oldcarnut Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 All original with 12K miles. The 20s were great years for the Super 6. Engines had counter balance crankshafts, pressure oiling, aluminum pistons, hard nickel valves, fully balanced engines. Speedsters would do 100MPH with there light all steel Biddle and smart body's. This two owner car just came out of a 50 plus year retirement. The car runs, drives, clutches, shifts, brakes like a 12K mile car. The hood and fenders are Japan. Body is brush painted Bruster Varnish. Leather is good. Carpet and front floor mat are excellent. Top is unbelievable. This car is fun to drive with lots of power. Recent complete professional service. If you like Original and want the car that everyone wants to look at, and a Great Car for Nickel age Touring, please consider this. $44,900 OBO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A. Ballard 35R Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 What does the front seat look like and are the original curtains there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldcarnut Posted February 14, 2019 Author Share Posted February 14, 2019 Yes, I have the side curtains . front seat is solid, but not as nice as the rear. seat bottoms look almost new. Doors panels are beautiful. car runs on it's original vacuum tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrbartlett Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 100 MPH with what rear end gear ratio and tire size? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jan arnett (2) Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 Beautiful car. Do you have the parts catalog? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldcarnut Posted February 15, 2019 Author Share Posted February 15, 2019 Jan thank you I have the parts catalog. STU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jan arnett (2) Posted February 15, 2019 Share Posted February 15, 2019 This catalog came with my MOON under the front seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldcarnut Posted February 18, 2019 Author Share Posted February 18, 2019 Jim.Tires are 34/4, rear axel is 2.75 to 1. on the Speedsters. engines turn 3000RPM. Ralph Mulford drove a stock Super 6 102.5 MPH over a measured mile. A new stock car record. A stock chassis won its class at Pikes Peak, and held it for 8 years. stock car racing goes on and on for the Super6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrbartlett Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 These cars always had a good reputation for performance. But I never dreamed they'd be geared like that, and thus run that fast. Makes you wonder where they envisioned driving it back in that era of mostly dirt roads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeke01 Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Hudsons like this one were popular with bootleggers. They didn't draw a lot of attention but were extremely fast. Zeke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott12180 Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 (edited) On 2/18/2019 at 12:13 PM, oldcarnut said: Jim.Tires are 34/4, rear axel is 2.75 to 1. on the Speedsters. engines turn 3000RPM. Ralph Mulford drove a stock Super 6 102.5 MPH over a measured mile. A new stock car record. A stock chassis won its class at Pikes Peak, and held it for 8 years. stock car racing goes on and on for the Super6. Not that I want to challenge the seller, but 2.75 rear end is a little hard to believe. With that low of a ratio power should be next to nothing, especially in a four passenger Touring. The Pierce 66 had a similar ratio but had an engine the size of the Titanic, nearly three times bigger. This Hudson engine at 3-1/2x5 is big but not that big. Same size as the Packard Six in 1928. 3.75 sounds about right for a fast car from around 1920. I would like to see a reference for that 2.75 figure. I'm poking around but haven't found anything yet. "classiccardatabase.com" says 4.75:1. A 1921 "Automotive Industries" magazine with specifications for all cars lists Hudson Super six as 4.90 ! 4.75 or 4.90 sounds way too slow, but with a very smooth counterbalanced engine they may have acquired their fast speed through very high rpm's. Perhaps the Speedster is geared taller. I hope someone can provide that confirmation. Edited February 20, 2019 by scott12180 (see edit history) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Roth Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 Checking with classiccardatabase.com at this link: http://classiccardatabase.com/specs.php?series=2253&year=1922&model=9779 It shows the 1922 Hudson Super Six Series O 4-passenger Speedster differential was 4.81:1 ratio, and had 34x4-1/2 tires (not 34x4) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael J. Barnes Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 For comparison, the 1924 Cadillac, with an 83 hp V8, offered three rear end ratios: 4.91:1, or 4.5:1, or the high speed 4:15 to 1. I have driven my car with the low gearing and now the middle. I have wondered about the stated ratio for the Hudson, because it would require reverse and first to be VERY low geared — just to drive slowly — and then what would second look like? These cars need to be geared down from third to second going up hills. If the Hudson gearing made second as fast as my third, then the car would be underpowered in second, and the driver would have to shift to first to go uphill. But first would be very slow! A four-speed transmission would solve this, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C Carl Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 Thanks, Mike, for drawing me into this discussion with the 1924 Cadillac "hook". As you well know, I have great affection and admiration for 1924 Cadillacs. Also, thanks to the data Marty has found, we can see that the standard ratio for the speedster is 4.81. The trans is 3 speed. With the 2.75s in road service, the driver would be a master at lightning fast double clutched downshifts. No real problem doing that. The problem would be in starting from standstill on a grade. But obviously these tall gears were specifically supplied for speed trials. Headwinds, in addition to grade requirements, would exercise the lower gears. It should be noted that torque peak, ( which defines ability to pull grades), would most likely have been in the high 'teens of rpm. What is it said about extraordinary claims ? Something about requiring extraordinary evidence ? So after scratching my head, I sharpened up my pencil, and dusted off my arithmetic skills. Said 2.75 speedster at 60 mph : about 1600 rpm. " " " at 90 mph : " 2400 rpm. Which means that " " " at around 100 mph that engine would be twisting around 2700 revs. This assumes my multiplication, division, addition, extrapolation and interpolation pass peer review. It should be noted at this point, that peak horsepower, (which defines ultimate velocity capability), would most likely be in the high 2000s, or perhaps 3000 rpm or so. In order to help with the extraordinary proof, we do need to know what the rpm at h.p. peak is. If we find out that is around 2700 rpm, (the design to achieve 100mph would have necessitated horsepower peak coinciding with target speed), then we need to know something about the aerodynamic characteristics of the speedster. Anyone have a picture ? In a stocker, all drag elements, headlights, fenders, runningboards, windshield, top, etc. would have to be removed. Obviously if a speed of 100 was the target,the 2.75s must have also been fitted. Removing as much weight as possible, and fitting a rigid tonneau cover would be recommended. Anyone have a picture ? Without getting into a long paragraph or three regarding aerodynamics and the, (and frankly my), misunderstanding thereof, even into the '50s and'60s, I will just say : Think about Ferdinand Porsche's mistaken intuition regarding the VW. Despite its round curves, it has a drag coefficient almost as bad as a Model A Ford. Gabriel Voisin through his aviation expertise, must have been at the forefront of automotive aerodynamics in the '20s. After all, he recognized the need for aerodynamic stability (ideally center of gravity ahead of center of pressure), as automobile speed capability was increasing. Even Voisin's drag coefficients are high, due to the hard angles and large flat, or single curved surfaces of his unusual coachwork. Maserati erroneously placed the air intake on the Le Mans 450S in a LOW pressure area of the hood. Should have hit around 220 down the Mulsanne straight. I don't think they could get out of the 180s, starving for air where it should have been force fed ! It will be aerodynamic considerations which will govern the ability of a 70 h.p. 288 cu. in. flathead 6 to move vehicle at 100 mph. And whatever the drag, power requirement goes up as the CUBE of the speed. Those last few mph come hard earned indeed. The world's first inherently balanced V8 powers MIke's '24 Cadillac. Rather well balanced from the factory it is, with a properly counterweighted crankshaft, and a significantly lightened flywheel, and greatly improved everything over its ancestors. With the 4.15s, these cars, when new, or well maintained could very fast cruise at 60 mph. There was just a bit more top speed available, as 60 was at around 2500 rpm. That was just in between torque peak at around 2000, and power peak at 3000, or just a hair more. My '24 and'27 Cads have the stump puller 4.9s. 60 occurs at around 3000 rpm. I have briefly hit 50 mph which I didn't enjoy one bit in the '24. I have been forced by traffic density and lighting conditions on an Interstate bridge, and also a tunnel, to run the '27 at 60 for several white knuckle miles. Though at power peak, it was not floored. These cars are really "unsafe at any speed". Their 4 wheel brakes, particularly those on the '24, were better than most of the mechanicals of the times. But still, they, and the handling limitations of 1920s cars make these cars most happy going slowly along 25-35 mph byways. I could be bribed to try to drive a 1922, 2 wheel braked, fully prepared Hudson 100 mph. But now in poor health in my mid 70s I just don't have much to lose. The amount would have to be significant, and I would rather drive my monster V12 SL 600 157 again. And you would have to pay me to do that too. Hudson power peak, anybody ? More evidence or documentation ? AACA library ? There are almost certainly pictures of this feat. AACA library ? - Carl 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldcarnut Posted February 25, 2019 Author Share Posted February 25, 2019 Marty. Yes I screwed up and forgot the 1/2 behind the 4 to make it 4 1/2. I have been very carful on my description of this car as I want the new owner to have the pleasure releasing it. The final drive ratio is 2.75 to 1, my be closer to 3 to 1. I measured it on my back. ALL YOU EXPERTS,DONT KNOW THE FACTS. I gave a hint with Mulford. I have all the letters etc. unbelievable what a 4 speed with overdrive does. I am sorry that I put this great original, historic car on this site to be criticized, and my integrity put in question. I will remove it asap. Stu Laidlaw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dep5 Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 27 minutes ago, oldcarnut said: Marty. Yes I screwed up and forgot the 1/2 behind the 4 to make it 4 1/2. I have been very carful on my description of this car as I want the new owner to have the pleasure releasing it. The final drive ratio is 2.75 to 1, my be closer to 3 to 1. I measured it on my back. ALL YOU EXPERTS,DONT KNOW THE FACTS. I gave a hint with Mulford. I have all the letters etc. unbelievable what a 4 speed with overdrive does. I am sorry that I put this great original, historic car on this site to be criticized, and my integrity put in question. I will remove it asap. Stu Laidlaw I too, tire of all the sock puppets and keyboard experts that feel compelled to chime in on every post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auburnseeker Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 I don't see any reason to remove it. Discussions like these educate us all and establish the facts which can then be used to later help others. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C Carl Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 (edited) Precisely. This is a discussion forum where everyone helps us all in many ways. Stu, I hope you take my contribution as affirmation. It is fascinating to see that h.p. peak would occur at 100 mph if the numbers coincide. That is the way the attempt would have to be engineered. The gearset would have been made in EXACTLY the specific ratio, and corroboration by using data and mathematics is enlightening. There will always be a number of forum participants who are fascinated by even the most obscure, or minute detail concerning any topic. Speed records are not as obscure as many topics fully ventilated here. We all love talking performance. A good idea is to regard this wonderful and acclaimed forum as a group of friends hanging out in the shop talking car. Or maybe taking a Dr. Pepper break from the grease pit, the old guys with a plug tucked in their lip and spitting in the sawdust. Remember that way back in the '40s when you and dad waited while the car was being lubed at the pit down the block and 'round the corner ? I do. That was at the corner of 57th and Cottage' in Chicago. In the winter, for warmth, they would have a pretty good fire going in the big trash barrel. That is where I would hang out. Stu, please regard all this discussion as great interest in a speed record most of us never heard of. I, along with many here, old, young, and in between, am particularly fond of the "Nickel era" cars. There are VERY few as cool and well preserved as your Hudson. By the way, what is the meaning of hood and fenders "Japan" ? Please do not delete. GREAT car, fine discussion. I hope an AACA member buys your Hudson. I wish I could. - Carl P.S. Are you saying that the 2 record cars had 4 speed overdrive transmissions, or does yours also ? And does your car also have a 2.75, or 3:1 gearset ? Edited February 25, 2019 by C Carl Add P.S. (see edit history) 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Bruce aka First Born Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 Stu, I don't have a dog in this fight. So please take these words as meant. Questioning a post is normal. Did the poster make a typo? WE don't know. Is the one doubting,questioning wrong in the assumption? Perhaps. For me, I enjoy the challenge of proving something with facts. And I have proven myself wrong a FEW times. Agree with C. C. Great car, btw. Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 3 hours ago, oldcarnut said: Marty. Yes I screwed up and forgot the 1/2 behind the 4 to make it 4 1/2. I have been very carful on my description of this car as I want the new owner to have the pleasure releasing it. The final drive ratio is 2.75 to 1, my be closer to 3 to 1. I measured it on my back. ALL YOU EXPERTS,DONT KNOW THE FACTS. I gave a hint with Mulford. I have all the letters etc. unbelievable what a 4 speed with overdrive does. I am sorry that I put this great original, historic car on this site to be criticized, and my integrity put in question. I will remove it asap. Stu Laidlaw Please don't remove it. The car is beautiful, and I very much enjoyed seeing it. I did wonder whether you meant your car had 2.75, or just that some special version back in the day did. Thank you for clearing that up. Many of us with prewar cars wish we had a little higher gearing than was usually provided back then, and I enjoy the gear ratio discussions. Even though I was not in the middle of this one, I am sorry you saw it as a slight. Thank you again for posting, and I hope you continue to do so in the future. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimy Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Dave Fields said: A Paige of similar vintage with 66-70 up exceeded 100 mph. But the record car was a 2 seater speedster called Daytona, and to get to that speed the headlights and fenders were removed Dave, as I've mentioned elsewhere, the Paige 6-66 owner's manual claims a 4.55 axle for all body styles, and my 1922 6-66 Larchmont II 4-passenger phaeton is screaming at 40 mph. The record-setting Paige (and I have a photo of it in front of the San Francisco delaership) just HAD to have 2.75 or so final drive gears which would be ineffective at best for everyday driving. So just perhaps the Paige and Hudson "record-setting" cars were modified in their gearing. I'm confident in asserting that 100 mph speeds, or anything close, could not be achieved with factory gears no matter how much sheet metal and lamp units they stripped off. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeke01 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 I made an earlier post on this thread and thought that would be all I had to say. However I can't let it go. I have a 1923 Hudson Speedster (four passenger touring). I have been on Glidden tours as well as VMCCA nickel tours with my car and I can vouch for the power and reliability of these Hudsons. Without undue modesty I am here to tell you that these old Hudsons will run away and hide from anything else. Buicks, Cadillacs even (shudder) Packards! Seventy six horse power, counter balanced crankshaft,cork clutch running in oil, what a machine! If I didn't already own one, i would buy this car and tour it for all it was worth. All the quibbling about gearing is just nonsense. Sorry to blow on and on. I'll get down off my soapbox now.(Has anyone seen my cane?) Zeke 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer09 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Was a 4 passenger touring also called the speedster? absolutely! have an early 20's title to prove it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Roth Posted March 2, 2019 Share Posted March 2, 2019 On 2/25/2019 at 7:17 AM, oldcarnut said: Marty. Yes I screwed up and forgot the 1/2 behind the 4 to make it 4 1/2. I have been very carful on my description of this car as I want the new owner to have the pleasure releasing it. The final drive ratio is 2.75 to 1, my be closer to 3 to 1. I measured it on my back. ALL YOU EXPERTS,DONT KNOW THE FACTS. I gave a hint with Mulford. I have all the letters etc. unbelievable what a 4 speed with overdrive does. I am sorry that I put this great original, historic car on this site to be criticized, and my integrity put in question. I will remove it asap. Stu Laidlaw Stu, First, my compliments on a fine car - wish I had room for it beside my 1915 Hudson 6-40 and Packard 7-Passenger Dual Windshield Touring. My prior note was not intended as a criticism - just a reference with regard to tire size, and a link to one of the specification resources. I certainly didn't mean to offend you with the reference option - a usually reliable one which helps many on several forum sites (forae?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wac Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 Just a word about the Classic Car Database that Marty referenced. I have looked up each of my cars in this database and have found errors in every listing. It's a good place to start, but not infallible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1919Hudson Posted April 7, 2019 Share Posted April 7, 2019 Very nice original car! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Phillips Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 I, too, am in awe of this old Hudson. To answer an earlier question, japanning is a type of black paint for automobiles that was used in the 1910s and 1920s before lacquer came along in the mid-1920s. There--my time spent at McPherson College was good for something! (had to put in that plug for them). From Wikipedia: Japanning is most often a heavy black "lacquer", almost like enamel paint. Black is common and japanning is often assumed to be synonymous with black japanning. The European technique uses varnishes that have a resin base, similar to shellac, applied in heat-dried layers which are then polished, to give a smooth glossy finish. Pete Phillips Leonard, TX. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kfigel Posted May 5, 2021 Share Posted May 5, 2021 On 3/1/2019 at 5:46 AM, mercer09 said: Was a 4 passenger touring also called the speedster? absolutely! have an early 20's title to prove it. Was poking around for info on vintage speedster models and came across this post. Just for my info...a Speedster model from the 1920's was a different model from a Touring car, correct? I know at least Studebaker, Hudson and Marmons in the 1920's offered both Speedster and Touring models. The four door Speedster models were advertised as a 4 passenger auto (like the car in this post) since their bodies were a little narrower and lower than the compariable Touring model. The Touring models usually had jump seats that allowed for six passengers (Speedsters never came with jump seats). So there is a difference between a Speedster and Touring model. It also seems like Speedsters tended to come with side mount spares. These Speedsters were obviously different from the body style of the Ford Model T Speedster. Do I have this all correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne sheldon Posted May 5, 2021 Share Posted May 5, 2021 I wonder where this car is today? (Don't really need an answer.) Yes, the 'speedster' term causes a lot of confusion. Mostly today, it seems to refer to model Ts or other often inappropriate cars that have been cut down and turned into wannabe racers or customs. The majority of the ones done in recent decades are very little like the ones built a hundred years ago. Sad really, the entire speedster/bug/cut-down/ wannabe racer hobby of the 1910s and 1920s was a big part of our automotive history! Such cars should be restored and enjoyed, seen and driven often. They are a lot of fun, and can be capable of driving many highway miles at higher speeds than stock cars of those years can safely do. Other than the 'whats in a name' speedsters of yore, the word was used to describe any of many vehicles that were built to be run faster than the usual run-of-the-mill vehicles. Even before automobiles became common, certain horse drawn light carriages were known as a 'speedster'. Among early automobiles, several manufacturers had lightweight racy models called by a variety of names, including 'speedster. Paige Detroit in 1912 and Metz in 1914 among others called their sporty cars a speedster in those years. In the early 1920s, a number of manufacturers had models called 'speedster', that basically resembled a standard touring car. Don't expect hard and fast rules here, there weren't any. Generally speaking, yes, the body sides were usually slightly lower, and the rear section slightly narrower than the standard touring cars were. Hudson and Marmon were two that were well known, but there were many others in those early 1920s. Most were considered four passenger, however, do not count out the jump seats completely. I did a few years ago see era photos of a six passenger 'speedster' with two jump seats! (If I recall correctly, it was European?) To confuse things further, in the later 1920s and on into the early 1930s, the 'speedster term was even extended to enclosed cars! Several quality manufacturers had semi-custom offerings resembling sedans with slightly lower window lines and slightly narrower rear sections. Franklin and Packard I know I have seen, Auburn I think also did. Auburn of course also built their boat-tail roadster for a number of years which was often referred to as a 'speedster'. So there. Clear as mud. A good friend years go had a 1921 Hudson four passenger speedster. His, unlike the OP car here, was a high mileage and somewhat tired mostly original car. He drove it on a lot of Nickel Age Club tours, and it was a great and reliable tour car car. I went on a number of tours alongside his Hudson speedster, and it went very well. They really are great cars! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kfigel Posted May 5, 2021 Share Posted May 5, 2021 3 hours ago, wayne sheldon said: I wonder where this car is today? (Don't really need an answer.) Yes, the 'speedster' term causes a lot of confusion. Mostly today, it seems to refer to model Ts or other often inappropriate cars that have been cut down and turned into wannabe racers or customs. The majority of the ones done in recent decades are very little like the ones built a hundred years ago. Sad really, the entire speedster/bug/cut-down/ wannabe racer hobby of the 1910s and 1920s was a big part of our automotive history! Such cars should be restored and enjoyed, seen and driven often. They are a lot of fun, and can be capable of driving many highway miles at higher speeds than stock cars of those years can safely do. Other than the 'whats in a name' speedsters of yore, the word was used to describe any of many vehicles that were built to be run faster than the usual run-of-the-mill vehicles. Even before automobiles became common, certain horse drawn light carriages were known as a 'speedster'. Among early automobiles, several manufacturers had lightweight racy models called by a variety of names, including 'speedster. Paige Detroit in 1912 and Metz in 1914 among others called their sporty cars a speedster in those years. In the early 1920s, a number of manufacturers had models called 'speedster', that basically resembled a standard touring car. Don't expect hard and fast rules here, there weren't any. Generally speaking, yes, the body sides were usually slightly lower, and the rear section slightly narrower than the standard touring cars were. Hudson and Marmon were two that were well known, but there were many others in those early 1920s. Most were considered four passenger, however, do not count out the jump seats completely. I did a few years ago see era photos of a six passenger 'speedster' with two jump seats! (If I recall correctly, it was European?) To confuse things further, in the later 1920s and on into the early 1930s, the 'speedster term was even extended to enclosed cars! Several quality manufacturers had semi-custom offerings resembling sedans with slightly lower window lines and slightly narrower rear sections. Franklin and Packard I know I have seen, Auburn I think also did. Auburn of course also built their boat-tail roadster for a number of years which was often referred to as a 'speedster'. So there. Clear as mud. A good friend years go had a 1921 Hudson four passenger speedster. His, unlike the OP car here, was a high mileage and somewhat tired mostly original car. He drove it on a lot of Nickel Age Club tours, and it was a great and reliable tour car car. I went on a number of tours alongside his Hudson speedster, and it went very well. They really are great cars! Thanks, Wayne. You kinda confirmed my understanding of the Speedster models of the 1920s. I believe they were a little narrower and lower than a Touring car to give them a more "sporty" look (?). When you throw in the very well known Porsche Speedster, things really get confusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibarlaw Posted May 5, 2021 Share Posted May 5, 2021 (edited) I saw this 1920 Hudson Speedster at Hershey several years ago. Quite impressive with the 2 sets of double side mounts. Edited May 5, 2021 by dibarlaw spelling (see edit history) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeke01 Posted May 6, 2021 Share Posted May 6, 2021 1923 Hudson Speedster. Zeke 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linus Tremaine Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 the car is still in CT as far as I know. I drove there with a car trailer to buy it and I found that it was, in my opinion, not as advertised and I could not justify the cost. It was at the maximum of my budget and needed significantly more work that I could take on at the time. It a wonderful car none the less and I feel that I will regret not buying it for the rest of my life. Id still like to find one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linus Tremaine Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 the car that dibarlaw posted is in california. I went and looked at it to get familiar with them, but its not for sale. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now