|
IOwnCalculus posted:Found on BringATrailer: Yeah, even the body lines on the lower half are the same. New nose, front quarters and hood, some emblems.... Here is the 72 
DILLIGAF fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Jun 10, 2014 |
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Found on BringATrailer: I would think any 68-72 A-body sheet metal would probably bolt right on. That reminds me of a 68-72 Chevy truck that some guy around here has done up as a Pontiac. It definitely got my attention the first time I saw it. Unfortunately, I haven't had any opportunities to get any pictures.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
   
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:God I'd kill for this. http://www.normandinchryslerjeep.net/jeep-wrangler-jk-8-pickup-conversion-kit.htm Seems reasonable. I was thinking it'd be easier to do to the stock 2-door. Seems like you could just put a short canopy on that one. This one requires new body panels.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
Boaz MacPhereson posted:That reminds me of a 68-72 Chevy truck that some guy around here has done up as a Pontiac. It definitely got my attention the first time I saw it. Unfortunately, I haven't had any opportunities to get any pictures. That would take some work, and I'd appreciate a pic if you're ever so lucky 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:That would take some work, and I'd appreciate a pic if you're ever so lucky I figured you would. I saw it a few times last summer pulling into the same restaurant for breakfast. I drive by that place every day on the way to work, but haven't seen him again. If I do, I need to get some pictures.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:Unfortunately the license plate holder juuuust about warps it around to awful. "Observe and weep as I hold this pedal down and press this button!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
I refuse to believe Tom Jones drives a "sissy vehicle".  bung posted:I won't disparage the participants of Gumball for being rich. But it is an incredibly narcissistic event and pretty much every entrant looks like a complete douche bag. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
I made my way to Ingolstadt, Germany over the weekend to visit the Audi museum thing. Here's a hint: it kind of sucks, they didn't even have a real Group-B rally car there. I got to see some generic Group-A stuff and a road racer or two, then basically their standard consumer cars. Granted, the cars had some great technological features at the time, but honestly were still pretty much boring crap. poo poo, you'd think they'd plaster the walls with Group-B and the LeMans cars with their incredible successes in each field, but there's barely any mention of them. I'd say avoid it unless you're really close to Ingolstadt, but if you're making a trip just go see the BMW Museum in Munich if you like old race cars/motorcycles. BMW has a loving poo poo-ton of them. That said, I did get to see the old Auto Union race cars which were amazing. They had the Type C and Type D on display.  Type C  Type D  Driver's Seat Type D  (Please forgive the wonky fisheye pictures - Audi stuffed them in a tiny area behind a solid wall and you didn't have much room to step back.) The Auto Union Type C was by far my favorite, though. 6-liter, 520 HP V-16? Check. 250 MPH* top speed? Check. Drum brakes all around?   The Type C also had this bizarre "Dualie" setup in the rear, which was just fantastic. I don't know the details on it, but I imagine it was their way of getting the power to the ground when wide slicks weren't even conceived, as this model came out in 1937. It's really odd because in all the other Type C stuff I've seen I haven't seen a photo of these rear wheels in use. Reading about the design though, a few websites claim they didn't really need the first gear in the transmission because of the ungodly torque produced by the V-16, so they blanked out the first gear in the 5-speed gearbox used in the Type A, giving the finished racer a 4-speed gearbox.  *Regarding 250mph top speed - This might not be 100% true as I had read on some websites that the cars only went from 172-195mph based on configuration. However, the panels at the museum stated specifically 250mph for the Type C, but then again, many of the exhibits were rife with spelling errors. It checks out with the km/h to MPH conversion from German, so who knows. Drum brakes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Heid the Ball posted:Charger done up as the General Lee Come on, it says Challenger right on the grille!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
N is for Nipples posted:Come on, it says Challenger right on the grille! Apologies, my poor eyesight. Should be a Charger though, to match up with the original show?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Model-name wise, yes Body-shape wise, no, since the Charger is now a four-door five-person sedan and the Challenger looks more like the old Charger than the Charger does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:
The Saboteur wasn't making poo poo up?? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
I want one. Badly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
Wasabi the J posted:The Saboteur wasn't making poo poo up?? God I love that game. I wish it lasted forever. There was so much map they didn't end up using for missions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
SierraEchoBravo posted:I'm guessing Gojira was taken? My former GTR owning friend had that on hers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
 Twin Cadillac 500, all-wheel-drive widebody Yugo. http://bangshift.com/general-news/sponsor/ridetech-calling-bring-weird-rear end-car-indy-weekend-goodguys-show-win-stuff/
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
1200 pounds of car, 1200 pounds of engine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
bung posted:I won't disparage the participants of Gumball for being rich. But it is an incredibly narcissistic event and pretty much every entrant looks like a complete douche bag. The one person who I know who does it fits right into that character mold.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
 TURN YOUR VOLUME RIGHT THE gently caress DOWN! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAkrzEqHHyA
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
88h88 posted:
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
88h88 posted:
Who doesn't love jet powered semi trucks? Also carbon offset lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
Wheeeeee!
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
Kinetic friction's a bitch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
Speaking of friction, the Jet Truck videos show how inefficient jets are at low speed compared to wheel traction: 36,000 horsepower (for the semi) to run a 6.0-second 137 mph pass, vs "only" 10,000 for a Top Fuel car to run low 4's at 330+. Now, that said, they are absolutely the most  way to power a vehicle.....almost: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mIfb4vIZOQ&t=60s
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Steam dragsters are bonkers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDDI5h8JQE0 If I understand it correctly, they use a pressure vessel capable of keeping water a liquid way past its boiling point, release a small dump valve which boils all of the water all at once, creating a pressure spike that triggers the main nozzle and sends it flying. There is no throttle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Nova goes in the other thread, dumbarse! Have a Prototype Gun Truck, based on a Bedford MK (taken at the overlord show in hampshire) 
Anghammarad fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Jun 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
I need this in desktop size.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
I want all of them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
2 R34s and 2 R35s but no Kenmeri?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I need this in desktop size. Ditto.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
donut posted:2 R34s and 2 R35s but no Kenmeri? I am shocked and saddened that I have never before seen the Kenmeri's rear end. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
RillAkBea posted:I am shocked and saddened that I have never before seen the Kenmeri's rear end. Really? The rear lights are really beautiful units. This is CG but for some reason there's no decent close-ups...  edit: ah! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
Stupid aerodynamics dooming us to an eternity of ugly car asses. I want the pre-1980's back.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
I like how this angle hides how bloated the car got over time since the latest are farther away. I'd love to see this same setup from the side then the front for maximum growth.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
davebo posted:I like how this angle hides how bloated the car got over time since the latest are farther away. I'd love to see this same setup from the side then the front for maximum growth. There was a picture like that floating around several years ago, but it was for the Accord or Camry or some other beige boredom machine. They had like 15 years of the things lined up and illustrating how bulky cars have grown.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
davebo posted:I like how this angle hides how bloated the car got over time since the latest are farther away. I'd love to see this same setup from the side then the front for maximum growth. I noticed the fading rear glass size myself. You can add cameras for visibility, but you can add anything to make the greenhouse feel nice and open again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:59
|
|
