V series 'Sandman'

[SMQQTH]

Yes you did. In your very first post at the end of your third sentence.

No I never asked! I know its a panel van! Look at the things. Hard pressed to say it looks like anything else!

And before you say its a ute with a canopy have a look at any panel van holden have ever released... all based off the utility format.

Um, no. Mine was a Kingswood base and a ute at that, but thanks for asking....

Sorry didn't ask that either... yes yes yes they were based off what ever the dealer fitted the Sandman pack to in MOST cases. Before you start saying something along the lines of mine a Brisbane build xu3 xx7 I don't care!

With that comment I was merely making the point that, hey 'Sandmans' where not the top of the line product to start with. They started life as an ordinary ute or van which than coped the holden option at the time called 'Sandman Pack'. With Exceptions...

You asked the question on a BB devoted to an Aussie classic and the result surprises you (and written sooooo well too - try these two next time - "thought process")? Why? Or is it that it was your intention all along to get a rise out of some, which is the more than likely reason you decided to play sciolist in the first place and now have placed a flouncy post having a go at everyone who seems to have a contrary opinion to yours....

Smell the roses mate and be aware that there is the odd person here who could see what you were really trying to do. In the mean time.... Grow-up.

Maybe I was trying to promote the fact Holden have dubbed these as Sandmans and hey maybe a web site called my sandman should recognize these as Sandmans. Maybe give the people that own these modern Sandmans some where to come hang out and contribute to the forums.

Clearly not everyone one likes this idea.

As for growing up... mate think I'm there.

The problem with forums or anything bashed into text on a public place is that things can be taken the wrong way. Clearly you have taken what I have started negatively. When in fact I was trying to make the point that yes they are Sandmans and maybe there is a lot of people out there that have never been shown the proof behind why they are regarded as Sandmans.

It failed as no one wanted a ute with a canopy on it.

Some people did mate and lots more still do or they would not be producing the panel van roof any more.

So if future judge type people want to call a V series ute with a canopy a Sandman then they will also have to call H series utes with canopies panel vans.

No not a panel van unless It one looks like a panel van.

However, who cares what a judge reckons anyway? Cars are restored to be enjoyed by all, if a judge likes it then thats a bonus.

100% agree with you there!


Regards Jon

[HK1837]

Since the original question was what do we feel about the Sandman canopied utes i'll stick with my original comments, and below stay with observations and facts.

No I never asked! I know its a panel van! Look at the things. Hard pressed to say it looks like anything else!

And before you say its a ute with a canopy have a look at any panel van holden have ever released... all based off the utility format.

Looks like a panel van. But isn't built by GMH as a panel van. It is a ute with a canopy. The brochure says so. The brochure calls the canopy a Sandman (conversion), not the vehicle it is fitted to. I see this as the same as cutting the roof off a 6cyl 3spd HZ van, and putting a van turret on it and calling it a Sandman!

Sorry didn't ask that either... yes yes yes they were based off what ever the dealer fitted the Sandman pack to in MOST cases. Before you start saying something along the lines of mine a Brisbane build xu3 xx7 I don't care!

Dealers had little to do with Sandmans, they were GMH built in the 4 x assembly plants of the day. The only dealer involvement was to fit the optional stripes on HQ-HJ, or to fit Nasco/GMP&A accessories of the day, which co-incidentally is what HBD is for these and the canopy is a dealer fitted accessory just like HQ-HZ mudflaps or other such accessories. I'm not sure why people still hang their hat on Brisbane built Sandmans being special in some way. HQ GTS or SS owners certainly don't feel that way about their cars built in plants outside of Brisbane!

With that comment I was merely making the point that, hey 'Sandmans' where not the top of the line product to start with. They started life as an ordinary ute or van which than coped the holden option at the time called 'Sandman Pack'. With Exceptions...

True, a Sandman wasn't a top of the line product, but was never intended to be. Just like an SSV ute in modern times isn't - that goes to a Calais as the top of the line Holden or the top of the line Holden Motor Company vehicle the Statesman Caprice.
No Sandman ever started life as a normal ute or van though, except maybe the very first concept vehicle(s) done in styling. They were all started from details on a production broadcast sheet with inventory parts allocated off the rolling schedule intended for each particular vehicle. Some of those parts (called feature changes or component options depending upon what they are) are unique to Sandman that could not be optioned on other utes and vans, and this made the Sandmans unique and distinguishable from early on in production. Examples: console brackets on HQ and HJ, lack of side strip weld-tabs on HJ Kingswood and full length headlining attachment equipment on HX-HZ Holden vans. Yes they started from the same basic body pressings as other cars of the day, but so did A9X, L34, XU1, XV2, XV4, XW8, GTS350 etc. Remember that XX7 (and later XU3) were codes for a special vehicle package, which was an option on a base vehicle. This was how all "sports" GMH product (and other stuff too) of the day was made except for HK-HQ 1837 (GTS327 and GTS350), and the seriesII Brabham HB which were unique models. All of the rest were special vehicle packages on a base vehicle:
Special vehicle package code - base vehicle
XS5 (HB Brabham) - HB S and SL
XV2 (HQ SS) - HQ Belmont
XV4 (HQ GTS sedan) - HQ Kingswood
XW8 (HQ GTS350 sedan) - HQ Kingswood
XU1 - LC and LJ GTR
XU2 - (SLR5000) - LH and LX SL/R
L34 - LH SLR5000
A9X - LX XU2 or SS+L31

There are many others too like B06 (HJ-HZ Ambulance - HJ-HZ tonner and van), XW4 and XY8 (Vacationer) plus many more.

Maybe I was trying to promote the fact Holden have dubbed these as Sandmans and hey maybe a web site called my sandman should recognize these as Sandmans. Maybe give the people that own these modern Sandmans some where to come hang out and contribute to the forums.

Clearly not everyone one likes this idea.

As for growing up... mate think I'm there.

The problem with forums or anything bashed into text on a public place is that things can be taken the wrong way. Clearly you have taken what I have started negatively. When in fact I was trying to make the point that yes they are Sandmans and maybe there is a lot of people out there that have never been shown the proof behind why they are regarded as Sandmans.

Again, Holden never called the vehicle a Sandman, the accessory is called a Sandman and it isn't built by Holden.
Personally I don't have a problem with them, and they look pretty good, but I like the look of the original ute better (but i'm the same for HQ-WB!).
Also more than happy to see people modify, customise etc and bring them to GMH/Holden events. They'll never be classed as (or in shows judged as) a Sandman though. They will always be a ute with an accessory. No different to a ute with a HBD hard tonneau.

Some people did mate and lots more still do or they would not be producing the panel van roof any more.

Good, they look heaps better and have more room than a butt ugly traditional canopy. Whilstever there is a market they'll keep the moulds and make some each year!

[SMQQTH]

So turns out people that have a HBD ute fitted with a HBD canopy. Have a Sandman!

Do you agree HK1837?

[SMQQTH]

I didn't say any such thing!

Holden never called the vehicle a Sandman, the accessory is called a Sandman and it isn't built by Holden.

Looks to me you did call the canopy and its associated bits Sandman!

As for Holden not building them... take a look at most of the parts that make up a Holden. A hell of a lot are subcontracted out. HBD may not be directly under the GMH logo but sure as hell HBD would have to work in conjunction with Holden and Holden would be giving the finial approval. Not to mention Holden would have to let the Sandman name be used on any product related to a Holden motor car.

Please HK1837 read the HBD sales brochure... it also says "rest assured with a 'Sandman' canopy, now you can add the convenience of a Holden approved and warranted canopy for you new ute."

Still stand by my words. If you have a HBD canopy fitted to your Holden ute, you have a Sandman!

[Taily]

No I never asked! I know its a panel van! Look at the things. Hard pressed to say it looks like anything else!

And before you say its a ute with a canopy have a look at any panel van holden have ever released... all based off the utility format.

Have another read of what I have actually written, not what you think I have written or think I said. I know I was trying to get the post written at 4:30 in the morning trying to get out the door for work and do apologise for its brevity, however at no point did I say that I disagree with your point you made about a ute being associated with the Sandman name or decal kit or looking like a panelvan or anything remotely like that. Holden (or whomever does their dress-up kits and aftermarket stuff these days) can call it whatever they like. They quite obviously realise that there are a number of the population in their late 30's and up who have reached a point in their lives where either the original or one of these V series starts to appeal. Many will take the option you've highlighted because of many reasons such as later technology, comfort, noise etc and yet others will prefer the early option for their own reasons. When you put a fairly narrow point of view forward on a forum such as this one you are bound to get a variety of answers. If you didn't think you were going to get that response here you may want to pause for a while and have a think about it.

Just to re-iterate, I don't disagree with you there.

Sorry didn't ask that either... yes yes yes they were based off what ever the dealer fitted the Sandman pack to in MOST cases. Before you start saying something along the lines of mine a Brisbane build xu3 xx7 I don't care!

Na, she's not a Brizzie build and I'm sure by now others have made the point better than I could about their origins. The point I was alluding to is that you actually made a generalisation that isn't strictly right in essence about the basis of ALL GMH's beautiful 70's creations.

With that comment I was merely making the point that, hey 'Sandmans' where not the top of the line product to start with. They started life as an ordinary ute or van which than coped the holden option at the time called 'Sandman Pack'. With Exceptions...

No argument there, as pointed out by others some have small differences in their shells, but lets not get off track. I, like many, aren't all that fussed about the new stuff but will welcome and listen to anyone with an open mind and in fact I reckon I'm pretty close to the mark when I say that just about 100% of the regular contributors here are the same, hence the reason that for the most part this is a fairly quiet BB where from time to time a differing view may get aired but always recieves a reasoned response.

If Holden, through an external division, wants to call/resurrect a package and call it a Sandman then I guess that is their call and they can do what they like. I don't think too many here would get their noses out of joint about it and start slagging off about them not being what they are being sold as. What we are (mostly) keen on is a shared interest or "passion" with a particular variant of a make of vehicle. God that sounds sooooo like a Shannon's ad...

Maybe I was trying to promote the fact Holden have dubbed these as Sandmans and hey maybe a web site called my sandman should recognize these as Sandmans. Maybe give the people that own these modern Sandmans some where to come hang out and contribute to the forums.

Clearly not everyone one likes this idea.

See above, suffice to say that it isn't up to any of us what is defined as a "Sandman". You originally asked an opinion, then stated yours and called those who disagreed with you (I believe) "narrow minded".

As for growing up... mate think I'm there.

Take a moment to go back and re-read what you have actually written, not what you thought you said. You might then get an idea why some have risen to your bait. I stand by what I said about what you wrote. I mean (and meant) no personal disrespect to you as a person, however you words in the post I quoted on page two sure do sound like a good dummy spit to me and designed to get a reaction (look-up sciolist) or to elicit a specific response (which you got....).

The problem with forums or anything bashed into text on a public place is that things can be taken the wrong way. Clearly you have taken what I have started negatively. When in fact I was trying to make the point that yes they are Sandmans and maybe there is a lot of people out there that have never been shown the proof behind why they are regarded as Sandmans.

Hallelujah to the first sentence!!! If I have misconstrued your actual written words (which I haven't) then I will (and do now) apologise to you publicly in front of everyone profusely, however if I have misconstrued your meaning of the words you have written then that unfortunately comes back to you not putting into words what you actually meant by what you've written. Quite happy to have a beer, a rum or a red with you and discuss these and any other issue you'd like to if I'm ever in the neighbourhood or vice-versa, my shout. I wouldn't have a clue nor speak for any as to the wheres and wherefors of your onus of "proof" in your last sentence however.

Very Best Regards,

Dave.