Camino LS6

and still more:

and more:

More:

Pretty good show today. I tried to take pics of the older and unusual cars for the most part.

Let's see some chops!

Damn!

This is what the Fbodfather posted to start that thread over there. Please follow his instructions and avoid any arguments. Consider this a brainstorming effort and post any chops you come up with. GM IS watching! Quote: Please -- no arguing (altho on this board, we very rarely have that problem...) Just would like everyones' opinion on what 'special edition' Camaros would be appropriate. To save time -- do not include RS/SS/Z28........ We anxiously await your reply!

I think that this is a chop contest in the making: http://chirpthird.com/vb/showthread.php?t=...age=1&pp=10

Not strictly right for this forum, but critical. http://web.camaross.com/forums/showthread.php?t=521398

Very cool read, thanks for posting it.

Now, THAT is cool. Thanks, PCS.

Very cool!

My driver's ed car was a Cutlass coupe. (RWD V8). :AH-HA_wink:

I keep looking at this thing and it looks like a Chevy small block with one side converted to a flathead - which I can't make any sense of. I see what looks like a GM alternator(on the wrong side), what looks like a GM valve cover, A distributor at the firewall, and something which almost looks like another distributor( without wires) at the front where some Fords have it. Can you even convert an OHV to a flathead? OK, the only thing I can think of is that someone figured out how to do this in order to run in two different classes with the same engine, maybe with a swap out of heads? It would change the displacement, but it still makes no sense to me. In fact, I can't imagine it running at all - seems to me the thing would be so out of balance that it would shake itself apart. I'm officially stumped.

I've been trying to imagine half of the engine as part of the turbo, making the boost for the other (powered) half. Maybe a creative way around displacement restrictions? Clutching at straws here.

Beyond strange. I'm trying (and failing) to see just how it would even work, let alone why it was done.

A semi-flathead V8?! turboed. in Ford Blue. Pass. side looks like an OHV Chevy. Never saw anything like that.

Propane is an excellent and clean fuel, and for a car that I'm keeping, I would consider that option. A friend of mine did it back in '79 or '80 and the car ran great but lost most of the trunk space to the tank. I really like the idea of gaseous fuels in general, so I'm hoping for feasible conversions to hydrogen. Yes, my truck is a diesel and converting it to biofuel would be appealing after warranty end if I could find a reliable supply. For me, that is the biggest concern- a reliable source of the fuels. There is no way that I have time to "brew my own".

Your comment begs the question: Just how many people care about a Nav system? Is the market really demanding it? Would it change a purchase decision? How does the aftermarket availability affect the value of a factory Nav? I'd actually like to know, even though Nav systems mean nothing to me. Is there a real need for factory Nav, or is it just the gadget-pansies that want them?

I bet the sh** hit the fan over that one. Someone's in deep trouble.

The actions of the powers that be on this subject will make of me an ally or an enemy. I hope they choose well.

If it were available, I would gladly use it. In fact, I think all new vehicles should be capable of running on at least two fuels. I would even convert some of my old cars to dual-fuel or alternative fuel if it were available and affordable. Should have been done 30 years ago.

!.alternative fuels 2. alternative fuels 3. alternative fuels Smaller cars won't fix the problem - and will leave me very surly in the bargain.

True. They will also kill the industry. Can't be allowed to happen as proposed.

I'd like to say Mustang, but I think I'm with Nick on this one: 3 series vert. The rest are just nasty. Edit: What about a Crossfire?