Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 08:48:55 AM

Title: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 08:48:55 AM
Post what you describe what is the most pathetic design transformations in a muscle car.  My vote goes to;

Dodge Challenger.

1970:

(http://krang.moparmusclemagazine.com/freestuff/mopp_0702_1970_dodge_challenger_1024x768.jpg)



1978;

(http://www.adclassix.com/images/78dodgechallengergtcoupe.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ZetaNine on July 09, 2008, 08:53:25 AM
the 2009 model has made up for it.

(http://blogs.cars.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/05/2009challenger.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: eskimo2 on July 09, 2008, 08:54:34 AM
They screwed up nearly everything in the ugly 80's.  Most of the 70's cars took a style drop from the 60's as well.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ZetaNine on July 09, 2008, 08:55:09 AM
the mustang II was horrid.....



1967
(http://cmsimg.detnews.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=C3&Date=20080514&Category=AUTO03&ArtNo=805140312&Ref=AR)


1974
(http://content.dealerconnection.com/vfs/dealers/B6245/1974-mustang.gif)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Stampf on July 09, 2008, 08:55:33 AM
Might as well throw the Roadrunner, GTX, Charger and all the other big Mopar models in there too.  

Cuda went out in style though.  :aok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 09:01:04 AM
My first car, the 1970 Plymouth Duster was pretty severely castrated...

1971
-----
(http://www.musclecarsforever.com/images/old_ads/1971_Plymouth_Duster.jpg)


1993
-----
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/1993_Plymouth_Duster_green.jpg/800px-1993_Plymouth_Duster_green.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: soda72 on July 09, 2008, 09:06:03 AM
Any car made between 1974-1978 would fall in this category...
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: lasersailor184 on July 09, 2008, 09:07:29 AM
I think that late 70's 80's blocky style looks horrid on everything, much less remakes.



As for some modern cars, I think they are extremely well done.  Like the Mustang GT, Charger, Challenger, Camaro...
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ZetaNine on July 09, 2008, 09:09:17 AM
Any car made between 1974-1978 would fall in this category...

????

(http://blog.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/Delorean_DMC_12__5607369.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 09:10:55 AM
Excellent, Zetanine, Slamfire.  :aok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 09:11:05 AM
I think that late 70's 80's blocky style looks horrid on everything, much less remakes.



As for some modern cars, I think they are extremely well done.  Like the Mustang GT, Charger, Challenger, Camaro...

Was just thinking... with the price of oil rising with no end in sight, do you all think we'll be in for another "80s style" redesign of all our production vehicles ?
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: lasersailor184 on July 09, 2008, 09:12:01 AM
We better not.  I'll be able to purchase my first real car in the next few years.  If they start pumping out those bricks I will have to buy used.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Speed55 on July 09, 2008, 09:16:06 AM
Was just thinking... with the price of oil rising with no end in sight, do you all think we'll be in for another "80s style" redesign of all our production vehicles ?

I still drive a 72 duster, with a slant 6.   :aok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: 1701E on July 09, 2008, 09:18:46 AM
????

(http://blog.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/Delorean_DMC_12__5607369.jpg)

That doesn't fall in the 1974-1978 category, that was made in the '80s :aok
However they are re-making it, but with no visual changes, that has been announced anyways.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 09:27:51 AM
the mustang II was horrid.....



1967
(http://cmsimg.detnews.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=C3&Date=20080514&Category=AUTO03&ArtNo=805140312&Ref=AR)


1974
(http://content.dealerconnection.com/vfs/dealers/B6245/1974-mustang.gif)

i dont have a pic, but ford made up for it with the fox chassis stangs......and REALLY made up for it with the 08 stangs..........
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Dowding on July 09, 2008, 09:34:54 AM
The Delorean was an appalling car. The Chief Exec of the company was locked inside it on its launch, it was appallingly designed, underpowered and the less said about the build quality the better.

Most US cars look crap apart from the ones made in the 1960s. Taking the styling back to that period cannot be called an achievement, unless you call common sense an achievement. Were the designers of that generation of car culled in 1969, stuffed and preserved in some secret museum?
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 10:14:45 AM
Like I said... I hope we don't have another "80s style fuel downgrade" to our cars...

Must see (it will make your day):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_GtLssyNAs

BTW, after the '70 duster, I drove the above car ('86 Dodge Aires) until it wouldn't function anymore (1998).  Those were some dark years... 



Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 10:37:44 AM
1967 Mercury Cougar
---------------------
(http://www.musclecarcalendar.com/FabFords2003/FFF107.jpg)

...pure badass

1986 Mercury Cougar
---------------------
(http://www.usedcars.com/imageserver/inventory/500x375/103A08/1-C33DA9E3-A02B-4504-BF74-E042D73C70D9.jpg)


....very "Corinthian Leather"/Montelbanish  :D
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: uptown on July 09, 2008, 10:39:29 AM
(http://usera.imagecave.com/uptown/69_dodge_charger_500.jpg)


(http://usera.imagecave.com/uptown/1st-Dodge-Daytona.jpg)


I never understood their thinking on this one. Dodge Daytona
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 10:42:34 AM
I never understood their thinking on this one.

...the Daytona... nice... totally forgot about that one... note how they "kept" the spoiler in a pathetic attempt to show "lineage"  :aok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: uptown on July 09, 2008, 10:44:48 AM
I've been looking for 67' Cougar tail lights for some time now. Best tail lights ever made. :aok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 10:46:34 AM
I've been looking for 67' Cougar tail lights for some time now. Best tail lights ever made. :aok

just noticed your sig at the bottom.......friggin hillarious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 10:54:36 AM
...the Daytona... nice... totally forgot about that one... note how they "kept" the spoiler in a pathetic attempt to show "lineage"  :aok
Yes, excellent find Uptown. :aok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 10:54:56 AM
1973 Ford Falcon XB (Australian)
-------------------------------
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/Australian_Ford_Falcon.jpg/800px-Australian_Ford_Falcon.jpg)

1983 Ford Falcon XE (Australian)
--------------------------------
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/1982-1984_Ford_XE_Fairmont.jpg/800px-1982-1984_Ford_XE_Fairmont.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 11:00:47 AM
Never even knew that model existed Slam. I think my retina's are damaged by viewing the late model variant.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 11:02:42 AM
Never even knew that model existed Slam. I think my retina's are damaged by viewing the late model variant.

...yeah I've been a fan of the Australian Falcons ever since I saw the original Mad Max movie  :aok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: uptown on July 09, 2008, 11:06:24 AM
And Chevy has had their brain farts too
(http://usera.imagecave.com/uptown/sucp_0710_12_z2007_atlanta_super_chevy_show1971_monte_carlo.jpg)

(http://usera.imagecave.com/uptown/97_Monte_Carlo.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 11:11:48 AM
1965 CHEVY Impala (SS Version)

(http://images.dieselpowermag.com/features/chevy/0707dp_01_z+1965_chevy_impala_ss_duramax+front_view.jpg)

2005 CHEVY Impala:

(http://images.getauto.com/vehicles/2G1W/2G1WP521959163034-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 11:12:14 AM

1969 Chevy Nova
----------------
(http://images.superchevy.com/features/nova/sucp_0709_16_z+1969_chevy_nova_z28+front_view.jpg)

1985 Chevy Nova
----------------
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Chevrolet_Nova_Sedan.jpg/800px-Chevrolet_Nova_Sedan.jpg)


...pure unabated BLASPHEMY !!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 11:13:51 AM
1969 Pontiac GTO Judge
(http://www.dragracecentral.com/stories/photos_go_here_04/pr/13-Beautiful_Judge.jpg)

1974 Pontiac "GTO"
(http://www.gtoalley.com/gtopics/74wgto.jpg)

Probably the quickest downfall of them all.

Oh, and Dowding, you can take all of the horrid American styling designs collectively and they won't ammount to 1% of the turds that have come from Europe.  Here's one:

(http://www.misterw.com/Citroen/Citroen08b.jpg)

:ok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: uptown on July 09, 2008, 11:22:00 AM
(http://usera.imagecave.com/uptown/Pontiac_GTO_02_8w.jpg)

(http://usera.imagecave.com/uptown/gto.jpg)

yep, don't forget the Goat. :cry
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 11:44:51 AM
Also let's not forget the Oldsmobile Cutlass

1970 'Cutty
-----------
(http://www.server7.com/images/BSG/show/2005show04.jpg)
1988 'Cutty
-----------
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b8/Oldsmobile_Cutlass_Supreme_Classic.jpg/800px-Oldsmobile_Cutlass_Supreme_Classic.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 11:52:14 AM
Also, that Cougar they spewed out in the late 90's, wtf was that?

(http://www.coolcats.net/welcome/images/99cougar.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ink on July 09, 2008, 11:54:24 AM
Post what you describe what is the most pathetic design transformations in a muscle car.  My vote goes to;

Dodge Challenger.

1970:

(http://krang.moparmusclemagazine.com/freestuff/mopp_0702_1970_dodge_challenger_1024x768.jpg)



1978;







(http://www.adclassix.com/images/78dodgechallengergtcoupe.jpg)



RIP i never even knew they put one out that year i thought they stopped at 74,

here is a shot of my 73, with the 340, 727 tourquflight tranny. by far sickest car i ever owned, and i have had some good ones.

(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/3girlsonzona.jpg)

oh ya if i diddnt have 6 kids, the first thing i would do is go get the new Challenger, it looks like they did a great job on it.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 11:55:15 AM
Also, that Cougar they spewed out in the late 90's, wtf was that?

(http://www.coolcats.net/welcome/images/99cougar.jpg)
Perhaps they were marketing the style towards the X-Generation?
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: straffo on July 09, 2008, 12:01:11 PM
Diablo if you make a comparison please make it fair the DS was never designed as a sport car

check this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_SM
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 12:02:38 PM
If they were styling it for the X Gen they should have called it something else entirely.  BTW, Gene Kranz drove a late 60's Cougar to and from Mission Control during the Apollo era.  I can only imagine what kind of sweet rides were in that parking lot at that time.  If my father were more of a gearhead he would have paid attention and let me know about it.  But that's what I get for having an electrical engineer for a father!
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 12:03:50 PM
Diablo if you make a comparison please make it fair the DS was never designed as a sport car

check this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_SM

I'm not saying it was a sports car, just a reply to the generalisation on styling that Dowding made previously in the thread.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: lasersailor184 on July 09, 2008, 12:24:01 PM
1965 CHEVY Impala (SS Version)

(http://images.dieselpowermag.com/features/chevy/0707dp_01_z+1965_chevy_impala_ss_duramax+front_view.jpg)

2005 CHEVY Impala:

(http://images.getauto.com/vehicles/2G1W/2G1WP521959163034-1.jpg)

I really like the new impala.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 12:24:56 PM
I really like the new impala.

Me too.  If I have to get a new car the new Impala is what I'm looking at.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 12:31:14 PM
I really like the new impala.

Well, I like the shape of soap too, but not for a car....

(http://www.edmunds.com/pictures/VEHICLE/2008/Chevrolet/2008.chevrolet.impala.20115719-396x249.jpg)

(http://www.nutritionfx.com/images/bar-soap.jpg)

:p
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 12:32:19 PM
Oops, sorry.  Meant Malibu, not Impala.

Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: lasersailor184 on July 09, 2008, 12:33:22 PM
At first glance, the Impala looks like your standard sedan.  But if you look closely, it has nice lines, fine details on the body design, and just everything that whispers muscle car.

Sure, it doesn't scream it like the old version does.  But that's what makes it different, more appealin.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 12:35:52 PM
At first glance, the Impala looks like your standard sedan.  But if you look closely, it has nice lines, fine details on the body design, and just everything that whispers muscle car.

Sure, it doesn't scream it like the old version does.  But that's what makes it different, more appealin.

Just an FYI, my mother's boyfriend who is a retired NY Firefighter and retire Broward County Sheriff, had a 2004 Impala, new. In and out of the shop continously. Undriveable by the time he hit 50k.  YMMV. Can't judge the whole lot on the possibility of one lemon, but I'm not a chevy guy anyway.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 12:37:38 PM
At first glance, the Impala looks like your standard sedan.  But if you look closely, it has nice lines, fine details on the body design, and just everything that whispers muscle car.

Sure, it doesn't scream it like the old version does.  But that's what makes it different, more appealin.

I had one as a rental a few years ago - i was pleasantly surprised with the power it had...  It's a decent "sleeper" muscle car.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 12:37:40 PM
Oops, sorry.  Meant Malibu, not Impala.



Looks like a BMW 5 series profile .  :O

(http://blogs.karldirect.com/wp-content/uploads/08-Chevy-Malibu.jpg)

(http://pic4.picturetrail.com/VOL767/2726312/8668097/324781670.jpg)

Next thing you know, you'll carpet your garage! :p
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ZetaNine on July 09, 2008, 12:46:14 PM
I can't look at this thread anymore.........it is too heartbreaking............ as a nation........we have peaked.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Bones on July 09, 2008, 12:54:05 PM
At first glance, the Impala looks like your standard sedan.  But if you look closely, it has nice lines, fine details on the body design, and just everything that whispers muscle car.

Sure, it doesn't scream it like the old version does.  But that's what makes it different, more appealing.

Hmmm.  It might whisper at a muscle car, as the only thing it appears to be designed for is to replace some Buick Electra type model.  Tired, old, and unappealing is about the best I can come up with for a description of the Impala.

There is nothing written that says a contemporary design has to look boring.

Someone else mentioned it, and I have to agree.  1969 was the epitome of automotive design for the American automobile manufacturer.  One of the things that made them great was being able to tell what car it was from 100 yards away, when the engine was not running, and about a 1/4 mile away when the engines were running.

There are also some very classic designs from about 1965 to 1969 that have never been matched in appeal.

I'll never forget the sound of the Chrysler big blocks or the Chevy and Ford small blocks.  Days we will never see again.  I am glad I got to live through them and feel sorry for those who did not.  It was truly a magnificient age for the gear head.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 01:06:10 PM
Remember that styling can be more influenced by aerodynamics than by pure form.  Unfortunately we live at an age where that is more the norm than it used to be.  That's also why I think the '04 - '06 GTO failed.  It looked like every other jellybean out there.  Albeit, it had 400hp, but it still looked like a jellybean.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 01:40:14 PM
Well, not nearly as bad as some of the others, but notable none-the-less...


1968 Pontiac Firebird
---------------------
(http://www.simsbodyshop.com/photogallery/1969%20FIREBIRD-SPLASH.jpg)


1993 Pontiac Firebird
---------------------
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/1993-97_Pontiac_Firebird.jpg/800px-1993-97_Pontiac_Firebird.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 01:54:27 PM
You really think it was that bad Slam?  I admit the Gen4 Firebird's styling was a bit over the top for me but it still seemed within reason as well.  I know quite a few young hotties that drive and love their Gen4 Firebirds.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ink on July 09, 2008, 01:54:36 PM
Well, not nearly as bad as some of the others, but notable none-the-less...


1968 Pontiac Firebird
---------------------
(http://www.simsbodyshop.com/photogallery/1969%20FIREBIRD-SPLASH.jpg)


1993 Pontiac Firebird
---------------------
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/1993-97_Pontiac_Firebird.jpg/800px-1993-97_Pontiac_Firebird.jpg)

Slamfire
nice car
i remember when i was around 11 or so my "dad" had a 67 firebird convertible with the 350. that was a real nice car, this coming from a HUGE MOPAR fan.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 02:00:27 PM
You really think it was that bad Slam?  I admit the Gen4 Firebird's styling was a bit over the top for me but it still seemed within reason as well.  I know quite a few young hotties that drive and love their Gen4 Firebirds.

Yeah I guess it's not that bad.... That whole Night Rider thing turned me off on them  :D
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 02:01:40 PM
My local F-body bud Julie and her WS-6 Trans Am.

(http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g308/txflood77598/15514107505.jpg)
(http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g308/txflood77598/15514107499.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Dowding on July 09, 2008, 02:03:13 PM
DiabloTX - this thread answers for me.

What happened to those designers? Was it just a shift in taste?
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 02:04:09 PM
I think it was a shift in many areas, mainly economics.  The Japanese have almost never gotten it right IMHO.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 02:05:17 PM
Yeah I guess it's not that bad.... That whole Night Rider thing turned me off on them  :D

HAHA, you sure it wasn't The Hoff and not K.I.T.T. that turned you off?  :)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Hornet33 on July 09, 2008, 02:06:06 PM
There's a car in those pics???? :O
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Dowding on July 09, 2008, 02:07:02 PM
I guess a box is cheaper than a curve to make. But still... until the new Mustang came out they really had wasted the name. The new one looks fantastic.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Slamfire on July 09, 2008, 02:07:23 PM
HAHA, you sure it wasn't The Hoff and not K.I.T.T. that turned you off?  :)

(http://blogs.indiewire.com/jamesisrael/archives/Knight%20Rider%20and%20Arnold%20Jackson-785551.jpg)


....you may be onto something, Sir...
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 02:10:52 PM
I guess a box is cheaper than a curve to make. But still... until the new Mustang came out they really had wasted the name. The new one looks fantastic.

Absolutely no argument from me...and I HATE Mustangs. 
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 02:24:32 PM
Absolutely no argument from me...and I HATE Mustangs. 

sounds like a guy that can't build something to beat one? :D
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 02:26:25 PM
sounds like a guy that can't build something to beat one? :D

Why should I build on something that beats them stock?  :D
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 02:29:06 PM
I'll never forget the sound of the Chrysler big blocks or the Chevy and Ford small blocks.  Days we will never see again.  I am glad I got to live through them and feel sorry for those who did not.  It was truly a magnificient age for the gear head.

you're forgetting the ford big blocks. you could always tell a ford on the starting line at the dragstrip. they have a deeper roar than the chevys..............

that said, i've always run smallblocks. they cost less :D
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 02:38:16 PM
I guess a box is cheaper than a curve to make. But still... until the new Mustang came out they really had wasted the name. The new one looks fantastic.

the only mustangs that were really a waste were the 74-78 coupes. they were all pigs, but at least the fastbacks looked fairly decent with ground effects. no worse than the same era firebirds or camaros.

 the 79 stang was the first fox chassis mustang. ford's been building the stang on that same chassis from 79 till 99 i believe. at some point they changed it's designation to the fox4 chassis, but from what i've been able to tell, it was essentially the same with some added bracing.

 for the record, ford built (i think) 26 different models on the fox chassis. a couple were the fairmont, couger, ltd2, and i think that ugly slpoe backed lincoln was a fox chassis too.

 the 79 stang was also the beginning of the re-birth of the american hot rod. it was followed by the camaro(again) a couple years later.
 by the mid to late 80's ford had the mustang performing much better than anything in it's class, or price range. they held that performance edge till mid ninetys i think.(my 89 only ran 15.2 stock....12.2 when i was done, fully street everyday driver) it's a shame that they've gone and overpriced it now, as although i like the fox chassis mustangs, i absolutley love the brand new ones. problem? for 30-40k, it's still just a mustang. and for that money i can buy a used cessna.




<<S>>
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Rollins on July 09, 2008, 04:03:07 PM
And Chevy has had their brain farts too
(http://usera.imagecave.com/uptown/sucp_0710_12_z2007_atlanta_super_chevy_show1971_monte_carlo.jpg)

(http://usera.imagecave.com/uptown/97_Monte_Carlo.jpg)

'Scuse me?  Don't diss the Monte Carlo!

Have a '72 black on black, fine ride sir- passes everything but a gas station.   :aok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 04:09:19 PM
Why should I build on something that beats them stock?  :D

well, because for the most part, the only things that did beat them stock to stock was waaayyy more expensive, at least till the late 90's when ford dropped the ball..........
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 04:11:02 PM
'Scuse me?  Don't diss the Monte Carlo!

Have a '72 black on black, fine ride sir- passes everything but a gas station.   :aok

i like the 69-70 montes........

<<S>>
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ChickenHawk on July 09, 2008, 04:17:24 PM
1969 was the epitome of automotive design for the American automobile manufacturer.  

I couldn't agree more.

(http://www.mustangspecs.com/boss/pics/69boss4291.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: whiteman on July 09, 2008, 04:27:13 PM
My local F-body bud Julie and her WS-6 Trans Am.

(http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g308/txflood77598/15514107505.jpg)
(http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g308/txflood77598/15514107499.jpg)

met her at the Otto's meet, I've never been so determined to look someone in the eye's as that before.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 04:30:27 PM
met her at the Otto's meet, I've never been so determined to look someone in the eye's as that before.

LMAO, no doubt.  But I've never met a girl so enthusiastic about Firebirds in my life.  You should bring whitey to Kemah this Saturday night.  Weather is supposed to be great.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 04:37:00 PM
I couldn't agree more.

(http://www.mustangspecs.com/boss/pics/69boss4291.jpg)


i hate to say it, as i like fords, and mustangs in particular......but the boss429 was a pig. it wasn't a street car at all. it was built to homologate the engine for nascar racing. thus, it's street performance sucked.

 the boss302 on the other hand...if you had room to get the engine up to it's 8k redline, hauled asss......

better choice if ya wanted a big engine in a stang in 69 was the 390, or a 428. i cant remember if any 427's came in the stangs or not, but i do know that there was an overhead cam 427 in the thrunerbolt galaxies.

<<S>>
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ink on July 09, 2008, 04:39:50 PM
I couldn't agree more.

(http://www.mustangspecs.com/boss/pics/69boss4291.jpg)


i will raise ya one 1968 S/S hemi cuda

10 second quarter mile

(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/68SSBarracuda.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 04:41:12 PM
i will raise ya one 1968 S/S hemi cuda

10 second quarter mile

(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/68SSBarracuda.jpg)
.

was that street legal?

thunderbolt galaxy500, i think was 10.90's street legal
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: whiteman on July 09, 2008, 04:42:43 PM
LMAO, no doubt.  But I've never met a girl so enthusiastic about Firebirds in my life.  You should bring whitey to Kemah this Saturday night.  Weather is supposed to be great.

I might just do that, have nothing planned this week and the car has been taking a break.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 04:53:27 PM
.

was that street legal?

thunderbolt galaxy500, i think was 10.90's street legal

That Cuda was not street legal, at least those tires were not! 

Yep, everyone (mopar fans) like to forget the Thunderbolt Galaxy 500 ;)

Quote
Drag Racing Legend
1964 Ford Thunderbolt

Not Your Father's Ford
1964 was a banner year for Ford as they sold more than 4 million vehicles. The biggest news was the Mustang but Ford had also tired of reading about MOPAR's success on the drag strip. To compete, they had Dearborn Steel Tubing totally modify and reconstruct the Fairlane 500 to make it lighter and more aerodynamic. Then they somehow shoved the Galaxie's High Riser 427 cubic inch V-8 under the hood. Officially rated at 425hp. It actually produced over 500. Forced by NHRA rules to make it a production car, 54 were sold, mainly to serious drag racers. Success was immediate as it was Top Stock Eliminator and Ford won NHRA's Manufacturer's Cup. Unfortunately each Thunderbolt sold for $3900 but cost $5300 to make.

(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/1964_ford_fairlane_thunderbolt4.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ink on July 09, 2008, 05:03:52 PM
they were street legal, at least i am under the impression they were.

although they came with no back seat, no radio,no sound deadners,  no insurance.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Stampf on July 09, 2008, 05:07:11 PM
.

was that street legal?

thunderbolt galaxy500, i think was 10.90's street legal


Yes it was, and for years and years it held the fastest quarter mile production car title.  :aok 
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 05:15:33 PM
I might just do that, have nothing planned this week and the car has been taking a break.

Sweet!  Hope to see you there!  I get there a bit early as the parking lot fills up pretty fast.  I'm usually there between 5:30 and 6:00.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 05:56:32 PM
they were street legal, at least i am under the impression they were.

although they came with no back seat, no radio,no sound deadners,  no insurance.

ya know....i love my smallblock fuelinjected engines.........


but i miss seeing the tracks lined up with big block fords, dodges, and chevys..............
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: whiteman on July 09, 2008, 06:23:24 PM
ya know....i love my smallblock fuelinjected engines.........


but i miss seeing the tracks lined up with big block fords, dodges, and chevys..............

still see plenty here.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 06:27:43 PM
Mike, what was it your ran in the quarter in stock configuration?
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Mark Luper on July 09, 2008, 07:24:59 PM
That Cuda was not street legal, at least those tires were not! 

Yep, everyone (mopar fans) like to forget the Thunderbolt Galaxy 500 ;)

(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/1964_ford_fairlane_thunderbolt4.jpg)

Rip, that is a 64 Fairlane 500, not the big Galaxie.

Mark
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 08:03:24 PM
Rip, that is a 64 Fairlane 500, not the big Galaxie.

Mark

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the the Thunderbolt Galaxy 500 on a Fairlane chassis with a 427 shoved in it?  If I am wrong, I trust your judgement as I was only 4 years old then. :p
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Mark Luper on July 09, 2008, 08:17:53 PM
Rip,

http://www.bcautos.com/musclecars/64galaxie.html (http://www.bcautos.com/musclecars/64galaxie.html)

This is a 64 Galaxie, a much larger car. You wouldn't be able to place the body on the Fairlane chassis. I'm familiar with that 427 version of the Fairlane, one of the first funny cars I watched in that era was the 64 427 Fairlane with an altered wheelbase. It primary did wheel stands for a show but it could knock down some pretty impressive times.

I always wanted a 427 in the Galaxie like the one pictured. I always thought they were the shiznit :)

Mark
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 09, 2008, 08:22:36 PM
(http://www.bcautos.com/musclecars/bt64.jpg)

Like a lot of the cars from the 60's, THAT has a lot of custom potential.   Wowzers!
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: vorticon on July 09, 2008, 08:43:15 PM
not exactly a muscle car but...

(http://www.ironstonefoundation.org/images/2007/2007%20Ironstone%20Concours/album/slides/1955%20Ford%20Thunderbird.jpg)

(http://www.esu8.org/~oneill/mpetersn/spencer_car_show_001.jpg)

(http://www.inwthunderbird.org/1979_tbird_dk_brn/79tbird_brn1.jpg)

(http://www.edmunds.com/pictures/VEHICLE/1993/Ford/7230/1993.ford.thunderbird.3623-T.jpg)

(http://www.analogstereo.com/images/om/ford_thunderbird.jpg)

Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 09, 2008, 08:46:41 PM
Rip,

http://www.bcautos.com/musclecars/64galaxie.html (http://www.bcautos.com/musclecars/64galaxie.html)

This is a 64 Galaxie, a much larger car. You wouldn't be able to place the body on the Fairlane chassis. I'm familiar with that 427 version of the Fairlane, one of the first funny cars I watched in that era was the 64 427 Fairlane with an altered wheelbase. It primary did wheel stands for a show but it could knock down some pretty impressive times.

I always wanted a 427 in the Galaxie like the one pictured. I always thought they were the shiznit :)

Mark
That's not a Thunderbolt though Mark.  This is what they looked like;

(http://www.bobsautomotivediecast.com/images/ertlcaro.jpg)

Only 53 sold.

Here is an article on them:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1964-ford-fairlane-thunderbolt.htm

I think we're talking two different cars. There is no way that the Galaxy 500 could do a 10 second 1/4 mile, too heavy.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Mark Luper on July 09, 2008, 09:10:47 PM
You are absolutely right Rip. The Galaxie was too big. The Thunderbolt had to have been the Fairlane. Look at the body on the one you show in your post and compare to the one I posted. The one I posted is the Galaxie, the big car, the one you posted, both the white one and the maroon one are Fairlane 500's. Key words here are Fairlane and Galaxie.

Now if Ford decided to call 53 of their Fairlanes Thunderbolt Galaxies then that certainly was their perogative but the Fairlane is the smaller chassis and the one raced in drag racing. They raced the Galaxie in NASCAR.

Mark
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Mark Luper on July 09, 2008, 09:15:31 PM
Went to your link Rip and the title said this:

"1964 Ford Fairlane Thunderbolt"

That is a cut and paste. We are talking the same car, you just called it a "1964 Ford Galaxie Thunderbolt".


Mark
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: VonMessa on July 09, 2008, 09:18:51 PM
1969 Pontiac GTO Judge
(http://www.dragracecentral.com/stories/photos_go_here_04/pr/13-Beautiful_Judge.jpg)

1974 Pontiac "GTO"
(http://www.gtoalley.com/gtopics/74wgto.jpg)

Probably the quickest downfall of them all.

Oh, and Dowding, you can take all of the horrid American styling designs collectively and they won't ammount to 1% of the turds that have come from Europe.  Here's one:

(http://www.misterw.com/Citroen/Citroen08b.jpg)

:ok

My father has a 69 Goat (Not Judge, but certainly not stock either    :devil )

I must totally agree with you on the downfall part.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: VonMessa on July 09, 2008, 09:24:18 PM
Yes it was, and for years and years it held the fastest quarter mile production car title.  :aok 

And you can't forget two words..       Max Wedge   :aok

Gotta love the old B-bodies.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: GFShill on July 09, 2008, 09:43:43 PM
That's a great find!  :lol

Like I said... I hope we don't have another "80s style fuel downgrade" to our cars...

Must see (it will make your day):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_GtLssyNAs

BTW, after the '70 duster, I drove the above car ('86 Dodge Aires) until it wouldn't function anymore (1998).  Those were some dark years... 




Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: GFShill on July 09, 2008, 09:52:01 PM
How about the inverse of this conversation?  The 95-pound weakling that got on the Charles Atlas training program:

1988 Nissan Sentra
(http://www.atlanticremarketing.com/auctions/2003/inventory/pages/files/V615.jpg)

2008 Nissan Sentra
(http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9G_bF4oeXVIGa8A46WjzbkF/SIG=11m5pgrd1/EXP=1215744680/**http%3A//i17.tinypic.com/33u8tns.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 11:05:18 PM
still see plenty here.

you're lucky. last time i was to atco dragway, was a few big blocks....mostly little engines though. and worse yet? when they have their puerto rican nights.........friggin mazdas toyotas nissans......all buzzsaws.............
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 11:07:32 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the the Thunderbolt Galaxy 500 on a Fairlane chassis with a 427 shoved in it?  If I am wrong, I trust your judgement as I was only 4 years old then. :p

nope.. they were both thunderbolts, but two different cars.

i think some of the thrunderbolts not only came with the hi rise 427, but some came with a 427 SOHC that produced well over 600hp.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 11:08:24 PM
Rip,

http://www.bcautos.com/musclecars/64galaxie.html (http://www.bcautos.com/musclecars/64galaxie.html)

This is a 64 Galaxie, a much larger car. You wouldn't be able to place the body on the Fairlane chassis. I'm familiar with that 427 version of the Fairlane, one of the first funny cars I watched in that era was the 64 427 Fairlane with an altered wheelbase. It primary did wheel stands for a show but it could knock down some pretty impressive times.

I always wanted a 427 in the Galaxie like the one pictured. I always thought they were the shiznit :)

Mark

that's not a thunderbolt galaxy though mark.......
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 11:09:42 PM
(http://www.bcautos.com/musclecars/bt64.jpg)

Like a lot of the cars from the 60's, THAT has a lot of custom potential.   Wowzers!

that's the beautiful thing about cars like the one you pictured there......there's absolutley no need to customize. it is absolutley beautiful as it is.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 11:15:53 PM
That's not a Thunderbolt though Mark.  This is what they looked like;

(http://www.bobsautomotivediecast.com/images/ertlcaro.jpg)

Only 53 sold.

Here is an article on them:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1964-ford-fairlane-thunderbolt.htm

I think we're talking two different cars. There is no way that the Galaxy 500 could do a 10 second 1/4 mile, too heavy.

check this link for the galaxy.......http://www.mustangandfords.com/featuredvehicles/mufp_0602_1964_galaxie_500_fastback_bore_stroke/600_hp_427.html
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Mark Luper on July 09, 2008, 11:29:07 PM
that's not a thunderbolt galaxy though mark.......

I realize that it wasn't a thunderbolt galaxie, I was showing him a picture of a galaxie so he could understand the difference between the galaxie and the fairlane.

Mark
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 11:31:49 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO_hirvvhoo&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMjCuht98q4

the vid quality kinda sucks, but figured a few may enjoy these.

Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 11:32:36 PM
I realize that it wasn't a thunderbolt galaxie, I was showing him a picture of a galaxie so he could understand the difference between the galaxie and the fairlane.

Mark

my mistake sir..i saw that as i read farther down the thread......DOH!!
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Mark Luper on July 09, 2008, 11:32:47 PM
check this link for the galaxy.......http://www.mustangandfords.com/featuredvehicles/mufp_0602_1964_galaxie_500_fastback_bore_stroke/600_hp_427.html

That is not a thunderbolt galaxie either, it is a reworked 641/2 galaxie. It is a beautiful car like I had imagined one.

Mark
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 09, 2008, 11:39:33 PM
That is not a thunderbolt galaxie either, it is a reworked 641/2 galaxie. It is a beautiful car like I had imagined one.

Mark

oo i know it wasn't a t-bolt....but i just HAD to put it there.........friggin biiiiiiiig beautiful car
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: mg1942 on July 10, 2008, 12:18:02 AM
Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations

The original Nissan Skyline GT-R (good-looking)

(http://www.dwr-classics.co.uk/95skylinerear.jpg)
(http://www.importvehiclesdirect.com/imports/upload/mainimg_194.JPG)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Skyline_R33_GT-R.jpg)


2009 GT-R (doesn't look good compare to original)

(http://api.ning.com/files/QYrCtpxKIXPq-s4OUl8N1yrcJdW52MQgD8d6xC9RxKq9OQLv16Sa*NzGjgcPChwyGLuh83CCk5sLUnbfWZqUAXYJruxAGVTr/nissangtrwallpaper1.jpg)




Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 10, 2008, 01:04:59 AM
Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations

The original Nissan Skyline GT-R (good-looking)

(http://www.dwr-classics.co.uk/95skylinerear.jpg)
(http://www.importvehiclesdirect.com/imports/upload/mainimg_194.JPG)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Skyline_R33_GT-R.jpg)


2009 GT-R (doesn't look good compare to original)

(http://api.ning.com/files/QYrCtpxKIXPq-s4OUl8N1yrcJdW52MQgD8d6xC9RxKq9OQLv16Sa*NzGjgcPChwyGLuh83CCk5sLUnbfWZqUAXYJruxAGVTr/nissangtrwallpaper1.jpg)






i've been soiled..now i have to go wash my eyeballs
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 10, 2008, 09:47:58 AM
Went to your link Rip and the title said this:

"1964 Ford Fairlane Thunderbolt"

That is a cut and paste. We are talking the same car, you just called it a "1964 Ford Galaxie Thunderbolt".


Mark


Ah. Okay. I had carried the "Galaxy" from the previous poster, thinking "Galaxy" was part of the name due to the 427 engine coming from the Galaxy. :)

.

was that street legal?

thunderbolt galaxy500, i think was 10.90's street legal


Incidently, I have owned both a Ford Galaxy (1967 convertible) and a Fairlane (1967). Both well used when I had them as a teenager. Both with a 289.  I also owned a 1964 Ford Futura convertible that had a 302 Boss dropped into it (project car from a local Automotive vocational school ) that had a Hearst In-line shifter. That car was fun! I sold it to a guy that restored it to original everything and it went on to touring in a traveling car show in the 1980's. You may have seen it, a red '64 (It was baby blue when I had it) not unlike this one:
http://www.hubcaps.org/blog/wp-content/images/2007/10/1964fordfalconfutura.jpg
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: ODBAL on July 10, 2008, 10:03:07 AM
Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations

The original Nissan Skyline GT-R (good-looking)

(http://www.dwr-classics.co.uk/95skylinerear.jpg)
(http://www.importvehiclesdirect.com/imports/upload/mainimg_194.JPG)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Skyline_R33_GT-R.jpg)


2009 GT-R (doesn't look good compare to original)

(http://api.ning.com/files/QYrCtpxKIXPq-s4OUl8N1yrcJdW52MQgD8d6xC9RxKq9OQLv16Sa*NzGjgcPChwyGLuh83CCk5sLUnbfWZqUAXYJruxAGVTr/nissangtrwallpaper1.jpg)



Maybe its just me, but the 09 version of that seems MUCH cooler than the original. I much prefer American Muscle (69 Chevelle SS with a 396 would be my dream car).  But I did recently sell my 05 Nissan Altima SE-R which was pretty sweet.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Carrel on July 10, 2008, 10:07:27 AM
A buddy of mine is restoring a 62 Impala SS 2 door hardtop- 327, 4 speed- He's got tons of work to do but it's going to be a beautiful car when it's done.

There's nothing like 60s muscle cars.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 10, 2008, 10:12:04 AM
Ah. Okay. I had carried the "Galaxy" from the previous poster, thinking "Galaxy" was part of the name due to the 427 engine coming from the Galaxy. :)

Incidently, I have owned both a Ford Galaxy (1967 convertible) and a Fairlane (1967). Both well used when I had them as a teenager. Both with a 289.  I also owned a 1964 Ford Futura convertible that had a 302 Boss dropped into it (project car from a local Automotive vocational school ) that had a Hearst In-line shifter. That car was fun! I sold it to a guy that restored it to original everything and it went on to touring in a traveling car show in the 1980's. You may have seen it, a red '64 (It was baby blue when I had it) not unlike this one:
http://www.hubcaps.org/blog/wp-content/images/2007/10/1964fordfalconfutura.jpg

i think i'm guilty of causing that misunderstanding rip..and mark......sorry guys......

i had a 390 64 galaxy convertible for awhile..till someone offered me enough to sell it.....
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: whiteman on July 10, 2008, 11:34:39 AM
Mike, what was it your ran in the quarter in stock configuration?

12.97, i got a Wednesdays car.

now that it's paid off it's time to put a little more fun in it.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Ripsnort on July 10, 2008, 11:42:03 AM
i think i'm guilty of causing that misunderstanding rip..and mark......sorry guys......

i had a 390 64 galaxy convertible for awhile..till someone offered me enough to sell it.....

No worries! I've heard it referred to it as a "Thunderbolt Galaxy" too, since it had the Galaxy 427 engine!
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 10, 2008, 12:14:47 PM
12.97, i got a Wednesdays car.

now that it's paid off it's time to put a little more fun in it.

what car was that again?
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: whiteman on July 10, 2008, 12:15:15 PM
01 Z/28,4spd auto.

(http://memimage.cardomain.com/member_images/9/web/717000-717999/717725_17_full.jpg)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: SFRT - Frenchy on July 10, 2008, 01:59:45 PM
 

Oh, and Dowding, you can take all of the horrid American styling designs collectively and they won't ammount to 1% of the turds that have come from Europe.  Here's one:

(http://www.misterw.com/Citroen/Citroen08b.jpg)

:ok

You should do your homework before such a statement. This car was the spaceship Enterprise for it's time, especially in 1955. I remember my grand pa offroading in his grass fields in his to go check on the cows. Mechanicaly, but not as well as the Peugeot 504, the thing could take a beating. I even bet you that it would have slaughter a 69 Camaro SS in a canonball ... while the driver drank champagne getting sexuall favors from a sweedish model.   :cool:

Anyway, France/Europe traditionaly embraced small engines/small sizes due to fuel economy cost AND narrow spaces requirements. Cars such as R8 Gordini, and Alpines A110 still ruled the rally world in their days despite ridiculously small engines compared to period equivalent USA.

(http://8000vueltas.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/r8gordini.jpg)
(http://www.passionautomobile.com/tour_auto/tour_auto_2007/82-ALPINE-A-110-1600-SC-1974.jpg)

As far as your Camaro, it is to me the nicest design for the post 80s GM line especially with the RS kit. Even if being far from my dreamcar as far as the design, I still favor them over the Pontiac Firebird line, and as you know, Firebird is my thing. Talking about Firebirds, your friend would impress me more if she'd drive a manual. Plenty of big breasted chicks out there prentending to drive cool cars already :t
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 10, 2008, 03:04:27 PM
01 Z/28,4spd auto.

(http://memimage.cardomain.com/member_images/9/web/717000-717999/717725_17_full.jpg)

and it ran thatr stock...i think chevy had them in the 12's since late 90's......
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 10, 2008, 04:46:40 PM

You should do your homework before such a statement. This car was the spaceship Enterprise for it's time, especially in 1955. I remember my grand pa offroading in his grass fields in his to go check on the cows. Mechanicaly, but not as well as the Peugeot 504, the thing could take a beating. I even bet you that it would have slaughter a 69 Camaro SS in a canonball ... while the driver drank champagne getting sexuall favors from a sweedish model.   :cool:

Anyway, France/Europe traditionaly embraced small engines/small sizes due to fuel economy cost AND narrow spaces requirements. Cars such as R8 Gordini, and Alpines A110 still ruled the rally world in their days despite ridiculously small engines compared to period equivalent USA.

(http://8000vueltas.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/r8gordini.jpg)
(http://www.passionautomobile.com/tour_auto/tour_auto_2007/82-ALPINE-A-110-1600-SC-1974.jpg)

As far as your Camaro, it is to me the nicest design for the post 80s GM line especially with the RS kit. Even if being far from my dreamcar as far as the design, I still favor them over the Pontiac Firebird line, and as you know, Firebird is my thing. Talking about Firebirds, your friend would impress me more if she'd drive a manual. Plenty of big breasted chicks out there prentending to drive cool cars already :t


Frenchy, read the thread.  We're talking mainly about styling and options.  Oh, and Julie doesn't need to be driving a standard as she's always talking on her cellphone!  :)  And that Citroen is but ugly no matter how NCC-1701 it may seem!
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 10, 2008, 04:47:23 PM
and it ran thatr stock...i think chevy had them in the 12's since late 90's......

Negative.  LS1 F-body's routinely were in the mid to high 13's.  That's why Mike said he had a "Wednesday" car.
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 10, 2008, 04:53:47 PM
Negative.  LS1 F-body's routinely were in the mid to high 13's.  That's why Mike said he had a "Wednesday" car.

my bad......givin chevy a little too much credit :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: whiteman on July 10, 2008, 04:54:20 PM
Negative.  LS1 F-body's routinely were in the mid to high 13's.  That's why Mike said he had a "Wednesday" car.

WEDNESDAY CAR
(Johnny Cash)
« © '77 House Of Cash »

 

The assembly line is runnin' slow on Monday
They've been livin' it up and layin' up Saturday and Sunday
On Tuesday they're about to come around
But they still feel bad and they're kinda down
And mad cause they've got four more day before the weekend rolls around
On Wednesday they're feelin' fine again
And they're workin' like a dog and diggin' in
Tryin' to do everything they should puttin' 'em cars together good
And I got me a car that was made on Wednesday on Wednesday
If you're gonna buy yourself a new car
You just better hope you're lucky enough to get one made on Wednesday

[ piano ]

On Thursday the weekend is in sight
And they're in a hurry and they don't do nothing right
Friday is the worst day of the week that's the day they make lemons dogs and freaks
If your car was made on Friday friend you'll soon be in the creek
Cause it's payday and the loafin' has begun
Lord them Friday cars just hope you don't get one
Monday Tuesday Thursday and Friday
Are all bad days and the only try day is Wednesday
And my car was made on Wednesday on Wednesday
If your car wasn't made on Wednesday I'd advise you not to even leave home any
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 10, 2008, 06:07:54 PM

You should do your homework before such a statement. This car was the spaceship Enterprise for it's time, especially in 1955. I remember my grand pa offroading in his grass fields in his to go check on the cows. Mechanicaly, but not as well as the Peugeot 504, the thing could take a beating. I even bet you that it would have slaughter a 69 Camaro SS in a canonball ... while the driver drank champagne getting sexuall favors from a sweedish model.   :cool:

Anyway, France/Europe traditionaly embraced small engines/small sizes due to fuel economy cost AND narrow spaces requirements. Cars such as R8 Gordini, and Alpines A110 still ruled the rally world in their days despite ridiculously small engines compared to period equivalent USA.

(http://8000vueltas.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/r8gordini.jpg)
(http://www.passionautomobile.com/tour_auto/tour_auto_2007/82-ALPINE-A-110-1600-SC-1974.jpg)

As far as your Camaro, it is to me the nicest design for the post 80s GM line especially with the RS kit. Even if being far from my dreamcar as far as the design, I still favor them over the Pontiac Firebird line, and as you know, Firebird is my thing. Talking about Firebirds, your friend would impress me more if she'd drive a manual. Plenty of big breasted chicks out there prentending to drive cool cars already :t


those are two of the ugliest impressions of a car i've ever seen...i suppose that next youre gonna try to convince us that the reneult fuego was a good car? :rofl
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 10, 2008, 06:11:03 PM
my bad......givin chevy a little too much credit :rofl :rofl

That's a common reaction from slow Ford owners!   :D :rofl :D :rofl :aok
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Mark Luper on July 10, 2008, 08:17:32 PM
That's a common reaction from slow Ford owners!   :D :rofl :D :rofl :aok

Hmmmm...(does he mean the owners are slow?)

Mark
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 10, 2008, 08:34:20 PM
Hmmmm...(does he mean the owners are slow?)

Mark

Shhhhh, we were supposed to find that out with his reply.  Dangit, never mind!  ;)
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: crockett on July 10, 2008, 08:54:36 PM
Was just thinking... with the price of oil rising with no end in sight, do you all think we'll be in for another "80s style" redesign of all our production vehicles ?

Well considering most auto makers go out of their way to make fuel efficient cars look like dog turds.. my guess is yes.

I think I'll just drop a natural gas powered V8 in my 55 Chevy truck if I ever get it finished..
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2008, 07:47:11 AM
That's a common reaction from slow Ford owners!   :D :rofl :D :rofl :aok


 :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

the only 2 slow fords i've owned were my 74 mustang 2.3L 4 spd, and my 95 taurus 3.8L.  :rofl :rofl

then only fast chevy i ever owned was my 70 c-10 pickup with a 400 smallblock 4 speed, 4x4. that was shockingly quick when i finished with the engine. :O

hell, even my 81 futura with a 250 straight 6 could handle average cars in stoplight challenges :O
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2008, 07:48:48 AM
Shhhhh, we were supposed to find that out with his reply.  Dangit, never mind!  ;)



 :rofl :rofl
i replied to your other one before i read the rest of the posts :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: DiabloTX on July 11, 2008, 09:01:58 AM


 :rofl :rofl
i replied to your other one before i read the rest of the posts :rofl :rofl

Yes, you tend to do that.  Positive proof of "slow Ford owners", lawlz
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2008, 09:32:48 AM
Yes, you tend to do that.  Positive proof of "slow Ford owners", lawlz

noo..that's proof of quick to jump!! :rofl :rofl :rofl

could have somethint to do with how i could almost always ""tree"" the other guy at the dragstrip :D
Title: Re: Most pathetic muscle car design transformations
Post by: Furball on July 11, 2008, 03:34:48 PM
Some awesome cars posted.  Shame they don't 'work' here.  Better start building my raft to get over there - any Cubans got any tips?

Oh, and Checkers has some amazing cars, will point him in the direction of this thread.