[Stuart]

Sorry, I quoted the wrong person - in any case, it doesn't matter specifically what year or model it was. I should have just said Buick in my initial post.

[geeteeohguy]

Originally Posted by Stuart

Sorry, I quoted the wrong person - in any case, it doesn't matter specifically what year or model it was. I should have just said Buick in my initial post.

No worries....I'm really picking nits here, and it doesn't matter. Using a 4 door vehicle of another make to represent the first GTO to me is so , so wrong I don't think I've gotten over the shock, yet.!!

[John V.]

Wow, I'm impressed! You guys obviously watched more intently than I did. Only saw Sun night but thought it was a good show. I do recall the unveiling of that Chevy and thought, gosh, it looks like a bigger car than I would have thought! Never considered that it wasn't a Chevy!

As to the other mistaken identity stuff, went right by me. I thought the history was interesting. I was particularly interested in what they portrayed for the relationship between Henry and Edsel. And it took me awhile, but wasn't the fired Ford engineer named "Knudsen" as in the father of Semon "Bunkie" Knudsen? If so, it was Bunkie who went full circle around '69 from GM back to Ford, "stealing" the GP nose for the T-Bird as I remember it as a 15 yo at the time.

It wasn't so much the cars but the personalities from the early auto days that kept me watching. Were they accurately portrayed? Who knows? I have always thought that getting your history from TV (even on the History Channel) is not the best source.

Another interesting story line was how Ford resisted the unions but supposedly GMs Sloan saw that the rise of unions and increased wages could be translated into development of infrastructure by gov't that would ultimately benefit GM.

Now you guys have ruined it for me. Just like my kids ruined Star Wars by telling me about the flaws in that film so that ever since that is what I watch for rather than enjoying the movie. Now I'll watch this Car show and be watching for gaffes! Thanks for nothing. LOL!

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by geeteeohguy

Champ, I concur on the 4 door being available. However, you could stand some brushing up yourself....the WIldcat came out in 1962, not 1963. I have driven one. The car in the movie is clearly a 1963 LeSabre....hell, it even says so on the 1/4 panel of the car in the going away shot. Clearly a LONG way from a GTO!

The "Wildcat" came out as it's own model in 1963 as I posted.

In 1962 - the "Wildcat" was a Buick "Invicta "sub series. It became it's own model in 1963.

As far as what car was shown in this show - I didn't watch it - so I didn't attempt to make a comment on what was or was not used in the show.

I just knew that the "Wildcat" was available as a 4 door.

[Tiger Paw]

Hmm! Inaccuracies from the media?

[Longs]

I'm into part 2 of 3 now and while the show is interesting and is good for entertainment, there was a lot of room for improvement. They probably could have done this show in two parts. They've shown the same bad sequences OVER AND OVER AND OVER. How many times did they show the Henry Ford actor with that stupid, smug look on his face staring out at a lot full of Model Ts? The "actors" who portrayed the historical figures were really bad too.

[Don57]

I found it very odd when Ed Cole brings Alfred Sloan out to the yard and convinces him to take a drive in this "hot rod V-8" car...................trying to sell Sloan on G.M. divisions
needing a V-8.................and the car they drive off in is a 1955 or 1956 Merc. By this time............the 1955 G.M. models would have been on the road.................and we all know the new 1955 models and their new V-8's. Had the Merc been a 52' or 53'.....................would have made more sense!

[U47]

The history channel is notorious for distorting history. Another thing, there is plenty of pictures and film footage of all the people involved in this show. Why hire actors to make a history documentary. They do this to all the shows these days. I just saw one on the Titanic sinking and it has the same elements.

Ever notice on the AMHC ( which used to be the military channel) the obsession with Hitler. Hitler shows all the time. They never mention the fact that the German / Soviet non aggression pact divided Poland in half between Germany and Soviet Russia and that Russia also invaded Poland at the same time? What happened to France and England's pact with Poland that if she was invaded they would declare war on the aggressor. Why didn't they also declare war on the Soviet Union also?

[Terry M. Hunt]

Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers.

[wheelspin]

This thread reminds me of how far we have come since I used to look forward to the only motorsport programming in the entire week shown on Sundays called ABC's Wide World of Sports. IIRC, I endured watching ice skating, round and pointy ball highlights, and ballroom dancing (which I like) just so I could see the opening and final laps of the San Jose Mile (motorcycles, which I really like) . These days we have a vast variety of domestic and international racing programs, numerous car building/repair shows, and history programs to chose from without commercials thanks to a DVR . YouTube offers a vast number of diy instructional videos that provide information that was only available in a Motors Manual, factory service manuals, by word-of-mouth, or actual trial & error experience when I began working on cars in the 50s.

In the full context of enjoying and learning from the subject show, how important are the few noted continuity errors .

[U47]

I suppose it depends on how much you value the truth. Many people don't have the knowledge of the subject to know when someone is saying the truth or not, and that misinformation they are hearing becomes the truth for them. That can be very dangerous.