So many great golden era DD tables out there, what do you recommend for $1000?

The arm does indeed look like the 7045.
However ZERO playtime yet as still waiting for the stepdown transformer to arrive and I am NOT taking any chances.
Has given me chance to clean it inside, although it was very clean looking internal already , but Deoxit never hurts!
Set it up with a NOS Glanz cartirdge so will be ready to hit the ground running when the stepdown shows up.
Hopefully this week although I am out of town for work all week anyway.

bimasta, The idea of using no plinth with a DD was the subject of a lengthy and some times contentious thread, me being one of those on the "nay" side of that argument.  The reason is this: Newton pointed out that "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction" (Newton's 3rd Law of Motion).  This means that any torque delivered to the platter has an equal and opposite rotational effect on the chassis; it "wants" to spin in the opposite direction.  Only gravity and the resulting friction between the chassis and the shelf is keeping a DD from spinning in both directions at once, around the spindle as an axis of rotation.  Ergo, it makes sense to add mass to the chassis in the form of a heavy and dense plinth.  Even leaving out the effect on damping of resonances, adding the mass increases the friction force between the chassis and shelf and assures that the work being done by the motor is diverted only to the motion of the platter.

lewm"Only gravity and the resulting friction between the chassis and the shelf is keeping a DD from spinning in both directions at once, around the spindle as an axis of rotation"

Actually a platter can not spin in two directions at once as simple common sense will tell you no need to quote, reference, or apply Newton to arrive at that simple conclusion.

You obviously didn’t get it, clearthink. You’re not thinking, clearly.