Here’s country singer Maggie Baugh:







Here’s country singer Maggie Baugh:







Last Saturday I posted a link to a discussion on classic car prices and the market thereof, and threatened promised a followup post. Here it is.
Right off, I’m going to suggest that anyone who’s happy with their 1979 Ford Bronco truck and can’t see the need for even having a discussion which features luxury classic car collecting may feel free not to comment. This post is not for you.
Let me start this off by looking at an anomaly: the BMW 507 from the late 1950s.

As anyone should know, this was BMW’s competitor to the Mercedes 300 Gullwing, in that it had a 3.2-liter V8 inside a lightweight chassis. It nearly bankrupted BMW back then because the market wasn’t willing to spend what amounted to a king’s ransom back then on a car that wasn’t a Gullwing, or (in the U.S.) a similarly-powered Corvette that cost a lot less.
It’s a great pity, because while BMW has pretty much always produced “handsome” cars (as opposed to drop-dead gorgeous ones), many people thought this was a beauty. Not enough people thought that, of course, which is why hardly any 507s were ever produced, and were bought by only the very wealthy (like Elvis Presley).
Nowadays, of course, it’s a whole ‘nother story, which is why the little thing pictured above sold earlier this year for just over $2 million.
Let me change course for a moment, while I talk about the Porsche 356.

Unlike the 507, Porsche made a zillion of the various sporty 356 models, because they were relatively inexpensive and for the time quite reliable, albeit underpowered. Because they were inexpensive, not much care was devoted to their upkeep, so they became somewhat scarce through pure attrition. Then in the mid-2010s people started to remember the 356 with great fondness, and a renewed interest followed, which is why the above-pictured 1958 356 (only two owners, 84,000 original miles, restored but not modified) is currently for sale for around $400k.
Well, that’s just silly, say a couple of people, which is why you can nowadays get a replica of the 356 — looking exactly like the original, down to the badges — with a fiberglass body and a better-than-the-original VW or Subaru engine with better efficiency, reliability and performance.

Cost: just over $70k.
Now to the puristi, of course, this is an anathema: it’s not a “real” Porsche, etc. etc. and I can see their point.
But what if you just want to drive a classic, beautiful car that is in good running order, will not cost you an arm and a leg to maintain and looks brand-new?
In other words, you want to drive the shape of the thing, and all the other stuff is irrelevant because of the steep cost of parts, service and so on.
It’s not too dissimilar with fine art, for example, where a decent print of a Monet — in acrylic rather than oil — can cost you mere hundreds, as opposed to the millions demanded for an original Claude. And honestly, to the non-art history major, it’s just as pretty hanging on your wall.
Still another example is that of the Land Rover Defender. The old joke about them is that if you want to go into the bush, you take a Land Rover; but if you want to come back out of the bush, you take a Toyota Land Cruiser.
The chronic unreliability of the Defender is so legendary that it’s a joke in and of itself. (In the UK, Land Rover drivers acknowledge the oncoming Land Rover drivers by flicking their headlights: a rueful admission, as the story goes, that yeah, I’m also an idiot.)
Nevertheless, many, many people love the Land Rover (I’m one of them), but are frightened off from buying one because they want to own a truck which doesn’t break down every hundred miles, has headlights and windshield wipers that only occasionally work, isn’t plagued by the usual
, and won’t fall apart with rust.
So why not get a truck that looks like a Land Rover Defender, but has a galvanized steel chassis, reliable electricals, and is powered not by the cranky and underpowered original Rover engine but by a nice modern Cadillac 5.3-liter V8?


Cost of the above monster: just over $100k — pretty much in line with modern-day Defenders — and the mileage on the engine is in the hundreds, not thousands. (Excuse me for a moment while I wipe off the drool.)
In other words, “driving the shape” shouldn’t cost you an arm and a leg, because you’re not driving the all-original heritage, just its appearance.
Which brings me back to the BMW 507.
There’s no industry around to make replicas of the 507, but some guys did make one — and a purdy lil’ thang it is too — with a handmade aluminum body, dropped onto an original BMW 502 chassis and powered by an original 5.2-liter V8, putting out about 150hp.


The thing is, though, that it’s not a replica, but an attempt to re-create the original. Hence its price: $540k.
The dealership selling this idiocy is in Dubai, which figures. Maybe some Arab oil sheikh will be tempted into splashing the cash for it.
Me, even if I won a mega-lottery? Never in a million years. I love the 507’s shape, but that’s all I’m interested in driving. This little luxury plaything? Nope, no matter how beautiful.
Oh, and in terms of the market: people who would be enamored of the BMW 507 are in my age bracket — i.e. not much longer for the world, so what you’re left with are people who look on luxury cars purely as an investment. And I suspect that the market for that era of luxury cars is going to disappear, just as the market for pre-WWII cars has also dipped precipitously as their nostalgia effect dies with the owners thereof. Even the stratospheric prices for Mercedes Gullwings is softening, or else it’s taking a lot longer to sell them.
I myself would be perfectly happy to own that 356 replica and the Defender restomod. I’m only interested in shapes; the rest is irrelevant.
Well, some time has passed in the disposal of The Layabout Sailor’s estate guns, and nothing has changed since this post. In other words, there are a couple-three rifles are still available.
Let’s start with my favorite, the Norwegian Krag chambered in 6.5x55mm.

As I mentioned earlier, the carbine has been sporterized because its original stock was literally falling apart (like, giving the unwary shooter splinters when handled). As such, it has little collector value because those old boys want it original.
But as a hunting rifle? Hoo baby. If I were younger and still hunting, you wouldn’t be seeing it here because I’d have kept it for myself. I’ve fired the rifle myself before, back when Jim and I were doing one of our many range visits together, and it’s a honey. Look, it’s not really a long-range (400+ yards) gun, because few carbines are. But if I were doing dense-brush hunting for hogs, or deep-woods hunting for whitetails or even black bears, I would take this Krag ahead of any other rifle. And I mean that.
As for its action:

Butter-smooth, of course, and that Krag loading tray ditto. None of that wrestling a stripper-clip or thumbing individual cartridges down into a stiffly-sprung magazine, no siree; throw five cartridges in the tray, snap it closed and the gun will sort it out for you.
This Krag is a proper Norwegian issue (see the arsenal proof stamps) and was made in 1908.

Honestly? I love this little carbine so much that if I had the money, I’d just buy it from the estate myself, despite my having quit hunting. It’s that nice a gun. But I don’t, so I can’t (more’s the pity).
Now here’s the deal.
I want to raffle this off to you, my Loyal Readers. There is a reserve price of $500 that must be reached first, but to make it really easy, I’m asking for a ticket price of only $10 (no limit on purchase quantity). So if I get fifty entries (assuming only one ticket per Reader), it’ll be done and dusted — I’ll do the draw immediately, notify the winner and ship it off to your FFL. Shipping is on me.
Now ask yourself the question: Would I like the chance to own a sweetie like this for only $10? (That’s the current cost of one McDonald Meal Deal, go figure.)
Zelle to [email protected]; Venmo to @Kim-Dutoit-3. (I don’t do PayPal anymore, sorry.)
And paper checks to the usual Sooper-Seekrit address:
6009 W. Parker Rd
Ste. 149-141
Plano TX 75093
Do it for me, do it for Jim’s Widow Irish, but most of all, do it for yourself. You will not regret it.
From The Englishman:
“Why do the Yanks have a No Kings Day when they’ve not had a king for centuries? It’s like the French protesting against soap.”

![]()

Ah, the good old days when we could unashamedly use !BOOBS! to sell products. But now:
![]()
![]()
...Florida, Texas brace for impact of still more Yankees. FFS. Still… okay, quit hogging the popcorn, y’all.
![]()
...actually, the opposite: the deportations aren’t unpopular, and everyone who’s MAGA is united behind them. Other than that, it’s quite true.
#MSNBC
![]()
...funny, we were just about to say the same about the Democrats.
Some International News:
![]()
...remember, it’s all part of The Great Cultural Assimilation Project©.
![]()
...like we care what the fence-sitting, speed-hating chocolate makers do.
![]()
...just to remind everyone: it took until 1975 for Seffrica to get broadcast television.
In the Lawn Ordure Files:
![]()
...what pisses me off is that he actually got two sentences of 18 years for each offense, but the asshole judge decreed that they be served concurrently instead of consecutively.
#JudicialBullshit
![]()
...and still no mention of weekly floggings, castration or flaying.
In Business News:
![]()
...that just gives ol’ Elon more reserve stock for his Mars colonization plans.

...says the retail organization who pretty much caused the whole “off-shore production” activity. I’ll believe this bullshit statement when 80% of Walmart merchandise is made in the U.S.
#NeverGonnaHappen
From the Dept. of Education:
![]()
...she was saving her vag for the highschoolers’ trip, no doubt.
And in the usual ![]()

And speaking of that lot, as we drive headlong down
:
![]()
...first thought: because she’s an attention-seeking slut, like the entire Kardashian coven? I report, you decide:


Amazing; after all that surgery and such, she’s still less attractive than the average Moscow street prostitute.
#NoManShould
Last week I ranted about this “Global Emissions Tax” nonsense emanating from the U.N., and it is with great glee that I see that God-Emperor (not King) Trump has nipped that issue in the bud:
A global tax on shipping emissions won’t take effect after pressure from the Trump administration to abandon the climate activist-fueled proposal.
The International Maritime Organization had been set to vote on Friday on adopting a global carbon tax aimed at pushing the shipping industry to stop using fossil fuels. But that vote did not happen after President Donald Trump on Thursday called for other countries to oppose the tax, saying that the United States would not “tolerate” or “adhere” to the measure.
From what I can understand, Trump threatened the voting nations with stuff like trade embargoes and tariffs if they voted in support of the thing, whereupon they said “Yes, Massa” and did what he told them to do.
However, let’s not crack open the champagne just yet:
Instead, the International Maritime Organization, an agency of the United Nations that regulates shipping, moved Friday to postpone the vote on the tax for a year.
“Now you have one year, you will continue to work on several aspects of these amendments,” said Arsenio Dominguez, the secretary general of the International Maritime Organization. “You have one year to negotiate and talk and come to consensus.”
So next year, it’ll come up for a vote again, and again we’re going to have to rap their nose with a rolled-up newspaper.
I have a simple suggestion to end this thing, forever. Tell the United Nations that if they ever try to impose a global tax system on the world (and on us, of course), this action will automatically trigger the United States’s immediate withdrawal from the UN, and the expulsion of the UN organization in toto from the United States.
Then get Congress to pass a law to enable the action. Shouldn’t be that difficult, even with the expected opposition from federal judges.
Message to the UN: We don’t do taxes.
End of story.