Camino LS6

Meh, GM has done way too much "me-too" thinking over the years. It's much more interesting to think about them innovating and leading for a change. Oh, and on the trucks, messing with interior space and feminizing the front styling would just be foolishness.

They got pretty big by '65, but I still love the '65-'67 fastbacks. Ever since I saw a really well-done bubbletop at a local show a few years ago I've had a major car lust thing going for them. Both the '61 and the '62. All of that aside, if I ever hit it big I will be building phantoms - and not just Camino phantoms.

Both the '61s and the '62s really work for me, I love the rear cove on the '62 and some of the detailing even more than the '61. But the '61 is almost Chevelle-sized and I really like that, '61: '62:

Yeah, '61s have really had my eye lately. I like how they are about as slim as a full-size Chevy ever got - and they have great lines.

Suzuki and Volvo did it in FWD vehicles right up until recently. Even an I6-Turboed-DI Camaro could be an interesting proposition if they can slant the engine. You know that such vehicles wouldn't really be my thing - But I see too much logic in the possibilities to ignore this idea. You could get your E-body back... You may have misunderstood me. Suzuki and Volvo did transverse I-6 FWD cars. Technically, so did VW, with a twist. In terms of packaging, the VR design is really the solution to the problem. 15 degree V, V6 makes it smooth like an inline, but not much longer than an I-4. Seems I may have. But then, FWD Suzukis and Volvos are in my "beneath notice" category. I do find it interesting the Chrysler's LH cars used a north-south configuration though. Those were some of the best-looking FWD designs of their time. A slightly taller hood, and they could have used an I-6.

Funny how we all have different notions of when GM was at it's design best.. I pretty much love the whole run from 1959 - 1972, the interest tapers and narrows for me at both ends of that. Just a few things here and there at both ends of the timeline.

Those are quite cool, Roger! I love phantoms.

I do like the sweepspear on the fifities Buicks... But overall, it's '59 and up for GM stuff.

Suzuki and Volvo did it in FWD vehicles right up until recently. Even an I6-Turboed-DI Camaro could be an interesting proposition if they can slant the engine. You know that such vehicles wouldn't really be my thing - But I see too much logic in the possibilities to ignore this idea. You could get your E-body back...

Now you have me thinking, Cubitar. Non-transverse FWD would be interesting as a way to make Buick distinctive in the market.

With the volume of full-size trucks, compact trucks, SUVs and RWD cars, the FWD thing really isn't important as a factor here. Still, a non-transverse FWD application would be possible.

Seen this before... just as nonplussed as I was then.

Brain damage. It's the only explanation.

Right now, I'm really liking the idea of a '61-'63 phantom.

This is the right way to do it.

I think this one's toast. New, thicker, bearing didn't take out the slop in any noticeable way. As an aside, I never saw so many bolts on one oil pan!

I could see an inline 6 in RWD cars, but in FWD models which are probably 90% of GM's output an inline 6 would be too wide for a transverse engine installation... Of course that's true. I just dismiss FWD because I couldn't care less about it.

To be honest, very few 50s designs work for me - at least until '59. The '55 Chevy is one of them. Others: Corvette (better each year through the decade generally) Studebaker Hawk (and variants) Some Chryco products The rest kinda leave me cold, and Pontiac really begins for me in '59. Lower, longer, wider really beats the bulbous, chrome-laden look for me.

You know, it occurs to me that with the noses on cars getting taller, packaging an inline 6 might be getting easier. Maybe designing to that parameter will again be more viable.

Time to go do this - the sun is starting to ease up.

Might end up that way - I'll post the results.

Damn!

OEM guages tend to be junk - so having good ones isn't a bad thing.

The Jeep isn't mine- I'm doing a friend a favor. It seems that he's in a gambling mood, so we will be installing the bearing and hoping for the best. It is one size up from one that wasn't quite thick enough, and the Jeep is a heap that he wants gone. So, one shaky repair coming right up! Might be fine, might be the end for the engine.

That's new information to me, thanks! I wish they had gone ahead as I've seen nice ones built from Nomads too. I'd love to have one, but could never destroy a Nomad to get one.