enough said.

My restored 66 Chevelle SS is a hoot to drive, and it turns heads when I drive it into Flagstaff.

A buddy of mine had one back in the day and we always called it the Impala-shit. I suppose there's something to be said for the nostalgic factor, but in terms of pretty much everything else like comfort, handling, safety, braking, convenience, emissions, maintenance, and even performance, newer cars are more fun to drive.

drive, but the heads that turn when I tool around in my 66 is a lot of fun also.
However, that 396 ci engine, coupled to the Borg-Warner side loader 4 speed, gets about 12 gallons to the mile, oops, I meant 12 miles to the gallon, it just can't pass up a gas station.

It's like comparing a Buddy Guy solo to techno music.

But it's also like comparing taking a shit in an outhouse in zero degree weather to shitting indoors on a flush toilet.

There's a lot to be said for utility.

Different vehicles for different purposes.

I have some V8 Oldsmobiles for weekend fun and little Saturn beater that just won't die for daily duty.

However for me it's just hard to get excited over something that when you get it up to 55 and pull back on the wheel, nothing interesting happens.

Even getting passed by the cars on the highway is better than being on the highway.

position (LOW) works for my 6'2" frame. Most vehicles, whether they are cars or trucks, my knees are constantly hitting the dash or the steering wheel, even if it's tilted ALL THE WAY UP.

At 6'4", I barely fit in my Jetta. It's replacement, a Passat, actually has a excess of room. I now have 8' to 10" of headroom and plenty of legroom.

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

...was a creative guy. He did the original Batmobile also.

is Al Lewis. I should find a pic of his Dragula Barris work.

Barris bought it for $1
http://www.1966batmobile.com/lf.htm

The Batmobile site has a lot of cool info. I saw one(or a clone) on the road about a month ago.

Those that followed were like some movie remakes. Some good, some bad, but none as good as the original.

Some Ferraris - and I defy you to find a higher performance car than a Ferrari - are actually ultra-low-emissions vehicles even under California standards because they are so efficient in terms of their combustion. De minimus waste products. Some Porsches as well, IIRC.

It was lowered slightly. I never painted it, but it was a real sleeper.

Fun to drive. The Impala is a great looking car.

only my B&M was a local shop that did my needle bearing wide ratio CJC6 up.
a good bit of car.
the prettiest ever built.

And the 1963 Falcon,

and my 1955 F100.

And my bikes.

only now it shares it with my 61 Futura, 53 Deluxe Panel and half a dozen Fairlanes and Torinos.
thats halfway.
no bikes.
third Pinto this weekend.

modified at all?

started with a first year little red 72 wagon 99k miles, 100 bucks. accumulated everything
and then some to swap a small block.
brought back a too cool green 74 sedan with a 289 and 4 speed from Ky and figured I was set
with that after a little fixing up. headers have turned into an epic problem, parts everywhere.
time not so much.

then this immediate issue arose and somehow I will trek 5 hours each way I suppose and
bring back a 71 hatchback with a 289 and C4 and all the right touches.
baby blue, matching my 70 XLT, to see that car trailered by that truck may just kill me with satisfaction.
wish me luck. I wont be taking the XLT that far, but someday they will snap necks and turn them to rubber.

That is what I had in the 1965 Mustang that I sold to my brother. Good acceleration and decent mileage.

How about the 72 wagon with the 289 4 speed combination? That could look fantastic.

prices kept climbing. little car doesnt really need a good T5 but Id hate to spend on a low grade trans.
took a long time to realize all the complications a T5 presents.
the 74 is ideal for swapping, the earlier cars are shorter in the compartment,
and all the common aftermarket II parts started in 74..
71's have a few advantages, especially the pre-safety revised doors.
I cannot wait to weigh this puppy and start subtracting with aluminum parts.
probably make up that difference with frame connectors.
I'll keep you posted.

Last edited Mon Oct 19, 2015, 08:53 PM - Edit history (1)

electronic ignition, better cooling, and it has an 4 speed with overdrive on 4th gear, so I can cruise comfortably at 65-70mph and get about 28mpg on the highway. Big disc brakes on the front, big finned drums on the back so it stops better. Being a 53 year old car where even the upgrades I've added are mostly 1970's era technology its still not on the level or performance/economy/safety as a new Corolla or whatever, but it's a hoot to drive and building it has been a learning experience for me.

I'm working on it a little at a time. The exterior is a little rough but I love the patina. And the cool thing about driving a car like this is it's an invitation to strangers to talk to you about history.

It looks like you kept the four bolt wheels.

Another thing was the great visibility with all that glass.

the rack and pinion getup seems to call the tune, mostly because I dont want to cut into the cowl if I can help it.
I am all about FE's and would love to have my 454 in there, although I have an assemblage of really cool Cleveland stuff that would be my first choice. I have what appears to be a Roush modified Edelbrock UR19 tunnel ram, about as sexy a period (70s Pro Stock) piece as I can imagine. Should be in a Pinto or four door Maverick, really.
but because the crossmember to oil pan clearance issue is what it is, and I really dont want to cut anything around the cowl, engine setback, etc, the practical solution smells like a twin turbo SBF or something. What I dream of doing with this car is tinting the windows enough that the roll cage is less obvious, and keeping the hood low profile.
I want to drive this race car on the street, and my street cars on the strip.
I have issues. Maybe more than National Geographic.
But someday this little SOB will be sporting Snoopy plates and giving Pro Street a better image.
it wont be very comfortable, but it might be quiet and fast with turbos..

Did the rear wheels even touch the ground with that megaton cast-iron monster under the hood?

I had larger tires on the car to help with traction, as well as a trunk mounted battery. It did not help a lot.

But that's still a teeter-totter with an elephant on one end and a little kid on the other. Interesting dynamics at speed in corners.

Got understeer?

The car would have needed serious suspension and brake work, more lowering and probably a 4 link rear suspension, to take corners at speed.s
I still remember one time driving in a country area, pulling up to a stop sign and having a man driving a new Corvette look over and laugh at the car. It did look rough but the body was clean. I asked if he wanted to race a bit to the next road. (About 1/4 mile or less.) He said yes. We left the sign and I was even with him from 1st to second, but pulled away in third. I waited at the next road until he pulled up. We talked and he commented about the speed. I mentioned the 428. He laughed and pointed to the fender badge that said 289. I said new badges were on order.

I can still feel the rumble.

My current car, a 45th Anniversary Camaro is a powerful pleasure, but doesn't feel as 'raw.'

ford through and through, but that car is just magical to me.

It wasn't very fast, though.

Never a big fan of the '69 Impala; thought it looked too long.

I always thought the '67 Impala looked the most bad-ass, but I absolutely HATE the taillights. (The '65 had cool taillights.)

Drive/tv has some great stuff.

I kept hearing people wistfully lament about letting their old muscle cars go, so I have held on to it.

Stupid-scary fast in straight line, couldn't handle for shit.

especially the rear suspension - live axle on leaf springs - literally came straight off of the stagecoach. "Primitive" doesn't even begin to cover it.

Your user removed the video...meh.

Never noticed the license plate! LOL!

Especially one with the lighted Lucite wings.

...as a way to have fun, rather than as an undesirable means of transportation.

Future generations will condemn our selfishness.

Some are progressive-when-convenient.

...was what you define as being "great on gas" as good as say this?

2016 Kia Soul EV

MPG City 120 | Hwy 92

I highly doubt it. No, I suspect that the car you defend as "great as gas" was truly an antiquated, global-warming, air-polluting, asthma-inducing monstrosity.

Lots of things that make life enjoyable do not withstand scrutiny when viewed through the lens of practicality.

Like skiing? Like the beach? Like the museum? Nobody really NEEDS to do these things, and most people have to drive to partake in these incredibly unnecessary and selfish indulgences.

...and as to driving, I don't -- I get around by bicycle.

I bet you're a blast to spend time with!

I have a '66 El Camino with a 383 crate motor, and I still have a significantly better carbon footprint than you unless you happen to be vegan.

...peanuts for breakfast. Tea also. Dinner tonight might be vegan "power sandwich"

I am glad that you are proud of your reduced carbon footprint; let us together work for ways in which we can improve.

And are you pedaling a generator to power whatever device you're using to connect to the interwebz?

That's what I do, and anyone who doesn't ain't shit and is destroying the galaxy.

than the beef you'll be eating for dinner.

Very few people use these old beasts as anything other than a weekend toy, with more time spent wrenching than running.

Besides which, I'm a vegan! I'm a walking fucking carbon credit!

I'm childfree! I'm doing the planet an even bigger favor

Can you be child-free if you have stepkids?

I mean, I didn't make 'em, I just gotta pay for 'em!

...if you did you would know that I do not eat beef (or venison, ham, chicken, etc.)

YUMMY!

.....for keeping a bit of cool history alive.

I have 5 years for my Jeep to be considered and Antique and last year I put 373 miles on it (though it gets 23mpg)

Though I must admit I'm on track to put over 400 on it, she's sitting on 266 miles now and there's still 7 months to go.

But you want to talk about fun....top down doors off it sure is a blast to just cruise around in. My future generations are already claiming it for when they are old enough to drive.


I've been searching for a 70 Jeep but the closest I've found so far this year was a 72 a co-worker had.

what do you care about the future?

just to celebrate my arrival on the earf.


I would lean AMX but can't swallow the price.

what a blast. 389 four speed. I paid $1088.00 in 1969, from a used car Chevy dealer. Right now I am working on probably my last Hot Rod. It's a 1963 Ranchero. BUT, I'm making a gasser out of it.
327 that I think I can squeeze 450 horses out of, Muncie four speed. I got the straight front axle in and some frame mods. It won't weigh much so it should be a little monster.

Last edited Fri Oct 16, 2015, 06:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Dude's a pimp

I'd stop short of calling it THE quintessential muscle car, though

Muscle Cars.

is actually more noted to be the first American muscle car. Pretty little car.

.


In 1962 and 1963, you had 413 CID (420 HP) & 426 CID (425 HP) Max Wedge Dodges that could lift their front wheels with track tires.

Imagine a Dodge Dart with 425 HP.


.

.

you're living the charmed life, snooper2

And listening to classic rock. While Sam is sitting in the passenger seat looking emo.

It had an "Ultra High Compression" 330cid motor - 4 bbl carb of course. It might have used the same block as the Chevy 327 ? The car was a Total sleeper. Gentle lubb-lubb-lubb V8 rumble at idle, with a slight powerglide whine (it had the Olds equivalent of a Chevy Powerglide 2 speed auto), I think the fan belt if it had a little squeak to it made more noise than the engine at idle! But when you put the hammer down, she took off like a rocket!

It could pass anything on the road except a gas station.