trinacriabob

Two regulars are having b-days today on C&G, according to the homepage: William Maley and ccap41 Every once in a while, I spot these. I just returned to check the forum after crossing the pond, so I'm still a wet noodle. Happy birthday to both C&G members!

@balthazar I told this guy how my dad had one. I only saw the grille and nose of his 1971 as he left. I liked the grille with the simpler lines on my dad's 1970 base coupe. The upward and downward sweeps of his grille were okay, but I liked the 1970 grille more. I only wish that the one our family had had been equipped with front disc brakes. The front and rear drum system, together, was suboptimal.

Today is always a tough day. It's hard to believe it even happened. I remember where I was when I heard the news, what the day felt like, what the week felt like, what the month felt like ... And that was 20 years ago. It means I have not forgotten. None of us can afford to forget this day 20 years ago. So, enjoy Sunday (tomorrow, 9/12) and have a good week.

Spotted today at a gas station. It's a 1971 with a Pontiac 400 and no A/C. Its owner was a cool guy. I asked him if I could take a few photos before I fueled up. That's all folks.

Kathleen Turner is often discussed when it comes to this topic. Here's one of the clips from provocative "Body Heat," a movie I have seen many times. That's then. Then, time marches on. About 15 years ago or so, she was on Larry King and said she doesn't get any come ons. And it sounded like she'd accept them! (She reportedly has R.A. and all the meds caused her to put on a lot of weight.)

I once read that a lot of head honchos are basically a big blob of an ego with 2 legs and 2 arms sticking out of it. That would apply to some professionals, too. I've see in it both people who run companies and as well as in some doctors and lawyers.

All sorts of animal videos end up on my homepage. I was looking at this one, thinking, "Wow, that looks like a warm and familiar area, with those houses and that vegetation ... " Well, it's in a suburb of Los Angeles abutting the San Gabriel Mountains. How do videos wind up capturing these random events? This teenage girl was brave.

And, being the "late adopter" that I am, I wondered how the new cast iron block / aluminum head / SOHC of the 4.6 L V8 would teeth for FoMoCo. It fared well. And so did the Chevy 3.5 and 3.9 V6 with newly added VVT that was inserted into Monte Carlos and Impalas in the mid 2000s. With basic engines that were meant to be good (some Chevy small blocks in the late '70s with premature cam wear, Buick 252 V6s born of the 231 V6 that had their issues, some Iron Duke 4s that lost a tooth or a cog in their timing chains, etc.) and still gave problems, a prospective buyer gets a little wary of auto engine technology that hasn't been on the road for a few years.

I think it will be grand when it crosses Lake Washington and connects the east side to the city proper. I know that's coming and I can't wait to ride on it when it does. I still need to drive across the new 520 bridge! It's all on my bucket list.

Had the opportunity to drive a rented (big) Thunderbird with a 4.6 L V8 up to Vancouver, Canada and back down across the border. I was surprised how much I liked it. That, too, turned out to be a workhorse for FoMoCo.

That's what I figured. Olds: 4.3 (260) Chevy: 4.3 (262), 4.4 (267), and, much later, 4.3 (263, I think) ... it would be interesting to see how bore and stroke differed, telling you if/which larger displacement small block they were derived from Pontiac: 4.3 (265) - - - - - I vaguely remember a Ford 255 V8. It was only around in 1980 and 1981, upon looking it up. It was a 4.2 L. It would have probably worked well with the last rehash of the retro Thunderbird.

Your wording has me confused. Time changed a lot with what they could squeeze out of displacements. The latest Chevy 4.3 put out 200 hp. The old carbureted 3.8 (231) put out 110 hp. In Series I, II, and III form, the 3800s put out 170 hp, 205 hp, and 200 hp, respectively. With time, they seemed to dial in on better fuel injection and ignition systems, and really kicked up the hp. I'm just saying that, had they kept engines like the Pontiac 265 and 301, they could have done a lot more with them, just like they did by keeping the Olds 5.0 (307) and making small improvements from when it was introduced as a carbureted engine, albeit a damn good one.

Cincinnati Reds baseball team. And a bunch of car dealerships. This is when her husband passed and she inherited them. I'm thinking baseball team and car dealerships could have made her rough around the edges real fast. Right ... she does have that office villainess look ... sadly, these types can do a lot of damage before HR deals with them as they should have earlier.

I had bookmarked a few things after this post and looking for info on these small displacement Pontiac V8s. First, I found this. A very cool 1982 Pontiac Grand Prix Brougham for sale up in Canada. Check out the full exhibit of photos. It's a Brougham that has manual windows and no A/C. I guess they wanted the interior but not the typical Brougham options. It can be hot and dry on the inland Canadian prairie. It says 4.4 V8, but we know it would be a 4.3. https://www.adrenalinmotors.ca/vehicles/776/1982-pontiac-grand-prix-brougham Then I pulled up an article on "the forgotten V8" - the 265. The article and the many comments said a lot about this engine and small V8s in that era. It's all fairly interesting ... at least to me. https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/the-almost-forgotten-engine-1980-1981-pontiac-265-cid-4-3l-v8-why-did-they-bother/ The article claims to have the ONLY photo on the internet of this engine ... super clean engine bay, nice layout with the distributor in the back, and an expected smaller air cleaner assembly. First, the effort was part CAFE and part marketing. The CAFE gain might have been 1 mpg, but that moves the dial in the right direction. The marketing is that people who didn't want to give up a V8 could have a V8, save "some" gas. Buick was going to move buyers to a V6 (the 231) and some folks didn't want that. Note that 3 divisions of GM had a "baby V8," with Pontiac coming in last, chronologically, with this smaller engine (after Olds and Chevy). Buick was focused on the 231 V6 and did not bother with making a smaller V8. (I think Buick including "even firing" on the 231 at its reintroduction would have gotten them more buyers, seeing how well this engine sold later.) However, in their line up, Buick offered the 260 in some cars (Skylarks) and the 265 in others (Regal, Century, and possibly the smaller, less trimmed out full-sizes). This undertaking would not have been a Cadillac thing ... they didn't make one, either. People say some interesting things in the comments. In one post by a guy named Larry, he said that the smaller Pontiac V8, specifically the 301, was better than Chevy's 305, and it was a political thing inside GM because the Chevy one was cheaper to build. I'll buy both of those claims. Most said that the small V8s were extremely durable - "smooth as butter" - if less power than what's typical in a V8 was acceptable. But the acceleration off the line in everyday driving was fine. It's that they petered out toward the top end. This Pontiac "baby V8" actually made a whopping 10 hp more than the one by Olds and Chevy! We've had one of these small V8s in the family and it was the Olds 260. Our neighbors also had an Olds 260. "Smooth as butter" definitely applies. And, @balthazar I do like it because it's serviceable and durable, as you say. None of these engines bring home the bacon when it comes to some of the steep grades a person might encounter in the West. However, the torque output of a "baby V8" is superior to that of a GM inline 6 or V6 of that era, having been in cars with both of those climbing up the Grapevine (~ 500 ft. to 4,100 ft.) What might have been so appealing about these engines is their quiet operation when accelerating, being revved while in park, or when idling because less cubic inches probably had a different breathing set-up than a 5.7 liter type powerplant. People did mention that these small V8s were still too much for the plagued THM 200, and did better with a larger transmission behind them. Also, I'm thinking the drivability would have been even better if these were outfitted with rudimentary TBI instead of a carburetor, with 10 or 20 more hp. But, over 10 years later, one could have their cake and eat it, too. The '94 to '96 only Chevy 4.3 V8 with TBI made 200 horses and they last and last.

I have been told that I can be fairly random.

Regarding Marge Schott, mostly I found her amusing. But then I was over 2,000 miles away from her reign when she was presiding over it. Here's the funny thing. This is a photo of a young Marge Schott taken when she was 28, according to the caption beneath it. How does one go from peaches and cream to boorish, considering how much money she had? The 180 degrees is perplexing. Most "debs" with coin go on to be society ladies and matriarchs.

Haha. Good one. Much like when I was once looking at a map of Mexico and saw the city Merida. Now, I don't know if Merida is a nice, safe place ... or it's not. However, a quick scramble of the letters makes it "mierda." Got it. On those seats, with all the pleats, moving around could be challenging. They look more suited to a parlor in a chateau in France. But I think a French chateau would keep it classier, with a "c." However, regular Brougham seating on my Cutlass Supreme was easy to move around on and provided the most comfort on long road trips than any car I've owned. That horizontal bolster landing near the shoulders - right above the pillow type part of the seat - also helped.

Thinking about @balthazar ... ... not really. - - - - - (saw this the other day)

I think that their taking it slow is better. It has been riding on essentially the same platform since 2005. So true. Over the years, each of the updates on this car have involved fine tuning and making it more modern looking and more relevant, and I have liked how it has morphed. I think they will be careful ... and hope they tuck any enlarged infotainment center under the cowl or embed it in the dash. But, then, come to think of it, the name Stellantis is a "F" up.

I just found this. I don't know if it's legit. It shows an upline Dodge Charger for 2022, with changes that probably didn't cost the automaker that much. Mostly, I like them. Plus: Hidden door handles ... good ... but hidden where? I wouldn't mind the gullwing look flush with the pillar The big character line moves forward, into the front fender ... that's fine There is a sculpted flank on the rear fender ... that would depend on what the car looks like from the rear, both straight-on and in 3/4 view Minus: The BIG woven air dam and scoops under the front bumper ... it looks like they've compared notes with Toyota Camry designers* They've scaled back the expanse of the narrow front headlights ... I liked them more when they reached further toward the center - - - - - * now, this just might be the "apples to apples" for their flashy V8 models ... and not be on the base models - I would hope not.

Random thoughts for this Saturday: 1. I am almost disgusted by how many people in my area do NOT recycle. All those boxes for their endless Amazon Prime packages are in the trash instead of the recycle bin. 2. I like Greek festivals, and ethnic festivals in general. I just picked up a lamb gyro along with desserts (1 baklava and 1 galatapoureko). When you go to these festivals, the a la carte pricing can add up. I wish they offered combo dishes. But then, there's no sales tax, tipping is optional, and it goes to support the efforts of small non-profit organizations that mean a lot to their members, so I roll with it.

A klass act, with a "k" Now that I have your attention ...

Spot on! Too funny.

Bingo. I liked the front end the next year a little better, where the lights are outside the grille and in the sheet metal. That's what my Dad had. But, so true about your statement, because when my Dad had one, it was basic a basic coupe (Bimini Blue) with an in-line 250 c.i. 6 cylinder engine. Nothing to go wrong. Dependable beyond words. And, our dog loved that car. When we said, "You want to go for a ride?" she started to wag her behind - because she didn't have a tail - and headed right for the Pontiac. She knew the Olds wasn't for her. (Whether or not she figured out that that it was because the Olds had velour seating, and my parents wanted to keep it clean, is beyond me.)

LOL. A loaded statement ... and a piece of work on various levels. It's all good.