balthazar

Modern stuff is pretty unilaterally acknowledged to be relatively soulless, so any inspiration to help address that problem is goodness.

Yeah, moltie did nail it: glass/frame from rear door installed on the front door off a 4-dr sedan. It's very well done- no extraneous trim splices or anything. With the patina, you don't even see signs the roof was cut. Just need to resolve the quarter trim-to-beltline intersection.

I foresee a growing problem. To wit: I have a set of rims up for sale on CL. Guy e-mails me from some sort of 'smart' phone in the morning, says he'll take them if he can pick them up today. A few hours later, he e-mails again and asks 'can I pick them up today or not?' A few hours later and it's 'if I don't hear from you I'll have to move on'. Problem for this 2012-typical 2-sec attention span guy is, I dont get e-mails on my phone and I didn't get home from work until 7PM and didn't read his many messages until 7:15PM. You'd think his 'smart' phone would tell him that. These folks are going to have to realize that not everything is as instantaneous as they want things to be.

I know. I love that stuff, makes the mind wheel....

^ The quarter panel dip looks to me to be in the factory location (where the trim angles upward), but yea; a profile shot would be very telling. These were all there were.

I just sent my friend a 155-page thread on COEs from there.

I think if the '56 had the actual 'S' B-pillar of the Nomad, it would work better for me, esp as an otherwise stocker. The '55, tho of course I know it's custom, has all the greenhouse lines as if built by GM. Here the custom work looks more factory IMO. Of the 2, I'd buy the '55 and fabricate the world's longest hinged decklid for it.

I'm going to disagree on the '55- the roofline fits a '55 better than the one on the '56. Proportions might be off on the '55 tho- hard to tell.

I'll have to read it. Page 1 looks like some nice work, and tho I love customs, a few cars IMO are a notch above being customized and the EB falls into that category for me. Automotive royalty.... But I'll have to read it.

I dont care for either the O-59 or O-60.

Lot of truck fans (not just GM) and hot rodders are aware of the Twin-Six. The issue is they are extemely heavy and theres no aftermarket support, which limits their appeal immensely. GM didnt build many and they are very rare today - all which adds to it being largely 'forgotten' today. A few people have messed with them, but the best feature of a built motor isnt the power, its the 'Gee whiz' factor of having a V12. The 'bolt 2 blocks together' myth mystifies me, as its impossible without advanced engineering & fabrication, if at all. Frankly, I believe it actually is impossible, but I wont go that far and say that.

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=284025

It's going to be so mildly evolutionary vs. the rest of Corvette's generational transitions, it's tough to see why all the secrecy is warranted. But... that's the OEM SOP.

I think it's better known that most believe. 'Original casting for the block' : there's no other way to build it.

Not a pick-up, but the proportions are right there, love this car ::

Lessee... doing painting last week; didn't involve the truck bed except for a few ladders Monday. Friday started a drywall tear-out job, Monday the bed was filled with insulation, 2 saws and some miscellaneous. Today I slipped back in and hauled off 4 contractor bags of garbage & some ripped-out framing. Waiting on other contractors, then I'll have to haul about 10 sheets of drywall to said job.

Prolly true, tho with cars getting taller & taller, perhaps the bumpers can eventually be sectioned a wee bit. Also bet aerodynamics was involved.

^ They went a bit too far in the other direction. Years back, IMO GM had too much 'air space' under their front ends (thinking mostly cars here), I believe that rendered said vehicles 'less solid' than some of the competition, even if subliminally. On the Sierra Roger posted, the front bumper/air dam is lower than the frame. I don't hate it or anything, but in looking at this sort of evolutionary body design... I can't become 'unaware' of it... and on a truck is seems... counterproductive.

You're a Chevy guy; you're used to stylistic self-deprivation.

^ Agreed ! Tho IMO the front end of the B-59 is tops (they're all cool), I always felt 'cheated' at the Buick's rear. Look at it's bumper vs. Olds & Pontiac... For some reason, Buick toned things WAY down ::

10-4 on the '70s continuation. Photographic angle makes them appear to point outward. Friend of mine had a '59 Star Chief, plus I just know these cars. They are merely pointed bumper ends, not uncommon and without a nickname.

^ Common automotive definition of 'skegs' has them projecting outward to the sides, IE: '61-62 Cadillac & '61 Olds. No such projection on the quarters of P-59s. You are referring to the points on the P-59 bumper, yes? Pontiac had the larger Bonne tails in '59 and '61 onward thru at least '70. Seems PMD got caught somewhat flatfooted in '60 with the tails & unsplit grille.

IHC offered one too, this is a '56 :: RE the Olds- the internet scuttlebutt is a handful were built by Olds for internal evaluation/ useage, but they were not 'official production'.