balthazar

'65 hardtop. Originally a 326 (that's the badge)- had to get the GTO option to get a 389. Currently has a 400 2bbl in it (prolly low-compression mid-70s variant). Last on the road in 1987, been sleeping in a container since '99. Odometer says 26K, awful clean for 126K but that's more likely than 26K. PS, PB, PWindows, AM-FM, factory A/C, so very nicely optioned. No floor, frame or trunk rot, just basically the lower corners of the front fenders (just like my GP). Guy had the optional Custom Sport 4-spoke 'wood' wheel, '64-only, highly sought after. I asked about buying it separately (3 times) but he said no. I said I would let him know in a day or so on the whole car, maybe I should go there in person with cash and make an offer. One of the wheels sold on eBay this year, in slightly worse shape, for $1425. (One from eBay) :

FINALLY…. something interesting:

^ GLS is just a copy of the Navigator anyway; a German brand trying to be what they aren’t. ?

But all those toyoter / hoonda buyers were buying all FWD.

Yes; adding features/ amenities & improving what's already present hardly ever increases sales.

^ SOP in the racing world.

To clarify, this was a Briggs Cunningham / Grumman build, not a Cadillac build (beyond the powertrain).

In addition to work, I use my truck a lot other ways. • I make occasional runs to the scrap yard; when I do aluminum I could make do with a much smaller bed, but not with steel runs. • I just finished moving my MIL out of her apartment, her couch was 2" too long for the 6.5' bed (tailgate down, load retainer up, ratchet strap), but that bed still made the move a bunch less trips. • Last month I was scavenging thru the 'Junkland' house, and a LOT of volume came out where that bed volume was key. • 2 months ago I took a lengthy ride to pick up a '71 GTO hood- it would not have fit in a 5.5' bed. • years ago my '04 (also a 6.5' bed) moved about 375 SF of pavers- I think I did it in 2 trips (brought to my house; not for a job). • When I picked up a '63 Nova convertible shell on a trailer, the bed was filled with fenders, bumpers, all sorts of sheet metal. • Firewood galore (I need to stock up). I don't pay for wood, I find it, so almost always it's branches/trunks, not cut-too-length.

Re-read my post.

I TOLD EVERYBODY THIS EXACT THING. Many, many times.

Rivian doesn't offer a 5' bed. I thought you knew that. And people practice consumerism in FAR more outlets than just Home Depot/Lowes. You don't need an 8-ft bed for commercial work, but you do need 6.5'. That's pretty much neither here nor there; Rivian isn't suited or intended for commercial work, just stating that fact.

So we agree- any plethora of journalistic opinion amounts to basically nothing.

Needs more variants/configurations and cheaper pricing to be a major player.

^ Or you could go with Pontiac & get AWD.

Automotive Journalism 101.

I stated right up front I was considering the context / the era this was in. I stated it, and I always do. That rides right on the back of folks commenting "A V-6 Camry is quicker to 60 than a lot of muscle cars from the '60s". That's blatantly out-of-context. And in that same vein of context, this is not comparing a -say- Triumph to a -say- Olds Vista Cruiser. The issue was the '1963 Road & Track Sports & GT" issue; there aren't any "massive" US cars in it. My issue is that nearly unilaterally, cars that aren't even CLOSE to 'not known for being fast' are in fact dismally & unbelievably slow- you're not going to enjoy the handling of anything that takes 30 seconds to reach 60- you can't even power thru a sweeping turn when you can't even gain 5 MPH doing so. Robert- I'm sure you've read a comment or two that the first gen Corvette 'wasn't really a sports car performance-wise', yet despite a full decade disadvantage, it's three times quicker than the Karman Ghia. A Chevette diesel ran 0-60 in 22 seconds! I guess what bothers me most is the unilateral acceptance. These cars were (mostly) sold in the U.S., but it's really hard to find any objective criticism in this issue of them, when they're not fitting for ANY on-road sporting activity. There's a reason almost all of the brands in the book are long dead.

It’s not ‘Rubbermaid’ tho- it’s not all hard plastics- door panels, dash top, console top are all nicely-grained soft padded material. It’s not the ‘80s inside, and it’s not the early ‘00s either. Your impression is outdated.

Going thru stacks of paper, here's a prime bit of why I rail against auto journalism as a reflex reaction. And of course you know I always take into consideration the context (or here; the era context): Road & Track, 1963 Karman Ghia 4-spd manual road test ~ "Few changes have been made other than the usual and expected refinements... Most important was the change in 1960 from 36(!!!!!!!) to 40(!!!!!!!) bhp, a seemingly(!!!!!!!) insignificant amount when viewed as only a 4 horsepower gain, but it represents an 11% increase, which made the difference between barely adequate performance and that which is very satisfactory." You've already read the HP numbers, and there's no way you can agree with 'seemingly'... but let's see what this "very satisfactory" performance actually is. 0-60 : 30.0 secs 1/4-mile: 22.7 @ 55 MPH top speed : 75.8 MPH

Wait.... is it truths, or 'opinions, nothing less, nothing more'???

^ IMO, Bolt is by far the best looker of the bunch. Nothing wrong with the mini but I'm bored to tears looking at them after (is it 20 years yet?). Rest are too gruesome to put in the driveway.

It's a photo of a print photo laying on a table.

Buddy stopped by with his ‘21 TrailBoss :