I don't remember 2 door wagons

[AnalogKid]

[Garret]

Now this gets my ICE juices going, probably ought to be over in the "restomods" thread too. Modern suspension, put a nice little bio-diesel engine in there mated to 4x4 running gear...

I need to go put the new gas tank and fuel lines in my Vanagon today to remind myself why I swore off doing another big car project.

Mine was factory 4WD. Pretty early in GM doing 4WD, so they put 4 or 5" blocks between the springs & axles to make room for the forward differential - jacked-up suspension before it was a thing. The original engine was a 280 something (286 maybe?) 6 cyl that got surprisingly good mileage for a big tall rig with pretty short gearing: @65 on the highway it dis about 15 MPG - IOW about the same as my 2014 1/2 ton pickup.

==========================

@ the topic of the thread: I know I'm in the minority, but for a daily driver I prefer a 4 door. Not just for hauling more than 2 people (which is a PITA in a 2 door), but it's so easy to toss my computer bag or a bag of groceries on the rear seat with a 4 door. The exception is my Spider, as with the top down, the rear "seat" is easily accessible.

[Jim Mahan]

Remind me. What Spider? Or is that for another thread?

[John Meachen]

A slightly older car than the Mk 1 Escort above.

[John B]

Ah yes , the 100E Ford. My first car was an Anglia, the 2 door sport sedan version of the above,were those deliverys called Thames?
3 speed and flathead 4, not even a gentle slope in top. I just drove up the road that I would have to climb in the Anglia in second, screaming away at 25 mph ...

[stromborg]

Mine was factory 4WD. Pretty early in GM doing 4WD, so they put 4 or 5" blocks between the springs & axles to make room for the forward differential - jacked-up suspension before it was a thing. The original engine was a 280 something (286 maybe?) 6 cyl that got surprisingly good mileage for a big tall rig with pretty short gearing: @65 on the highway it dis about 15 MPG - IOW about the same as my 2014 1/2 ton pickup.

==========================

@ the topic of the thread: I know I'm in the minority, but for a daily driver I prefer a 4 door. Not just for hauling more than 2 people (which is a PITA in a 2 door), but it's so easy to toss my computer bag or a bag of groceries on the rear seat with a 4 door. The exception is my Spider, as with the top down, the rear "seat" is easily accessible.

Ford had those jacked up "High Boy" trucks for the same reason, clearance for the transmission. If I were going to build something like that I'd rather it be at a more "normal" ride height. If the transfer case was anything like the clunky one in my '68 it would be a shame to pair it with a modern drive train.

I'm with you on 2 door vehicles, not as utilitarian as a 4 door (3 in the case of my van). I don't regret my Miata one bit but it also doesn't have a vestigial rear seat, you just use the trunk.

[Garret]

Remind me. What Spider? Or is that for another thread?

Fiat Spider 2000 (sometimes referred to as a 124 Spider)

It has a back seat/shelf that a person can sit sideways in if needed, but mostly it's handy for stuff. A big drawback to the Miata is the lack of something like this.

[Garret]

Ford had those jacked up "High Boy" trucks for the same reason, clearance for the transmission. If I were going to build something like that I'd rather it be at a more "normal" ride height. If the transfer case was anything like the clunky one in my '68 it would be a shame to pair it with a modern drive train.

I'm with you on 2 door vehicles, not as utilitarian as a 4 door (3 in the case of my van). I don't regret my Miata one bit but it also doesn't have a vestigial rear seat, you just use the trunk.

One of the things I liked best about the truck was how it shifted - the lever was easy & smooth as silk. 2WD to 4WD was equally easy, though, of course, you had to stop to go to low range. Fords I've owned (such as my '69 F100 with a 360) required more force - IOW more like a bigger truck.

[Canoeyawl]

That model GMC had a very special transfer case, all gears, no chain, difficult to source parts for and expensive. On the level of IH or Marmon Harrington, it was built by Dana Spicer. (edit: I think, it could have been Borg Warner, it was 30 years ago when I rebuilt one)
Bullet proof is the word.
Those 3/4 ton GMC trucks were put together by Napco and are desirable today.

B82653C1-47D8-4D33-AC4E-BB9178B03768.jpg

[Garret]

That model GMC had a very special transfer case, all gears, no chain, difficult to source parts for and expensive. On the level of IH or Marmon Harrington, it was built by Dana Spicer. (edit: I think, it could have been Borg Warner, it was 30 years ago when I rebuilt one)
Bullet proof is the word.
Those 3/4 ton GMC trucks were put together by Napco and are desirable today.

Pretty sure mine was 1/2 ton. Never saw "NAPCO" on it either. Great truck until it succumbed to road salt.

[Canoeyawl]

I had one of these (59 GMC). Mattress in the back when it wasn't hauling stuff of course...

37F28697-4A46-40CC-A060-B4AEF4C99126.jpg
This isn't mine - just an internet pic. I ran plain 7.50-16 tires on black steel rims. Mine had less chrome too.

Napco...

[Garret]

Napco...

As I said - not mine, an internet pic. Mine was dark green, with way less chrome, plain wheels & nowhere near3 as purty. Maybe it had been done by Napco - but it didn't say so anywhere.

[Canoeyawl]

Pretty sure the Napco was 3/4 ton and up.
Really heavy duty