Lexus CT

'bout time for another post, here it is,

The Lexus CT

(caranddriver.com)

The CT is a Prius wearing a Tartan plaid shirt. The main difference is that the Prius is driven by quinoa and sandal enthusiasts (and strangely, suburban families) that don't mind toxic, toxic cadmium in their cars, whereas the CT driver, is a bit of a mystery. From what I can deduce, the CT is driven by teff-ingesting golfers. Apparantley this is a very broad segment of the market, because I see these things everywhere!

The CT is quite underpowered for 2017. The C200h F-sport makes 134 horsepower and it takes 10.6 seconds to get to 60. When cars are that slow nowadays, it might actually become dangerous when merging onto the highway.

Somehow, the CT gets "40" highway MPG, but the Prius gets "50" mpg. I know those figures are probably fudged, but how can a badge engineered version of the same car get 10 less MPG? I looked into this, and apparantley the CT uses an older version of the Prius hybrid drive. Generally, if I'm going to be spending $32,000 on a new car, I would prefer it to be from this century!

The transmission appears to be of similar quality as the rest of the car. It is a CVT, which means that it essentially has infinite gear ratios. This seems good for fuel efficiency and get-up-and-go, but really, CVT's end up sounding like the New York Stock Exchange, but all the people replaced with cows (MoooOOOOooMMoooooooMOOOOO), as well as breaking a lot.

So, the Lexus CT. Driven by golf and non-GMO free range organic quinoa enthusiasts, under powered, under fuel-efficiency'd, and wonky transmisson'd.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Chevrolet Trax

'bout time for another post, here it is,

The Chevrolet Trax

(caranddriver.com)

To start, the Trax has one of the worst names out there, amongst "Kicks" or "Gremlin". I doubt the Trax can actually manage any of the tracks it is eponimously named for, as it has a minimum ground clearance (the clearance of the lowest part on the car) of only 6 inches. To compare, a Challenger SRT , which is a low-slung muscle car, has a minimum ground clearance of 5 inches. The power helps the Chevrolet about as much as the dismal ground clearance.

The power comes from a 1.4 turbo four-pot. It creates 138 horsepower, not nearly enough to propell its bloated features around. This fact is fairly evident in the 0-60 time of 9.3 seconds. This would have been acceptable just ten years ago,but nowadays, it would be difficult to merge on the highway. Also, because the Trax is basically a Cruze that eats too much ice cream, the gas mileage goes down from highway 37 mpg for the Cruze, down to 33 for the Trax. All this is to make it look like the Trax is a high-riding off roader.

Also, on the note of eating too much ice cream, the Trax weighs 3151 pounds. Actual pounds. At times like these, I wonder such things as: "Is it possible to put a car on a diet?" and "Was lead accidently ordered for the body panels instead of steel?".

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Nissan Sentra

'bout time for another post, here it is,

The Nissan Sentra


(image credit: Nissan)


To start, the Nissan Sentra may seem like a bit of a diamond in the rough. It looks like a $19,000 car in a world where $24,000 seems like an acceptable starting price for a midsize sedan. The Sentra most certainly costs $19,000, but it isn't really a car. It's a $19,000 dollar toaster-in-the-rough. Car and Driver reports that it is "painfully mediocre" and that "the days of truly great small Nissans have gone". Overall, C&D really did not like the sad little box (neither do I), giving it a report card of 1.5 out of 5 stars.

For a world where cars are so much faster then they were 10 years ago, the Sentra doesn't really keep up with the herd because it has a 0-60 time of 9.5 seconds. This would be very acceptable in the '90s, '80s, and would actually be considered quick in the 70's and 60's, but we live in 2017, where 9.5 seconds from 0-60 is slow. Really slow. Not-being-able-to-merge-on-the-highway-slow. Those 9.5 seconds are suprisingly fast, considering it makes 130 horsepower.

So, the Sentra. A boring toaster, a let down to the other Nissans and Datsuns like the Hakosuka, and has a Citröen level of power.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Citroen 2CV

time for another post, here it is,

The Cíṫȑöĕñ 2CV! (if anyone can tell me how to pronounce Citröen with all the extra diacritics, he/she will be rewarded with 400 internet points!!)

(credit: bbc.co.uk)

Wait--no--sorry, it's easy to get confused, the 2CV's actually this one:

                    
(credit: Mecum Auctions)                                      

To start, the looks, as I just pointed out, are froggish (yay! that's a dictionary word!!). This may be because the 2CV was designed on a shoestring budget in the early 30's (and was outdated then), was then hidden from the Nazis when France surrendered during WWII, then brought back to life in 1949. The Boîte inutile was produced from 1949 to 1990! How did this thing manage a production run of 41
years,  but the Top Gear "Eagle-Hammerhead iThrust" only manage a production run of a single car? 
Both were made from some sheet metal and shelving bits lying around the shop!

The performance was about as good as the body. A whole 12 stampeding, champing-at-the-bit
horsepower propelled the Citröen around via a boxer-2 engine. My ride-on mower makes twice that, and I'm pretty sure if I removed the limiter, I could go the top speed of 52 m.p.h. 

I'm actually staggered that I was able to write this much, and come up with this many synonyms for this monstrosity.

So, the 2CV. Froggish, outdated, somehow had a production run of 41 years, and REALLY, REALLY slow.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Chevrolet Citation

'bout time for another post, here it is,

The Chevrolet Citation


(public domain)

Well, to start, the Citation is probably the most boring-ly styled car ever. It seems like the designers just drew a "two box" sedan, added the hatch at the back to ruin the little styling features it had, then drew the little curved window line at the back to make it seem like they tried. Needless to say, I would issue the designers a citation.

The engines are just as bad as the looks. One of the engines is the famed Iron Duke, the same engine that powers the now-being-phased-out mail truck. It makes an earth-rending 90 horsepower! The other engines aren't much better, either. The most powerful is a 130 somewhat-bored-horse-containing LB6 V6. It had multi-port fuel injection, which was advanced-ish for '85, but a 2.8 liter engine making 130 horsepower, even in '85, was pretty bad.

The way that power was put down wasn't exactly top-notch either. It was front wheel drive, which is farily normal today, but when it came out in 1980, it was revolutionary. However, the drivetrain was made to the same standards as one of those fake Rolexes.

It also seems that someone stole the regular wheels, then put space savers on, and then put on the hubcaps and painted white trim on the tires to make it seem like nothing was stolen. Hang on, I just got word that that was how they came from the factory! I can't beleive someone put pizza cutters on the hubs.


So, the Citation, mail-truck power, looks that are comparable to a pile of bricks, the drivetrain is comparable to one of those clotheslines that has a crank on it, and the wheels are a little bit narrower that the width of a human hair.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Geo Tracker

time for another post, here it is,

The Geo Tracker (The first generation. The second generation is equally bad.)



(source: public domain)

Well, the Tracker just looks sad. I think the Tracker might be sad because of its horribe name! It may also be sad because it has a maximum of 96 horsepower(71.6 kW). The 1.6 liter L01 four-banger (the most powerful engine!) depressivley pulls the Tracker from 0-60 M.P.H. (0-97 k/h) in 13.8 seconds! To give you an idea of how long that takes, read this next bit out loud: battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship battleship. Now the Tracker has hit 60 mph (97 k/h), and is on its way to an earth-rending top speed of... ~80 mph, according to Geo enthusiasts.

Ok, back to the sad looks. It seems like a Ford Bronco was accidentley dry- cleaned, then was melted slightly, removing all of those sharp, good looking body lines.

Also, because of how (relativley) high the definetley-not-a-Suzuki rides, and because the wheelbase is so short, it has a tendancy to flip! So, not only does it rattle, bang, and clatter at 60 mph, but, if you need to say, turn, it will roll!

So, the Geo Tracker. Looks sad, goes slow, makes noise, and kills you!

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Sorry this post took a long time.

Quirkiest Car Ever

'bout time for a DIFFERENT post, here it is,

I thought I should do a bit more of an audience focused post this week. So, I ask you, fanbase,

What is The Quirkiest Car Ever Made?

I propose the Meshershmitt Tiger. After World War II ended, Mesherschmitt were not allowed to make figher planes, for obvious reasons. It used a canopy from the more famous kind of Meshershmitt, the WWII German airplane manufacturer. That's not even the best part. Because it was powered by a 2-cycle engine, to get reverse, you have to twist the key the other way, and it is possible to get all the gears going backwards! Here is a picture of the little car with a VERY VERY chequered past:


(credit: carpixx.com)

What do you think? Post your answer in the comments!

Prius C

time for another post, here it is,

The Prius c uppercase C!


(source: caranddriver.com)

Well, it's a Prius. It is also a Prius variant. It is also just downright terrible. To start, it isn't actually eco as the salesman would have you believe. The amount of pollution created from mining the nickel, extracting the neodymium, and not dying from the cadmium makes the Prius more environmentally damaging than a Land Rover Discovery!

Is it only me, or does anyone else see a bit of crossovery-ness in this 2018 model? A Prius crossover or CMax would pass the point of bad, and reach the point of just pitiful. This current, not-quite-crossover Prius is currently straddling the line of bad and pitiful in the power department, however. The c makes an earth shattering 99 horsepower! This is enough to propel it to a supersonic 102 miles per hour, and it gets to 60 of those MPH's in 10.8 seconds! These figures are nothing compared to the astounding fuel mileage, though.

The "eco-friendly" and "hybrid" Prius gets 46 highway MPG. It also costs $21,000. I have done the math using the combined MPG (46) (assuming that gas is $2.60 USD everywhere, and that the Prius does 10,000 mile years) you would have to own the Prius for 24 YEARS for the fuel efficiency to validate not buying a Ford Fiesta costing $16,520.

The Fiesta goes from 0-60 in 8.7 seconds, and goes 115. Certainly not fast, but a lot better than the Prius. So, to all the Fiesta owners out there, you can feel even more smugly superior in front of Prii, because you have saved a quarter of your life!

So, the Prius c, slow, possibly a crossover, slow, and environmentally damaging.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Telsa is Having Problems With the Model 3

'bout time for another post, here it is,

✊Tesla is Having Production Problems With the Model 3!!✊


(source: Car and Driver)

The all electric car maker that has been taking quinoa and sandal enthusiasts (and strangely, suburban families) with tons of money to throw away by storm, has suffered several large problems. You may start clapping now.

The C.E.O. of Tesla (Elon Musk) readily admits to the fact that they are in "Pre-production hell". Apparently this is because the Model 3 is made of steel, where the Model S (sedan) and the Model X (horrible crossover) have aluminum bodies. It doesn't help matters that the Model 3 has specific parts, that it doesn't share with the X and S, and not enough of those parts have arrived at the Tesla gigafactory®™© regular factory without a dumb name. The whole thing has become a bit of a PR shambles.

The Model 3's delivery quota hasn't been met, so a lot of people are quite upset, because they just payed $35,000(!) for a "people's car". To add insult to injury, Tesla is now refusing the limited free supercharging credits that you get with the X and S for the 3. In fact, there will be no free charging for the 3 at all, long distance or otherwise! This is a fairly good thing; it means that the money you pay for other people to charge their Teslas (through taxes, and other fairly boring things of that nature that I don't understand fully, so hey, read this with a grain of salt, also, do you notice that this bit of writing in parentheses is getting really long? I do, and would like to say that really long parentheses writing is cool a[ijoareioj DISREGARD HIM[removed by editor]) you keep, and Tesla has a PR nightmare on their hands.

The Model 3 isn't any really great engineering feat, either. It only gets 220 miles of range! The Challenger SRT Hellcat is not only amazingly cool (at least quite a bit cooler that the Model 3) but it gets 425 miles of range! The Model 3 is an electric car. Frequent readers of my blog will know what I think about these nickel-cadmium menaces.

So, the Model 3, electric, a PR nightmare, a "people's car" for 35 grand, a bit of a scam, and they might not actually get delivered.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

The Camaro SS

Time for something a little different, here it is,

The Camaro SS!

(credit: puzzlewarehouse.com (if you can't see the image so well, here is a link to a blown up one: https://cdn.unifiedcommerce.com/)
(This review is for the first-gen Camaro)
A little while ago, it was the birthday of the Chevrolet Camaro, a car which (barely) stood the test of time, as well as the tighter 1972 emissions restrictions, that killed off a lot of muscle/pony cars (the actually good version of the Mercury Cougar comes to mind).

The basic image of the Camaro was simple: it was fast, handled well (for the time period; it actually handled like a dresser full of bowling balls), practical, and cheap. It could (and was) used as a family car. The aforementioned speed has to come from something, though.

The motivation in question is a 396 V8 chucking out 375 horsepower in '65. In the non-street-legal COPO version of the Camaro, the 7.0 liter L89 was making 435 horsepower in '67. Not only is the Camaro fast, but it is famous, too.

The fame comes from the fact that it was introduced as a pace car at the Indy 500, and that it was Bumblebee in the Transformers movies!

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Toyota Corolla iM

time for another post, here it is,

The Toyota Corolla iM

(credit: caranddriver.com)

To start, it isn't really a Corolla. It's on a Corolla-ish platform that has a four inch shorter wheelbase,  and it isn't a sedan. It's not really even a Toyota. It really is the Scion iM, just rebadged as a Toyota because Toyota discontinued Scion last year. What's worse is that the iM is the replacement for the xB, which is basically just a toaster with wheels.

It has one trim level. The Trabant 601 had multiple trim levels! I find this one trim level business quite odd, because most hatchbacks have about four million trim levels. It has about as many horsepower as trims, so it's not exactly fast.

The performance is down compared to its competitors. The slightly more expensive Ford Focus hatch does 0-60 in 8.5 seconds Slow, but it is definitely not a performance car, and doesn't have a rakish, "sporty" body. The iM does 0-60 in 9.1 seconds. .6 of a second is years in car terminology. The Ford also makes 160 horsepower. Once again, a bit underpowered, but the iM has just 137 ponies working as hard as they can to pull it along. Even if you aren't interested in performance, it is useful to have a bit more power than you need, because it will make a difference in merging and setting off at the stoplight.

What's worse is that this car will be errm... how do I put this nicely... modified distastefully. I'm talking about how neon green alloys with 45 degrees of negative camber will be installed, and how the car will be made to ride two inches off the ground. Not to mention the horrible body kits and spoilers that will be purchased. Dubious performance modifications aside, the iM automatic has a fatal flaw.

The flaw in question is a CVT. It stands for Continuously Variable Transmission. It is basically two cones with a belt attaching them together. It essentially gives you infinite gears, as the belt can move around on them, effectively gearing the car up and down. However, it basically just makes the car sound a bit like a yodeling cow inside (i.e. it sounds like: MoooOOoooooOOOooooooOOOOOOOOoo). CVT's are also much more prone to breaking compared to a regular synchromesh standard-shift or auto.

So, the Corolla iM. It is really a Scion, it has one trim level, about as many horsepower, will be a target for "stancing" and "moos" inside.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Honda CR-V

'bout time for another post, here it is,

The Honda CR-V

(shop.honda.com)
OK, reason number one that I reeeely don't like the CR-V is because it is a crossover. I find it weird that someone thought: I want to take a car that thinks it is a subcompact (a Honda Civic), but really is a small mid-size car, jack it up, and put an SUV looking body on top of it all.

The CR-V also has a continuously variable transmission, which is basically two cones with one side attached to the engine, and the other cone, to the prop-shaft. Between the cones, there is basically a large belt that moves around a lot, giving you infinite ratios. This sounds great for fuel efficiency and good get-up-and-go, but what it really does is make a lot of  mooing noises and break a lot. The engine the transmission is linked to isn't great, either.

The most powerful engine, a 1.5 liter turbo, makes 190 horsepower. That would probably be enough for a Civic, but the CR-V has put on a bit of weight (394 pounds, to be exact). The comparison between the 0-60 times of a Civic and a CR-V are quite astonishing. Here are the facts and figures: the Si Civic goes from 0-60 in 6.3 seconds. Not bad. The CR-V of the same price, however, lumbers from a standstill to sixty in 7.5 seconds (this is the AWD one, the front drive version would be slower (and $1,300 cheaper), but I can't get a time.) The performance may be bad, but the looks are worse.

I find those optional robot wheels HIDEOUS! They are as bad, if not worse than the Hyundai Veloster's wheels. This over-styled-ness seems to continue around the entire car, a good example being the headlights, which look like Star Trek control panels of some kind. The taillights are much the same deal. They are all lumpy and bumpy, which you can see if you look at the picture closely.

So, the CR-V. Slow, expensive, ugly, loud, and driven primarily by people who want a Suburban, but can't fit it in their garage.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Acura Integra

time for another post, here it is,

The Acura Integra

(credit: commons.wikimedia.org)

Where to start? It was one of those barely sports cars made in Japan in the '90s. What's worse than its fake sporting credentials (the biggest engine was a 1.8 liter) is that the Integra was a Honda Civic underneath.

There is a slight issue with the styling.  The front fascia looks like one of those hideous multi-eyed bugs. Also, the body lines of the fenders don't really line up with the the side of the car. So it looks like it has fender flares at the front, but not at the back.

The engines weren't great, either. The most powerful version, the Type R made 195 horsepower. The (equally hideous) Toyota Celica of the same time period had a 2.0 liter Turbo that made 251 horsepower, for $4,000 more than the Acura. $4,000 is a lot of money, but the Celica Turbo All-Trac had AWD, a turbocharger, and was a rally homologation car. With the Acura, you get an Acura badge.

So, the Acura. Slow, not a sports car, and hideous!

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Chevrolet Spark

'bout time for another post, here it is,

The Chevrolet Spark

(credit: caranddriver.com)

The people that buy this car obviously aren't interested in 0-60 times, but I'm pretty sure the salesmen at the dealership don't advertise the appalling 12 seconds that it takes to get the car to 60. Or the fact that the Spark makes 98 horsepower.

Even though it is the size of a toaster, the Spark has 10 airbags! At that point, there must be airbags for your eyelashes and toenails!

The Spark also comes in a electric version, too. The electric version might be economical with gas mileage, but the drivetrain needs to be replaced every six or seven years, if driven normally (letting the battery go flat, using fast charging stations). On a related note, in the battery there is nickel, and nickel mining is a filthy operation that causes a lot of acid rain. Also in the battery, there is deadly deadly cadmium which is famous for being in old yellow paint, and poisoning artists. In the electric motor, there is neodymium. Neodymium is very energy consuming to extract.

The rear brakes are drum brakes! This is 2017, and there is a car with brakes from the 30's! What's worse is that because there is no asbestos in the rear brakes, they won't work as well as the drum brakes from yesteryear.

It gets 39 MPG. That isn't really shocking considering that the engine is a 1.4 four-cylinder, attached to a car that weighs about two pounds. What's worse is that you can't capitalize on this because of the nine gallon fuel tank. Sure, it gives you a good range of 358 miles, but if it had a normal capacity fuel tank, it could go 716 miles on one tank!

The spark also comes with a CVT. This makes it sound like they're filming an episode of Bonanza! under the hood (i.e. lots of MOOOoooooOOOooooooooo). This is because instead of gears, there is a belt being moved around on two cones using the same principle of  shifters moving a bicycle chain around.

So, the Spark. Slow, electric, bad brakes, and doesn't make good use of its fuel sipping ways.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Geo Metro

'bout time for another post, here it is,

The Geo Metro

(credit: https://upload.wikimedia.org/)

It looks like some car (or some toaster). It must be the dullest and boringest car ever. Brand new, they were $6,750. That's fabulous for a new car, but it might have been better to just get a decent condition used car.

A used car would be faster, too. The base Metro has a one liter three cylinder engine. The motorcycle engine under the hood makes a mind-boggling fifty-five horsepower! From what I can deduce, the top speed is between sixty-ish and the high side of ninety MPH.

The transmissions aren't great, either. There is a five speed standard shift, which is normal enough, but there is also a three speed automatic. In the '60s three speed autos were outdated!

So, the metro. REALLY REALLY slow, a toaster, and boring.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Pace Car Lap

I went for a few laps in a pace car around the New Hampshire Motor Speedway!!
Here is a video:

East Coast Camaro All Vehicles Show

I went to the All Vehicle Show in Andover, Mass. and took some pictures!

Engine of a 2017 SS Camaro

'68 GT500 CobraJet

'13 Boss 302 Mustang

Drag Modified Chevelle

Drag Modified Ford Maverick Engine

'65 Tempest

'58 Impala

'66 Impala SS Convertible

'57 Bel Air

First Generation Camaro SS!

VW Golf

'bout time for another post, here it is,

The VW Golf


(credit: autoblog.com)

Right, it's basically a new VW Rabbit. This should mean that the clutch linkage should break a lot, and that when people attempt to get in it, the door handles come off.

It isn't cheap, either. $19,895 gets you the base model. For just a little more than $20,000, you could get a Dodge Dart GT. The Dart GT also has 14 more horsepower. But not only is the Dart better value for money, but it also has character. The VW is boring. It doesn't have the good looks or sportyness of something like a Ford Focus.

The GTi version isn't much more interesting either, as the most powerful trim level pumps out just 220 brake horsepower. The equivalent Ford Focus costs $3,000 less, and has thirty-two more horses under the hood. Also the Ford can come with stripes, therefore it is both faster and better than similar cars that don't come with stripes (i.e. The Volkswagen Golf).

So, the VW Golf. Expensive, boring, and slow.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

The Miata!

'bout time for another post, here it is,

The Mazda Miata

(credit: commons.wikimedia.org)

I'm pretty sure the thought process before buying a Miata goes something like this: "I want a convertible two-seater exotic car... but I can't afford a Ferrari 488... so I'm going to get a car that is both slower and more expensive than a 2014 V6 Droptop Mustang." Sure, if you get a cheap used car, it might be constantly developing a problem, but so will the Aventador Spyder that you can't afford.

I don't think the Mazda is really a sports car. It makes 155 horsepower... the same as an '07 Camry.  The MX-5 also tops out at 141, and that's the two liter version! Not really fast enough,  considering that a Charger V6 does 140 and costs $1,000 less than the top spec Miata.

The styling is also a bit iffy. The front and back look normal, but in the middle, the Miata looks squashed down; like a couch when someone is sitting on it!

So, the Miata. Slow, bad looking, and generally not great.

Do you have any thoughts about cars/cats? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Ford Flex

Time for another post, here it is,

 The Ford Flex

(public domain)

The Ford Flex is a rather expensive family car, to get the top-of-the-line model, The Blue Oval expects you to pony up $40,180!. On top of that, Ford will nickel-and-dime you for things like power telescopic steering column and pedals. Why are they not included in the top-of-the-line trim? Car and Driver tells me in their review that the interior panels are both out of date, and that they don't fit quite right. For a car that starts at around thirty grand, the interior panels should fit right.

It's not like the Flex comes with a V-8 either. It has the V-6 Eco-Boost with turbos as the engine powering the Limited. The Duratec powering the lower end trims churns out a measly 285 horsepower. That would be more than enough for any small-ish sedan, but not nearly enough to haul around the Flex's 4,439 pound bulk. That's the weight of most old (and some current) muscle cars! It's not like the Flex makes up for it in torque either, with only 260 pounds-feet of the stuff.

The Flex is available in such colors as "Magnetic" (black-ish) and Blue Jean (a navy blue looking color). I seriously wonder who comes up with these names and how.

I'm sorry that this post was a bit late.

Do you have any thoughts about cars? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!

Show of Dreams

I went to the Show of Dreams British car show, and I took some pictures!

Do you have any thoughts about cars? What drives you crazy? One post a week so stay tuned!