Connect with us

Tech

I Can’t Put the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Down. Can Apple’s Foldable Change That?

Published

on

I review a lot of phones, and most of the time, it’s easy to move on to the next handset. But the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 gave me a problem I didn’t expect: I genuinely didn’t want to stop using it.

I fell for the adorable, passport-size foldable the moment I got my hands on it back in June at Samsung’s headquarters in Korea. It’s a compact doomscroller’s dream, with a versatile inner display that’s perfect for watching movies in landscape orientation or browsing social media in portrait. It’s also incredibly thin and lightweight, measuring just 4.5 millimeters thick when unfolded and 9.7mm when folded, while weighing just 201 grams. I can hardly tell it’s in my pocket, and I love the way it feels in my hands.

Beyond its functionality, the Z Fold 8 is an eye-catching statement piece. It’s been the center of attention at many gatherings, soliciting “oohs” and “aahs” from friends and passersby alike. 

Galaxy Z Fold 8 Review: Small But Mighty – and Pricey

Over the past few years, phone-makers have rolled out their fair share of innovative designs, from the ultraslim Galaxy S25 Edge, iPhone Air and Galaxy Z Fold 7 to the futuristic Honor Robot Phone. But somehow, none has left a lasting impression on me quite like the palm-size Z Fold 8. It’s not only incredibly satisfying to hold, but it’s also one of the most practical phones I’ve ever used. Its biggest drawback, perhaps, is having to step outside of Apple’s ecosystem — and risk getting booted from my group chats for “turning” messages green. (It’s shallow, but it’s true.)

With Apple expected to unveil its own passport-size foldable iPhone at its Sept. 9 event, the Z Fold 8 will either find itself living in that high-profile device’s shadow or benefit from renewed interest in foldable phones.

Advertisement

Setting the stage for a foldable iPhone

The Z Fold 8 is by no means perfect. It only has two rear cameras, a 50-megapixel wide and 50-megapixel ultrawide — no telephoto here. The 4,800-mAh battery is good enough to last a day and then some, but it’s not shattering any records. The device doesn’t have built-in magnets for Qi2 charging, which is disappointing for a phone released in 2026. It’s also wildly expensive, with a $1,900 starting price. 

But the Z Fold 8 has something that outweighs all those downsides: a design that’s genuinely enjoyable to use. I can fire off texts and emails on the 5.5-inch cover screen, which, despite its compact size, never feels cramped. When I open it up, the 7.6-inch inner display gives me plenty of room to multitask or stream videos. Turn the Z Fold 8 on its side, and it transforms into a slab phone-tablet hybrid — perfect for scrolling through Instagram or hacking away in Google Docs.

Rumors suggest the foldable iPhone, speculatively dubbed the iPhone Ultra, could have a similar 4:3 aspect ratio. That means it may also feature some of the drawbacks of a more pocketable design, like scaled-back cameras and battery life compared to nonfolding premium phones. But if the iPhone Ultra’s design is anything like the Z Fold 8’s, it’s possible people won’t mind the trade-offs.

“With Apple, even when consumers are not getting the best value for money but it’s a novelty, they care less,” Francisco Jeronimo, vice president of client devices at International Data Corporation, told me late last month. “For the iPhone ‘Fold,’ consumers will not compare specs; either they want the form factor or not,” Jeronimo said. “They will be willing to compromise on the camera because they want the foldable.”

Advertisement

I’m curious to see how Apple could reshape this evolving category and nudge it forward. IDC forecasts that global foldable shipments will grow more than 12% this year, with Apple’s expected entry helping to drive that growth. The research firm also expects Apple to ship more than 17 million foldable iPhones by 2027, giving the company nearly 40% global market share by the end of next year.

Maybe Apple will surprise us with a more traditional book-style foldable, like the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra or the Pixel 11 Pro Fold. Both are excellent phones that earned strong CNET reviews, but with more standard foldable designs, I can’t say I find myself reaching for either one as often as I do the Z Fold 8. So I’m crossing my fingers that Apple has another irresistible foldable up its sleeve — one that can compete for my attention.

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Tech

Sony Bravia 5 review: meticulously controlled brightness, strong sound and a slick OS

Published

on

Why you can trust TechRadar


We spend hours testing every product or service we review, so you can be sure you’re buying the best. Find out more about how we test.

Sony Bravia 5: Two-minute review

The Sony Bravia 5 is a mini-LED TV with crisp images, strong contrast and great gaming features. It occupies that level in Sony’s TV range where the brand has historically struggled to maintain its high standards. The Bravia 5, though, bucks this trend in pretty spectacular fashion.

The Sony Bravia 5 retains both mini-LED lighting and local dimming, for starters, as well as an 120Hz panel to keep gamers happy. Sony says the Bravia 5 LCD panels are still made to the brand’s Master Backlight Drive standard too, and they’re equipped with a full up-to-date version of the Google TV smart system.

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

US troops can still be tracked by purchased location data, and Congress wants to know why

Published

on

PUBLIC SECTOR

DoD controls on mobile ad identifiers haven’t stopped military location data turning up for sale

The US military’s effort to prevent troops from being tracked by adversaries through purchased location data hasn’t worked as well as anticipated, and lawmakers want to know why.

Advertisement

US Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Rep. Pat Harrigan (R-NC) on Friday asked for an investigation by the Defense Department Inspector General into policies that have only partially stanched the flow of location data that allows military personnel to be tracked and targeted.

In May, Wyden, Harrigan, and a bipartisan group of 12 other members of Congress released details about how commercially purchased location data – often captured by mobile apps and advertising SDKs – can be used to identify where US military personnel gather and to target those locations. They noted that the DoD has been aware of this threat since at least 2016.

The lawmakers urged Defense Department CIO Kirsten A. Davies to take steps to mitigate this risk, including turning off advertising identifiers on DoD smartphones and issuing a policy requiring the disabling of advertising identifiers on all personal devices brought into DoD facilities or overseas.

Since then, various military branches have blocked advertising identifiers on government-issued devices. According to the letter, “several DoD components – the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, and Special Operations Command – confirm that they now disable advertising IDs on government-issued devices to protect their personnel from such threats.”

Advertisement

But that hasn’t entirely eliminated the availability of location data tied to US military personnel. Citing ongoing reports, Wyden and Harrigan want to know why location data pinpointing the movement of troops continues to be available.

“We commend these service branches for implementing this cybersecurity defensive best practice on government devices,” they said in their letter [PDF] to the DoD IG. “However, recent reports regarding the continued availability of commercial location data originating from DoD facilities raise troubling questions.”

The two lawmakers speculate about the reason DoD policies have fallen short. One possibility, they say, is that some parts of the DoD turned off their advertising identifiers only as recently as July. Another, they say, is that disabling ad identifiers may no longer be sufficient to limit the availability of location data. And the third is that the location data is coming entirely from the personal devices of DoD personnel and contractors.

Zach Edwards, staff threat researcher at Infoblox, told The Register in an email that it’s good to hear all the military branches have disabled advertising IDs on their phones because it will make members of the military and their families safer, especially those serving in combat zones overseas.

Advertisement

“This change will essentially ensure that military device location data isn’t being included in bulk data sales being done by numerous vendors,” he said. “It’s truly unfortunate that Google and Apple have not effectively reformed their mobile advertising IDs, even after it’s been well documented that it’s the primary piece of data being used by data brokers to connect up people’s mobile phone location data for bulk sales.”

Mobile advertising identifiers (MAIDs), Edwards explained, serve as join keys for tracking people – they can link different datasets.

“So one core benefit is that military data won’t be available for sale via data brokers, who will sell to literally anyone with a pulse and a credit card,” said Edwards. “But the other slightly less obvious benefit is that this MAID was also being broadcast to all ad systems participating in the auctions.”

Edwards said that while states like California, Vermont, Texas, and Oregon have data broker registries, he’s unaware of any Russian or Chinese ad tech vendors who have registered. And those companies, he said, partner with Western publishers and mobile apps to collect data anyway.

Advertisement

“I think it’s important to appreciate that these ad tech companies in Russia and China have also likely been getting MAID data from the programmatic ad tech auctions from members of the military, and companies in those countries have an obligation to share it with the state without any ability to appeal or provide any external notice,” he said. ®

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Can AI Now Design PCBs That Just Work?

Published

on

With the recent release of its GPT-6 Astra model, OpenAI explicitly pushed the claim that it is capable of designing complete circuit boards in KiCad, starting from a provided schematic and outputting a fully routed PCB that theoretically could be sent off to be manufactured. This of course raises the question whether this is just a nifty party trick that works under strictly controlled conditions like most auto-routing tools, or whether there’s more to it. In a recent [EEBench] blog post, OpenAI’s claims are put to the test.

Back in 2024, we looked at how LLMs handle circuit board design, starting with the schematic. The conclusion was that you might as well just do it all by hand. Tracking progress here, [EEBench] is an electrical engineering agent benchmark that tests how effective these so-called AI agents are at performing useful hardware engineering work. As their methodology already makes clear, creating a populated and routed PCB from a schematic is just one step of many.

Consequently, GPT-6 Astra scores 69.3% (+/- 10%) on their benchmark, roughly in the same ballpark as Claude Opus 5, albeit cheaper and faster. It should be noted that [EEBench] is run by the developers behind Atopile, which is a code-based system for creating PCBs in KiCad with a strong focus on use by such AI agents.

Advertisement

Despite this, the blog post makes it clear that there is still a long way to go before hardware engineers can receive their pink slips and take up another profession. After all, while vibe-coding a quick prototype PCB can be a nice shortcut, for a one-off project PCB, most boards are expected to handle all the edge cases, be fully validated by multiple independent engineers, and have passed stringent testing before committing to a production run.

(Top image: from OpenAI GPT-6 Astra KiCad video)

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Daily Deal: CyberTraining 365 Online Academy

Published

on

from the good-deals-on-cool-stuff dept

CyberTraining 365 is the best training destination for you and your team. Here you can Master Cyber Security techniques such as Analyzing Malware, Penetration Testing, Advanced Persistent Threats, Threat Intelligence Research, Reverse Engineering, and much more. This online academy offers 3,877 up-to-date modules on all the latest technologies and industry standards. These courses are aligned with the National Cybersecurity Workforce Framework developed by the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE). It’s on sale for $80.

Note: The Techdirt Deals Store is powered and curated by StackSocial. A portion of all sales from Techdirt Deals helps support Techdirt. The products featured do not reflect endorsements by our editorial team.

Filed Under: daily deal

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

How Long Does J-B Weld Last Once Opened?

Published

on





If you’ve ever been in need of a super-strong adhesive, epoxy is a godsend, and J-B Weld’s two-part Twin Tube is some of the best. J-B Weld products have a huge number of uses, from metalworking and woodworking to sealing up small holes, but like any adhesive, one it’s been exposed to the air, the clock is ticking.

The good news is that, even though you’re likely to have leftovers, they’ll last you a long time. J-B Weld says its twin tube epoxy can last up to three years if properly sealed, kept in a cool, dark place and, most importantly, if the resin and hardener never mix inside the packaging. It’s nice to have a little extra epoxy in reserve, in case you run into exotic use cases like “fixing” a specific USB vulnerability.

Fortunately, because J-B weld stores the resin and hardener separately, it’s much less vulnerable to air exposure than traditional one-part adhesives. The chemical curing reaction only actually kicks off after the two components are dispensed from the tube and mixed, after which the epoxy set in around four to six hours, and fully cured after about a day or so.

Advertisement

Other J-B Weld products have different timelines

While the twin tube epoxy is no replacement for proper welding tools for metalwork, J-B Weld produces a whole line of products to cover various disciplines and use cases. Its MarineWeld, for instance, is great for aluminum, other metals and composites, and fiberglass, and shares the same, roughly three-year lifespan of the original formula. In fact, J-B Weld says the three-year shelf life is applicable to all of its Twin Tube and syringe-format products.

Longevity varies for some of the company’s other offerings, however. J-B Weld makes a number of putty sticks, sealants, adhesives, and other single-component products. According to an official FAQ,  while you can expect the putty sticks to last around the same three years as the Twin Tube epoxy, the super glue may only survive up to a year and a half after opening. These sort of adhesives and sealants are more vulnerable to surface contamination from air exposure or moisture than the Twin Tube products.

Advertisement

To stretch their lifespan, close them as soon as you’re done using them, and make sure the packaging is sealed up as tightly as possible. Epoxy putty should stay wrapped in its original plastic film or container, and needs to be replaced when it dries out and cracks. The same goes for any sealant or adhesive that’s hardened in the nozzle or separated beyond remixing.



Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Pixel Watch 5 Leaves the Latch Unlocked for Simple Repairs

Published

on

Google Pixel Watch 5 Repair Fix iFixit
Most smartwatches get glued shut, live a short life, and then sit in a drawer. Google’s Pixel Watch 5 still refuses that fate. iFixit’s teardown team opened the 45 mm model and handed it a provisional 9 out of 10 on the smartwatch repairability scale, the same mark last year’s Pixel Watch 4 earned, with a few small changes that make the job even clearer once you are inside.



Opening the case feels more like servicing a dive watch than taking apart a little phone. Interior latches are released with two Torx screws, the rear sensor glass is removed, and reusable O-ring gaskets replace a smear of adhesive for water resistance. IP68 and 5 ATM certifications remain in place since the seals provide the function that glue typically accomplishes. You don’t need a heat gun to get started. You’ll need a driver, some patience, and the knowledge not to lose a screw on the carpet.


Google Pixel Watch 5 (41mm) – Android Smartwatch – Obsidian – Wi-Fi
  • The new Google Pixel Watch 5 offers a smarter way to a healthier you.[1,2]; Designed for Gemini Intelligence, get proactive help, and personalized…
  • Precision-crafted to do it all: The Google Pixel Watch 5 features the domed Actua 360 display with scratch-resistant Gorilla Glass and up to 40 hours…
  • Metrics that matter: Advanced sensors help you stay ahead of your health and wellness; and Google Pixel’s most accurate heart rate tracking is…

Google Pixel Watch 5 Repair Fix iFixit
The most common type of repair is battery replacement, and Google has simplified that process. After the latches are removed, a few green screws guide you toward the vibration motor and ultimately the cell itself. The color coding is new to this generation. The 45 mm watch has a 465 mAh battery, which is 2.2 percent higher than last year’s 455 mAh unit, and the printed face of the battery even directs you to Google’s repair hub if you stumble in without a plan. Pull the connector, lift the cell, and the exhausted battery work is complete. iFixit has already produced a guide specifically for this exchange.

Google Pixel Watch 5 Repair Fix iFixit
Screen work takes longer, but you still have a removable display and a gasket that can be replaced while the casing is open, which is important because those rings wear. Before the panel can be removed, you must first remove several screws of various lengths, a bracket, and a press connector. According to iFixit, that procedure is the only spot where a future Pixel Watch may become simpler. The site already has guides for the screen, back sensor glass, battery, and vibration motor, so you won’t have to guess based on a paused video.

Google Pixel Watch 5 Repair Fix iFixit
The mainboard is mounted within the chassis using a single screw and a press connector on the reverse side. LTE variants feature a small antenna pogo pin on the edge. Drop that pin, and you’ll be on your knees for the rest of the afternoon. The hardware around that board has been upgraded: Qualcomm’s Snapdragon W5 Gen 2 Accelerated platform, 64 GB of storage, and 3 GB of memory. Google claims a 20% speed increase over Pixel Watch 4. None of the additional silicon comes in the way of disassembling the watch.
[Source]

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Great Scott in 357 Bricks, LEGO Speed Champions Time Machine from Back to the Future (77256)

Published

on

LEGO Speed Champions time Machine from Back to the Future 77256
Holiday gift lists fill quickly with licensed toys, yet few manage to serve both the parent who still quotes the clock tower scene and the kid who just learned what 88 miles per hour means. LEGO Speed Champions 77256 Time Machine from Back to the Future does that job in 357 pieces for $22.49 (was $28), aimed at ages 9 and up. Finished size stays compact at just over 6.5 inches long, 4 inches high and 2.5 inches wide, so it fits a shelf, a desk or a mix of other 8-wide Speed Champions cars without dominating the space.



Builders start with a single shared chassis and then choose a movie. The first configuration makes use of the rear lightning rod and California OUTATIME plate from 1985. A few extra pieces transform it into the 1989 flying look, with Mr. Fusion attached at the back, an orange plate, and wheels flipped sideways. Both variants retain the rear air vents, a cockpit for two minifigures, a printed flux capacitor, and the time calculator. Conversion remains simple enough that switching between modes after the initial construction takes only a few minutes.

Sale


LEGO Speed Champions Time Machine from Back to The Future Building Toy for Kids – Pretend Play & Display…
  • MODEL CAR BUILDING TOY – The LEGO Speed Champions Time Machine from Back to the Future (77256) building toy for kids 9 years old and up lets young…
  • 2 MINIFIGURES – Kids can place the Doc Brown and Marty McFly minifigures inside the cockpit for creative storytelling and pretend play adventures
  • BUILD 2 WAYS – Kids can construct the DeLorean from the first Back to the Future movie with lightning rod and California license plate, then rebuild…


The majority of the visual load falls on printed elements. Flux coils, clock circuits, headlights, and other body panels are already decorated, requiring only seven stickers. On a much smaller scale, new slope pieces help recreate the DeLorean’s wedge contour and stainless-steel appearance. The roof lifts off cleanly, providing access to the interior without damaging the bodywork. Construction goes through five numbered bags and normally takes about an hour, with the LEGO Builder app accessible for 3D rotation if paper instructions become too cramped.

Advertisement

LEGO Speed Champions time Machine from Back to the Future 77256
LEGO Speed Champions time Machine from Back to the Future 77256
Marty McFly and Doc Brown both get updated prints. Marty wears a real puffer vest initially seen in another theme, and the separate piece rests over his torso, matching the 1985 suit more than a flat print ever could. Doc Brown gets a detailed radiation-suit body, a clock around his neck, and a two-sided skull. Both figures fit within the cockpit together, which is unusual for a single Speed Champions vehicle. The legs remain unprinted, a frequent sacrifice at this pricing, but the torsos and Marty’s vest make the pair clearly recognized.

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Pixel Watch 5 Demonstrates Good Repairability

Published

on

Although we often find ourselves drowning in a seemingly unending sea of portable devices that are effectively e-waste once an internal component gives out, it’s good to remind ourselves that there are a few examples out there by large brands that manage to tick all the fancy feature boxes, while still being very much repairable. Case in point the Pixel Watch 5, a smart watch which much like its predecessor gets a 9/10 on [iFixit]’s repairability score.

No heat gun required, just undo the latch on the side of the watch. (Credit: iFixit, YouTube)
No heat gun required, just undo the latch on the side of the watch.

Despite featuring an IP68 rating, opening it is as easy as taking out a few screws to release its latch. This allows the back to swing open, with not a drop of glue in sight, just an O-ring gasket that keeps moisture out and can be reused many times. Digging into the guts, there are color-coded screws that guide one’s hand as the very modular design is taken apart in a matter of minutes.

Being able to simply unlatch the back, and also easily obtain spare parts are two aspects that are a very welcome sight indeed. Although it’s much easier to just glue everything together, something like this latch-and-gasket approach is something that we hope that more manufacturers will copy for these small devices.

It’s potentially also an idea for one’s next DIY smart watch project, as tempting as reaching for that tube of glue may seem.

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

AI chatbots will agree and misinform if you just put a little pressure, warns research

Published

on

AI chatbots have a well-documented habit of hallucinating information and sometimes agreeing with users even when they are wrong. A new study suggests that simply refusing to take no for an answer can make the problem worse.

Researchers from the University of Arizona tested seven AI models, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 1.5 Pro, Llama 3 70B, and DeepSeek-R1. Instead of judging them from a single response, researchers kept conversations going while repeatedly feeding the models information they knew was false.

The study used 100 false statements covering everything from obvious nonsense to much more obscure information. Researchers then repeated the misinformation as many as 50 times during the same conversation to see whether the chatbot would eventually give in and agree.

Keep repeating a lie, and AI may eventually agree

None of the seven models was completely immune. ChatGPT 3.5 proved the most vulnerable to repeated misinformation, affirming false statements in 12.3% of interactions. Claude 3.5 Sonnet sat at the other end at just 0.08%, while GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini remained below 1%.

ChatGPT 3.5 initially rejected 96 out of 100 false claims. After the same claims were repeated 50 times, however, it ended up agreeing with 18 of them. Researchers also noticed some models switching back and forth between agreeing and disagreeing with the exact same misinformation, a behavior they call “reverberation.”

Advertisement

The AI was also more vulnerable when the subject was obscure and had relatively little information available online. The researchers found a statistically significant connection between informational obscurity and misinformation acceptance during the repetition tests.

Arguing with AI produced some strange results

Researchers also tried pushing the chatbots with increasingly argumentative responses. Most models actually held up fairly well, but DeepSeek-R1 was a major exception. Its misinformation affirmation rate jumped from 1% during simple repetition to 22.2% under argumentative pressure. Its frequent use of sarcasm and satire also made some responses difficult for the researchers to reliably classify.

There was some good news when the models were given a fresh chance to reconsider their own mistakes. GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, Gemini 1.5 Pro, and DeepSeek corrected all of their previous errors, while GPT-3.5 corrected only 32%. Claude 3.5 Sonnet made very few errors in the first place, but failed to correct the four mistakes it did make, although the researchers caution that the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

This One-Of-A-Kind Chrysler Concept Has Sat On The Ocean Floor For 60 Years

Published

on





July 25, 1956 was a sad one for fans of both concept cars and ocean-going luxury liners. This was the day the SS Andrea Doria collided with the SS Stockholm and sank a day later, taking its cargo of one very special Chrysler concept car with it. The Chrysler Norseman concept, shown above, was the result of 50,000 hours of work, including the 39 months it took to design and build. The Chrysler Norseman is one of the classic Chrysler concept cars that history forgot.

The Chrysler Norseman, a joint venture of Chrysler and Carrozzeria Ghia in Turin, Italy, displayed groundbreaking design features, including its pillarless roof construction that did away with the A-pillar and provided an unobstructed view through the car’s windshield. It was claimed to handle eight times the car’s weight in the event of a rollover. Other Norseman features were its all-aluminum major body panels for weight reduction, its sloping fastback roof, dominant tail fins for that jet-age look, hidden headlights, and concealed trunk and door openers. The glass rear window was retractible, moving up and into the roof for additional ventilation. It had a 129-inch wheelbase and measured 227 ½ inches long, 80 inches wide, and 57 inches high.

Advertisement

Inside, the Norseman promised the future, with four individual bucket seats finished in two shades of leather and pods holding the car’s controls and instruments. An additional aerodynamic benefit came from a covering placed underneath the car’s body. It definitely qualifies as one of the strangest cars ever built by Chrysler.

Advertisement

What else should you know about the Chrysler Norseman and the Andrea Doria?

The Chrysler Norseman was a fully functional vehicle, not an unpowered styling fantasy. It used a 331-cubic-inch V8 producing 335 horsepower, mated to a two-speed, push-button automatic transmission driving its rear wheels. Unfortunately, the Chrysler Norseman would never become the star of the 1957 auto show circuit, thanks to its date with destiny. 

It was a dark and foggy night, but both the Andrea Doria and the Stockholm ocean liners, which are different from cruise ships, were equipped with radar, which should have alerted them to each other’s presence. Human error on both ships’ parts caused them to collide at an angle close to 90 degrees. The Stockholm’s reinforced bow, made to break Arctic ice, sliced into the Andrea Doria’s hull, opening up its watertight compartments on the starboard side. This caused the ship to list to that side, making the portside lifeboats unusable. The ship would remain afloat for another 11 hours, allowing other ships on this heavily-traveled route to come to the rescue. By 5:30 a.m. on July 26, most of the survivors were rescued and placed on other ships. At 10:09 a.m., the Andrea Doria sank to the bottom of the Atlantic, coming to rest on its starboard side in 260 feet of water. 

This sad event resulted in the loss of 51 lives, 46 on the Andrea Doria and five on the Stockholm. As for the Chrysler Norseman, a diver who visited the wreck in the mid-1990s reported its condition as, “…most of the car is rust, corrosion and a heap of indistinguishable junk.”  

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025