balthazar

It's a beast, no doubt. Wheelbase on my truck is 153". Understandably, the steering is quite a bit sharper (in angle) than shorter vehicles. I have no maneuverability issues- but I've been on a steadily increasing wheelbase diet since day 1.

You might consider tire diameter here... and the RPM you're at @ 60. I have 3.73s in the B-59, but the tires are tall and it will turn but 2500 @ 60 (TH400)- not bad with no OD & 3.73s. That aside, this boils down to money & preference- little else. Your pattern of use (and even potential use) doesn't warrant hardware changes by itself (IE; you aren't drag racing or doing interstate travel with frequency). A TH350 in good shape is not overstressed behind a 406 just cruising. If it doesn't have 100K or thereabouts on it and you can handle the 'pussification factor' of driving a "slushbox" , I'd replace the seal for now... esp with such limited usage. Not an option to put joints in the exhaust for possible future disassembly/trans work ?

These are far too long in the tooth to gain my admiration.. but they've prettied it up as much as possible. Hopefully they blacked-out all the many exposed screws that hold all the lenses & hardware on, too.

http://cnj.craigslist.org/atq/2068088512.html

"1966 mec" = '66 Merc (Comet Cyclone GT convert pace car)

I'm getting around 16.0 (no DIC, but every tank is charted) out of my LLY 6.6 2500 CC, but mine is an HD. I would ask you to -assuming the trans quadrant works the same as it does in my brother's '07 and has a manual mode)- to watch how infrequently the Allison goes into 6th.

Commodore chop is everything the G8 was, with a horizontally split grille instead of vertically. That is to say; not bad, but nothing special (visually).

I would definitely agree - with your motor combo/power neighborhood- 2.5", X-pipe, mufflers, 2" tails is the way to go. You aren't pushing enough air to warrant 3" pipes.

Why don't you send me money in a birthday card, and more money in a holiday card, and every year after this. Why should your relatives be "more entitled" to gifts from you than I am, simply because I didn't have the "good luck" to be part of your family. Are you xenophobic? I'm PM'ing my addy to you right now, and my birthday is in Jan. I expect you to make up for the decades you've missed in the first check, too. I'll accept PayPal if you prefer. What's that.... your resources aren't unlimited and you can't afford to send checks to me, everyone on this board & everyone in your town?? You're squinting; is that sunshine too bright for you ??

>>"You're ignoring the fact that there is basically no legal avenue for legal immigration anyway, so it's a useless distinction. It's a red herring in order to oppose immigration generally. Saying you only support legal immigration, but then support a system that allows for very little legal immigration, doesn't strike me as supportive of immigration. "<< My family all came here as immigrants- of course I don't oppose immigration or fear foreigners. I have great pride in my ethnic backgrounds, too; made it a 15-yr spare-time project to research all the branches of my family tree (oldest branch dates back to the 1600s and there have to be over 700 individuals listed). So you're flat wrong with the xenophobic allegation. Laws can be changed. You need to petition the U.S. Gov to do so if you believe so, but until they are; we are a nation guided by laws, laws that need to be enforced & upheld, regardless of your opinion of them. To advocate breaking federal law at the rate of millions & millions of times over is, in fact, to oppose immigration, because entering this country illegally is NOT 'immigration'. Continuing to obtusely & purposely ignore the definitions here is exactly like calling :: >>You opening the door to your house & inviting me in, and >>me slicing your screen and crawling thru a bedroom window at 4AM "the same thing".

If they are here illegally AND they're taking up a job that an American citizen could otherwise take, that's 2 reasons they need to be gone. But for the eleventy-millionth time, no one is advocating a ban on immigration, just a ban on illegal immigration. All companies that import should pay a sliding scale business license fee in order to tap into the richest, most lucrative market in the world, yes. They're certainly not going to pull out over it; 5 years ago toyoyo was making 75% of its global profit in the U.S. alone.

There is a still-existing black '65 GTO hardtop that the owner claims was a pre-production pilot model, that the factory stamped panels initially in a thinner gauge to check dies & assembly. That car is the first I've heard of such a thing being done, but I'll buy it.

Me too: LeMans for '50 or '51, and the PanAm in '54 are the only factory-sponsored racing that springs to mind. There were non-factory cars now & again of course: Cannonball Run for '71 & '72 (Cadillac placed 2nd the one year). As much as I have read on Cadillac over the years.... the premise is very strange, but the AL-body thing puts it over the top. I'd go out on a limb and say the 'AL-production body' claim is incorrect... but I would LOVE to be proved wrong here.

Yes, because ALL illegal immigrants do is pick berries. No way they're involved in nearly every blue-collar industry out there; no way. This dovetails perfectly with your rosy sunshiny view of the issue. >>"If they aren't illegal for any particular reason, it doesn't make sense to freak out that they're entering the country illegally to work."<< Spock would slap you.

Mexico is a hot mess, but it's NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY. It is NOT our country and it's people are NOT our citizens. Our country is swirling in the bowl- we MUST take care of our citizens first. Resources are strained and the economy is also swirling in the bowl. And those illegal immigrants (you really MUST learn that there is a difference) aren't "making my life better", they're competing with me for work. You are advocating anarchy.

66Stang ~ >>"As the old saying goes..."<< I have a photocopy of a B&W pic, but currently no scanner capabilities. Only thing it would show is a '64 convertible with Grand Prix trim/grilles. Can't recall (without diggin it out) if it had the GP windshield or not. >>"Cadillac actually built a set of Aluminium race cars right about 1964 or so...full aluminium bodies, looked like a production car IIRC. LONG time since I've read anything about them..."<< Production aluminum-bodied, circa '64 Coupe deVilles ???? I don't think so; that would be news to the Cadillac enthusiast at large. Never heard this before, and frankly it just doesn't fit. GM bowed out of racing in Jan '63, too. Something's fishy....

^ The MASSIVE disconnect between ideology & reality....

>>"You need to look before that--the proportion of foreign born residents in the US was much higher in the 1890s than it is today."<< It was; 14.7% in '90, with a total population of 62 million. So what of it? Crunch the numbers: if 14.7% of 350 million moved in, that'd be 51 million people. But to what end ?? For what purpose or goal ?? And how to provide for them ??? What dictates maintaining a immigrant percentage figure from 120 years ago to today ???? Makes no sense on any level.

>>"That's how it worked for many years in this country."<< See post #116.

The Economist - So who's going to be the judge of "good moral character" requirement that's in this proposed 'Dream Act' - Harry Reid ??? What about the circumstances of their upbringing- should they really be held responsible for the effects of the atmosphere they were raised in? That's frequently a mitigating circumstance WRT Americans accused of crimes- it should be extended to foreign lawbreakers, too. And what's with the 'certain' illegals being eligible- for EX: why are those who crept under barbed wire @ age 16 'discriminated' against ??? Aren't they just as much 'American' as those who crept in @ 15 ??? I think that even if you are a newborn rolled under the fence you should be included. In fact, just let EVERYBODY in, and make it so the moment they touch toe to U.S. soil they're handed a SS check so it's "fair".

Really like the split tailgate, and the hide-away bed sides (provided snow/ice conditions are worked out). More cubbies are always better. The flip-up 'rack bar' needs some sort of accompanying 'load bar' on the roof tho. The proportions are pretty good, 110" wheelbase is very short tho. Not sure what the potential market for something this small & utility-focused is.

I've seen numerous LEDs out on cars.

That ^ I would completely agree with. I don't think there's a single micro-entity in Gov that could not use a thorough going-over & streamlining. Also, a great quantity of Gov entities just need to be flushed. There was an analysis done a few years ago, and the result was that 22% (<-this I remember explicitly) of all federal programs either no longer have a reason to exist, or have no measurable effect either way.

There was at least 1 factory-built '64 Grand Prix convertible (still exists), even the data plate was stamped 2967 (29: Series 29 GP, 67: convertible).

>>"The assumption for this law is; if you are brown and speak spanglish, you are assumed to be here illegally. "<< This is your assumption, correct? It's certainly not mine. There is nothing in the law that addresses race, EXCEPT to state that race cannot be the sole factor in pulling a motorist over. OK, since we've established the law itself is not racist; as soon as you dismiss the language of the law and assume the future actions of the police, you are assigning behavior to people you have no knowledge of, people who have been trained to follow publicaly-available protocol... and you are assuming racial motivation on their part. There are FAR more criteria and details involved in assessing a person than just skin color, and police are specifically & exhaustively trained in these ways. >>"Do you really think, if he were caught speeding in AZ while missing his papers, that he would be hauled into jail while his immigration status gets checked out?"<< I'm not willing to project any personal assumptions or impressions on police officers I have zero knowledge of. But technically speaking, if it came up that your boss was a Canadian citizen and was without papers, yes; the law allows him to be detained until his immigration status is verified. If he was without required papers, he is subject to a penalty. That's the law and therefore that's what should be done (if we are nationally who we claim we are). Do you advocate him being let go in said hypothetical without being verified & fined ?? There are 6.5M residents of AZ and 31% are Hispanic (LEGAL citizens). That's 2,015,000, plus an estimated 750,000 illegals. So REAL CLOSE to HALF of the state's people are hispanic/latino. Do you believe police are suddenly going to pull over HALF the states' population and demand papers because they are simply 'brown' ? The sheer volume of 'browns' in AZ forces the police to rely on far more than just skin color. But to assume the cops enforcing this are judgementally simplistic & outright racist is ridiculously unfair. Remember, just as is the case with the federal law, the touchstone is at the point of enforcement. The Fed does NOTHING, tho they have these same laws on their books. SB1070 has been completely neutered at this point, but what will happen at the point of contact still remains to be seen... not assumed. Since there is no evidence as to what will happen & the law has yet to be enacted in full, the reaction here is directed at the law itself... which is a restatement of federal law. It is still within the realm of possibilities that the State will effectively do what the Fed does: NOTHING.