Re: GT vs ST rear bulkhead

From: Scott Donnelly (oharajem(at)free.midcoast.com)
Date: Thu Aug 19 1999 - 09:29:37 CDT


Hmmm... An article reprint in the Alpine Gold Portfolio mentioned the soft top
option on the SIII GT though it's the only mention I've come across.
Misinformation apparently.
SD

Kurt Eckert wrote:

> There is a slight angle to the back seat. There was no option to get a soft
> top for the GT that I know of. There would be no place to stow it. I have
> heard of people ruining perfectly good GTs by removing the rear seat and
> installing a soft top.
>
> Kurt
> 63 Series III GT
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-alpines(at)autox.team.net
> [mailto:owner-alpines(at)autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Scott Donnelly
> Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 8:58 AM
> To: Alpine folks
> Subject: GT vs ST rear bulkhead
>
> I'm not particularly attracted to the looks of the Alpine convertible
> top (much prefer the hard top) and am thinking of finishing off the area
> behind the seats and the soft top storage well like the GT style. From
> the few pictures I have seen of GTs, the rear bulkhead seems to be less
> upright (angled back) which appears to eliminate or close the gap on
> what was the storage well. It would also make the area more habitable
> for kids. Yet, I have also read that the soft tops were optional on GTs
> which makes me curious how the soft top was stowed. Is there in fact a
> difference in the rear bulkhead position?
> Scott Donnelly
> SV



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Sep 05 2000 - 11:01:10 CDT