Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

balthazar

In Hibernation
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    40,855

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    583

 Content Type 

Everything posted by balthazar

  1. balthazar
    The current SIlverado 1500 starts @ 5300 lbs. I strongly agree this is too heavy, my old mid-'90s F-150 RC/LB started around 3900 lbs. Damn electronic BS- pulling some of that nonsense out would be a good start to slimming down.
  2. balthazar
    ^ http://www.falconerengines.com/faq.php?faq=falconer_v12 Thought this one was quite pertinent : Is the Falconer V12 just two blocks welded together? Absolutely not. The block, crank girdle, heads, valve covers and intake manifold are dedicated castings. These parts are cast aluminum, although a cast magnesium intake manifold was produced for aviation variants of the Falconer V12. Only the prototype engine was constructed by welding the necessary components together. For reliable, repeatable results, no production (even semi-production as Falconer) is going to cut & weld anything together. An intake, say, is one thing- no moving parts, easily machined (still more expensive to do it that way). Cranks, cams & blocks (where moving parts are installed) - no. Too inefficient, too high a factor of inefficiency of operation / durability. It's like casting cams & cranks in aluminum, just because all your heads & blocks are AL and you had the material right there. Interesting 2-page message board topic on AL cranks : http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/aluminum-crankshaft-120596.html
  3. balthazar
    Generally speaking; a correctly executed weld is stronger than the steel pieces it joins. Cranks, however, are solid- it would be very challenging to get it re-welded solid, and dimensionally accurate after that. IMO, the slightest runout on the rotating assembly is equally troublesome.
  4. balthazar
    I'm in @ $1000, but above that; no.
  5. balthazar
    Crap: nope. I have 1912-1986, plus 1909-1911 (Reliance & Rapid).
  6. balthazar
    I have anything older than '87, but I'm guessing you're looking for newer than that.
  7. balthazar
    Same issue, no? IMO, a lot of people seem to think that 'cutting & welding' 2 -say- V6s together just wham-O-presto makes a V12. The link just ran parts thru a bandsaw then welded them. Let's see it run, and run well.
  8. balthazar
    Not really. Well, cutting & welding is, but getting alignment spot-on between all components isn't 'finger-snap' easy.
  9. balthazar
    ^ I would not say that. Plenty of '50s cars were stripped out themselves, loads of Ford Customs, Plymouth Savoys, Chevy 150s, etc. Since the resto boom starting in the '80s, a much higher percentage of existing '50s cars today are notably better equipped than back in the day. IMO, the RANGE of equipment varied much more than today. The 1950s decade saw the greatest degree of change over 10 years than any other. A Chrysler in 1950 had either 116 or 135 HP. By 1960, the top engine was (by many accounts; vastly underrated) 400 HP and was clocked at 145 MPH @ Daytona. There is, of course, far more evidence of this sort of thing. If you are referring to the typical level of trim on '50s cars, then of course; YES. RE the Scotsman cars, they are SO spartan (the painted hubcaps, for EX), they remind me of '60s mainstream mercedes.
  10. balthazar
    Yea, the Scotsman line was uber-stripped- shows up more obviously in the car line than the truck; '50s trucks seldom strayed from the 'Scotsman Approach' as a whole. The '50s Stude trucks have some nice lines, the cabs are really rounded, tho I prefer the M-Series to the E-Series.
  11. balthazar
    Also saw a Tesla S today, white. If we weren't opposite each other at a light, I would never have noticed it- pretty generic. '50 Merc 2-dr, black, chopped & shiney, Fing sweet, motorin'. I love these, HAVE to get one someday. '66 LeMans 2-dr hardtop, aqua, buddy bought it & we trailered it home. Needs a motor/trans, but is pretty solid for a Jersey oldie. Looking forward to getting a nice 389 in it.
  12. balthazar
    1957 T-bird, white over light blue, had the optional 312, dual quads, optional race kit high-po cam, 1of 8 so equipped. Excellent original condition, 1,300 miles, drag strip car, really cool.
  13. balthazar
    Watched a CTS-V coupe roll slowly by me at a local car show today- still looks awesome. Hope the ATS coupe steals a bit of the swagger the CTS coupe does so well, and doesn't come off boring/generic like a 3-series 2-dr.
  14. balthazar
    IMO, neither is up to the current Cadillac standard.
  15. balthazar
    For some reason, I have a random copy of the Home News Tribune, a New Brunswick NJ-based newspaper, date Nov 20, 1969. I found these used car ads interesting : • 61 Austin-Healey 3000, good condition, overdrive, $795 • 69 Camaro Z/28, Hurst, 3.73s, 6600 miles, $3300 • 63 Impala convertible, $600 • 67 Biscayne, 427 motor, best offer • 65 Impala convertible 4-spd, $1275 • 68 El Camino, SS396, 4-spd, 24,000 miles, best offer over $2000 • 62 Corvette, 340-HP 4-spd, excellent cond, $1450 • 61 Merc convert, new top, $225 • 66 Belvedere 2-dr Hemi 4-spd, exc cond, $1800 • 69 Road Runner, Hemi 4-spd 4.88s (no price) • 64 GTO 4-spd, loaded, exc cond, beast offer over $1000 • 67 Firebird 4-spd convert, $1600 The above are private sale ads; some dealer listings : • 68 Sedan deVille, $4695 • 64 Riviera $1495 • 64 Chevelle SS auto 1395 • 67 Chrysler 300, 440, $2010 • 66 GP, $1695
  16. balthazar
    Got some greatly-needed refinement, looks much better. Could stand a bit more, IMO.
  17. balthazar
    I realize most people are going to be extremely dismayed & disappointed that the sedan comes out in 2014, the coupe & convert take another year, and the diesel, 4WD & hybrid will take 2 or 3 years! Because these same people always FREAK when an American brand staggers it's intros.....
  18. balthazar
    '70 Dart 2-dr hardtop, white with 1 green door & notable cancer. Must've been the original owner, because the plate design it was wearing was last issued in 1979. 42 years in a Dodge Dart... Buddy bought a '68 Impala convertible, red, black top & interior, I-6/PowerGlide, bench seat. Plan is for a big block/TH400, and blow it out.
  19. balthazar
    You're right. It's not actual cargo space, it's the trendiness factor of being in something higher up. Most CUVs have terrifically short cargo areas unless you jack the set out, and vertical space is largely useless unless you transport balloons or those oversized stuffed animals. Only way wagons are going to make a major inroad as an alternative to CUVs & the smaller SUVs is to enlarge the cargo space in length & width. They don't have to offer a 10-foot floor space like an old Plymouth Suburban did, but when you open the hatch and see literally 1.5 feet of room... where's the draw? The mid-size sedans, most of which offer some degree of a folding rear seat do 90% of the same thing.
  20. balthazar
    Reg hit upon it squarely- the handful of current wagons don't generally offer tremendous, useable cargo room, so, yeah.
  21. balthazar
    I kno the miles are low, but a bit high-priced for a '94, no?
  22. balthazar
    Also sorry to hear. My folks have a Cruze- other than the TSB/recall WRT the lower shield catching oil/potential fire (which came out before their first oil change) the car has been excellent w/ no issues.
  23. balthazar
    The Govt's track record WRT 'green' companies investment is DISMAL; more like criminal negligence. You can't force the market and lawmakers are clueless. If Fisker goes belly up it's a shame, but a fresh $100K car is never NOT going to have an uphill battle, no matter what's underhood or how slinky it looks.
  24. balthazar
    I was unaware the current Mustang did this :
  25. balthazar
    What do you mean "based" ?? lol
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search