balthazar

I am very possessive of my tools and they are pretty clean, but I don't obsess. They are used regularly, and if I cleaned them every time they got dirty, I wouldn't get as much done. My shop is just over the neat/messy line towards messy- it would be a lot neater if I lived alone and didn't have to drop things in mid-stride because of dinner/ work/ life.

Wheels look like they were made with K'NEX. Other than that, the thing is completely invisible.

I wouldn't term it "infamous"; I had to think a bit: Gran Sport, Riviera, Park Avenue.... was the Regal a package before a model? Not a large quantity, tho I don't find the occurance of concern either way. Off-topic -- I saw a Buick commercial Sunday on the Food Network, it had Tiger Woods hitting golf balls at a canvas, and each ball exploded in color like a paint ball. At the end was a clear posed shot of the Riviera concept. No doubt it'll make thousands of viewers jerk upright and proclaim 'WTH was that- a Buick??', tho personally I think it looks awful and nothing like a Buick has or should.

I watched the 1st part thru, but bailed on the 2nd. I had problems with what I saw as some inconsistancies in the 1st part- make a cohesive presentation that fires on all cylinders and you'll get an honest open-minded 'hmmm' from me. Otherwise I'm going to toss it out the window.

>>"Also back in the day, weren't 4X4 pickup trucks actually converted by outside companies for decades before the factory started building them? "<< Yes: IIRC.... Marmon-Herrington did Fords from the '30s thru '58 (light-duty & HD), when Ford offered factory systems for '59, and NAPCO offered aftermarket 4x4s for Chevy, who came online with their own system for '57, but I think NAPCO systems were only offered within the '50s. Dodge is the standout here (in trucks, Dodge has paved the way on numerous features)- the Power Wagon appeared for WWII duty and continued with little change thru circa '68- otherwise it looks like the non-PW Dodges got 4WD for '57, too. But 4x4s go right back to the dawn of the industry: The Gold West truck Co of '13-22 had both 4WD & 4wheel steer trucks, among others.

>>"Olds Turbo-BOP-215 V8 is one of those holy grails I'd love to have! (I'd drop it in a '59 Buick...)"<< You'd replace a 325 HP motor for a 215-HP unit ??? {Where's the cuckoo clock emoticon?!?} :wink:

Buick Twin Turbine Dynaflow has a planetary ('mechanical') low gear, but when put into drive, does not use that 1st gear. It does not shift, period, from 0 to 125+ MPH- stator blades change the hydraulic resistance for infinite ratios. Triple Turbines use 3 stator segments for smoother, more powerful operation- these were extremely expensive units in the upper models. Tho technically the DynaFlow can be called a 2-spd, like I said, in normal operation it would have to be classified as a CVT, even tho the physicalities of how it works are different that modern CVTs (which are more mechanical than a DynaFlow). A DynaFlow is certainly NOT a "traditional automatic".

Was grinding on the '59, had 10 4' tubes blazing away in addition to the electric grinder. Hope someone was picking up my slack... :wink:

No factory Crew Cab Chevy (light-duty) trucks until '73.

>>"was Verdero green available only as a GTO color? I think I've seen it on Lemans, Firebird, and such..."<< Across the board color (A-, B- & F-body), offered '67-69 inclusive, data plate code Q/73 (depending on year). >>"Were any Ram air Firebird Convertibles built in 69?"<< Yes: 160 RA IIIs (including the 8 T/A converts) 17 RA IVs >>"Does anyone have any info on the RAM AIR V package? Supposedly you could build this with over the counter parts, I would like to know if anyone/very many people ever did and what the performance potential of this was."<< RA V gets somewhat confusing because the name covers numerous very different engines with different intents: 303, 366, 400 & 428 CI. Noted Pontiac racer & fanatic Pete McCarthy ran a 400 RA V in a '66 GTO circa 1970: the 1st run was a disappointing 12.2 and on the 2nd run the block blew apart. Upper end parts reinstalled on a Tempest circa '74, in a build that should've been a "low 10s" car, resulted in a 11.6. MCCarthy's opinion is that the motor needs a race chassis and a full race build to reach it's potential.... but what that may be more specifically, depends on to what level the build goes to. The RA Vs running today all seems to have been modified to varying degrees, not that there's anything wrong with that. Estimated quantity on the most common (400) is 80 crate engines sold.

10-4!

The 'car industry' is not neccessarily known for unilateral brilliance (just ask this board), but regardless; I'm OK with running counter to their general opinion. >>"What you have to factor in is the fact that the Chinese economy has been growing at a rate in excess of 8-10% every year for the past decade."<< In and of itself, this tells us nothing directly about future product. It certainly does not dispute the prevalent lack of quality seen in -say- Year 8 or 9 or 10 in that decade past, does it? Economic well-being does not guarantee anything, ie; the manufacturing mindset is the prime directive. Can you draw a parallel beween past U.S. economic charts and auto industry overall quality year-on-year? Why assume the same unsupported correlation for china? Don't forget; overall it's gotten worse, not better. >>"The resources at hand in China just five years ago were a very different ball game to what you find today."<< This sort of factoid is tossed about with abandon, implying beyond-expectation solutions to a laundry list of challenges. But if the people/companies are still in place that knowingly put unspecified/ illegal/ toxic elements in previously manufactured consumables & goods, what is our assurance anything will change? In other words; was intentionally injuring their consumers solely a byproduct of want... or... an industrial culture that finds such practices, in fact, acceptable? >>"Granted, it was built under the auspices of BMW..."<< This is just about impossible to overemphasize the significance of. When outside entities are in control, true competitiveness is obtainable. All bets are off outside of that, according to everything I've seen. Look; it very well may turn out that many or most of chinese industries eventually work as well as or better than their japanese competition. But for now, based on numerous examples in many segments, this is just not supported by example to date.

>>"Just for clarification, GM trucks through the ages have always had 8' and 9' beds available on the stepside models."<< I see the Chevy 9'er prior to '73, but not '73-74 (did not check further). The pre-'73 9'er was on a 133" wheelbase, and the post '72 8'er was on a 131.5"- indicative, or are my listings missing something/in error? Frankly, a 9-foot bed is something I associate with the '40s (Dodge had one), and a 'modern' 9-foot bed is foreign to me. I see now I was just unaware, but is it possible the '73 redesign 'standardized' the beds to 8' max? {checking...} I see nothing longer than 8' listed for '77 or '80, also. BTW- in '72 at least, the Long Horn is listed as a 8.5-footer, not 9'. XP- having the same bed 54-87 points to the likelihood that all were the oak/stainless bed floor, no?

>>"Buick Gran Sport (1968 — 1972) Buick Invicta (1959 — 1964)"<< Gran Sport started in '65 on the Skylark & Riv as an option package, and was a separate series beginning in '66. Invicta was down to a single model in '63, the wagon. No '64 Invictas. Buick Gran Sport (1965 — 1972) Buick Invicta (1959 — 1963)

thegriffon :>>"The Chinese cost advantage... is over-rated..."<< I apologize that I cannot recall the specifics of industry, but it was last year I read about a chinese manufacturing entity that was paying workers the equivalent of 22 cents/hr for 12 hr days, 6 days a week, plus not allowing the 'employees' to leave company housing. Can you tell me that cultural mindset is no more only months later ? aatbloke :>>"You have your head in the sand, and I can understand why. The Japanese' learning curve took thirty years to incur some real damage to the US car industry. The Koreans took some twenty-five years to inflict further damage. The Chinese - with the sheer variety of car manufacturers and qickly improving products such as the latest Geely GT and Roewe 550 could see a similar learning curve of just a decade, and which has the ability to inflict terminal damage. You're scared to death."<< You may be scared of this, but assume too much RE my motivation. The only thing that "scares" me here is the industrialization of china consuming increasing quantities of irreplacable vintage iron as scrap. I do not buy new automotively, and those modern vehicles that do suit my needs, the japanese (& korean & chinese) do not build. But by my calculator; japan (toyota) started importing in '57, and after years of not accomodating the U.S. market, 'fell into' the Energy Crisis of '73. Even by '80, that was only 23 years, tho in that no one knew of toyota until the latter half of the '60s; one could legitimately argue that it took toyota merely 15 years to make a major impact ('65-80). hyundai first imported to the U.S. in '86, so they are right around the same timespan as the japanese WRT vehicles in the U.S. market; by '86 there was little 'anti-asian car' sentiment left- toyota 'paved the way' for hyundai here. IF a chinese company 'makes it', based on the degree of manufacturing ineptitude they've displayed repeatedly in exponentially-simpler products, it's logical to project the same rise in ability in automobiles to take at least twice as long as the koreans & japanese. The only thing I see countering this is the industrial chinese willingness to committ brazen plagerism. CARBIZ :>>"Japanese products were never as horrible as the Chinese products are. I will agree that Made in Japan would have evoked derision and laughter 40 years ago, but I don't remember Japanese products having the wholesale flimsiness and downright criminal cheapness of the Chinese made products washing up on these shores now."<< You're spot-on; japanese consumer products decades ago were generally not as good as the same segment American products, but they weren't the slipshod knock-offs that break at frightening fractions of typical segment lifespans, ala a major portion of chinese goods. Japan is not korea is not china; to assume china will eclipse the koreans & japanese in -say- automotive performance (because they are also asian??) is not based on example. enzl :>>"Additionally, if we're going to blame the Chinese for the consumer products you have discussed, you must first blame the Western Brands that have plastered their names all over the sh!t being offered today."<< So you believe that a 'western brand' TOLD the chinese factory to put formaldehyde compounds into toothpaste ??? Is there anything you can find fault in without connecting it to America first & foremost and the Detroit 3.2 ultimately ? moltar :>>"I don't see any way of undoing the damage that has been done over the last 3 or so decades..."<< The vast majority of automobiles in America used to be American built. No doubt there were those in the '30s, '40s and '50s who couldn't see that changing either. Many claim that deteriorating quality turned the American consumer away from the domestic automobile; is that not the same scenario we are seeing from China now (deteriorating-to-non-existant quality)? Throw in the continually shrinking dollar and the unwillingness to control the borders and you have compelling (if liberal) reasons for a manufacturing turnaround. Steel alone is poised for an upturn since global demand & pricing has rendered U.S. ouput insufficient for even our own demands & more competitive globally. Who foresaw that one?

Oo, I didn't check in here until tonight. >>"- Is there any production breakdown of trucks built in this configuration (Chevrolet vs. GMC, 2WD vs. 4WD, 1/2 ton vs. 3/4 ton, etc.)?"<< '73 Chevy~ C-10 Step-Side 8' bed (#CC10904) : 7040 units K-10 Step-Side 8' bed (#CK10903) : 417 units C-20 Step-Side 8' bed (#CC20903) : 4654 units K-20 Step-Side 8' bed (#CK20904) : 525 units C-30 Step-Side 8' bed (#CC30903) : 1939 units No K-30 in '73. {I suspect the numerics are switched for the C/K-10- they're inconsistant: -904 vs. -903} In '74, Chevy starts consolidating production totals, ie: "all C-10/K-10, except Suburban: 445,699 units". GMC lists NO production breakdowns after 1926 (at least thru '86); only model or calendar year totals. >>"- What years was this configuration produced?"<< In the post-'72 style: '73-'86 (which is the last year my source lists), tho as you alluded to, it was available before '73 also. In fact, a random mention: '70 C-30 Step-Side 9' bed : 2101 units.

I agree with Dodgefan: competition improves overall quality (in theory at least) when the new competition IS competitive... bringing a new LCD into the field will not improve anything above it. When a chinese circular saw guard falls off and the blade rips open the operator's leg, what, exactly is DeWalt or Mikita going to change on their saw, which does not have that problem and never did? In this day & age, especially with the broad, reaching assumption the chinese are able to be competitive globally, there is no excuse for the blatant negligence & intentional subterfugue going on in today's chinese design & manufacturing. It's amazing what people are willing to consider: perhaps the idea of putting human sewage in cooking lard simply never occurred to anyone over there as a bad idea, you know, because they're 'still coming out of their 3rd World coccoon' (unless, of course, you know... it was intentional). >>"Anyone who underestimates the Chinese does so at their peril."<< What about those who judge chinese manufacturing from factual instances ?? The Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled 447 products sold in the U.S. in 2007, and 298 were from good ol' China. That's 67%. In 2006, china-made goods were recalled 221 times, or 47% of all recalls- so they're getting better at being the worst. Lead poisoning was targeted in the U.S. in the 1970s.... and here is china reintroducing lethal amounts in children's toys almost 40 years later. A simple 'teething mistake' (no pun intended)? You can chose to believe that if you like, but it seems clear that simply encountering chinese goods is "done at one's peril". >>"it took the Koreans roughly 20 years to reach the Japanese standard in the US, China will probably be able to do it in 10 or less..."<< YOU go buy their stuff, you're welcome to it. I'm already done with everything from there. This weekend I twisted three (chinese) 5/16th lag bolts in half screwing them into predrilled fast-growth pine. I am now forced to save all hardware older than roughly 20 yrs old, so I can have dependable supplies on hand, becasue most all of what's commonly available is now made in china. But don't miss it --> This new competitor to the fastener market did NOT improve the quality of other manufacturers, it simply undercut their marketshare with slave-labor manufacturing costs and drove the quality makers out of general circulation (or business!) altogether. In other words, chinese product LOWERED the segment's quality. Guess that pretty much f**ks the ol' textbook theory, don't it? So yeah, let's bring the world's worst here so some more domestic manufacturers can shutter their factories... and we can have some more space for important things.... like more coffee houses & bookstores !!!!!!!!!

>>"Buick 364 Nailhead - 57 - 59"<< 364 ran thru '61. Chevy Copper-Cooled 4 : '23 Chevy ZL-1 427 : '69

Wow; the taillights reach to the centerline of the rear wheels- I'm surprised the headlights aren't matching that. Soon enough, both the headlights & taillights will be on the doors and cars will 'turn' 90-degrees. Basic shape is smooth, tho generic, but most of the details need serious revision.

>>"...a truck that sells almost 200K units a year a chunk out of the domestics market indeed."<< I would not assume this is neccessarily true, or have you seen segment totals/percentages ??

I'm another who really doesn't mind the SE version nose- it's unique, which is worth a few points in my book right off the bat. The basic lines of the G6 are slick as is -I still think the car looks distinctive in base form- and the sedan body does wear the SE nose better than the coupe.

Slowly seeing more & more Malibus here, but not nearly as many as the accordian. Have to say one thing tho, the 'bu's 'U.S.'-sized rear plate cubby is so tremendously refreshing to see, and the chrome trim sets it off nicely. Car looks very good.

7 Pontiacs 4 Buicks 4 Fords 2 Chevrolets 1 Merc 1 Plymouth 1 Dodge

RE: the vid- is that a GM commonality now; the speedo briefly pegged to 140 when it was started up. Congrats on your new ride! >>"It had that new car smell, and that's about the best smell in the world. 'cept maybe for *****"<< :wink:

There are some interesting surface treatments (and a bunch of derivative ones), but that string of LEDs in the tail looks like bargin-bin X-mas lights. There's so little future left for auto design, it's depressing, really.