(first posted 4/15/2015. Aiden is now at the University of Arizona, but he had to leave his ’79 Z-28 at home. But that doesn’t seem to be blunting his success with the young women)
(Welcome our newest Contributor, my nephew Aidan, age 13, who lives in San Mateo, CA. Last year when I was down to visit, we did two joint CC hunts, which I wrote that up here and here. We went on another CC hunt yesterday, and found a motherlode of cars, which we will both be writing up from time to time, but individually. Aidan picked this one as his first car to share. He does love red classic muscle cars. Paul N.)
When I first saw this Chevelle Malibu in the distance walking with uncle Paul, I thought it was my favorite model: a 1970 Chevelle Malibu SS, but we soon figured out it was a ’72 SS 454, because of the single headlights and the grille. Cherry red with the famous two stripes through the middle, this car was the hottest version of the last of the true hardtop Malibu coupes.
The 1970 SS 454 was the first year a new version of the already famous SS396 was available with Chevrolet’s biggest engine, and it instantly became a legend because the LS6 version of that engine was rated at 450 horsepower, which was more than any other muscle car of its era. This car was happy to take on 426 hemis.
That 450 horse high performance LS6 was only available in 1970; since this is a 1972 model, it must have the lower performance LS5 engine, which had been rated at 360 gross hp, but with the change to net hp ratings in 1972, was now rated at 270 hp. Still plenty of muscle.
The optional Cowl Induction let the big block 454 breathe fresh, cool air, which allowed it to make the most of its power potential. I think it also looks better than a front-facing hood scoop, and works better too.
The SS models were always famous for their bucket seats and consoles, but by 1972, you had to pay extra to get them. Obviously, this one has an automatic too. Looking at this interior, one might think this could have been a 6 cylinder Malibu that belonged the old lady who lived across the street when I was growing up.
Actually, I like cars with bench seats more than modern cars with bucket seats and a console because you can get in the passenger side and just slide across to the driver’s side for a quick getaway.
If this was an old lady car, it wouldn’t have come with a tachometer. Of course we can’t be totally sure this car is a genuine original SS 454 because anyone could change an old lady Malibu into a SS 454 clone. The parts are all easy to get. Just like the bench seats, I like the old fashioned dashboards because they have much more style than modern car dashboards today.
These look like original Rally wheels, but probably widened to fit modern, wider tires. I like this body style, but I prefer the 1970 model with the four headlights. Although this car was wearing Cooper tires, I would have liked to see Goodyear tires, my favorite brand on classic muscle cars.
Sadly, the big 454 wasn’t running when we were there, but wouldn’t it be nice to hear it through those twin exhausts and see it roar down the road and off into the sunset. Or better yet, be sitting in its bench seat while doing so.
Follow-up reading:
Curbside Classic & Driving Impressions: 1979 Camaro Z-28 – Nephew Aidan’s First Car
Nice writeup. So anyone out there want to take a gander if this is a real SS?
The only thing that looks wrong are the wheels, they should be 15″x7″ five spoke, stamped steel and painted grey.
Hard to tell for sure, there was no VIN identifier after ’68 so cloning is easy as the parts are so available. The bench seat and column shift isn’t that rare either, there were many made that way from ’70 until ’72.
Yes, very nice write-up!
Welcome Aidan, and what a great find for your first contribution !
Last year I had the pleasure to have a close look at a 1971 Chevelle SS454. I assume it’s mostly the same as a 1972, although I see the grille and the outer light units are somewhat different.
With respect to those who like the 1968 and 69 and the 1972 Chevelles, I’ve always preferred the 1970-71 model years the best. I don’t know why, I’ve always found the front end to be the most attractive. I could do without the aftermarket gauges you see underneath the dash. If one has to install gauges, I’d want them to be installed inside the gauge cluster, if possible, where one would normally see the warning lights.
Here’s what’s presented as the “correct original SS dashboard” of the 1971 above. Where there much differences from the lesser models ?
That’s the correct SS dash, but without the optional tach and engine gauges that our featured ’72 has.
The round gauges were optional (with or without tach) on most lesser Chevelle models, but this is what the vast majority of Chevelles of that era had…..
It could be interesting to compare the 1968 and 1969 Chevelle/El Camino dash with the 1970-72 models.
My ’71 and ’72 Chevelle Coupes had the standard rectangular “sweep” speedo and a fuel gauge as their only instrumentation.
From what I understand, the ’73 Colonnade models were supposed to debut in ’72, but a GM-wide strike in 1970 held up the process a year. Hence, very few changes in any of the GM intermediates and trucks for ’72.
Welcome aboard! It’s great to see contributions from the pre-driving people as they definitely have a very fresh perspective on automobiles.
Aidan, you picked a good one to start with. I’m eager to see more from you.
Let me also extend my welcome to you Aidan! I’m sure your uncle has well-acquainted you with CC. Excellent introductory write-up, and I look forward to more pieces to come.
I agree with you that the Cowl Induction does look much better than a tacky forward-facing hood scoop.
Nice work, nice car!
Nice write-up! A couple of points, I think you meant to say the Chevelle was the second best selling “intermediate” car in 1972. That car is labeled as a cowl induction, but it doesn’t actually have a cowl induction setup (note the missing trap door near the edge of the hood). This car just has the “domed hood” which all SS models had in 1972.
Interesting to see a SS Chevelle with a bench seat and column shift.
Drove a ’69 SS 396 in my high school days back in the ’70’s with the same setup. Loved the bench seat while on dates! The Chevelle would pass almost everything but a gas station. Had 4:10 gears in the back and was quite the screamer. Looking back, I’m amazed I didn’t get killed in the thing at age 17-18.
Welcome to the board, Aidan! Great first article.
I plan to install a dummy cowl induction hood on my ’71 GMC Sprint. Maybe a real one if I can get it to work with a small block.
Does anyone else find it appropriate that that gorgeous Chevelle is parked steps away from a Snap-On tool truck?
Great read thank you.I like this car a lot and want to burn rubber away from lights with Deep Purple’s Highway Star on th e 8 track
For those who asked:
NON SS Chevelles had a “ribbon” speedometer and a few token gauges (fuel gauge, clock, and…?). My sister has/had a 70 Malibu with a 307 and Powerglide, a nice enough car. She got it just about the time my folks got their new 78 Mercury Zephyr. The Malibu was better built, but the Zephyr was a better driver.
I got to drive my room mate’s 69 SS 396 which was equipped with a bench seat and column mounted auto. That was a nice car, though I would have preferred a different color to it’s avocado green metallic.
Nicely done. I always enjoy seeing how today’s teens look at cars first experienced by those a generation or two before.
I am warming to these a little. These high-end performance models leave me a little queasy about how original they might be. A six cylinder sedan, you know it’s the real deal. But with these, there are so many repop parts available that “tribute” cars are all over the place. I just don’t know my Chevys well enough to offer an opinion here.
I think I liked the 72 as well as any year of these A body Chevs of this generation. That was not an easy feat for Chevrolet stylists to pull off, keeping the 5th version of the design as good as the first, but they did it.
Bench seat was standard and Strato bucket seats were optional on all 1966-72 Chevelle SS models. And the console didn’t automatically come with the bucket seats. You had to pay for the console separately, so it was possible to get an SS with buckets and a 4-speed on the floor with no console or buckets and automatic shift on the column – have seen more than a few of both. I think the bucket seats were around $100 and then the console another $60.
For 1972 the SS package was $357. The 454 was $279 with transmission $238 (either 4 sp man or 3 sp auto). Console (req bucket seats) $59 and seats add $137. The induction was another $158 and gauges $84.
Was it possible to get the 454 and mandatory transmission (at just a bit over $500 combined) on a Chevelle without the SS package, cowl induction, or any other mandatory options?
All things considered, that’d be a nice sleeper and falls in line with my assertion that the 1972 454 Chevelle was the last true musclecar. The old 440 Six-Pack option for Mopars ran about the same amount, and the Chevy would have been nearly as fast, and easier to live with.
In fact, how much was the 402 big-block? Although it was technically gone as a model, a 402 big-block, 1972 Chevelle would be what was previously an SS396 and, if it was much cheaper, could be even better than the 454 as a budget musclecar.
I believe that, through 1973, the 454 was only available in Chevelles with the SS package (or in 1973, the new Chevelle Laguna). The big block 400 was the largest engine available in other Chevelles, until it was dropped after 1972. In 1974-75 the 454 could be ordered on any Chevelle, but by then it had been greatly detuned, and demand for engines that large in intermediate sized cars was low.
The SS package is required, but nothing else other than a transmission choice (not the 3 spd manual).
I always thought column shifters looked a little out of place on muscle cars though it’s never stopped me wanting one.
Friend had a 68 Chevelle SS with the 325HP 396, auto, ps and bench seat. Medium blue with black vinyl roof. Strangely it had power windows but no AC or disc brakes. Only had about 60k miles on it and after repaint it was nearly perfect. Drove it more than once, fun car. Nice write up, the apple must not fall far from the tree. Hope to see more article’s from you in the future.
Very well written article about the ’72 Chevelle SS 454. A little bit of history in order, there was only an SS 396 Chevelle from 1966 to 1969 then in 1970 when GM finally lifted the 400 cid limit on mid-sized cars, Chevy offered both an SS 396 standard with a 350-horsepower 396 and SS 454 with standard 360-horsepower 454 (LS-5) or optional 454/440 (LS-6). Probably the best production Chevelle SS ever thanks to an improved suspension, front disc brakes and rear sway bar, unfortunately it came out in time for the insurance wrath that began in mid-1970 when underwriters jacked up rates for such cars to unbelievable levels – or refused to insure them at all. That along with the plans for 1971 to detune all GM engines to run on low-octane gasoline made the ’70 SS the all time best. For ’71 in response to the insurance wrath, Chevrolet brought the standard Chevelle SS back to its original 1964-65 status as a trim package with the 245-horsepower small block 350 2-bbl the standard engine with the 270-horse 350 4-bbl optional along with the 300-horsepower 402 big block (which replaced the 396). In addition to the standard SS, the SS 454 was still available with the 365-horse 454 (LS-5) standard and the only engine available (some sources indicated that the 425-horse LS-6 454 was a ’71 Chevelle option but that engine was a “Corvette-only” offering that year though it’s possible some ’71 LS-6 Chevelles were built via a COPO order). The ’71 Chevelle brochure mentions only the LS-5 454 as being available. For ’72 the SS engine lineup stayed the same though horsepower ratings dropped due to the change from “gross” to “net” measurements – including the 350/165, 350/175, 400/240 and 454/270.
My understanding of the SS’s status over time is as follows:
1964-65: distinct model, based on and badged as a Malibu (“Malibu SS”).
1966-68: distinct model, based on but no longer badged as a Malibu (“SS 396”).
1969-73: option package, available on any Chevelle 2-door, not limited to Malibus. (This effectively made a cheaper “base Chevelle” version of the SS available, to compete with the Plymouth Road Runner.)
In 1972, for one year only, the Chevelle SS was available with any V8 engine offered in Chevelles, all the way down to the lowly 307.
Nice piece, and nice car. Something heartening about the fact you’re aware the non-SS Chevelles even existed. And then I remember you live somewhere they don’t salt the roads…
Put me down for the contrarian opinion since I always liked the ’71/2 single headlights/wraparound turn signals better than the ’70 quad lights. To each his own, I guess.
Some of the ’72s, like this one, have clear/white front signals with amber reflectors; others have all-amber ones. I’ve never figured out or found out what rhyme or reason there was to which cars got which but I think the all-amber ones were a midyear change.
interesting, never noticed that.
My understanding, from when I briefly had a SS El Camino, the all amber turn signal lenses were only on true SS cars (and El Caminos).
In 1971, I was working parking cars at a resort, a Chevelle station wagon pulled in, I gave them their tag, and got in to move it. This was a top of the line Concours Estate wagon, with a baby crib in the back. First thing I noticed was the floor shifter, a Hurst, hooked to a 4 speed! Full gauges, reverse warning light, the whole package. I blipped the throttle, and the cowl flap opened up. When I parked it, I walked around it, and it had full SS 396 markings. I made sure I kept the keys, and when the owner came out, I asked him where the hell he got that car. He told me ‘my wife wanted a wagon, I wanted an SS, this is what I got, after 6 weeks going thru the books with the dealer”. He said he was there at the dealership when they rolled it off the transporter, and the car caused quite a stir. I’ve been told repeatedly since then that ‘that car didn’t exist’, or ‘the dealer put the SS trim on it’, but, I saw it, drove it, and talked to the owner. The ‘good old days’ when you could order just about anything with enough patience. I wonder where that car wound up.
Nice write-up. I like more that 71-72 style of Chevelle than the 70. They look specially nice with the 5 spoke that graced the second gen Camaro Z/28. The 69 Chevelle also looked sharp.
Sadly, no basket handle shifter.
If you want to hear the roar of a 454, and cheer yourself up, check the video on this car:
http://bringatrailer.com/listing/71-chevrolet-corvette-454/
Dad had a 71 or 72. Yellow, with the sweep dash and basket handle shifter + buckets + console. I cannot remember if it was an SS or not, but it had an “imported” engine, AKA a different motor to what GM fitted for that market back then.
Thank you ! You have a really great way with the words ! So, you should keep it up ! 🙂
A strong case could be made that the 1972 Chevelle big-block SS (particularly the 454) was the last, true musclecar in the same vein as cars like the ’49 Olds ‘Rocket’ 88, ’55 Chrysler 300, ’64 GTO, and ’68 Roadrunner. Yeah, Chrysler, Ford, and GM’s sister divisions continued on with some half-hearted efforts from 1973 on, but 5mph bumpers and colonnade styling just didn’t cut it.
There’s no need to limit yourself to factory specs. If you are going to use your own motor in the car anyway, there are a few others that will meet your muscle car requirements:
79 nova
80 malibu
I tend to like the 74 camaro…normal looking chrome bumpers and small rear window.
No, it has to be factory. Otherwise, it opens the door to all sorts of RWD vehicles which have gotten the quick and dirty SBC swap. The vehicles that spring immediately to mind are V8 Vegas and Chevettes.
Some would argue that the Buick Grand National and last RWD Impala SS sedans qualify but, although both were certainly fast enough, the GN had a turbo V6, and the Impala was a four-door sedan. Even today, cars like the Charger and Challenger, although every bit as speedy as the cars from the sixties, the Charger is yet another four-door sedan, and the Challenger is not a hardtop and is a bit too pricey. It’s also a ponycar and those were never technically considered ‘musclecars’.
The final Chevelle two-door hardtop gets all of the right musclecar boxes checked, including affordability and the ability to use it as a daily driver in addition to ‘speed contests’.
Pony cars are a subset of muscle cars, not non-muscle cars.
I really have a hard time categorizing the current Challenger as a Ponycar, in fact this Chevelle is the exact same length as the Challenger today(seriously, both are 197″!), every other dimension is probably smaller even(the wheelbase is for sure longer on the Dodge). The proportions are even close as it doesn’t really have the Ponycar long hood/short deck dimensions so distinctive to the genre.
Plus I’d say anything with a positive displacement supercharger = Big block for modern times. Roots type superchargers provide tons of low end torque, and the Hellcat is no exception.
I hope I do not insult you with this reply…it assumes you do not know certain things about old cars and old car guys because of your young age.
Pony cars are termed such because the very first pony car had a big chrome pony on its grill…the 65 ‘stang.
Basically, a muscle car is a smaller(or lighter) than full sized car with a full powered(or extra powered) engine from a full sized car. the 49 olds rocket 88 club coupe is arguably the first one. The 413 powered dodge dart of 1962 may be the first of the UBER muscle cars.
I’m pretty sure you know what a sports car is. The original definition of a sports car would be a british 2 seat roadster with exceptional handling and a tiny engine and fantastically light weight. MG and Jaguar and Morgan cars of the 30s thru 50s would be examples. Arguably the Lotus car company was the pinnacle of the classic sportscar blueprint.
A pony car was an attempt to make a muscle car handle like a sportscar. It never achieved this goal. They were merely a midway or compromise between the two…in the beginning. As time went on, the pony car became more muscle car and less sportscar. By the 1980s, the only muscle cars left were the pony cars…mustangs and camaro/firebirds, the limited edition Hurst-Oldses and the Buick GNXs and the Chevy Monte Carlo SSs. there were some limited numbers of Malibus in the early 80s with muscle car-like options available. All were extremely limited numbers except the pony cars.
I really don’t think my age matters here, I’m quite aware what a british sports car is and that ponycars are spawn of the original(most successful) iteration of it, the Mustang. I know quite a bit about old cars, I come here because others do as well and it’s fun to see them pop up on the streets and learn a thing or two I may not have known or considered about them from first hand experiences, or dig up histories.
I think your description of the ponycar is a bit odd, namely making a muscle car handle like a sports car part in the beginning. That would imply the 64-1/2 was a Muscle car out the gate, which it wasn’t, it was a Falcon with a more appealing youth oriented body. Sportscar like if you will, as sports cars of the time still retained the long hood/short deck styling, and the primary structural changes made to the Falcon to create Mustang was pushing the passenger compartment back. Most ponycars to follow, except the 64-69 Barracuda, copied those proportions and that specific aspect was a major trait for the segment. Either way though, they didn’t start out as Muscle cars in any sense of the word since they were by in large everyday cars whose only performance trait was their styling. Once Shelby got involved of course Sports Car handling became more legitimate and then later once 390s, 396s, 400s, 383s, ect made their ways under the hoods they began to become Muscle cars.
Something I always wanted to know.
I can see and understand the difference between an A-body Barracuda (pony car) and a B-body Road Runner (muscle car).
But what about a Barracuda with the 383 engine or a Mustang Boss 302 or Mach 1 ? Still pony cars or do these “promote” to muscle cars thanks to the engine ?
You are trespassing into dangerous territory. Even American car aficionados argue amongst themselves about this very question for their entire lives. There has never been a conclusion to this battle.
P.S. I use the word “trespass” humorously, as if you were to walk into the middle of a field between two opposing armies and ask them what are they arguing about just as they commence firing at each other.
I personally don’t consider the Boss 302 a Muscle car, nor the 67-69 Camaro Z/28s. The former really is the true successor to the original 65/66 Shelby GT350, which itself by 1969 was really just a slightly more tarted up Mach 1, it was developed for and aimed squarely at road racing, rather than the quarter mile (or boulevards) which is the playground of real Muscle cars.
The 383 Barracuda though I do consider a Muscle car though. That engine compromised the car in many many ways in the name of straight line speed and bragging rights, which is the whole mantra of the Muscle car era.
John is correct though, the lines are very debatable. I personally don’t see things black and white very often and this to me is no exception. I think once Big blocks started getting jammed between the narrow shock towers it became hard to call some of them ponycars anymore. Muscle car = big engine in a light body, it doesn’t seem to just limit itself to the definition that it must be big engine intermediate, which would limit them to GM A bodies, Chrysler B bodies and Ford Fairlanes/Torinos. The GTO set the stage of the loaded up big block lightish car, which came to define the segment, the he Mach 1 package on the Mustang actually mimics the GTO formula directly, just on the “compact” Mustang rather than the intermediate Tempest.
Thanks guys.
Then there also was this sub-category “gentleman’s muscle car”…
My favorite from muscle car Peak Era, the 1968-1970 Plymouth GTX with a big & fat 440. In a “gentleman’s” color like this burgundy.
While I’ve seen plenty of 1968-1970 Road Runners and Chargers, or GM and Ford products for that matter, the GTX is the one I like most. And never saw in the metal.
The big-block ponycar as musclecar debate has been going on for decades, with fierce defenders on both sides. Personally, I’d say, “no”. Stuffing a big-block into a ponycar’s engine bay was always an issue on Fords and Mopars. During the smaller sixties’ ponycars, the engine bays weren’t really large enough for a big-block, meaning power accessories were usually unavailable but, more critically, it meant that exhaust systems were more restrictive. This meant that any weight advantage over a big-block intermediate musclecar was negated by a lower horsepower rating. Then, when the seventies’ generation of ponycars got engine bays big enough for the big-blocks, well, they also became just as heavy as the intermediates.
And then there were the GM ponycars. Their engine bays weren’t as restrictive so, if there was ‘one’ big-block ponycar that could beat the intermediate cars, it would be the ’67-’69 SS396 Camaro. The Firebird 400 would be in that category, too, but Pontiac didn’t like the idea of their ponycar being faster than the GTO, so the Quadrajet carburetor in the Firebird actually got a screw that prevented the butterflies from opening all the way.
It’s worth noting that there’s no such musclecar debate with the high-winding small-block engines when they went into compacts like the Nova and Duster. Likewise, A-body Barracudas that had the 340 might be considered a musclecar, too. But the 383 or 440 Barracuda? Not so much.
One more word on those sixties’ big-block Barracudas. The legendary 1968 Hemi-Darts and ‘Cudas super-stock specials came with ‘shorty’ muffflers installed as a perfunctory requirement to make them technically legal, but those mufflers were intended to be quickly removed for drag-strip use. There were other features that made them quite ill-suited for normal street use (they came with a note that said as much) such as no window winders (they were held up with seatbelt straps), no sound deadening, radiused rear wheel wells, ‘body-in-white’ paint, van front seats, and no rear seat.
Ah, yes… the 1972 Chevelle! Long my favorite car from that era – AND the last of the pillarless hardtop mid-sizers from GM.
I never cared for the big-block editions because I would never be able to afford the care & feeding, but nothing looked sharper on the street! I would have to go with the “Heavy Chevy” option if I were to actually buy one, but with my lack of financial resources at that time in my air force life, I’d probably option for the 250 cu. in. six & Powerglide!
To me, as long as it was a hardtop, I could cruise as economically as possible! Looks & style have always been the focus of my automobile love, not power.
Oh, yes – I’ll take one in either red, yellow or metallic brown!
I agree that the 1972 SS454 Chevelle is one of my favorites, but it’s simply due to the engine being detuned for regular, unleaded gas. Was it as fast as the 1970 LS6? Nope, but you could use a ’72 SS454 as a daily-driver. I’m not so sure about that LS6. Those might not have been as finicky and maintenance intensive as, say, a Boss 429 or 426 Hemi, but not as easy to live with as the later, detuned 454, either.
I spotted that vintage Chevelle commercial on Youtube.
Aidan, welcome to the CC Contributor family!!!
I wasn’t much older than you are now when these cars were new. I think we all preferred the 1970 to the ’72 back then…although I’ve come to like the ’71 with its more defined grille and headlight bezels compared to the ’72.
Stephane, cool you dug up that TV spot. I don’t remember this version with the Chevelle but this was part of an entire series…I remember the Caprice/Impala versions. They’d turn up on the NBC Tuesday Night Mystery Movie.
Wow! Aidan I am really impressed with your work. I knew you’d pull it off. Bravo!!
Very nice write up, Aiden. It’s good to see a youth with old school interests. I think more kids today would look up from their iPads and tweeting if they just knew how awesome old (and new) muscle cars are. I hope you get something V8, RWD, and fast when the time comes to get something in the driveway with your name on the title!
BTW, the wheels on this beautiful 72 are probably not original, IMO. The rally wheels look wider than stock and the center caps are the earlier style that was no longer used in 72.
Lane Exact Detail had a stunning 1:18 diecast 1970 Chevelle LS6 model with a tan interior.
Interior.
Under the hood, now that’s some “Exact Detail” !
My first diecast ever was a 1:18 Ertl 1970 Chevelle SS in yellow with black stripes, this was a first run series with not super accurate proportions, no chrome around the windows or fenders, no opening trunklid, dogleg hinges on the doors and hood, and a completely plastic interior with no detail whatsoever. Diecast models sure have come a long way!
I wasn’t aware there was a detailed version of the 70, I might have to get one.
Also on the topic of our subject car I think Maisto made a 71/72 at some point. It was nicer than Ertl’s 70 version in terms of detail but the roof was plastic(simulating vinyl so as to make the casting universal between coupes and convertibles)
Still plenty of (new) 1:18 diecast 1970 Chevelles around. Highly detailed, high quality, thus expensive. Like Acme Diecast / GMP. Based on the old Lane Exact Detail molds, I think.
Here’s one of their 1970 LS6 models.
Aidan, welcome and nice work! Definitely good to see the younger generation keeping up interest in old cars–these Chevelles were one of my favorites too when I was your age. (20 years ago now…wow, time flies.)
I also actually prefer the ’71-’72 to the ’70, but it’s just personal preference for the twin-lamp version rather than quad. A great-looking machine in either guise!
What a classic design. These pre-1973 Chevelles were superb. I loathe almost everything that GM built after 1980, but I can still take my Ford fanboi pride and gush with enthusiasm over a great product – even if it is a Chevrolet.
Now I need to take a shower…. ROFL.
I tooke a ride in a friend’s 1970 LS6 Chevelle SS 454 in 1973, and it remains to this day the single most frightening automobile experience I’ve ever had. The noise, the accleeration, conbined with the lean on corners – I was no so happy to exit a car in my life. I don’t think I ever got in it again.
“never so happy”