balthazar

I know what I was thinking: the majority of crew cabs are SHORT beds; whats hard to find is crew cab STANDARD beds. The ‘double cab’/STANDARD bed and the crew can SHORT bed are on the same wheelbase, so it’s ‘easier’ to crank them out I guess.

Running boards = ?

Now we're on the same page. I think the 'build' number plays loose with the defining terms to pump up the number. 3.0L is uncommon. But if I could get it basically 'free', I would.

I sat in a '19 Silverado- the seats were a bit on the hard side but not terrible. The issue becomes -with as high as these trucks are- that the softer/deeper the front seat is, the faster the exit-side bolster wears out/thru. I don't want to sink 6 inches into a seat and they have to scooch & scooch to get in/out, or to adjust my position while driving. Then again- I actually use a truck to work out of/with, not cruise 4 states away with a power boat on the hitch. Supple squishy leather is not going to last vs. cheaper, more durable materials.

I just search zip code 98115 (seattle) in a 50 mile radius and a CC/SB with the 3.0L shows 28 exact matches. This is thru the chevrolet.com vehicle locator.

Are you sure those were only 3.0Ls? That motor doesn't seem to be that commonplace yet. A 100 mile radius of me -looking only at '20 CC/standard box 3.0L's- returns only 28 matches. If I deselect the 3.0L, that only rises to 285.

At Chevy, the vast majority are extended cab/short bed, 4WD V8s, which puts you at $46K as it is.

They don’t build planes to absorb impacts with other planes tho.

Yikes; a bolt-in CAST aluminum structural element???

^ Give me a Silverado 1500 crew cab / standard bed 3.0L DuraMax for $15K off sticker and I'll sign!

Correction: Bolt sold quite well... FOR AN EV.

• A business case can make all the sense in the world for an individual in one location. But you can't then say 'You're wrong; it's cheaper to own an EV' based solely on your location, when they are in a different location. • I have never encountered an as-built 220V outlet in a garage. The home I GC'd in 2016 doesn't have one. Plus, you have a majority of older homes that would've predated such a code if there were one. Like a 'Model T garage' that's never been updated/rebuilt. When I googled around, a 110 outlet is generally regarded as being good for 3 or 4 miles for an hour of charging. That's only about 50 miles overnight. Also saw a few estimates for a Level 2 charger installation being a grand to $1500. Depends on the existing in-house wiring/panel too, don't forget. Some of those Model T houses still may have 20A knob & tube systems.

Newport RI 1940 :

I understand PREFERRING to own a mini truck vs. a mid-size truck, but it's nonsensical to pitch it as 'a mid-size truck is too big for city use'. Simply not true.

• Your gas prices are well over the national average. What you should have considered is the (much lower) national average for regular gas ($1.87) and the (much higher) national average of electricity (13.2 cents/kW). • You used the minimum rating of the 31/47 MPG Cruze. That's not real-world or objective. • You forgot the permit & labor charges to upgrade the home for an electric car charger, plus the cost of the charger itself.

Typical PR. Look no further than “they’re going to be profitable between now...” OEMs can launch 1000 EVs, or 10,000, but buyers have to BUY. And if that dream that everyone is lazily and effortlessly charging overnight was true, the constant clamoring for and building thousands of public chargers would also not be happening.

^ ‘63. Might be a ‘421’ emblem on the fender, but it’s mounted a bit high. Something going on non-factory in the rim department. Have seen a number of ‘car/aircraft’ interchanges that used ‘60s Pontiacs- they built some excellent powerplants. EDIT :: a NASA site says the car had a Tri-Power 421, but it also stated ‘just like Daytona 500 cars did’ but the race circuit only used 4bbls, and there they were all Super Duty engines.

^ Of course; driver skill is #1. ?

There's a lot of factors involved, wheelbase being just one. Longer vehicles have more leverage to slide. Period RWD cars often had much wider tires than subsequent FWD cars- wider tires = shoeshoe. It's largely an invalid comparison between 2 very different vehicles that started the narrative. What would be illustrative is comparing a -say- early 70s fulls-size RWD car vs. a period Toronado / Eldorado; similar weights, power, lengths & tire size. Only issue I ever had winter snow driving was a regular cab / long bed RWD pick-up, which must be like 80/20 weight distribution. Everything else I had: Bonneville, Catalina, Safari, etc, etc all did fine in the snow.

Detroit-Electric, Washington State, 1919 :

9-yr old Chevy, photographed in '39 in the high snow & road salt state of Texas :

Pic I posted above was at a 1938 State Fair, I assume it was a 'booth' where the operator had to guess your weight within X pounds. Can't tell how tall she may be, but then again; just about EVERYONE was 'light' in the '30s. I'll bet 91 lbs for a young woman was common then. But if she's 'on the scale', he already guessed and her smirk must mean she won a prize.

Dangerous work; guessing women's weight. Only 91 lbs here (perfect) :

Omaha NE 1938. The truck; I don't know the year at a glance.