balthazar

Saw 2 circa '63 F-Series- a nice patina'd green Styleside F-250 and a mint red mason dump.

^ don't forget the new 6-lunger s-class... a 4-banger cannot be far behind. -- -- -- -- -- Exactly right : daimler owns freightliner yet quizzically insists on branding garbage trucks and the sprinter vans as 'mercedees'. That's only a negative for the brand, and they just don't seem to understand that. I got a 4-page flyer from the local mercedees dealer a few weeks ago. Cover had a clk or something on the full cover, luxury home in the background, sunset, not a bad presentation. However, the full back page was the mercedees sprinter, with 4 different configurations cut-out and pasted on, and giant monthly dollar cost numbers stamped on it. What kind of schizo message is that??? These 'anti-mercedees' should all immediately be branded as 'freightliners', along with the decades-old G-wagon anachronism. Has ANYONE taken a close look at the body hardware on that thing?? Giant exposed rubber gaskets around the screwed-on turn signal assemblies? Really?? Daimler's mad-impulse volume grab is counterproductive to their self-proclaimed 'best of the best' taglines.

Not so sure being internationally oblivious is a status symbol. Tends to make one slavering over an s-class as an owner look foolish, IMO.

GM did the wheel thing 'back in the day' also. The famous Pontiac 8-lugs were designed by PMD but manufactured by Kelsey-Hayes. Same with the Cadillac Sabre Spokes.

poor quality... long-dated, no-progress design... FWD.... stoic lineup... it's never been a high-end product or stood out from the crowd. saab's heyday was 25 years ago; they've been treading water ever since.

Never cared for these- no motor to speak of and I was never able to look past the 'patchwork' nature of it's creation. RR glass always looked out of place.

I've said the same thing more than once WRT the DTS' tails pictured above. Well done & classy AND unique.

Gas would be a concern- how about a turbo 4 instead of a honking gas-sucking V-12 ? They say a 4 can do the work of a 12 now

Dammit, Moltar; too quick !! Actually- only part of one : See, I told you it was 'quick' : Clever engineering here: the handle to pull out the tray self-uprights when you slide it back in (note 1st pic). I love stuff like this : I'm going to use this one, or at least test it out. As I recall from childhood, they tend to explode the cubes quite a bit. But there's no knocking the longevity factor here...

It's vintage, has a surprising quantity of aluminum in it, it's quick, and it's pretty cool. Pics on the way....

'62 Corvette Fuelie, white, mint, factory-spec, motoring. '57 Ford 2-dr hardtop, white over 'terra cotta', mint, parked.

184" vs 162", but seems utterly immaterial. Anyone who cannot handle a tiny 184" vehicle had better give up driving. Next will be a nissan CUV around 145" for those who cannot handle 162", and after that, 120". Ludicrous. Murano is 189"- maybe that's the more pertinent overlap question for some.

Saw the first one on the road yesterday- they are NOT moving here. Still laughingly awful to look at. Anyone bother to ask how this isn't stepping all over the rogue in size/function?

Problem with GMC in this era is- they did not observe annual model year changes and there are no yearly VIN ranges to pin it down, either. This is the reason image searches are going to bring up conflicting data; no body knows. As Moltie stated, it's definitely a '64 or later due to the non-wrap windshield. The "GMC" grille lettering was altered slightly to more squared lettering for '66... which this truck does not have. That's all the yearly ID criteria I have handy, so this is either a '64 or '65. Calendar year production: '64 : 110,521 '65 : 136,705 Unless removed during resto, she doesn't show the V6 badge on the hoodsides. I know what you're thinking; 'that must mean it has a V8', but GMC didn't offer an 8-lunger from '60 thru '66... so no V-6 badge would mean I-6. Swing over to the Package Van and the menu starts out with an I-4. In '67 the hoary ol' 283 V-8 makes a brief showing, along with a 3-cyl diesel. GMC sure had some interesting engineering in the '60s, under it's own general manager & discretionary budget, eh?

I've never found Jeeps to be even mildly interesting, but this initially registers as a 'wow!' from me. Front end is aggressive without looking arbitrary- why can't BMW or mercedees get something out the door this interesting and/or cohesive?? Range Rover Sport just looks pedestrian against this. And the LEDs, in that they're filling the slot they're in, don't come off as an afterthought like audi's wavy front LEDs float in their holes. Looks very well done by the pics.

I only fill at the 'big truck' pumps- there the diesel nozzle is considerably larger than the gas nozzles.

Pontiac's full-size studio started to lose their moxie for the '70 MY. The strange front fascia piece, with the seam all the way around it and the too-narrow disharmonious grille is the start of the long greasy stylistic slide. That said, I like the '70s & '71s, but you can have everything after that. Those 2 aren't good looking designs, moreso just weird (well... '70 is) :

No MCs that I recall.... and I would not have taken note of any CCs. The show area was a ghost town- the forecast rain was well publicized. The Hudson was the only car I walked over to while crossing the strip (show area). In general, anything newer than '71 (with a few exceptions) gets 'filtered out' automatically.

They have no theme/language- never had. Each generation starts something different, and each is either generic or plain weird.

Would agree with the above- check the obvious but I wouldn't worry. I have a 'photonumericgraphic' memory; I remember numbers easily. I looked at a Pontiac for sale, odometer said 69244 (I still remember this). 2 years later I went back to check it out, it hadn't rolled 1 mile. Car was 27 years old then. I daily drove it for 2 years- the trans ended up needing a rebuild, but that I attributed to age, not to merely sitting, otherwise the car worked out great (this was a real Pontiac tho, not a 'marketing brand Chevy'- prolly had the most to do with it).

For subaru fans, here's hoping the interior quality is greatly improved.

Pretty cheesy overall, even for Bertone.

O.M.G. - an actual tactile finish to the wood ?? Is this the return from the buried-under-a-half-inch-of-clear mercedes has been pushing for some years now? Their wood finishes look like a table top at Red Lobster. Reminds me of the American Walnut in my Pontiac- very nice to see.

I don't believe I ever replaced a conventional taillight bulb in my 146K F-150- I don't think I'd ever own a vehicle long enough to worry about bulb longevity. Tails are already far bright enough as it is- at some point someone will come up with something brighter than an LED and then it'll be 'moar tech'. Moar is not always better. My issue with LEDs is 2-fold. I used to see them advertised in catalogs/ backs of magazines, available in strips or blocks of LEDs, and that's primarily how we're getting them: in obvious strips or blocks. Was behind a honduh insight today- big triangular tails with LEDs just plopped in there with no geometrical rhyme or reason; inconsistantly spaced. 'Who cares' is all it said. The other reason is our introduction to LED tails: school buses, tractor trailers and garbage trucks- not a particularly aspirational association. Whatever- some are just going to LLUUVV them to death because that's the way they're buttered up & served as. I don't mind the Malibu's tails overall but really need to see them in person. But I'd prefer to have them 'screened' ALA the way the circa '01 DTS's tails were; where the naked strips of 'off-shelf' LEDs weren't so blatantly visible.

http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/category/trucks-and-jeeps/cars-with-beds/page/1/ http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/category/trucks-and-jeeps/cars-with-beds/page/2/ http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/category/trucks-and-jeeps/cars-with-beds/page/3/ http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/category/trucks-and-jeeps/cars-with-beds/page/4/ http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/category/trucks-and-jeeps/cars-with-beds/page/5/ http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/category/trucks-and-jeeps/cars-with-beds/page/6/ http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/category/trucks-and-jeeps/cars-with-beds/page/7/