balthazar

If it's heavier, costs more AND returns less MPG, he can bitch about Cadillac all the more.

And humanity continues to unravel while technology continues 'moving forward'. Yay us !!

Back. $h! mostly everything hurts. Not doped up right now, tho I have a 40-count bottle of Oxycodene. Got comped an overnight due to some monkeyshines I tossed at my doctor on the table. What great, amazing fun.

And 1962 is well before I was born, but as I've stated before; I fail to see how that matters. Things of passion, things of quality, things that stir the soul and go on to become 'classics', these things are worth learning about, embracing, remembering, nurturing. Few manufactured items approach the widespread allure of the automobile, a terrifically difficult & expensive thing to restore and even maintain... yet millions do and get great reward in return (beyond dollars). 1980 is old, I know this. I'm only borderline delusional. I too started driving in the '80s and I remember well the deplorable vehicles that were the norm then. They were -for the most part- so unremarkable & disposable, most are not worth studying. Who cares? Can anyone imagine repro parts for an '81 Citation in 2021 like there are for the '69 Camaro today ??? No; because it will NEVER happen. The Citation is now 30 years old and it is still an unloved baseball, still getting smacked around. In '62 IIRC, Chevy ran a few ads featuring the '57 Chevy (I believe it was for the OK Used Cars ads). They did this because even then, even the corporate ad men caught wind of that car's appeal. And that appeal has never diminished; it has only grown... because (and despite the fact that I am sick-tired of it) it. was. greatness. History has proven that 'wind' correct a billion times over. I do not remember C-57s in use as daily drivers, I'm not old enough. I never saw them outside car shows or junkyards or the backyard garages of lucky owners. But I sure as hell am not going to ignore it because it's outside my sphere of experience. The Citation IS from my sphere... and I have chosen to reject it. That 'wind' may never lose it's stink. Much of what blows since 1980 stinks, too.

>>"Don't let percocets keep you from posting."<< This, is a capital idea. As soon as I can manage it, I will see if anything interesting pours out while under the influence. There's a LOT in the attic.... Thanks for the well-wishes, they are appreciated. Have to be there 7:30 AM, hopefully I'll be home by mid-afternoon. Later...

The styling isn't amazing, but it's certainly not hideous. It's amazingly complete for being unrestored w/ 50K on it. The BIN price is well within line for an original concept, it's cheap even.

<<"But then the clue is Balthazar, even 1962 is like brand new for him"<< Close. For me, automotively & still to this day, 1980 is 'new' to me. '62 would merely be within the range of 'the usual'. -- -- -- -- -- >>"I went with a much more powerful version of the 215."<< Buick 215 was available in all 3 of the compacts, but only Olds got the 215/215 turbo in their '62-63 Jetfire.

See; posting the year blew the bottom out of it. Some sort of well-tattered R&T compilation issue (cover's long gone- starts on page 5- I have no idea what the title is). Full front-2-back with road tests of 'sporting' cars, Alfa-Romeo, 3 different AC models, Aston Martin DB4, Austin Healey 3000, DKW, Ferrari 2+2 & 4.9, Hillman, Volvo, triumph, porsche, Jag, Rover, Simca, etc etc. American cars are the AC-Ford Cobra 260, Corvette, Avanti... and the '62 Buick Skylark (why am I hearing that said in Marisa Tomei's voice ?). Was I right- unexpected inclusion, no? First off, all these cars (Corvette aside) are SLOW. Porsche Carrera 2L, 2220 lbs, 152 HP, 4-spd, 1/4-mile : 16.9 @ 83 Buick Skylark, 215 V8, 2980 lbs, 190 HP, 4-spd, 1/4 mile : 17.9 @ 79 Corvette, 327 V8, 3030 lbs, 4-spd, 1/4 mile : 14.9 @ 95 Just thought it a interesting chance at hoodwinking you guys with the mention of the carrera.

6 sales HAVE to be down due to the economy : not many rental agencies replacing their mazda 6 fleets with '10 6's.

Well if I outright give you the years, I haven't much challenged you all, IMO. Oh all right : 1962.

Not that anyone particularly cares or is likely to notice, but I expect to be 'away' from the board for the better part of a week. Going in for a bit of surgery Thursday and I expect to be laying around popping Percocets and dozing at will for some days. I started my extended hyperventilating first thing this morning; I like to jack up early. >:/

SAmadei ~ >>"I've been surprised you would take apart National Geographics... I thought they were one of the holy grails of old magazines."<< Quite common. I could not bring myself to cut up the 1940s issues, tho... tho I have in years past. IMO, Life would be the holy grail- harder to find, usually will cost you, treasured by more, nice big ads, usually different ones. -- -- -- -- -- GMTruckGuy74 ~ >>"Is there an easy process to de-bound a magazine? Some I have done in the past haven't turned out too good, while others were just a staple to be removed."<< Nat'l Geo is relatively easy: snip the staples with side cutters, bend 'em upright and cut them flush. Then you can remove the ads (only in the front or rear of the issue), tearing it from the glued binding. With non-stapled, glued, square-bound mags, like current M/T, I would likely tear off the cover, then remove pages until I came to the ad. Sometimes a 'glue ridge' builds up by the time you reach deeper into the issue- you should X-acto that off to avoid tearing the edge of the ad. Non-glued stapled issue are the easiest, tho the fold is not as sharp- so tearing a 1-page from a 2-page spread has to be done more carefully. -- -- -- -- -- I've been reading thru various issues at breakfast and have concluded they are not worth keeping whole to me, esp -like I said- I am short on ads of the '00s. I will keep plenty of clipped pics & select articles, but the ads will be most welcome.

Incorrect, sir. The car in question was new (in it's 2nd year), but another vehicle, quite different but from the same marque, used the same name. That would not apply to the Mustang.

Waiting to enter the highway @ a light, got to watch a new sonata (& the current maxima right behind it) come thru the looping jughandle. Frankly, while certainly swoopy, I find it to be too much so: too much flamboyancy for the segment, which is pretty down to earth. The swoopiness makes the wheels look terribly small. This should've been the genesis design, unfortunately (just longer, & w/ much bigger rims). And it really wasn't any more impressive than the maxima -esp when you read that it's trying too hard- just different. Meh.

Thanks, Cubitar- that's it (tho I'm not positive it was 2-toned as above). Big tough-looking monster, grille is a nice freshening - I'm gonna have to check it out when it's out. genesis AM grille is no surprise- the stock grille is terrible.

Was behind a giant burnt-orange Ford Super Duty, waiting at a light on U.S. Rt 1. What caught my eye was the Michigan Manufacturer plate. When it turned into the Ford dealer 1000' later, I caught a backwards glimpse of a completely different 2-bar grille in the vein of the Interceptor concept, and a different (smaller, higher) front fender vent. Special package (then why all the way from MI ?), or tease of 2011 ??

Yea- I recall yoyo using SR-5 on nearly everything at one point or another. But in the '75 ad, it's listed just like an official name. Prolly didn't use "Hilux" in the US because there wasn't a single molecule of 'lux' involved. Either that, or some of the convoluted thinking behind the whole nissan/datsun dance was involved.

>>"Well, in 1994, it was still just the 'Truck' in the US. Tacoma name didn't come out until '95"<< I'll accept this info, yet I have a '75 ad for a toyoyo truck and there it's captioned the "SR-5 Sport Truck". That, at least, is a helluva lot easier to get excited about than... "Truck". -- -- -- -- -- What is it with auto marketers; 'Pontiac is Car', 'Toyota Truck', 'VW: the car' -- lame lame lame.

I am almost done with the 2010 Recount of my ad collection. Done to date: Chrysler (944), Ford (1347) and GM (3444) are done, and the independants are mostly sorted & awaiting counting (est: 350), then the dreary foreign ads will be the only thing left (est (200). That's a total of around 6300 ads. Yes, I'll get to those request in short order. I went thru maybe a 16-ft tall stack of National Geographics and de-bound them to get clean, full-sheet ads out. Those are all processed..... but being 'in the groove', I am eyeballing a 16-in stack of Motor Trends & C&Ds from '02-08. Lots of decent, performance-oriented ads there, and my post -say- 1990 ad count is painfully thin. Think it'd be a 'bad thing' to cut up auto rags just for the ads? Wouldn't be the first time for me, and I do save random pics and articles... There's no one out there clamoring for magazines this new, are there ???

Strange, poorly done ad. From 1994 Nat'l Geo- note the picture captions : What's with "Truck" - couldn't remember the name ???? And wouldn't it help support "and everything in-between" if -say- the celica was on the left and the "Truck" was on the right ? Kinda a 'size range' thingie at least? Weird.

ShadowDog ~ >>"Even with the cast-sharing between the pushrod and OHC block, did not the LQ1 still end up one of the most expensive engine designs for its time? I would think if the same idea could be used, it would have to be based on development of a new block designed to share the different valvetrains, and not from a design originally for one or the other. This, because the LQ1 ended up a bunch of fussy fixes to accommodate the change from pushrod to DOHC with oil sealer plugs and funky hoses for coolant channeling, etc. Being belt driven wasn't such a bad thing, at least helping to reduce noise levels; however I imagine it was more of a necessity than an exact thought."<< Would like to delve into this much further. Designed from scratch, a dual-capcity OHC / IBC engine should not be prohibitively expensive (some more CAD time, of course). But the space taken up by the cam in a IBC set-up is doing a lot of nothing in a OHC set-up. Since perception has such a heavy thumb on this 'To Overhead, or Not To Overhead' discussion, a dual-capacity block would -decently utilized across a number of lines, seem on the surface to have the greatest chance of pleasing 'both sides' and costing the least. A chain-drive 'tensioner/sprocket' for the OHC set-up, and some chain covers are nickel/dime stuff compared to 2 different blocks. Then, with varied displacements AND both 'pushrod' and OHC heads, you have the greatest degree of differentiation across all the divisions using it. Someone post some exploded views of a IBC V-8 and a OHC V-8 and let's get started designing this...

#1 : coupe (2-dr hardtop). choices #2 thru #8 - left intentionally blank #9 : wagon #10 : sedan

I am found in a Road & Track compilation of sports & GT cars. I am a V-8-powered RWD coupe with a manual trans. My motor is between 3.5 & 5.5 liters and it's aluminum. I am rather new, tho my name was used before. I am not japanese, and I am merely 1 full second slower in the 1/4-mile than the porsche carerra in the same issue. Be that as it may, my inclusion in this compilation, by many accounts, would easily be termed 'unexpected'... despite the fact that I am quicker than the majority of vehicles whom I share pages with.

About 6" where I plow- took about 7 hrs to do.

I'd like to see some of the independants return, because they had their own approaches & executions- the same thing today might really freshen up modern cars. Hudson, Studebaker, and DeSoto (not an independant, but stills fits the criteria). And of course Tucker... tho this one is so 'exposed' at this point, I'd fear the same reaction would occur as it did for the '04 GTO- shy of expectations.