Does That Come in Midnight Blue?

This truck will either enamor you or turn you off completely; I doubt there will be any middle ground.

Personally, I think it is the future of heavy hauling.

Trucks started as an engine up front, two place cab, drive wheels out back format well over a hundred years ago. The only innovations in the last hundred years have been diesel engines in stead of gas and air brakes.

The trucks and their loads have gotten bigger, but the basic layout hasn't changed. Until now.

The ad- and that's what it is; and ad- doesn't stress it, but I would be willing to bet a bit of driver input went into this rig as well. I have spent a bit of time in the cab of an 18 wheeler. Not an extensive amount; I am no where near the million mile club. Maybe the 50,000 mile club, but, I digress. So I can say that the number one problem a driver faces is being able to see (usually it is being able to see that idiot in the 4-wheeler that just doesn't understand the difference between an 80,000 pound semi and a 2,500 pound Civic); this truck design seems to have taken that issue into account.

It also seems to have taken the comfort of the driver as a design consideration as well. No more two box cab/sleeper; all one box; just like a motor home.

I'm sure this truck has issues. Like how much it will cost to build. 2 53 x 8 foot carbon fiber panels? Yee-haw! I'll bet most first-graders couldn't count all of the zeros at the bottom of THAT invoice.

But if it does make it into production, can imagine seeing a couple of them convoying down the road?

I have seen the future, and here it is.

Down for the Count?

You have probably already seen the footage; 8 priceless cars dropping into a sinkhole. The article is from The Truth About Cars; it isn't only the post or the footage, it is also the comments.

The Internet is a  super tool, but so are some of the people on it. But I mean that in the nicest possible way. (Where is that sarcasm font when you need it?)

Part of the problem is language. Some people fail to draft their comments in an understandable way; others cannot comprehend and interpret simple English and yet a third set willfully fails to understand- to be contrary, to start an argument, or just because.

In the world of automotive aficionados there are several schools. In this country the debate between Ford and Chevy goes back almost 100 years. Back to when Chevy came out with the overhead valve 'Stovebolt' 6; a design they just retired a dozen years ago, and the Model T Ford. Both both Chevy and Ford fans agree Dodge is a big step behind the two of them. And then there is the American Cars versus Foreign cars; American and European versus Asian Cars. They sometimes remind me of high school rivalries- intense, but in the end meaningless.

Some of those rivalries show up in the comments; The inexplicable sadness from the Corvette guys; the unsympathetic remarks from the Ford and Doge folks. The dedicated humanist- THEIR ONLY CARS GET OVER IT.

Me? I'm with you fellers.

There were some one of a kind, priceless cars damaged when this sinkhole opened up. Milestone cars. There will be, and can be, only 1 Millionth Corvette. You can't replace it, you can't reproduce it. But you CAN repair it.

The Museum is in Bowling Green Kentucky, right across the street from the factory where they have been building these cars for 30 years. I don't think any detail will be so arcane or expensive that it can't be reproduced by the company that built these cars originally.

One commenter compared these cars to the Mona Lisa, negatively. His comment was that these were mass-produced items; easily copied. Unlike the Mona Lisa. I'm sorry to laugh in his face, but I am forced to. I can go to the internet right now and down load a copy of the Mona Lisa.

See? Easy.

No, it is not 500 years old, painted on a wooden panel or priceless. Well, it was sort of priceless; it was free.

But it has been mass produced. Yes, there is only one original, and the ownership of the original means something. I also seem to recall that old Mona here has had some work done in the last 500 years. She ain't exactly 'all original', if you know what I mean.

And in the end none of these 8 Corvettes will be either.

So maybe they do have more in common with the Mona Lisa than is viable at first blush.

They're Called Pony Cars for a Reason

A lot will be written about Mustangs in the next few months, during the run-up the 50th anniversary in April, both about the old original 64-1/2 models and the 2014 ones.

But this post, over at The Truth About Cars caught my eye. Can you imagine owning a car for almost 50 years?

More importantly, can you imagine owning one of the most iconic cars in American Automotive history for 50 years?

Today it's hard to imagine the impact the Mustang had. we aren't as car crazy as we once were, and the shear proliferation of makes and models makes the introduction of a new model something only the real car nerds will slobber over.

But in April of 1964 it was a big deal. Ford, GM and Chrysler had the market almost to themselves. American Motors sold a few cars, and Studebaker was still selling a few as well. The European makers were specialty only; Mercedes, BMW Jaguar, Rolls Royce at the high end, and Triumph, MG and Morgan on the sport side. And Volkswagen; making a few inroads but by any means a powerhouse. There were a few Japanese makers starting to show up on the roads on the West Coast, but Chevy sold more cars in 1963 than all imports combined.

But they were starting to make there presence known; the drive for fuel economy had started. Chevy had the Corvair, and Ford the Falcon, but the Falcon lacked sex appeal.

And then Lee Iaccoca showed off the Mustang. Basically a Falcon with a new body shape; it did exactly what Ford wanted it to do; sell over half a million cars a year. Ford hadn't had a sales demon like this since the introduction of the Model A back in 1928; almost 50 years earlier.

And 50 years later those cars are still desirable. I have known 2 of the original '64-1/2 - 66 model Mustangs.

My Uncle had a '66 Fastback 2+2; V-8 powered and that reddish-orange color that looks so good on a Mustang of that vintage; similar to the one above. But his had hubcaps with spinners, not the factory sport wheels. It had a black interior, and he took my cousin and I (both of us his 6 year old nephews) a ride in it one Sunday. I remember taking the ride, and being in the car, but the ride itself is a blur. I don't know if it is a blur because of the speed we were traveling at, or because it was 50 years ago and I was only 6.

But I do remember that car.

Another was a '65 model my Aunt (my Uncle's sister) had for a while. I was 14 or 15 at the time, so it would have been a 10 year old car at the time. And it was not what some would have considered collectable. Unlike the car in the article- with the convertible, V-8 and sport options, my Aunt's car was a 6 cylinder and a three speed column shift with a bench seat. It looked like a Mustang on the outside, but the inside was still straight Falcon. The color didn't help either. Instead of Baby Blue, it was brown, inside and out.

Of course, I would give almost anything to have either one of them today. My Uncle died in '68 and I have no idea what happened to his car. My Aunt's was the same way; it was there for a year or so, but one visit it was gone.

It takes a special person to keep a car for 50 years.

I'll Take the Ferrari, Thanks

I was perusing Instapundit this morning and saw this headline: "When Going to College is Like Buying a Ferrari on Credit.". Yeah, that caught my eye. It linked to this article on The Blaze, which references an article by Glenn Reynolds, aka Instapundit. If it wasn't such a good article I'd make some comment about shameless self promotion.

It is especially timely because I was talking to my nephew last weekend, and he mentioned some schools he was interested in, and at one of them a four year degree costs $200,000.00.

I checked. You can't get a Ferrari for $200k. At least you can't get a NEW Ferrari for $200k. That amount of cash will get a very nice 2 year old Ferrari however.

The thing is, the government will lend an 18 year-old kid that $200,000.00 IF he spends it at a college of their choice.

They will not lend an 18 year old kid that amount for a used Ferrari.

I think that's a shame. How about a little analysis?

Lets say I buy an indocrina... I mean 'Education' with that money. What will that education be worth in 10 years? How about a show of hands? How much of what you learned during your four years of undergrad do you still remember and/or still use? And I mean what you learned in THE CLASSROOM! How many of you are earning a living based on the field your degree was in? How many of you are using your Geology Degree as a basis for your management position in the growing field of fast food?

Now lets buy that used Ferrari!

First; having a car like that will open lots of doors. Not a member of the Hill 'n Dale Country Club? Roll up in a Ferrari; I'll bet they let you in. Roll up in your 10 year old beater Taurus and flash you degree from the University of Beer and Broads; my guess is they will hand you an employment application. For kitchen help.

Roll up to ANY hot spot in the city: Ferrari- you have a girl. Degree- you may get a free beer and some commiseration from the bartender, using his $200,000.00 Humanities Degree to mix drinks and change out empty beer kegs.

I could go on (And on. And on. And on...) but you get the picture. Plus; most, if not all Ferraris appreciate in value. Historically, the older a Ferrari gets the more it is worth. So your $200k investment today will net you double that in 15 years. Give or take.

Economists talk about something called 'Opportunity Cost of Money'; spending your cash one way means, as money is individually finite, you cannot spend it another way. Meaning every dollar you spend on rent is one less dollar you have for beer. Or vise versa. Every dollar you spend repaying that $200,000.00 in student loans is one dollar less you have for a house payment, car payment, 401k funding. Or beer.

I'm not against a college education. In fact, for certain positions I am positively for it. What I'm against is the ubiquitous nature of the college degree. One purchased at fantastic cost, on credit, and never used.

What are you buying for your Two Hundred Thousand Dollars and no sense (pun intended)? The piece of heavy stock paper with you name on it (which cost the college $1.45- it pays to buy in bulk) or the education that you allegedly obtained in your chosen field of study?

So; just how often will a discussion of the finer points of Women's Studies come up in the slack times between asking "do you want fries with that?"

I know some folks in the Payday Lending field. Before you can borrow $200 they must fully disclose the terms, interest rate and how much you will be paying back.

When you borrow $200,000.00 in student loans, some student- working at the school to avoid student loan debt- will advise you to "sign here to pay for next semester".

How many 18 year-olds would hesitate to sign if they knew the money they were borrowing today would still be coming out of their paycheck when they they are 40?

And that this debt will cost them that used Ferrari?

Do Emission Standards Equal Horsepower?

Amazing how, at times, a simple article can start a massive discussion on several other, tangentially related, topics.

Take this post over at The Truth About Cars. Starts off with a rant from a used auto dealer about the deals he has missed because his county still has emission control checks.

Then it sways into the difficulty of diagnosing a glowing Check Engine Light, and the various ways to defeat, where it is legal to, the emissions systems.

And then swings off into the Constitutionality of Emissions checks as opposed to emissions systems, with a swing back to whether the checks and the systems themselves serve a public purpose, and should be a legitimate function of government.

Wow; that's a lot of territory.

Ya wanna know what I think?

Of course you do; you've read this far, haven't you?

Back in the day of the big block engine with points and a carb we re getting about 10% of the power of the gasoline to the road. The rest didn't burn, and washed into the oil or trickled out the exhaust pipe.

Yep; we was polluting. Part of the advances in emissions have lead to less gasoline being a pollutant, and more of it being turned into horsepower. That's how you can have a Ford Focus with 420 horsepower. These systems have also become more reliable. Fuel injection is not new. Automakers experimented with it in the 1930's. Chevrolet had a production FI unit in 1957.

But they were about as reliable as $3.00 watch. So the idea was shelved until it had to be revived.

Not that I think the current state of automotive technology is solely the result of emissions standards. Physically engines could only get so big in an automobile; 500 cubic inches was about all there was. New ideas had to be developed to squeeze more horsepower out of a drop of gasoline. The technology that was developed would have been developed where there were emissions standards or not. Maybe not as quickly, but it still would have been developed.

Things would have worked just like all the others advances had; high end manufacturers would experiment and develop; the mid-level would  produce thousands of units, and the consumers would do the road testing for a few years until the bugs were worked out.

Without emissions standards would we have street legal cars pushing 600 horsepower? Oh yeah.

The market would have demanded it, and the automakers would have made it happen.

Yesterday Was My Birthday

And I spent it well.

First my boys took me out to Frisch's for the breakfast bar. I may have to deny the next sentence when I next see my doctor, but I had half a plate full of eggs with green peppers, onions and cheese; a half dozen link sausages, about 10 strips of bacon, a big bowl of fried potatoes with sausage gravy, a big slice of ham and a dozen big hunks of pineapple and melon. A couple of glasses of ice-tea. Other that the pineapple and melon, I don't anything I ate was on my official diet.

Then we went to get measured for Tuxes for my son's wedding in March. Always fun. Especially when the cute young thing doing measurements asks if you wear your pants on you belly or below it. But then, when it came time to fit a jacket, their sizes must run small. Every jacket I tried on was way too tight. My upper arms were straining the fabric and I couldn't move my shoulders at all. We finally went to a jacket that my fitter claimed would have room at the waist, but finally fit my shoulders, barely.

And we had to fit the Young'un for her bridesmaid dress. Yikes! David's Bridal was a flippin' madhouse. and the prices! between the tuxes and the dresses, the rehearsal dinner and all, I am really gonna have to make a big dent in the open bar just to break even. But I think I can manage.

Then came the fun part of the morning; out to the junkyard. I am still looking for a transmission for my BMW (the damn thing only lasted 250,000 miles; it should have still been under warranty) and I was hoping they would have one. The car I have been waiting 3 weeks to hit yard finally did, but someone had already pulled the tranny. It looks like I am going to have to breakdown and spend some real money on one. I did get a few other pieces that I have been needing but couldn't find, so that was a birthday wish come true anyway. I still can't drive it, but when I do, it will function a little better.

And then I spent about an hour with the grandsons. Always brings a smile to my face. They are truly one of the things that gets me out of bed some winter mornings. Everytime I see them they have gotten a little older, gotten a little smarter and just a bit cuter.

Then it was off to a gaming party with my brothers and a few others. I didn't win anything, but it was fun anyway. I love the games my youngest brother finds. No Monopoly or board games for us on these occasions; Bang, Pit, Citadels, Settlers and the like. Strategy games, with a smattering of luck thrown in just to confuse you. We spent about 6 hours at the gaming table, eating pizza rolls all the while. Another sentence I will need to deny at my next doctor's visit.

Then home, where a 12 pack of Leinenkugel's Oktoberfest was on ice. My youngest son and I popped Smokey and the Bandit into the DVD player and sat and played 500 Rum and watched one of my old favorites. When that ended I had him pick out another movie, and his choice was El Dorado; an old John Wayne Western.

It was a great day; no cake or party (that is today), but I was able to do what I wanted to do and enjoyed every minute.

I can't wait for my next birthday.

Well, maybe that is a bit of a stretch.

Countdown to Christmas- C-Day-1

Tomorrow is Christmas Eve. In my minds eye I can see Santa and his helpers making their last minute preparations; feeding the reindeer; polishing the harness and the sleigh; making sure all of the packages are accounted for and the famous red suit is back from the cleaners. Elves running  every which way; dealing with last minute details and making sure Santa's yearly trip goes off without a hitch.

Similar arrangements are going on at the homestead, but not on a North Pole scale. We will be loading up the front wheel drive sleigh ourselves in a couple of hours and heading off to a couple of parties, and I am trying to get my old iPhone to load my Christmas music so I can use it like an iPod during today's festivities. But it's not going well.

I dumped the iPhone for a Droid about a year ago- one of the happiest days of my life- and I haven't messed with the cussed thing much since. I had forgotten how much of a PITA the thing is. With the Droid loading music is as easy as drag and drop. The iPod has to 'SYNC'. And it can only sync music in the iPod format. So, if you didn't buy a song from Apple or rip the CD using iTunes it has to be converted to the WMA format before it can be synced. Oh, and loading all of Christmas music means I had to wipe out the music that was on the cussed thing to start with, and after Christmas I need to go through this again to restore the music I had on there in the first place. Anyone who believes this is a good system probably has never been introduced to any other.

I know I promised no bad news until after Christmas, but I had to rant about that frustration, and add that Friday night I was talking to a group of iPhone 5 users, all of whom were crabbing about short battery life. SUCKERS!

And what little snow we had has melted, and none is forecast until the 26th, so no White Christmas this year, which isn't rare. This area has only had 7 White Christmases in the last 40 years. My memory says that ain't right, but it could just be that snow at Christmas creates a better memory than a rainy one.

Well; except for one year.

I think it was 1966. Every year on Christmas Eve we would visit my Mom's parents up in Reading Ohio; about an hour ride or so. The eating and gifts would last late into the evening, and then packing the car with kids and presents would take another half hour. we usually hit the road about 10:00 and I was asleep by 10:02.

For some reason this year I was wide awake and watching the cars we passed on the expressway and watching the rain fall. We came up beside a bright red 1967 Ford Falcon station wagon; the entire back end crammed with toys and wrapped presents. as we drew up next to the drivers window I saw the driver's full white beard and red suit; yeah, it was him. Santa took his eyes off the road long enough to see a very wide-eyed young man staring at him, and then took one gloved hand off the wheel to give me an admonishing finger wag.

I was asleep before we passed his hood ornament.

For some reason ever since I keep my eyes open for red vehicles on rainy Christmas Eves. But I've never seen him again. I guess we each only get one chance to catch Santa on his rounds. I had mine almost 50 years ago. and still remember it like it was yesterday.

Cars Aren't Guns.

I saw this on a friend's Facebook page the other day- Post Newton obviously- and had to respond. Lets look at the points one by one, shall we?

First: Title and Tag at each point of sale. Anybody know why a car has a title? I mean, besides me? Well I'll tell you. Cars were initially treated like any other piece of personal property; horses; carriages; furniture for example. A Bill of Sale was prepared by the seller and given to the buyer along with the item. The Bill of Sale was your proof of ownership. The problem was automobiles were expensive, and usually left unaccompanied in public places. Unscrupulous individuals would drive off in your horseless carriage, forge a Bill of Sale to themselves and convert your property into cash. The only way to regain your property was through a lawsuit. So the several states decided to title cars and register the titles with the state in order to stop the lawsuits from multiplying with the number of vehicles on the road. That lead to licensing, and then taxing the automobile, until we got where we are today.

Yes; guns are stolen on a daily basis, and those stolen guns are re-sold and then used in the commission of various crimes. But I really don't want a state data base or each weapon and where it is to be created, especially since there is a small and vocal portion of the country who want to confiscate and destroy those weapons.

And just for the record, if a movement is ever created to confiscate automobiles, I would be in favor of ending the state control of the licensing and titling of automobiles as well.

Second: Training. Did you know it is entirely possible to legally own an automobile, and legally drive that automobile with out a license? You just can't drive it on public roads or property. But you can drive it on your own property. Same with a gun. You can legally own and carry a concealed firearm without a special permit. As long as you never leave your private property. I am all in favor of permits for concealed carry. When you are on public property and in public places your actions will affect others- including me- so a required training and licensing is not a problem for me. As long as it is the individual who is permitted, and not an individual weapon.

Third: Written Test- See Second, above.

Fourth: Practical Test- See Second, above.

Fifth: Health Requirements. One of the things a firearm does in level the playing field. It allows a 75 year old woman to be equal to her 25 year old attacker. What would a Health Requirement be? You can never be too old or frail to be able to use a weapon for protection.

Sixth: Insurance. Based on? A car is capable of doing expensive damage if misused, or even through no fault of the driver if there are adverse environmental conditions; rain, snow, ice or fog. There are statistics on everything on the insurability of an automobile- and its driver. The same car will vary, depending on the age, marital status, driving record and sex of its driver, just as the same driver's insurance cost will vary between a Camaro and a 4 door Accord.

What will be the standard? Last year guns were used in the commission of say, for the sake of argument, 300,000 crimes, from assault to robbery to murder. Who do we determine insurance rates? Out of the more than 300 million guns estimated to be in this country, 300,000- assuming each weapon was used only once to commit a crime- we are looking at a less than one tenth of one percent use for damage on average. And of the more than 200 million gun owners, again, less than one tenth of one percent have misused their weapons. And that demographic probably doesn't even carry car insurance.

The vast majority of gun owners are already responsible for their weapons. Insurance would be a superfluous requirement and an onerous burden for no practical purpose.

Seventh: Inspection and Renewal. For who? owners, concealed carry permit holders or the guns themselves? Inspections are a requirement that has been dropped for the most part for automobiles; Permit renewals are a requirement already for concealed carry, and again, I have no issue with that requirement. But a yearly requirement to have each weapon inspected would be just like insurance; an onerous burden for no practical purpose.

All in all, each of these requirements would be a gun banners dream; they could still allow gun to be 'legal' but practically outlawed.

All of you in favor of making those points requirements for a firearm, think about this:Each abortion performed would be required to have a permit issued by the state; training for the mother in what stage of development her baby is at; testing to make sure she has absorbed that training; she must have written permission of the father in order to have the abortion;a requirement that she be financially responsible for the proper burial of the baby and a requirement that she attend the burial.

Hey; what's your beef? Abortion is still legal.

Servant; or Master?

In the United States of America the government is supposed to be the servant of the people; we, as the voters are supposed to be in charge. Congress is supposed to listen to us, and act accordingly. The President is supposed to hear our voices and respond.

Isn't that what they tell us every 2, 4 or 6 years? Hell; some of them may even believe it.

But then the election is over and the mask slips. Then we find out out servant is a tyrant.

Take for instance the EPA and the new ethanol requirement. There has been a lot of resistance to the increase of ethanol in gasoline, but all of the complaints have fallen on deaf ears. Big, jug-eared deaf ears.

The EPA doesn't care that less than one-half of one percent of the vehicles on the road right this minute can use this fuel without damage. Knowing this administration, they probably consider that a feature; not a bug.

What type of damage are we looking at? Well, ethanol is alcohol, which absorbs moisture. so anything it comes into contact with that contains moisture will start to be dried out; things like fuel line hoses; rubber seals on gas tanks and gaskets on intake systems. Ethanol is also less cohesive than oil based gasoline; meaning it will flow past the rings in engine cylinders, washing the lubrication off of the cylinder walls, allowing the rings to mark or scar them, which will hasten engine wear.

This cylinder wall bypass will also allow ethanol to contaminate the engine oil; thinning it so that it provides less protection, increasing wear on the bearing surfaces of the internal moving parts.

Bottom line: ethanol will cost the owners of 228 million vehicles in the country money. money for either a major engine repair or a new car or truck. What are the chances you vehicle is one of the 228 million affected? Odds are pretty dang good.

I don't know about you, but in the New Normal Economy (also known as Obama's Depression) I ain't got that kinda cash.

And that is just cars. This fuel will also damage/ruin your lawnmower; chainsaw; weedeater; rototiller and snow-blower, as well as every other piece of gasoline powered equipment you put it in.

 Plus- and here is a real kicker- the addition of ethanol LOWERS fuel economy. There is less 'bang' in each quart of ethanol that there is in a quart of gasoline, so the more ethanol you burn the more fuel you will use. Since the addition of ethanol will not lower the price of a gallon of gas, the cost of your commute has just gone up.

And ANOTHER kicker; burning food in your gas tank will raise the demand for corn, which will also raise the price/cost of the corn. Which means the addition of ethanol will most likely mean an increase in the cost of a gallon of gas.

Unless the Federal government continues to subsidize the ethanol industry with a larger subsidy, paid for out of our taxes. Unless of course they just borrow the money (hey; when you are $16,000,000,000.00 in debt already, whats another billion or two?) instead, meaning we will pay for the subsidy and the cost of the interest to borrow the money to pay the subsidy, in addition to paying for the repairs to our gas powered equipment caused by the ethanol we are paying to subsidize.

But that subsidy won't apply to other uses of corn; like as animal feed or creating sugar. An increase in the cost of corn will lead to an increase in the cost of any foodstuff that relies on corn. Not only Fritos, Doritos and tacos, but anything that contains High Fructose as an ingredient, or eats corn, like cattle/beef, hogs/pork and chickens.

Not to mention what this will do to the cost of moonshine and bourbon.

This is a government that is the servant of the people?

How do I fire this servant?

Oh yeah; never mind; apparently we can't fire this servant until we can find a suitable replacement.

And we have to wait four three two more years to even start the search.

A Road Trip Into The Past

James Lileks was discussing this movie short the other day on his blog, The Bleat, and one of the commentators had a link to the original film.

Interesting little blurb. I love the 1930's vision of the future.

This short is from 1937; 75 years ago. The depths of the Great Depression. And yet; there was still a vision of the future that included progress.

Something we sometimes lack today.

I loved the old shots of laying concrete roads. Things have changed a little in the last few years. But they still use the angled iron forms, and the equipment still rides on the forms. How much things change, and how much they remain the same.

The part where they talk about the bridges in New York City is especially humorous, given the situation up there today, with the flooded subway tunnels and the jammed traffic. But then, years in the future to them was 35 years down the road- 1972.

40 years ago for us.

This being a Chevrolet production, they of course talk about how much safer the cars are 'today', back when hydraulic brakes were on 50% of the cars made, the automatic transmission was two years in the future and seat belts were still only in race cars. Average top speed in 1937? About 60, if you could find a road to press a car hard on. There were cars that would go faster, but they were the super cars; Cadillac, Packard, Duesenberg.

Most folks plodded along at 35 MPH, and dreamed of 55.

And  newfangled super-highway.

Friday Night at the Movies X

For some reason yesterday I was in the mood for a James Bond movie. I wanted Thunderball, but Netflix didn't have it. So we watched The Man With The Golden Gun. You know one Bond movie is pretty much like any other. Good-lookin' half dressed women, car chases and stunts, and a super villain Bond needs to kill to make the world safe for humanity or democracy or some other noble goal.

 It is a good Friday Night Movie. It does do a little preaching about running out of oil, but it was filmed and released in 1974, right at the height of the OPEC oil embargo caused energy crisis, so I guess a little preaching isn't to bad, especially since the premise of the movie is for Bond to retrieve a stolen device that would allow the efficient harvesting of solar energy.

The car chase is great, including the scene where Bond flips a car 360 degrees laterally while jumping a river to get at the bad guy. The funny part was the Bad Guy was driving a 1974 AMC Matador, while Bond was driving an AMC Hornet, and the cops were driving AMC Sedans.

In Hong Kong no less. I never realized AMC was such a popular brand in the Far East.

And of course at some point Bond has to get captured by the evil doers, who, instead of a quick bullet to the head and dump the body in the ocean process, decide to have a school of martial artists kill Bond. I guess it was graduation test maybe? Anyway, as usual, Bond takes a few knocks and then manages to escape the evil clutches, it this case with the help of a couple of teenage martial artists, who just happen to be girls, who manage to defeat 30 or so members of the dojo. The evil doers apparently are having trouble finding good help.

The final showdown is not as thrilling as some, but still fun to watch as the bad guy gets his. and then of course Bond rescues the device and the girl and escapes on a just happens to be handy Chinese Junk.

Its not the best of the Bond films- in fact most reviews call it the worst of the series because of the comedy that had been inserted- but hey, a bad Bond film is till better than 90% of the other junk out there.

And I liked the comedy aspect. I've said many times I watch movies to be entertained, and The Man With The Golden Gun does just that. Fast paced, it never drags, and jumps from one piece of excitement to another without time to fetch a beer.

I also found a couple of other Bond films on Netflix, so I may have a few more James Bond nights at the movies. But I doubt I'll write reviews, unless I see one that lacks good-lookin' half dressed women, car chases and stunts, and a super villain Bond needs to kill to make the world safe for humanity or democracy or some other noble goal.

I Have a New Hero

102 years old, and still drives.....

Her 1930 Packard. 3 speed unsynchronized transmission, no power steering, no power windows.

My new hero.

I wonder if she has a Great-Granddaughter my age?

Reminds Me of The Good Old Days

I was looking for something to blog about tonight, and was having trouble. So much to talk about, but then, so much of it is horrible. Iran and their nuke program; Israel, as the target of said nuke program; Obama and...., well, Obama and anything he says or does is horrible.

So I went some of my 'Feel Good Sites'; like Sippican Cottage; The Duffel Blog and Sippican's companion site, The Borderline Sociopathic Blog For Boys.

That's where I found this video.

I'll have to admit I have done a few engine changes in my time. I have even done a few swaps, where we took out a V-6 and dropped in a V-8, or pulled a small V-8 and dropped in a honkin' big one. Sorry; went back to my old days there for a minute.

My sister had a VW Bug that required what seemed like constant maintenance. My brother and I had it down to a science. We could drive the bug into the garage and have the motor on the work bench in less than 10 minutes flat. But I have never done an R&R (remove and replace) on an engine in 42 seconds.

Wow. But then, I never did any of my engine swaps with a squad of Royal Marines.

And none of my swaps were on a specially prepared car, like this one. But that being said, this is still an impressive display of team work. And they may be able to drive that car, but they wont drive it far. No Radiator, no coolant, no transmission grease. The 10 meters they drove it is probably the limit of its distance; any more than that and you'll be sweeping up pieces of it.

I am trying to think about what would be my favorite engine swap. I guess it would have to be the one we did on the 1977 Lincoln Town Coupe.

Dad bought the car with a bad motor in it; a 400 big block with a spun main crank bearing. But the car was beautiful. Black, with a black leather interior, and every option Lincoln offered, including the factory CB radio.

We happened to have a 429 laying around from a 1969 T-Bird we bought for parts, so we through a few gaskets on it and dropped it in the Lincoln. This thing went from a 166 horsepower 400 to a 390 horsepower 429. Yeah; we doubled the horsepower. But then, this car weighs about 4200 pounds bone dry and empty. It was a flat dog with the 400. I mean a SERIOUS dog; I got beat off the line one time by a school bus. A FULL school bus. Being driven by a nun. Okay; that last part was a bit of an exageration, but not by much.

I think she was actually a former nun.

But, I digress.

Afterward, we had a sleeper. A sleeper is a car that doesn't look like it is fast, but is wicked fast. Like a 400 horsepower, 4200 pound Lincoln. I wish I had a nickel for every Honda that was expecting a snail, and ran into a jackrabbit at a traffic light.

I miss the good old days, when a weekend a couple of bucks would be all you would need to swap an engine. Now it damn near takes that long to disconnect the damn wires.

Well, maybe not that long, but a damn sight longer than 42 seconds.

Well, You Start Here, and Then Go There, And Then...

I have blogged before about how one thing leads to another. Train of thought- pun intended. Well; I'm doing it again.

Today I was reading a legal description for a piece of property in Fayette County Kentucky, and part of the property ran along side of the tracks for the CNO & TP Railroad.

The what? I asked myself. What was the CNO & TP Railroad? Well, It is the Cincinnati- New Orleans and Texas Pacific Railroad. Formed in 1869, it is wholly owned by the City of Cincinnati. The only intercity railroad owned by a municipality. Ain't that a kick in the head? There is a lot more information at the link, But apparently the line has a certain amount of notoriety to rail buffs, or as they are sometimes called, Foamers. That is an interesting story in its own. Do an internet search for Railroad Foamer video.

But, I digress.

I was doing a little more searching, looking for more info on the CNO & TP RR (TP; Considering Cincinnati's Procter & Gamble, a TP railroad kinda makes sense) I found another page, NKY Images; full of hundreds of old pictures, including some on the now familiar CNO&TP RR.

Including one old newspaper article about a car on the railroad tracks of the CNO&TP. The things you can find on the internets!

What is really interesting about this article is that it talks about the horseless carriage killing the horse, and now it's setting its sites on the Iron Horse. That was truer that anybody in 1924 knew, I would suspect. Not that personal cars would soon rule the railroads, but there is a technology hidden under the hood of this vehicle that is 80 years ahead of its time for cars, and 30 years to early for the railroads. This thing is a hybrid.

And, it wasn't the first one. There is a hybrid manufacturer even older. Back to my old friend Jay Leno's Garage, and his Owen Magnetic.

This was the technology that did kill the Iron Horse Steam Locomotive. All modern locomotives are diesel electrics; the drive wheels are each driven by an electric motor, and the electricity is created by a diesel powered generator; just like in a modern hybrid, and in our early iron wheel automobile.

Another thing too, while I am on this newspaper article. I love the way it is written. If newspapers were written like this today they might still be making money. Which reminds me; the money line in the article: 'by an over enthusiastic devotee of Bacchus'.

The author used this line, knowing that most, if not all, of his readers would know who Bacchus was. I'll bet you could read this article to an honors English class in any high schools and they would not be able understand a significant portion of it.

Yet in 1924, this was puff piece.

Yeah; we have come a long way.

Friday Night at The Movies III

Okay; I kinda lied. Its Friday and Saturday Night at The Movies. Why? Because its my blog and I'll do as I please.

Okay; that's not strictly true either. The real reason is I couldn't make a decision on which movie to blog about, so I'm going to do both. Plus; they were short movies.

Friday night was Bob Hope and Bing Crosby- Road to Bali. Have you ever seen one of their Road pictures? If you have then you have seen them all.

Plot? A plot would have gotten in the way of the music and the gags. There is a loose story, but they never let a good gag get ruined by a possible story. Sight gags, slapstick, word play, no matter what you laugh at you will laugh at something in this movie. Always beautifully photographed, you could spend most of the movie just looking at the scenery.

A good way to spend an hour and a half some nasty evening.

Saturday night's movie was another Dukes of Hazzard lead in; Eat My Dust. Again, no real plot. A 17 year old kid steals a stock car off of a race track (an ORANGE one) to impress a girl, and they spend the rest of the movie running from the cops, who seem a bit inept. Sound familiar? One interesting bit is Ron Howard plays the thieving kid.

Released in 1976, it's a movie you need to be in the mood for. In the mood for a lot of engine noise and some running amok on the dirt roads in California? Yep; here's your movie. Character development and touchy-feelly garbage? See if you can find a copy of Kramer versus Kramer somewhere.

I also think I have used more words in this review that they actually used in the movie. They weren't real big on conversation. I also think I counted 117 separate and distinct uses of the word (phrase?) Yee-Haw.

Just like Road to Bali, I can think of worse ways to spend an hour and a half. One at the top of the list would be to watch Kramer versus Kramer.

A Run Down Nostalgia Drive

I have directed folks to James Lileks' site before. And after today, i will probably do it again. If you can't find something on his site to interest you, go ahead and shut off your internet.

He has a whole section on old motels, illustrated with postcards from the '50s to the early '70s. You know back in the day when an independent roadside motel could still make a living with a couple of dozen rooms. And a pool. Had to have the pool.

What amazes me about these postcards are the cars parked around the motels. Cadillacs, Lincolns, Thunderbirds, Oldsmobiles and Buicks. All clean and shiny.

So, here is my question:

Did the folks who owned the motel wait until they had a collection of good-looking, expensive cars in the lot, and then tell 'that photographer feller' to come quick, or did they arrange with every friend they had with an expensive car to show up on photo day?

Or, did the photographer arrange for the fancy cars, knowing that in a couple of years the picture would be dated, and they would need to have it retaken?

Either way, I just find it interesting that in none of these shots is anybody traveling in a 10 year old Chevrolet station wagon.

The picture above is from the site, and I swear this place looks familiar. we drove to Disneyland when I was a kid- that entire trip is the subject of a series of future posts- and we spent the night in Colorado.

I could be wrong, but you never know.

Friday Night at ther Movies II

I was surfing Netflixs early Friday evening and ran into a movie I hadn't seen in years. Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry. It was a little different. Okay, saying this film was a little different is like calling PEEPS a health food.

The camera work looks like it was shot with an iPhone, and the acting could be considered wooden at best. But the reason to watch the film is the car chases. They are very real, and not cinematic in the least. Cars do what cars physically do. They get damaged when they collide with both movable and immovable objects, and require repair after said collisions. They also overheat and burn up when pressed to hard. And helicopters need fuel to run.

I like this so much better that the car chases that seem to go on for a thousand miles with nobody ever stopping for gas, and multiple collisions with no damage to the car. If the goal is realism.

Face it; I love Smokey and the Bandit, from the opening credits when the big rig fires up in the early morning light, to final scene with Sheriff Justice ready for another chase with less that half the car he left Texas with. I have to take an afternoon one weekend about every 6 months of so to sit down and watch The Bandit run that Trams Am all over Georgia. But in a lot of respects, Smokey and the Bandit is a live-action cartoon. That is part of what makes it FUN.

Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry is, in some respects, not fun. You know my criteria for a movie, a good story, convincingly told. DM,CL fills that requirement. Parts are interesting, parts drag out way to long, and some parts you just think to your self; WHAT?

I also have to disagree with Wikipedia on at least one point; they call Peter Fonda's character 'likeable'. I never found him likeable. Had I played almost any other character in the movie I would have hit him hard in almost any scene. He was about as likeable a bad case of shingles. The opening seen he and his buddy steal $150,000 form a grocery store by kidnapping the manager's wife and daughter. Oh yeah; that's a likeable bunch.

But the cars... In my opinion the most likeable star was the 1969 Charger R/T. Maybe that was why I disliked Fonda's character so much. He was behind the wheel of this machine less than a minute when he used it to take the door off of a police cruiser. And then tore half of the front end off off later in the film when he t-boned a pickup truck at an intersection.

The movie ends rather abruptly. The helicopter runs out of gas; they escape from the cops and are home free.

Until they t-bone a train and die in a fiery crash. Ahhhh; the final comeuppance.

But it made money; over $28 million. it was released in 1974, and laid the blueprint for movies like Smokey, and TV shows like The Dukes of Hazzard.

All of the elements are there; the hot car; the hot girl, the inept police, the likeable outlaw who isn't really a crook, even though he has broken the law, maybe, depending on your point of view. And the chase.

Chase scenes are as old as the movies. Name a Western without a chase scene. Name a Comedy without one. Name a Romantic Comedy without one. The difference is, this movie started The Chase Movie. So at some point, if that is your genre of preference, you need to watch Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry at least once. Preferably at the Drive-In, in the front seat of a 1966 Oldsmobile, with a tinny speaker hung on your door and a large popcorn in your lap.

If none of these items are available, a beer, Netflixs and your recliner are okay. and the surround sound will improve your viewing experience. When they uncork that 440 Charger for the first time, you might just turn the image off and listen to nothing but the noise, like I almost did.

Again One Thing Leads to Another

Okay, so here's the story I am blogging about. I found it through a link at Instaundit; that lead me here, and then finally to this.

Which story am I blogging about?

Well, MINE of course!

I read Instapundit daily, at least. I consider it the Reader's Digest of the Internets. Not the modern, large format People Magazine wanna be, The Old Reader's Digest. The one that aggregated Stories of Lasting Interest.

Any rate, the tree ring story caught my eye on Instapundit. Interesting reading. But they never do explain how they figured out how old the trees were. I can understand how they fell into the lake, but how do they know which tree is is 20 years old, and which one is 2,000?

And I'd love to know how they can extrapolate the temperature OF THE ENTIRE GLOBE from a bunch of soggy trees in Finland!

That leads me to the second article.
A dungeon, secret passageways, peepholes and lingering ghosts: A young couple paid $395,000 in CASH and might have gotten more than they bargained for by buying castle in Missouri is the headline. But what is the news? They bought an old house, dressed up with a lot of stonework. Yehaw. Here is what I found interesting. They paid cash. $395,000 in cash. What makes that funny?

The buyer is a MORTGAGE BROKER. I didn't realize there were still mortgage brokers. I thought they had disappeared with the property flippers.

And then the last story. This guy spent 40 years looking for a stolen car; and found it. They don't go into details, but from the way the story reads it must have been Dad's car; Dad died and the kids were settling up the estate by selling the car.

Here's my question: How did Dad (assuming I am right) tag and insure a stolen car for over 40 years?

And also: if your car was stolen, how long would you keep the keys and old title?

In the interest of full disclosure, I still have the owner's manual and the key to a car I sold 30 years ago. So maybe I would still have the key and title to one that was stolen.

But; I also admit to being a little odd....

I Remember Them Days

You have to wonder if it was intentional, accidental or a useful by-product of something else.

Oh; sorry; you don't know what I am talking about, do you?

I just read this post over at Truth About Cars, and it hit a nerve. Basically, masculinity ain't what it used to be.

The question is, where did it go, and why? Was masculinity intentionally forced out of the American male; was it's demise an accident, and not an intended consequence, or is this new lack of masculinity something that will be happily accepted as as a by-product of some other nefarious scheme?

 It used to be the gender roles were pretty well assigned, and everybody knew their place. I don't mean that in a chauvinistic way, I mean that a man held a door for a woman; she accepted the courtesy and we all went home happy.

Then came Feminism. And what was once a courtesy became an insult.

So now what's a poor guy to do? Say you have two boxes to carry with a female co-worker. In the old days it was easy. YOU DIDN'T HAVE A FEMALE CO-WORKER!

Sorry; just kidding. In the old days it was easy. The man stacked the boxes and carried them both, chatted with the woman and handled opening the doors with his foot. It wasn't chauvinistic (the dreaded "C" word); it was masculine (the accursed "M" word).

Then came Feminism. Obviously, the man only carried one box; to do all of the work was the "C" word. Then it became more complex; do you carry the heavy box (damn "C" word again), or the light one? Do you see where, possibly incrementally, being masculine made you chauvinistic? But, the obvious choice- let her carry both boxes- was also seen as the dreaded "C" word.

And of course you still had some woman who considered you a neanderthal if you expected her to carry either box, or even open a few doors on the way. So, instead of a decisive, masculine, American Male, we became Wilbur Milquetoast, waiting for the woman to determine our next course of action, so we could avoid causing any offense to anyone.

This has become the default mode. Men went from getting haircuts to getting hair styles. Then came the facials. And now most males are considered Metro-sexual; feminine right down to their Manis and Pedis.

And cars have not helped; they have hurt. Once upon a time a Man spent a Saturday afternoon getting dirty. The car needed something done to it; oil change; grease job; tune-up; new bearings or bushings or brakes or bulbs. it was always something, and something you could do in the driveway.

Now checking the oil (never mind changing it) requires a factory trained service technician. Everything is covered up with a plastic shield, held down with a fastener you have never seen before, undone with a tool that is $49.95.

On Sale.

At Pep Boys.

Which is another damn thing. Auto Parts Houses used to be a bastion of masculinity. Now? Unicorn shaped danglely air fresheners instead of bins of lock washers and pink frou-frou floor mats and seat covers instead of creepers and jackstands. Oh they still carry creepers and jackstands. They just hide them in the back of the store, like their ashamed that they actually still are forced to sell actual, you know.... tools.

Sorry, but everything feminism has touched it has drained the masculinity out of; Auto Parts Houses are just one of them.

And now, apparently Lamborghini. No more testosterone fueled engine and steering wheel loosely coupled together by some low and sexy bodywork capable of screaming down a twisty two lane.

Now we have room for a couple of car seats and a DVD player for 'Lets Learn to POTTY!'.

Yep. Masculinity is dead.

Is that a !?!- At A WAL-MART?!?!?!

I had to stop by the local Wal-mart tonight to pick a few things, and as I was heading back to my car I happened to see what I initially thought was a new Chrysler.

Then I did a double take.

Yep.

its a Bentley.

A $285,000.00 Bentley.

Parked next to the cart rack.

It must be a rental.

To a recent lottery winner.

And I don't understand the picture. I know why the quality is so poor; iPhones ain't much in the night time photo department.

I just don't understand why it is rotated like it is. It showed up right when I edited it.

I'll blame that on the iPhone too.