Lincoln Introduces the Corsair Grand Touring

Always good to have powertrain options.

Like this, should help those that Fear a pure EV move more that way but with backup.

12 hours ago, dfelt said:

Like this, should help those that Fear a pure EV move more that way but with backup.

Like this myself.......

when i was traveling the other day i passed two newer state fleet vehicles that would normally likely not otherwise be fleet vehicles.  A plug in hybrid Pacifica and a hybrid RAV4.  MN passing cheesy renewable energy mandates, they must have been extending orders to start spending big bucks on purchasing EV fleet vehicles to appear to be in sync with being green.  I suppose in some cases the hybrid costs more; in the case of the Pacifica, a lot more then buying a cheap ass grand caravan.  Not that state fleets will be buying Corsairs, but you never know....... at least the new Escape is a hybrid again.

18 hours ago, regfootball said:

when i was traveling the other day i passed two newer state fleet vehicles that would normally likely not otherwise be fleet vehicles.  A plug in hybrid Pacifica and a hybrid RAV4.  MN passing cheesy renewable energy mandates, they must have been extending orders to start spending big bucks on purchasing EV fleet vehicles to appear to be in sync with being green.  I suppose in some cases the hybrid costs more; in the case of the Pacifica, a lot more then buying a cheap ass grand caravan.  Not that state fleets will be buying Corsairs, but you never know....... at least the new Escape is a hybrid again.

Hybrids make better sense for State, County and City fleets. They waste so much fuel idling their auto's that the higher mpg of a Hybrid makes sense as even in the case of a 5 year turn, they probably save money even with the higher initial costs.

Police auto's should all be hybrid with the amount of fuel they burn just idling. Plus they could benefit from the electric instant torque to get going.

3 hours ago, dfelt said:

Hybrids make better sense for State, County and City fleets. They waste so much fuel idling their auto's that the higher mpg of a Hybrid makes sense as even in the case of a 5 year turn, they probably save money even with the higher initial costs.

Police auto's should all be hybrid with the amount of fuel they burn just idling. Plus they could benefit from the electric instant torque to get going.

in the case of a pacifica, its not worth it for a state fleet to spend 10 grand more, or more, for a multipassenger vehicle.

On 1/18/2020 at 12:36 PM, regfootball said:

in the case of a pacifica, its not worth it for a state fleet to spend 10 grand more, or more, for a multipassenger vehicle.

How do you quantify that? I see so many state auto's just idle in parks, on the roads, etc. They probably burn away $10 grand in a couple years just idling.

Washington state says they base replacement of an auto on mileage then years, so 150,000 miles or 5 years old if the auto has a record of problems. Otherwise the auto can go longer in the fleet if it has a low cost of maintenance.

Savings on 10 grand of fuel can easily make this up.

I don’t even USE $10K of fuel in 5 years, never mind idling away $10K of fuel.

2 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I don’t even USE $10K of fuel in 5 years, never mind idling away $10K of fuel.

You aren't a fleet driver, though...not driving 25k-50k miles a year? 

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

I don’t even USE $10K of fuel in 5 years, never mind idling away $10K of fuel.

Correct, the City of Seattle here averaged 28,000 miles a year on their fleet vehicles and during sporting events, the Seattle Police auto's are constant running at idle for 6 to 8 hrs. All that fuel is wasted.

Just now, dfelt said:

Correct, the City of Seattle here averaged 28,000 miles a year on their fleet vehicles and during sporting events, the Seattle Police auto's are constant running at idle for 6 to 8 hrs. All that fuel is wasted.

While a hybrid will save somewhat money on idling it will not be as significant as you think.  My wife drives currently a hybrid and at idle or even slow speed the engine indeed will be cut off.  However,  that will be the case only until the battery gets low and than the engine will kick in to recharge the battery.  When the weather is cold or hot and the load on the battery is high (plus municipal and police vehicles have additional equipment that will increase the load) the engine turns on quite often.

8 minutes ago, ykX said:

While a hybrid will save somewhat money on idling it will not be as significant as you think.  My wife drives currently a hybrid and at idle or even slow speed the engine indeed will be cut off.  However,  that will be the case only until the battery gets low and than the engine will kick in to recharge the battery.  When the weather is cold or hot and the load on the battery is high (plus municipal and police vehicles have additional equipment that will increase the load) the engine turns on quite often.

I have thought of that and thank you for pointing it out, the Hybrid systems seem to be more efficient, your running a much smaller motor in generation mode than a big V8 idling all that time. 

Not sure who it was but I think it was @Drew Dowdell or @dwightlooi who pointed out that for a hybrid, you could have a very small 1L diesel generator that would be super efficient at recharging a battery pack.

I still think hybrids can be more efficient than a city, county or state, heck even federal just buying a ton of V8 auto's.

4 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

You aren't a fleet driver, though...not driving 25k-50k miles a year? 

Cops of course are the extreme. But not all fleets run that high; school buses average 12K but some are only 8K.

Regardless, it has to be the north end of the extreme to idle away $10K of fuel.

As far as fleets, postal and parcel delivery seems like the use case where EVs could work the best.   Lots of stop and go low speed daily use. 

Seems possible; not sure how such operation affects battery depletion.

On 1/20/2020 at 7:36 AM, dfelt said:

How do you quantify that? I see so many state auto's just idle in parks, on the roads, etc. They probably burn away $10 grand in a couple years just idling.

Washington state says they base replacement of an auto on mileage then years, so 150,000 miles or 5 years old if the auto has a record of problems. Otherwise the auto can go longer in the fleet if it has a low cost of maintenance.

Savings on 10 grand of fuel can easily make this up.

https://carfromjapan.com/article/car-maintenance/how-much-gas-does-idling-use/

at 1/2 a gallon of gas per hour and 2.50 per gallon of fuel.......it would require 8,000 hours (333.33 days) of idling to burn 10k in fuel.  In the case of the Pacifica being a plug in, now you're burning electric energy created from fuel anyways or inefficient and costly and toxic renewable energy. And storing it in a big ass battery with toxic materials.

On 1/20/2020 at 1:03 PM, Robert Hall said:

As far as fleets, postal and parcel delivery seems like the use case where EVs could work the best.   Lots of stop and go low speed daily use. 

this i agree.

On 1/20/2020 at 10:31 AM, dfelt said:

I have thought of that and thank you for pointing it out, the Hybrid systems seem to be more efficient, your running a much smaller motor in generation mode than a big V8 idling all that time. 

Not sure who it was but I think it was @Drew Dowdell or @dwightlooi who pointed out that for a hybrid, you could have a very small 1L diesel generator that would be super efficient at recharging a battery pack.

I still think hybrids can be more efficient than a city, county or state, heck even federal just buying a ton of V8 auto's.

on the new Chevy Trailblazer it's only got a 1.2 to start with!

On 1/20/2020 at 12:53 PM, balthazar said:

Cops of course are the extreme. But not all fleets run that high; school buses average 12K but some are only 8K.

Regardless, it has to be the north end of the extreme to idle away $10K of fuel.

particularly for a state fleet vehicle that may only serve to be a company car for a desk employee to drive up to meetings and back a handful of times a week.

On 1/25/2020 at 3:40 PM, regfootball said:

now you're burning electric energy created from fuel anyways or inefficient and costly and toxic renewable energy.

Gonna Say some states might be toxic using Coal, but BS on the inefficient, costly toxic renewable energy. That is NOT TRUE!

^ there are some numbers / facts worth consideration. Oils, greases and petrochemicals are required to build a wind turbine, a 2 MW unit costs 3-4 million & only lasts 20 yrs (with 3 gearbox changes along the way). Any discussion of efficiency must also take into account base costs and longevity. 

There’s a hydro-electric turbine that at least circa 1990 was using the same main bearing installed circa 1902. I believe the turbine was of mega-tonnage. Sorry I don’t recall the details, but it may very be still running. 

It was a major disappointment for me to learn a modern, new millennium turbine, that turns so incredibly slowly, isn’t built to last 75-100 years. That’s unquestionably, an inefficiency.

13 hours ago, balthazar said:

^ there are some numbers / facts worth consideration. Oils, greases and petrochemicals are required to build a wind turbine, a 2 MW unit costs 3-4 million & only lasts 20 yrs (with 3 gearbox changes along the way). Any discussion of efficiency must also take into account base costs and longevity. 

There’s a hydro-electric turbine that at least circa 1990 was using the same main bearing installed circa 1902. I believe the turbine was of mega-tonnage. Sorry I don’t recall the details, but it may very be still running. 

It was a major disappointment for me to learn a modern, new millennium turbine, that turns so incredibly slowly, isn’t built to last 75-100 years. That’s unquestionably, an inefficiency.

Pretty much all the Hydro dams in my state, Washington have had their turbines running since installation. You are right that these old mega dams were built to last compared to newer stuff. 

I understand that oils, grease and petrochemicals go into building solar / wind generation equipment. If built right it should last a long time, but I also get that companies have looked for the cheapest way to build things. At least they do not require petro on going long term like a gas / coal power generation plant and motor along with no emissions once in production of electricity.

Nothing is perfect, but some are better than others long term when you look at what it does. I have not looked but I suspect that emissions of a wind turbine other than when in production of the motor is significantly less than a Coal or Natural gas electric production system.

Regardless of where the power comes from, we are in a new era of how auto's are looked at and powered and I honestly think we are back in that time of a major change that happened in the 1920's as plenty of auto companies came and went and we are there now again with the Hybrid / EV auto's. Sadly this also means billions spent and lost as many of these companies will get bought up or go bankrupt. What we have in the end will be interesting to see.

One thing I know, we will never loose our trucks, after all regardless of sci-fi movies like A.I. where you saw all these electric auto's that were 1, 2 or 4 person, you never saw a truck. Yet we know we will always need trucks as constructions to basic hobbies will always require hauling and people will always have a need for the usefulness of a truck.

17 hours ago, balthazar said:

^ there are some numbers / facts worth consideration. Oils, greases and petrochemicals are required to build a wind turbine, a 2 MW unit costs 3-4 million & only lasts 20 yrs (with 3 gearbox changes along the way). Any discussion of efficiency must also take into account base costs and longevity. 

There’s a hydro-electric turbine that at least circa 1990 was using the same main bearing installed circa 1902. I believe the turbine was of mega-tonnage. Sorry I don’t recall the details, but it may very be still running. 

It was a major disappointment for me to learn a modern, new millennium turbine, that turns so incredibly slowly, isn’t built to last 75-100 years. That’s unquestionably, an inefficiency.

not to mention already needing to retire and dismantle recently built turbines and disposal or recycling of said items is an issue.  10 years maybe in some cases.

4 hours ago, dfelt said:

Pretty much all the Hydro dams in my state, Washington have had their turbines running since installation. You are right that these old mega dams were built to last compared to newer stuff. 

I understand that oils, grease and petrochemicals go into building solar / wind generation equipment. If built right it should last a long time, but I also get that companies have looked for the cheapest way to build things. At least they do not require petro on going long term like a gas / coal power generation plant and motor along with no emissions once in production of electricity.

Nothing is perfect, but some are better than others long term when you look at what it does. I have not looked but I suspect that emissions of a wind turbine other than when in production of the motor is significantly less than a Coal or Natural gas electric production system.

Regardless of where the power comes from, we are in a new era of how auto's are looked at and powered and I honestly think we are back in that time of a major change that happened in the 1920's as plenty of auto companies came and went and we are there now again with the Hybrid / EV auto's. Sadly this also means billions spent and lost as many of these companies will get bought up or go bankrupt. What we have in the end will be interesting to see.

One thing I know, we will never loose our trucks, after all regardless of sci-fi movies like A.I. where you saw all these electric auto's that were 1, 2 or 4 person, you never saw a truck. Yet we know we will always need trucks as constructions to basic hobbies will always require hauling and people will always have a need for the usefulness of a truck.

the speed of adoption of more electric propulsion on cars will depend more on refueling infrastructure.  When we can fill our cars in 5-15 minutes, literally in nearly the same number and prime locations of places where we currently get gasoline, while we stop to pee and grab snacks..... and i don't see jack in terms of that happening in ten years at this time.  20 years out, maybe.  Need electrical service and grid and FAST chargers to everywhere where gas is now.    And they know this, that is why we are still only seeing incremental technology on automobiles with electric.  Battery design will also need more time like that till we get to the point where the battery is not so huge, not so expensive, not so dangerous, and not requiring so much toxic metals from kids in 3rd world countries.  And finally price of electric cars will have to become nearly equal with gas equivalent for the average consumer vehicle.

https://www.wired.com/story/segway-bringing-hoverchairs-wall-e-life/

1 hour ago, regfootball said:

not to mention already needing to retire and dismantle recently built turbines and disposal or recycling of said items is an issue.  10 years maybe in some cases.

Further adding to my dismay at the short lifespan of so-called "sustainable energy source" wind turbines was learning that there are already 'wind turbine junkyards".

4 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Further adding to my dismay at the short lifespan of so-called "sustainable energy sources" was learning that there already are 'wind turbine junkyards".

Just like there will be 'EV junkyards'...no one is going to keep an EV for 10 years or 150k miles...they will be obsolete and expensive to repair, just lease for a few years then junk/recycle...

Someone interested in the car hobby could always re-power an obsolete EV as IC.
Someone built an LS-powered Model S already.  ?

2 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Someone interested in the car hobby could always re-power an obsolete EV as IC.
Someone built an LS-powered Model S already.  ?

I think that was a joke, not sure if it was ever finished. I recall seeing a video where someone was scoping out fitting an LS into a Model S and there wasn't nearly enough room for it...

32 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

Just like there will be 'EV junkyards'...no one is going to keep an EV for 10 years or 150k miles...they will be obsolete and expensive to repair, just lease for a few years then junk/recycle...

Consumable appliances

16 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

I think that was a joke, not sure if it was ever finished. I recall seeing a video where someone was scoping out fitting an LS into a Model S and there wasn't nearly enough room for it...

Fit in a Grand Prix, it certainly could fit in a larger Model S.

7 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Fit in a Grand Prix, it certainly could fit in a larger Model S.

From what I've seen, the frunk area ahead of the firewall is very tiny in the Model S...no room for a radiator, engine, etc.  maybe a transverse 4 would fit.  More Cruze or Sonic sized up front. 

17 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

I think that was a joke, not sure if it was ever finished. I recall seeing a video where someone was scoping out fitting an LS into a Model S and there wasn't nearly enough room for it...

Just finished searching YouTube and yup, all click bait, no complete or running Tesla S conversion to ICE. Clearly does not fit without major re-engineering. did find a few Skylines that had been converted to EV using Tesla Motors. Pretty cool.

Of course major surgery is required.

I knew a guy who put a 426 Hemi in a Dodge Omni. Numerous people have put a blown big block Chevy in a Nash Metro.

You guys forget that torches, grinders and welders aren’t just for angry peasants.

25 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Of course major surgery is required.

I knew a guy who put a 426 Hemi in a Dodge Omni. Numerous people have put a blown big block Chevy in a Nash Metro.

You guys forget that torches, grinders and welders aren’t just for angry peasants.

You are thinking about cars with normal unibody structures, though...the Tesla doesn't have that..it has the giant battery pack and some simple aluminum and cardboard tubes attached to it with glue and spot welds, it sounds like..

I could someone doing some redneck engineering and mounting a Model S body on top of a truck chassis, though...

9 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Of course major surgery is required.

I knew a guy who put a 426 Hemi in a Dodge Omni. Numerous people have put a blown big block Chevy in a Nash Metro.

You guys forget that torches, grinders and welders aren’t just for angry peasants.

Yup full story here it was all mock up as a joke.

https://insideevs.com/news/328334/tesla-model-s-fitted-with-chevrolet-ls3-v8-engine/

QUOTE: 

"The guys over at East Bay Muscle Cars haven’t given out much info about the build, and that’s because it was a joke all along."

"EBMC was actually recruited by Draper University in San Mateo, California, to take a Tesla Model S shell and turn it into a reception desk. It came out awesome, nonetheless, but during the early stages of the build, the guys at the shop couldn’t help themselves and dropped an LS3 into the “frunk” of the Model S shell."

30 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

...someone doing some redneck engineering and mounting a Model S body on top of a truck chassis, though...

Sure; that and much harder automotive projects have been successfully executed before. If one can 'EV' an IC vehicle, the reverse is just as possible. Don't need a 'truck chassis'; people are custom building frames all the time. The back half of my B-59 (and the suspension) was scratch-built.

I know one guy (via the 'net) who put a B-59 on a '77 Cadillac chassis- nothing there remotely lines up and the wheelbase is wrong. All the body mount locations & number are different. He waved all that work off, and really had no answer as to what he gained by doing so. People with tools get ideas and make it work.

Nash metropolitan: wheelbase : 85". Original weight : 1800 lbs. Nothing there structurally could handle even 150 HP, never mind the possible 800 this might have. Basically you hang the Nash sheetmetal and interior on everything else custom.

I'm sure someone will ICE an EV at some point, but it doesn't really make sense... seems pointless.  With a Tesla, for instance, no performance advantage would likely occur from a lot of work to ICE it, since it's so fast the way it is in ludicrous mode.  

Pffft- it could go faster.
'Making sense' is seldom part of radical re-engineering automotive projects. That's not the goal.

My brother is getting I think his 4th engine HE put into his Firebird finished up, and it was a fine running & looking 400CI powered car when he bought it. I drove it and it would burn the tires off (too small/street tires). It hasn't been street legal since I think the 1st engine replacement, but he keeps re-doing & re-doing it. His prerogative, but basically it's driven by wanting to go faster.

Engine 3 was already way faster than a Model S in Ludicrious; best (lightly modified) time I've seen was 10.41 sec and he was already at 9.6. New mill should be good for right around 7.9-8.0, which would equal the verified world's fastest EV doorslammer.

Top EV performance is light years behind top IC performance. And an IC competition engine can still be torn down/rebuilt faster than it takes a Model S to fully charge & bring the batteries up to ideal temp for Ludicrious Mode launches.

18 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

I'm sure someone will ICE an EV at some point, but it doesn't really make sense... seems pointless.  With a Tesla, for instance, no performance advantage would likely occur from a lot of work to ICE it, since it's so fast the way it is in ludicrous mode.  

Agree, the upgrades will come when 3rd party vendors build bigger EV motors and people take a Tesla S and put in a much larger EV motor.

I don't believe it's the motors as much as it is the batteries. Unfortunately for competition; the EV packages are the antithesis of competition - they are HEAVY. Model S is 5000 lbs and it's not really that quick. 100 lbs = 1/10th of a sec in the quarter mile.
Giving it more power/batteries just makes it heavier, not lighter.

19 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Pffft- it could go faster.
'Making sense' is seldom part of radical re-engineering automotive projects. That's not the goal.

My brother is getting I think his 4th engine HE put into his Firebird finished up, and it was a fine running & looking 400CI powered car when he bought it. I drove it and it would burn the tires off (too small/street tires). It hasn't been street legal since I think the 1st engine replacement, but he keeps re-doing & re-doing it. His prerogative, but basically it's driven by wanting to go faster.

Engine 3 was already way faster than a Model S in Ludicrious; best (lightly modified) time I've seen was 10.41 sec and he was already at 9.6. New mill should be good for right around 7.9-8.0, which would equal the verified world's fastest EV doorslammer.

Top EV performance is light years behind top IC performance. And an IC competition engine can still be torn down/rebuilt faster than it takes a Model S to fully charge & bring the batteries up to ideal temp for Ludicrious Mode launches.

Those aren't for real world use, though, right? ...stuff built for drag racing has no bearing on real world performance cars.

12 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I don't believe it's the motors as much as it is the batteries. Unfortunately for competition; the EV packages are the antithesis of competition - they are HEAVY. Model S is 5000 lbs and it's not really that quick. 100 lbs = 1/10th of a sec in the quarter mile.
Giving it more power/batteries just makes it heavier, not lighter.

I don't think people are necessarily building drag racers out of a Model S..definitely too heavy for that use case..I'm talking about real world performance...a Model S in ludicrous mode is 2.4 sec 0 to 60, .that's very quick for a real car with a warranty, working A/C, cup holders and all the essentials...

If one happened to live in an area where they thought they could get away with ludicrous mode launches without getting nailed, I suppose. Seen plenty of videos of teslas on the drag strip, tho, but there they’re limited to what Tesla built. Drag racing a factory stock car always struck me as pointless.

Point of my answer was, you could build a markedly faster Model S if you went IC. If that was important to you.

19 minutes ago, balthazar said:

 

Point of my answer was, you could build a markedly faster Model S if you went IC. If that was important to you.

I'm sure one could, but it would be a lot of work.  I like vehicles that come with warranties, predictably start, have working A/C and don't require hours and hours of wrenching.  Get in, drive, enjoy..I need another fun car..(I don't really want a Tesla, though, lots of ICE vehicles that are quite appealing to me).  

And of course that’s your prerogative. Most people don’t want/know how to work on vehicles.

There are plenty of swaps that are done just because they can and want to. Stuffing a Ferrari 458 engine in a BRZ is one that comes to mind. They can into all sorts of issues but just wanted to because they had the skill and money. 

Anybody doing real swaps like that are just doing it because they want to, more than anything else. Like @balthazar said, in the end, it's just because they want to. 

Very true what @balthazar and @ccap41 are saying that those with skills, money and desire for the project will convert.

Perfect example is me. I have my 1994 GMC SLE Suburban up on blocks now, planning to pull the ICE powertrain and convert to AWD electric. Love my suburban, love the space, want a nice fast quiet ride and with the space between the wheels underneath, it will fit enough SCRiB Toshiba Solid state batteries to give me an 800 mile charge. Using in-wheel hub motors with dual controllers will according to the manufacture in Detroit give me 800 hp and 4,000 lb ft of torque.

Cost of the motors, wiring, controllers, etc. comes in at $12K. Battery pack is almost $60K. Yes, $72K or buy a new ICE Suburban. But the new ones I do not like as much as my old one and it is paid for, I have my SS and Escalade, so why not have a cool project for me to work on and the wife once Rivian and Ford have their EVs out will get a new auto.

That is my plans and focus. I do have to find a buyer for the custom built 402 I have in the suburban with trans, diff's and customer chip controller.   Love auto projects.

72k isn't worth it, IMHO. That's just absurd.. 

What the price difference for 50% of that battery pack for 400 miles of range? Or 500 miles of range? 

7 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

72k isn't worth it, IMHO. That's just absurd.. 

What the price difference for 50% of that battery pack for 400 miles of range? Or 500 miles of range? 

400 miles was $30k half the price. I honestly thought the same thing when I originally priced it out over the holiday break, but then thought about this as just like @balthazar auto project that he has been working on for years, this will take me a few years too and the last thing to buy and install will be the battery pack. As such, I expect big changes to happen in the battery industry over the next 18 to 24 months and costs to come down considerably by the time I purchase the batteries.

I am also going to update the interior with new carpet, insulation, etc. All things bulbs will be replaced with LEDs, so this is a long term project for me, I am excited to start.

47 minutes ago, dfelt said:

400 miles was $30k half the price. I honestly thought the same thing when I originally priced it out over the holiday break, but then thought about this as just like @balthazar auto project that he has been working on for years, this will take me a few years too and the last thing to buy and install will be the battery pack. As such, I expect big changes to happen in the battery industry over the next 18 to 24 months and costs to come down considerably by the time I purchase the batteries.

I am also going to update the interior with new carpet, insulation, etc. All things bulbs will be replaced with LEDs, so this is a long term project for me, I am excited to start.

While so much of it is taken apart, you should dynomat everything. I've ridden in a vehicle where they dynomat-ed the wheel wells and it is amazing how much noise is coming from the tires and pavement. At that point, what's another $500-1000 to dynomat the inside of every panel and it would truly be whisper quite inside and out. 

I'm looking into putting a dynomat on the insides of my wheel wells because that would be great. 

Do you have everything taken out already and you're just waiting to start purchasing things or is there still plenty of disassembly to go? Project pictures?? 

3 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

While so much of it is taken apart, you should dynomat everything. I've ridden in a vehicle where they dynomat-ed the wheel wells and it is amazing how much noise is coming from the tires and pavement. At that point, what's another $500-1000 to dynomat the inside of every panel and it would truly be whisper quite inside and out. 

I'm looking into putting a dynomat on the insides of my wheel wells because that would be great. 

Do you have everything taken out already and you're just waiting to start purchasing things or is there still plenty of disassembly to go? Project pictures?? 

Right now just up on the blocks, ski season is my focus, so will start taking it apart this spring.

Agree with you on the Dynomat. Planning to do the whole auto, so from the roof to the doors, fire wall, floor, etc. dynomat to remove the road noise.

Wife and I have gotten to the point where on road trips, we do not want the tire, wind noise, etc. want a quiet relaxing drive.

As I start taking it apart, I am planning on doing a thread on the project so folks can see what all I end up doing to it.

There are a number of other brands and materials that are far more cost-effective than Dynomat, which is hugely overpriced, IMO. I did the floor/ firewall/ rear bulkhead on my B-59 with a heavy foil-faced butyl rubber product and it cost me less than $50. I am looking for something to do the roof, and haven’t done the doors yet.

EDIT: same stuff is now $33/roll and I used 3 rolls, but I bought it a number of years ago and then I believe it was 18-20/ roll.