My post wasn't meant to be angry or malicious. I'm sorry if you felt that way.
I posted because i am confused.
Maybe i can clarify why i posted.
Ellos the original poster said the window pillars are present when the window is down.
A picture was posted (maybe this is where i got confused) of a 66' that had no window pillars. Maybe I assumed this is the original car he is talking about.
I posted that the picture had no widow pillars.
Geeteeoh responded to my post it isn't a window pillar.
I am still confused.
I posted a responce from my phone i don't see it posted here, so i will refer to my "fluent " remark.
My Avatar is me in 1981, My brother and I have owned Collectively 64, 65, 67, 68. and the last one Pontiac failed on the ventura body.
I have always had a GTO in my garage since 1974, i am now 61 and have 3 in multiply stages of restoration now.
I DO NOT in anyway claim to be an expert. But i am fluent. sorry if i came out cocky, it wasn't my intent.
And that "fluent" is mainly 65's.
With posting, black & white, they lack emotion, feeling or even tones, and your post sounded arrogant, maybe even a little condescending. This is why we use the selection of "Smilies" to enhance some of the responses so we know where you are coming from. You could have been chuckling when you wrote your response and it was all in the nature of fun, but how do we know?
Your statement, "I know .....Ello posted, the car HAS the window frame on the door when the window is down" does come off poorly with the intro "I know" and adding to that the capitalization of "HAS" which comes across as loud. Adding the segment of "...." makes me believe you were injecting "what the F" in there but left it out so we could all fill in the blank - tell me I am wrong. Now if you had written a response such as, "I know
, I was just pointing out that the photo shows the window down without any post, so it would be a hard top", my response to you would have not taken place. So keep in mind how you say things in type as it may not be well received as written and you may get a response that you had not intended.
One of the reasons I hate texting and rarely do it.
If you read the first post, you would understand that the poster does not have clue as to what he has inherited - thus his confusion in the body style types. We who grew up with these old cars know the differences from sight, and can tell you what year it is whether it is Pontiac, Chevy, Plymouth, Ford, etc.. His confusion is like mine today when I look at contemporary cars and haven't a clue as to make or model because they all share the same shape with very little character to differentiate one from another unless you really stare hard or place them side by side - not so the "older" cars.
You are going to find many who have not a clue on what they have or what they are looking at or what it is they need to do to fix/change something. They may be enthusiast who did not live through the era some of did when we owned, drove, and worked on them as our everyday rides and they had no connection with the word "collectible." So that has to be taken into consideration.