Lumpy

I figure that anytime you can get a car like that, for less than a new economy car...it's a good deal. But if it just looks good from a distance, and a bit beat close up, one does have to look at the cost to put in "more better" condition. k.

Fiat....why I oughta!!! Hmmmm...I'm not sure what would constitute inbred. But I'd say there's nothing inbred in running a Chrysler Fire Power engine. I used to have one in a 1949 Internation Harvester flatbed. But I bought it that way...didn't do any cross breeding myself. ken.

The Ranger 5 speed does sound like a good conversion. But I sure love the three on the tree....wonder if one could make a 5 on the tree. ? Retaining my three on the tree is the main reason I've never seriously considered going to another type of transmission. Sounds like the Ranger tranny is the way to go if that is not a consideration. Certainly, on level ground, you could gear the rear end quite high. On level ground I can start off in second gear. On level ground, I can pretty much let the clutch out with my foot off the gas pedal. However, you never know where there will be a steep driveway or hill, or some situation where you don't want to flog the clutch to death. Pull some prize hulk out of a field? I don't know. Maybe for some that/those situation(s) never arise(s). ? I know I don't want a first gear that feels like second. k.

I think the above describes MOST newer cars. I'm glad you want to help him out of kindness, and not because he demands or expects it. still...one should not look the gift horse in the mouth. k.

How high, or how low first gear is would be a consideration. My first gear is fairly high, so I wouldn't gear my rear (!!!) higher for that reason. If my first gear felt lower than it is, I'd do it. I'm not saying that Lumpy would not pull a higher first gear "okay", but I wouldn't want it any higher. But another person might drive Lumpy and think it had a plenty low first gear, so just a matter of personal opinion. Or to put it another way, some guys might not mind having to slip the clutch quite a bit in first, some would. I'd rather have a low first gear, and an overdrive, than visa-versa. ken

Thanks. I posted a couple of others of those bikes over on "show us your rides", or "show us your other rides". Also have two dirt bikes, a 1974 TT500 (Yamaha) and a 1974 Honda XL350 which just turned it's first 1000 miles. No kidding. Former owners kept it as a museum piece, I care for it well, but use it for some light trail riding during hunting seasons. They are over there too. ken.

I believe they are as reliable as any other...If you are buying this for the son, I'd sure not worry if he likes the looks or not...INDEED the choice is not his. Even if he's giving you the money to find him a car...perhaps he's too busy...I'd still be more worried about it getting from point A to point B, and not if it wins any popularity contest. I mean, if he does not like what you get him, whether you pay for it, or do all the leg work...too bad too sad!!! Seriously. Hmmmm...well, my mother in law does have one, and I have driven it from Cheney to Seattle and back, and did not find any lack of power issues. No, it didn't run like my Dart, but it did fine with three people and lots of "stuff". I think they are good cars. They do have a narrow market nitch...for basic transportation I'd take advantage of that. He may absolutely love it. If not he could sell it and get whatever he wants, and not bother you about it. Or he could paint it black, and put flames and skulls on it. Oh one more thing. If you really take a non-biased look at a PT, it's not a bad looking car. It's just that it's outside of the box of all the other cookie-cutter cars. If you want to see a really UGLY car along the same lines, look at that Chevy they brought out in "answer" to the PT. Now that's tragic. Okay now I'll shut up. ken.

If you play loud, no one can hear you sing! Guess I better learn the base line to that Mister Frog. k.

1937 UL Harley Davidson, and the 1992 BMW R100R. !! I have a friend with a Royal Star, he really loves it. ken

Small venues is where it's at, forget the concerts. I play bluegrass, and there is usually very little or sometimes no amplification. Although, I play bass so absolutely need some, so I use an amp. With the people I've played with, or most of them, I'll be the only amplified instrument. If you like bluegrass, again, seek out the bluegrass bands and forget the concerts. !! There are many amazing bluegrass bands, some far better than many "big names" in country or other music. k.

Winchester 94. Funny how many deer the old timers could kill without a big old hunkin' three pound scope on their rifles. Had a '49 Dodge truck with a dent in the fender where someone TRIED to shoot it with a .22. Yep, just a little lead plated dent is the worst it could do. ken.

It's not just you. It's just the way it's done now, and no one dares to be different and use a more reasonable sound level. What most people expect, and they'd complain if it wasn't maximum loudness. Many musicians believe that it "has to be loud", or the fans won't like it, or they won't make money if they don't play it "loud". It's a mentality really. Some musicians have told me that at certain places, certain audiences, it doesn't matter what they play, or how good they play, just so it's "loud". Again...a mentality. Lots of good live music to hear that is not at large concerts, and does not cost as much. Sometimes far superior to the big names...and at enjoyable sound levels. ken.

I have a '73 power wagon much like that blue truck, (call it "Big Mo") and a flatbed much like that, which I haven't put on the truck yet. Mine is a 3/4 ton which was a 360 truck, but I put in a 400. 360 was fine, but I got a fresh rebuilt 400 in a trade...so into Big Mo it went. 360 went into my son's 3/4 ton, as his 318 was quite sick, which he then rolled three times a week later, and joined the Army. So I got the 360 back, but there wasn't hardly anything else of much use off the truck. Anyhow, I'll always have a soft spot for 1970's Power Wagons. Deathbound, by the way, nice Pan. You like them simple, naked, light, and hand-shifted like me. Just before I built the UL, I was looking for a 1951 Pan motor for the project. Missed a couple of Pan deals, then just blundered into that UL engine for a really nice price, and all rebuilt, so I went with that. k.

Wish the kid would get his running, but he keeps spending his time and money on a 1971 Dart. Go figure. I like Darts, but I like 1964 Barracudas better. The one we have is an orginal 4-speed, 273 car. ken.

My son's 1964 Barracuda, which used to be mine, is also black. Nice looking motorcycle. Me like motorcycles. k.

Well most wise motorcycle riders know to tighten nuts and bolts on a regular basis...of course the consequences of not doing that are a bit worse when you are balancing on two wheels. PVC would be...."Politically Very Correct". ken.

Oh I get it, and I don't disagree. And I'd be first to agree that 200hp from a stock, or close to stock engine is better than 200hp from an engine that's been tweaked to within an inch of it's life, and has to spin 8,000rpm to achieve it. You know it probably sounds like I'm anti-performance, but I'm not. I have a very healthy engine in my 1972 Dart, 360, that used to be in a car that I used to bracket race. When I drive that car, I drive it with "enthusiasm". I love the driving "experience" of that car, it's power, it's go-fast appeal. You know, a hot 360 in an A-body feels about the same as a hot 440 in a B-body...that should be enough performance to make most anyone happy. When I get in Lumpy though...I don't expect or even want that level of performance. Don't even want more power than what the shaved head, and dual carbs provide. Really I want the 1940's flathead driving experience, not the V8 experience, not the tire-frying experience. Me and Lumpy like driving down some paved back road where we might only see another car every five or ten minutes. Me and the Dart like to scare each other. Kind of the same with my motorcycles, I have a more modern street bike, and a 1937 antique. When riding the antique, I have no desire to bang through the gears, or race anyone. When I'm on the BMW, then I sometimes ride with....enthusiasm!! I guess I'm trying to say that different vehicles, provide different driving experiences, for me. ?? Did that make sense? I don't think you have to hop a slant six up very much to provide more HP that you might easily get from the 230...but you still might not get the power you would from a box stock 318 or 360. So I agree with you there. !! And I'm not talking about a slant six that's been massaged to approximate a 273 or 318. But I'll still say the Slant six is a little bit more closer to the car's original feel, or "vibe" if you will, and can provide a worth while increase in HP. And I may be totally, utterly wrong! ken.

Very nice. Could you send me that visor? I'm planning to paint Lumpy black, and I think it will fit. That's a good looking car. ken.

It does work the other way around. I used to work with a guy who had an old Power Wagon. He mounted another tranny behind the tranny, backwards, and that gave him some Lower gears, and a decent highway gear...if I remember it right. I forget exactly how it worked, but I did see it with my own eyes. So, the theory seems to work for an underdrive, but it wouldn't make an overdrive. But perhaps an underdrive would produce an overdrive, if the rear end gears were very tall. ??? Purposly over gear (low numerically) the rear end, and get the real ratio you want by under driving it a bit. ??? Although, in actuality, that would be a lot of work and fabrication when you could just install an overdrive transmission. Great brain teaser. ken

What I liked about the slant six transplant was that it just seemed right, being a Dodge/Plymouth straight six engine, and that is also just looked right. But that's just me. I think that it's also true that you can step the performance up on that engne quite a bit. With the flat six, you can only do it, "a bit". Looking at the thread on doing that, it didn't look that painful....and the easy way is not always the best way. I'd spend the extra time to use an engine that made sense to me. Now you can get quite quite a bit more power from an eight, but unless you are going racing, I think a hot slant six would have lots/plenty of power, and get better gas mileage than a V8. But I'm quite happy with my 230, so again, that's just me. Again I say, FLATHEADS FOREVER! I'd rather have a modern engine in a Dart or Duster, than in anything from the 1940's or earlier. ?? ken

I ordered springs from "Spring Specialties" or something like that. I think it was Spring Specialties. I was able to specify the amount of drop I wanted, (they would not go over 2.5") and if I wanted the springs stiffer or softer than stock. I got the impression they make them up, don't stock them. I have not put them on yet, but should get to that soon. They cost a little more than $220, but again....I forgot! Will try to get them on soon and elvaluate them. ken.

Well...I'd have to think about a hemi. !!! Yes, all things considered, the slant six swap really does make a lot of sense, I think that's the way I would go, if I was going that way, which I am not. Flatheads Forever! ken

Wow! I always wondered why someone took the fluid drive out of Lumpy. When these cars began to get old, I suppose a lot of them were run with all sorts of strange stuff instead of the proper fluid, and then they failed or didn't work right. Poor Lumpy. But that's okay, I like Lumpy just the way she is. But that sure was some interesting information. ken

If he maintains and retains the flathead engine...I can kind of appreciate it. If he goes the engine transplant route....not so much. ken.

Lumpy is a little of both. k.