balthazar

^ Sure there is, and it's a short one: Stude sheet metal can be hard to find. RE: the definition of 'shoebox'... I've repeatedly heard it associated with the '49-51 Ford.... my casual thought was it's because Ford had integrated rear fenders (smooth down the sides like a shoebox) whereas -for comparison- Chevy didn't until '55. I've heard it once or twice connected to the Tri-5 Chevys, but by that time EVERYTHING had integrated fenders, and the term had no more relative meaning for a given post-'54 year. In fact, Stude itself didn't go that route until the '53 Champion. Here, Chevy followed Ford (with V-8s, too)....

No doubt it's a big job- chip out the really loose mortar, etch it all, then 2 coats of DryLoc. Last I checked it was $97 / 5 gals. You'd likely only have to paint the mortar as opposed to the rocks, but that would look pretty bad. You know how to tell if the gutters need cleaning... But yea- ventilation would be a great plus.

Can you get 'Pacer' or 'Ranger' or 'Corsair' emblems to interchange with whatever the alfa model names are? Please?

Well, they were low....

DryLoc the interior walls. Yep- there goes the cozy stone look... but it'll stay dry. There's no gutters on the barn, are there. That's a lot of roof footage dumping right down next to the walls... wet outside will seep inside. After/instead of that: you need ventilation.

^ GT Hawk debuted for '62 with the squared-off roof; no "GT" '61 and earlier. Love those. Saw 2 '63 T-birds today, 1 white & 1 black, both very nice, plus a '56 Chevy sedan delivery, quite rough.

Someday I'm going to need a scratch-built, X-piped, 3" system built that conforms to the B-59s chassis.

Yea- I was certainly generalizing. The fabric-wrapped stuff is neat (except when you open it up; lot going on in there). BX is awesome; obviously not as easy to work with from the homeowner standpoint but the meese can't chew thru it.

Romex is what's running thru your post WWII house, making everything cost you money.

Ahh c'mon, man; we're all friends here. Just callin' it as I see it.

Aluminum came & went in an eyeblink (approx a decade) as far as being in code for home wiring. It corrodes where joined with dissimilar metals, and that can cause enough heat where fire can start. AL expands more than copper, which tends to loosen connections sooner. AL also has about half the conductivity of copper and a third the tensile strength. It's NOT a good move really on any front (except weight). Hopefully BMW doesn't cut their corners that hard.

reg is down on anything domestic 6 months after it debuts.....

Whether it's 3 letters or 3 numbers and a letter- it's all the same meaningless glop. Car isn't called "S-class", it's called 8 or 11 different alphanumeric combos, only each has an 'S' in it. No where on the car is it labeled 'S-class', so each engine change, it's a different model. Not to mention when it used to be 350S. Add to that the 'S' in the 'SL' and the 'SLK' (why the cheaper car has more letters is a puzzler) and 'SLS' and who can keep any of the mishmash straight. Mercedees needs to bring in a new letter or two and work a bit of sensibility into it. Same diff.

I admire my father's work ethic and determination to see thru to a goal, and his strong sense of family. And his sense of humor.

Well, BMW didn't start building cars until 1928. Cadillac alpha-numerics predate that easily; the "V-63" line came out in 1923, so I'm not seeing your fix there. 'mercedes-benz' as a brand didn't exist until 1926, but I'm being a smartass there. Regardless, neither BMW nor mercedes was worthy of emulation from Cadillac's standpoint anywhere prior the 1960s, IMO (later WRT BMW).

>>"Most luxury marks (read Japanese and American ones) use alpha-numeric because they want to copy BMW and Mercedes."<< Cadillac was using numerics before there was a BMW or mercedes-benz. Cadillac proper names started in the '50s.

I looked- couldn't find it either....

And the well-earned & recent reputation for building utter crap since their debut here.

1. They may have been sidetracked with technology/electronics, yes. 2. The Gov't is incapable of this. 3. & 4. Agreed.

^ see miata wheel chart link in post #7 for general idea

F-Body component weight list : http://www.bfranker.badz28.com/fbody/weights.htm

That would definitely be an interesting/informative list. We do it now for food....

So does the Fed in general. Don't hold your breath...

What would you suggest? You can't think that the manufacturers haven't been looking at exactly this since the '80s.

general comparison: mazda miata wheel size/weight chart : http://www.miata.net/faq/wheel_weights.html -- -- -- >>"Miniaturization should be able to ameliorate that to a certain degree. I just refuse to believe that this issue can't be conquered."<< I don't doubt that that has been the focus for some time. But try and get a 3033 lb golf back even halfway to 2145 lbs (2589). Fed regs alone won't allow it.