a car design. That thing is anything but an
| "Old"-smobile.
|
| It was named after the founder, Ransom Olds. I get it, though.
| neilv wrote:
| > _That thing is anything but an "Old"-smobile._
|
| At one point, they had an advertising line, "This is not your
| father's Oldsmobile".
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNewkCV7-pc
| bluedino wrote:
| From 1975-1985, they were selling 500,000 Oldsmobile Cutlasses
| per year. Insane.
| deafpolygon wrote:
| When I see this, it always fascinates me how cars are one of the
| things that remain consistently boring -- there's so much room
| for different enhancements, styles of steering wheel, and so on ;
| and yet the most we've been able to do is stuff a computer in the
| dash (yes, I understand autonomous cars are a thing too, but I'm
| focusing on cars we drive).
| nickdothutton wrote:
| Somehow still looks like the future.
| thomasfl wrote:
| No distracting touchscreen. Only controls you learn with muscle
| memory after a few days. Brilliant.
| TomMasz wrote:
| If you remember the average age of Oldsmobile customers (and
| remember Oldsmobile) you know this would never have sold well,
| even if they had switched to a more conventional interior. This
| is something Pontiac might have tried, though.
| Lammy wrote:
| It makes me want to play RoadBlasters (this is the highest of
| praise)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-08-12 23:02 UTC)