Chevy C10 Pickup Truck Comments - Postage Paid

Wow, I guess you're not afraid to speak your mind, are you, Garry?! I find it hard to believe you'd be able to approach either of the truck owners and repeat those sentiments, as you're not only insulting the trucks, but the hard work they personally put into them in order to create the so-called junk. In other words, you might just as well have said something bad about their mothers! Basically, though I'm not the best example of always saying the right thing, one lesson I learned the hard way a long, long time ago-be careful what you say about another man's (or woman's) wheels. It's no secret a collector vehicle is more than likely an extension of one's personality, so when you put it down, you're also putting them down. In this particular case, you chose to heavily criticize a couple of trucks that have some amazing metalwork-no gaudy paint, loud interiors, or anything outlandish other than "non-traditional" body panels-so it's hard for me to see where these Chevys really struck a chord with you. No matter, I was really fortunate to have the opportunity to feature the trucks in the raw, and if I had the chance to do it again, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Sorry they weren't to your liking.

Factoid Or Falseoid? I was just reading the latest issue (Sept. '06) and ran across the Classic Factoid in the back of the magazine (pg. 85). If I'm reading it right, the Chevy Bow Tie was out for 70 years prior to Ford's Blue Oval, but Ford was in the car business 100 years earlier? Who wrote that Factoid? OK, that's all-bring on some more '61-71 Dodges and plug my Dodge truck message board!
Brad Gigliotti
Via the Internet

OK, it sounds like we have a little communication breakdown here, don't we! Grant Peterson is head of the Factoid Department, which as you may have noticed has become a regular feature in the magazine now. After reading that particular 'oid a few times over, it became very apparent that what I originally understood now seems quite awkward indeed. Yes, it seems like we're claiming that Chevrolet was in the car manufacturing biz 100 years prior to Ford-wrong! Grant wreaked havoc with semantics that day, but more importantly, some of the information he provided got cut from the layout. What he actually meant to say was that Ford had been in the business of making cars 10 years prior to Chevy. Now, while that may be true, his first portion of the Factoid is, well, more of a Mythoid. Guess the fact checkers (oftentimes, that'd be me) missed the boat on that one. Chevrolet's first production vehicles, which debuted in 1913, had the unmistakable Bow Tie crest, but Ford's Blue Oval didn't appear on grille shells until 1928, which by my crude math computes to about 15 years-a far cry from seven decades! Either way, those two sentences should not have made it to print, but they did. We're human, and we make human mistakes, though when we do, there's a big audience watching, making the egg that much harder to clean from our faces

Cheap Economy
First off, I love the magazine! It's gotten me in lots of trouble! If I were single, heck, it would be half as bad. Anyway, I have locked onto a possible way out of my dollar dilemma. You mentioned in your "Lose the Tube" article that a '55-59 1/2-ton third member will drop right into a '47-54 rearend housing. Wouldn't this be the easiest, least expensive way to go? If you really think it would work, I'd be happy to give it a try and get back to you. Just let me know if there's anything I might need to take into consideration. I am not an expert mechanic, but I'm loaded with "the old college try!" If you let me know you think this will work, then I'll let you know from a simpleton's point of view how close to brain surgery it would compare.
Paul Hanney
Via the Internet

Paul, as we discussed in my e-mail reply to you regarding this matter, that information about the Task Force center section working in an Advance Design rearend housing came directly from Tom Langdon at Langdon's Stovebolt Engine Parts (586-739-9601; www.stoveboltengineco.com). In talking with him about my recent T-5 conversion in the '53, that option came up, as I had a brand-new third member that never quite made it into my '55. However, the Dana 44 from a neighbor's AD pickup basically fell in my lap before I could give the option a try, so I don't have firsthand experience with the swap. Though there is a reported weak point with inner bearings in relation to the earlier axles, if a stock or mild inline-six is used, that wouldn't be an issue at all. Still, I strongly recommend anybody considering this contact someone who's done it, like Langdon. The other option is going with Patrick's (520-836-1117) taller ring-and-pinion conversion. Hopefully, by the time this reaches print, you'll have figured things out-and supplied me with the photo documentation to prove it!