A couple of weeks ago I posted a bunch of pictures from the storage lot that I use for my trailer. Several of the comments seemed to ask for more, so as your humble and ever-so-faithful servant, I made the trek back to document what I had skipped over previously. I even gained access to one of the buildings and discovered some treasures within. It’s hot out, so without further ado, let’s get going.
This late model Toyota Dolphin camper is in remarkably good condition. While I still notice the older models sort of regularly, these newer ones seem to be seen less often. This seems to be one of the larger models and actually still looks fairly contemporary today.
Not so this Dodge, which looks a little rougher around the edges. The whole top assembly appears to be fiberglass and that is an immense A/C unit up on top of it. The sunshade looks like it has an image of a current Challenger on it, so at least the owner is keeping up the “Mopar or No Car” mantra.
I found out that this Chevy is the “lot truck” that the attendant uses to move trailers around when needed. It fired right up and sounded in good fettle, these seem to be becoming quite desirable trucks and while it certainly could use some cosmetic work, mechanically it seems sound.
This lot doesn’t just have old iron, there is also newer stuff, although I am not familiar enough with RV’s to date them correctly. While newer I believe this is still maybe early 90’s at best. Titled in South Dakota I am not sure why it is being stored down here. Once they reach this size, they are more accurately known as “coaches” but I am not sure what they would be powered with.
Last time we seemed to have a preponderance of Ford products, however here is a Roadtrek 210 on an extended body Chevy Van 30-series chassis. Being the heavy-duty version it is probably more suited to a camper conversion than the old Toyota trucks were, what with their problematic dually rear axles. Roadtrek is still in business and is generally considered to build a fine conversion.
And the Chevrolet’s keep on coming, another pickup filled with equipment but a 2009 registration.
This cutaway camper is a Mobile Traveler, also on a Chevy Van chassis. I do not believe Mobile Traveler is still in business and this one appears to be from the late 1970’s.
Another Chevy Van, this time a 20-series. For many years I loathed the styling of these, nowadays I am starting to like them more and more.
More than these Econoline’s anyway. I’ve flip-flopped Ford vs. Chevy for this particular era. That graphics package does it absolutely no favors nowadays but back in the early 1980’s I’m sure it was just the thing to be driving while wearing Dolphin shorts and a Members Only jacket.
I know Jason Shafer would love this thing if he were about a decade older than he actually is, I recall last time he was practically begging for more info and pictures on these types of vehicles. It would have certainly provided more comfort on the side of the road than his old Galaxie did. Just think, he could have been enjoying old Miami Vice episodes on the built in VHS while sipping an a Bartles&Jaymes wine cooler until the tow truck showed up.
TranStar is another brand that I have not seen around as of late, this looks like another fiberglass conversion on a heavy duty platform. I’ve wondered if these would or could look any more modern if the graphics were removed and the whole thing just repainted in a solid color. Or black with a red diagonal stripe and make it the A-team’s RV.
Here’s just the thing for cross-continent touring. A Challenger coach. I believe this a 1971 MCI but I know that at least Paul can give us much more detail. The destination tag reads “Niner” which is a local mountain bike company so it may be theirs.
This was the largest vehicle that is currently being stored here. And this one sports the mother of all luggage racks as well.
Here is something a lot smaller, an early 40-series Toyota Land Cruiser with tow bar and jerry cans for extra fuel. These are still somewhat plentiful, but usually not with hubcaps and the skinny tires.
Finally we have arrived at the most interesting vehicle here, a Chevy bus that has mated with a Dodge A100 van. The pictures pretty much say it all.
I did find it interesting that they chose to cut the Dodge body within the headlight housing, a more natural cutline would seem to be just above that.
Of course, around back the builder went for a more rustic theme, even including a rear gunner perch with shingled roof.
Across the aisle last time I ignored the Malibu wagon. Once ubiquitous, now rarely seen, this one seems in acceptable condition with the horizontal surface rust often seen in relatively dry but sun scorched parts of the country.
I know you guys can tell the exact year and probably the engine based on the grille and hupcaps, and I’m sure at least one of you used to own one as well. All four hubcaps are still attached and the whitewalls look in good condition as well. I wonder what the story behind this one is.
Just behind the Malibu is this solid hunk of iron that I believe to be a 1956 GMC 100 pickup. This one also has what a commenter on the previous post believed to be the original Colorado historic plates.
This is a much newer Chevrolet truck from the late 80’s, 1988 perhaps?. Aside from the generous helping of patina, it still looks ready to go to work.
Last time we had a sad little Mercedes 190E, this time we have this equally sad E30 BMW. I want to say it’s an early 318i, but could just as easily be a 325e, it has the little spoiler on the back but I can’t tell if that was added on or not.
The wheels are aftermarket and without wipers this critter is not going very far around here given our summer afternoon monsoons. This one even seems to have a tanline, it looks like a bra (bikini top?) protected the front end to some degree from the massive sunburn that the rest of the hood has.
Alright, I know this one but just can’t place it. I was raised in 1980’s California, these were not plentiful there anymore by that time so forgive me. Tell us, what is it? The grille screams Chevrolet to me but without identifiers I have no idea.
Here’s a very nice old Dodge Club Cab (200-series?) with a camper on top. This one appears to be four wheel drive and I love the green color, it goes very well with the license plate. By the way, you guys were right, I have been regretting giving up the Dodge Ram truck that came with the foreclosed house I got a few years ago…I could have stored it here, it would have fit right in.
Remember the yellow Corvette from the previous post? Well, here is the other one I alluded to back then. I have no idea what the appeal of keeping this cab section would be. The rear bodywork was literally torn away. I assume that the suspension inside is from the front of this car, I see at least one yellow Bilstein shock.
Here is a closer look at the trailer full of frames beyond what’s left of the Corvette. Any guesses?
Another Dodge Sportsman RV, again in period white with orange/brown/burnt umber color scheme. I’m sure this was someone’s pride and joy at some point, I wonder how long it was been here.
Here’s a 1968 Dodge D100, it appears to be a longbed, yet another truck with the bed being used as outdoor storage. I see a bench seat in the back as well as a grille. What vehicle does that grille belong to?
A regular cab short bed Chevy from the mid-80’s. Hard to believe that this configuration was once so common. How did it take so long for the manufacturers to see the benefits of the double cab?
Of course as soon as I write that here it is, the crewcab equivalent. I really did forget I shot this until I clicked to literally the next picture I shot after writing the previous sentence. A Custom Deluxe 20-series, this is the 30-year old equivalent of what nowadays seems to be all over the place, a rarity back then purchased mostly by municipal fleets as opposed to the general populace.
Two weeks ago we saw two Firebirds, well, here is a third hiding behind a shed. It looks to have been pieced together from several donors, if for sale, it would undoubtedly be listed as “99% complete”
Right behind the Firebird is a nice Ford flatbed. The tall weeds precluded me from venturing any closer. The searchlight on the A-pillar is interesting though and I like the grille a lot.
Someone asked how large the lot is. This picture is from one of the ends of the lot (standing just in front of the Crewcab Chevy) and you can see the other end in the distance.
This picture is the other dimension, I am standing near the Corvette midsection and looking at the administration trailer which is right by the front gate. I am terrible at judging distances so this is as good as it gets.
Yes, I got into one of the buildings! (I got permission, don’t worry). This Ford F-100 Ranger is in great condition down to the original hubcaps and aftermarket but nicely matching topper.
I believe this is a 1976 Oldsmobile Toronado. Well, I know it’s a Toronado, I think it’s from ’76. Sorry about the shaky shot. No, I was not overcome with emotion and swooning over it.
I did get very excited for all of you Broughamistas out there when I saw the interior. Buttons. Velour. Patterns. Brown. Pillowtop. I think this one ticks all of the boxes. And the condition of the interior is absolutely remarkable. I mean, I get the Brougham fetish but let’s be honest, for most of our regular viewers it is difficult to imagine the appeal. Seeing one that is showroom fresh does wonders to help one understand it and rekindle the faith.
This one’s a local, having been sold by Reynolds Olds right here in Fort Collins. They aren’t around anymore (Reynolds I mean), but this car appears to be driven regularly and has just gotten its historic registration renewed to 2020 (5-year cycle for those).
For the Ford lovers here is a nicely preserved 1966 Mustang. I think I can see a 289 marker on the front fender. I’m not sure why the trunk lid appears to be bowing a bit, there didn’t seem to be any obvious damage.
Well, that’s pretty much everything. There were a few more rusted hulks in the deep weeds and I didn’t get into the boats or the other storage sheds (this time, ha!) but I hope you enjoyed our second lap around the old storage lot as much as the first one.
A Toyota Chinook/Dolphin is on my bucket list, for certain.
You will see a plethora of RVs registered in South Dakota. Why? Residency laws are less restrictive and registration is much less expensive. Here’s an article on that.
http://www.interstellarorchard.com/2012/11/12/setting-up-south-dakota-residency-for-rvers-1/
The Chevy hardtop is a 1965 Impala.
I think what is throwing me off is the character line, specifically the way it turns straight down at the front of the front fender. Usually the character line doesn’t stop, i.e. it continues forward to the grille. All the 1965 Impalas I looked up on Google seem to not have the downturn at the front.
Edit: Actually I am sure it is a 1966 now, thanks to r_henry’s comment below.
Cripes! Nobody can identify a ’66 Chevy without help??? Geez… when I was 6 I could tell a ’66 Impala from a ’66 Bel Air at night from a quarter of a mile away… damn, I am getting old…
Psst:…It’s never polite to disparage volunteer contributors!
I’m going with 66 Impala…
I vote with Twalton – 66 for sure.
The funny thing is, there was a ’66 Impala article posted here just a week ago, in which both the article and its discussion thread extensively covered the styling differences between the ’65 (first year of the styling package) and ’66, and which one people liked better.
It’s definitely an Impala, because that was the only full-size ’66 Chevy model whose two-door had this semi-fastback roofline. The Biscayne and Bel Air two-doors were pillared sedans with a more squared-off roofline, while the new Caprice two-door was a formal-roofed hardtop.
Also, since I don’t think anyone has commented on it yet, the Malibu wagon is somewhere between a 1978 (first year of the downsized A-bodies) and a 1981 (last year for dual headlights; the 1982-83 models have quads). I can’t narrow it down any further than that; maybe someone else can.
Great pics- this was just the thing for me to read over lunch! So many interesting vehicles – I’d be worried driving that Chevy school bus under some railroad crossings with low height clearance, but it would make for a spacious homespun camper. The Roadtreck 210 would be more practical. +1 for the broughamtastic interior of the Olds Toronado : )
My first thought was 11’8″.com…
Yep! Would love to see this one go down there!
The camper shell on the really nice red/white Ford pick up is actually the rather rare factory option. You can tell by the shape, the splash of color along the front/bottom edge, and the emblem on the front side edge. Wow!
Yup I was going to mention that it was the aftermarket from the factory option. I’m forgetting who made them for Ford but it was one of the aftermarket companies but that 4 seasons badge pegs it as the one available from Ford along with the paint job.
Thanks Jim. Nothing as interesting as a walk through a storage yard…or a wrecking yard. The old bus with the van on top? Well, when kids from your grandparent’s generation were in their early 20’s in the 1960’s, they were likely in the back of one of these smoking weed, listening to The Beatles, and engaging in Free Love.
You are right, that is a Chevy. 1966 Impala. Its a classic worth knowing, read up!
The “bowed” decklid on the Mustang is a perfect example of mid-60’s build quality. Nearly all American cars were built like that. I am thankful for the Germans and the Japanese. Without them, we would all be driving $30,000 Pintos with similar build quality right now. Competition is a good thing!
You give me too much credit, I’m older than you think. It would have been my parents that were in their 20’s in the 60’s in the back of the bus. I was born in 1969. Thanks re: the Impala! – I had meant that when I was a teen in the 80’s SoCal was filled with imports, not nearly as many domestics as other places.
Again, thanks for the contribution. No intention to sound superior (or old), sorry. We are within 24 months of each other.
ah, no worries, thanks for your contribution as well!
Yes certainly that truck lid on the Mustang show how “bad” quality was in the 60’s. Certainly that car is exactly as it came from the factory and has never been wrecked, repaired, rusted, repaired, and don again in the last 50 years.
That particular flaw is quite common on early Mustangs. I have a 1968 example that was the same way…before I had the decklid modified to fit properly.
No it is not a common flaw from when they left the factory.
The coomon flaw was college kids trying to force the trunk lid shut after jamming too much crap into the car’s too-small trunk. “Dude, these speakers are like 1/4 inch too tall – oh wait, never mind, I got it shut.”
Regarding that deck lid on the Mustang:
Fitment of body panels continues to be an issue for some auto manufactures. Just recently I looked over at aTesla traveling along the 101 freeway (in Oxnard, CA) next to me. Click on image provided. The rear deck (trunk/hatch) lid aligns pefectly on the left side, but very poorly on the right side (note the lower edge of the tailights). One would think that a very expensive car like a Tesla would have better build quality, but this image indicates such is not the case.
My two Mazdas have very uniform panel and door fitment all around. So did my el-cheapo Kia Forte. As you observe cars on the road or at curbside, keep an eye out for the gaps between panels and doors–they should be uniform along the entire perimeter. You will see some are excellent, others quite poor.
Panel fit issues drive me nuts. The other thing that irritates me is paint issues. I see GM cars with blotchy, mottled factory paint, especially pearl whites and silvers. I also see collision repairs that are a shade or two darker than the rest of the vehicle…blend lines in mid-panel jump out at me too. I realize that some colors are tough to match, but at least try.
2000s era Ford trucks with two tone paint had a bad tendency for the tape stripes covering where the colors met to be crooked…not just misaligned between the bed and cab, but crooked on the doors.
Indeed. Orange peel is visible on most new cars it seems. Once one develops an eye for such things, it is impossible to un-see it!
Not a fan of those Chevy vans – they look ok, I just never liked driving them. The Ford is better, except that it is probably a lowly 302 mated to an AOD, which ruins it for me. Count me as a Dodge B series guy if I have to do a van of the 80s.
The bus with the Dodge A-100 upper deck – just wow. Homemade Scenicruiser with a Beverly Hillbillies flourish out back. “Jethro, slap some paint on the back of the rolling house.”
When in college in the 1980’s, I worked part-time in the campus garage–I helped take care of all the vans, buses, trucks, lawnmowers, etc. used on campus. We had long chassis vans from all three makers. I felt the Fords were best built, and dynamite with the 460, 351s were okay. The Chevies with the 350s ran great, but front suspension was not as robust as Ford’s–replaced bushings and tie rod ends frequently. The Dodges had good power from the 360 engines, and the rear A/C was coldest. The track team always requested the Dodges because the pole vaults would fit inside diagonally–the other vans weren’t quite as long inside.
I hated driving those Chevy vans as they seemed to be designed for drivers with child-sized feet. I’m 6’3″ with wear 10 1/2 wide shoes and there’s simply no room at all for my feet in one of them, and the contemporary Dodge vans have the same issue. The only vans with worse foot room were the Ford pugnosed vans of late ’67 to early ’75.
Used to drive a ’93 GMC Vandura myself, same design since, what, 70s? so I hear you on the foot space. With the cab sitting right on top of… everything, I guess, in the front, they had to concede space for mechanical bits. The driver at least got more width than the passenger side, but the wheel well was brutal. I’m 5’6″ on a good day, and could never get my left foot comfortable.
Perhaps the most telling difference between the E-Series and the G-vans was how they felt after years of hard use. Back in my telecom days (I worked for a major infrastructure manufacturer) we had a periodically rotating fleet of vans that went out primarily to cell sites under construction. When I first went out into the field in 1997 our group had a mix of E-Series and G-vans. The Econolines were with one exception newer models (’95-’97) while the G-vans were of 1989-90 vintage.
The one older Econoline was a 1990 model which I spent quite a bit of time in. Like our G-vans it had been driven hard but regularly maintained. All things being equal the G-vans just seemed like they were made of thinner sheetmetal and squeaked and rattled considerably more than the Ford.
Can’t say if it was the assembly quality (the G-vans were built in Lordstown during the bad old days) or just the basic design (mechanically bulletproof but everything else seemed cheap). Bottom line was that the Ford was IMHO vastly superior.
The Fords had the advantage of a full frame while the GM were unibody and suffered greatly because of it. There is a reason that GM eventually went to body on frame construction for their vans too.
Nice tour at lunch time!
That bus is an MCI 7, their first 40 footer, and used extensively by Greyhound to replace the Scenicruiser. Impressive luggage rack!
–They may have taken Scenicruiser routes, but there is no way to actually REPLACE a Scenicruiser. For all their mechanical foibles, there is nothing with the sheer presence of a Scenicruiser (or the acrid smell of 8-71 screamin Jimmy exhaust!)
Jim, thanks for renewing my feelings about conversion vans. My having a conversion van is like having a case of the clap; there is no age I can fathom from which I can fully appreciate it. Plus, with having the clap, medication can usually clear it up. Medication cannot eradicate a case of conversion van ownership.
Standing on the side of the road waiting for a tow truck is always a good time to contemplate one’s life. I heartily recommend everyone doing it at least once. However, if I were in true Miami Vice (or Hawaii Five-O or even Beverly Hillbillies) mode, I would have had to hike to the nearest pay phone before walking back for my Bartles & Jaymes.
I need to go do this sometime! This is way more fun than any museum.
The Malibu wagon is a 1979 model.
Beat me to it. 1979 indeed, Classic trim level. My ’79 (standard) has the same hubcaps, and the ’82 Classic I used to own was the same paint color with very similar surface rust. Fun fact–the passenger-side rear view mirror was an extra cost option, mine doesn’t have one. It’s also, in my experience, pretty rare to see one with dual mirrors that aren’t the “sport mirror” option.
Thanks for further photos of the two-story bus–that thing is kind of mind-blowing.
I was all set to claim the Dodge D100 pickup until the end:
Mustang with a 289? Sign me up!
Thanks for the articles, really enjoyed seeing these vehicles.
Yeah, pretty decent size place! I would love to own that ’56 GMC and I kind of like that flatbed Ford. Hmm.. sounds like a song!
I love the full size Challenger coach and that would be great for cross continent motoring, the Malibu is catching my eye and a local high school kid had one very similar this past year with dual pipes poking out under the rear bumper. There is hope for the kids yet!
Conversion vans are growing on me – maybe because there are times when I’d like to pilot my living room down the road…
Regarding the stack of frames the one on top is a Disco Vette. Gas tank and energy absorbers for the rear impact bar give that one away. You can also almost make out the front mount for the control arm.
It is sitting on a 1/2 ton 4×4 GM chassis from the late 80’s or 90’s. The tow hooks are definite giveaways as is the general design of the front suspension and the 6 wheel studs.
A neighbor has a dolphin just like that
Chrysler removed its ‘toilet seat’ in ’61, but it grew back on this one!
I wanted a conversion van. Bought a 59 chevy model 26′ school bus instead. Stuck a 350 up front and it would pull tree stumps. Brakes and tires were tough to keep going though and fuel economy was nonexistent. Sold it. Still think a conversion van would be neat but no more big buses. The short bus built on a van might have been better for me. Coulda, woulda, shoulda, I dunno. Probably won’t do anything now. Maybe hang a teardrop on the back of my 4runner.
What about that ’60 Plymouth and ’61 Chrysler lurking in the background?
+1
I think we covered those in part 1 a couple of weeks ago. If you missed it here is your lunchtime reading for tomorrow 🙂
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/storage-lot-classics-waiting-for-the-day/
Thanks for the tour Jim. I have many memories of seeing that model of MCI bus throughout Eastern Ontario and Quebec, as operated by Voyageur Colonial Bus Lines in the early to mid 70s.
Excellent tour Jim, the perfect accompaniment to my lunch!
Just think, he could have been enjoying old Miami Vice episodes on the built in VHS while sipping an a Bartles&Jaymes wine cooler until the tow truck showed up
Sound like good times to me! Too bad it won’t get to the 88 MPH threshold for time travel.
The Chevy bus / Dodge van is my personal favorite (in the sense of being the weirdest thing in the lot, not the one I would like to take home). Really makes me curious about the thought process that led to its creation. I would really like to see the inside of that thing to try and figure out what’s going on. I assume the van part is some sort of loft bedroom?
That wart on top of the Dodge isn’t a ginormous a/c; it’s a storage bin.
Yep.
I believe they were called “X-cargo” and had a picture of a happy snail.
Ah, I remember the X-Cargo. I always liked the snail decal as a kid and came to appreciate the pun a little later.
Wow ~ lots and lots of cool classics (or old junk) there .
.
The Chevy Bus is a ’60 or ’61 , I remember hippies adding VW Beetle or VW Vans to the roof of old School buses , this one is unique and IMO very cool .
.
The GMC ” Task Force ” truck , did it have a Hydromatic tranny ? many did .
.
Hard to choose one to like/want the most .
.
-Nate
Where is the storage lot located?