3rd gen firebird, basically a Formula clone. 17x9s. Good rubber. In a perfect world everything else would match DSE's blue IROC pictured above.
This is why I don't like the clean GTA that I currently own. It's too nice to cut the ground effects off of. Car already has the hood, and I have one of those front bumpers in the garage.
TheRX7Project said:In reply to STM317 :
That first blue one you pictured gave me a little movement. It just looks right.
Seconded.
TheRX7Project said:In reply to STM317 :
That first blue one you pictured gave me a little movement. It just looks right.
Just your average 8500rpm LS7 IROC. Nothing to see here.
There are so many cars that look beautiful, but just cannot keep up with the comfort/handling/speed of modern cars. I think a 240 or 260Z would be lovely. Grafting a MGA body onto any miata sounds like something I would drive. How about a 1959 impala wagon that drove even as good as a new F150?
I'm really looking forward to helping a friend complete his BEAMS swapped '76 celica.
As I work through my own eternal project of a resto-mod 1968 GTO I understand why so many of these cars sit rather than get driven, but I am bound and determined to be different. My goal is to turn it into a car that I can hand the keys to a friend who has no prior old car experience and offer no instructions beyond, "have fun!"
Even after this is accomplished there is still the issue of the bespoke or made-to-order parts required for such a car. I cannot imagine ever selling my car and not worrying about the next owner being able to service the hodgepodge of parts. I suspect this is the case for even the nicest resto-mod cars.
An early Pontiac Grand Am.
vwcorvette said:pinchvalve said:Oh, and I'd want to do a early-80s Supra
Clean up the lines, integrate the wheel arches better, massive rolling stock over a race car suspension and a twin turbo straight six up front.
Leave this alone. Perfect as is. /thread
This needs more engine... 5 MGE is pretty lacking... although a fair amount can be done... While I'm not a fan of "JZ"ing anything... this is a good car for a 2JZGE (yes... no turbo)
Carbon said:I want to do a first gen celica again. Gonna do a coupe this time, 1uz swap it with real cams, headwork and itbs. Throw some recaro pole positions in there. Do a nice rotisserie build on it, tucked and simple. Man that would make me happy.
Agree.... although my desire would be a 76 Fastback... with smiley bumpers... running a 4V-U, 3.5 liter hemi V8
Will said:IMHO the silver truck isn't a restomod--basically every part on it is custom. To me, a restomod has to look more or less original. That said, I don't want quibbling over words to create the impression that one kind of hot rod is inferior to another. I like the silver truck...I just don't think restomod is the right word for it.
This is my T-Bird. Every body panel on it is stock (except for the front bumper). It has all the factory trim, factory interior, factory dash, factory gauges, factory radio (face, the guts are electronic), etc.
But it also has this.
I agree with your terminology, though I think the line blurs a bit as people make incremental customizations. I would definitely say that the silver truck is a custom. It is really not trying to look like the original truck at all.
If I were to do an IROC I'd probably have it more on the custom side of things, though I'd want the exterior to look like the original IROC exterior, maybe have things like panel gaps cleaned up, different headlamp light sources, something led or xenon. The interior though has to go.
With a new 5.0 Coyote, 6 speed, Mustang IRS, more for Grand Touring than track. The interior would have very minor touches just for some extra long distance comfort. And yes it would be the four door.
My wife's first car when we got married was a 66 Mustang coupe, 289 4V 4 speed. We sold it when it was time to have babies, cuz no AC yada yada yada. I wish we had kept it, but it seriously needed power steering, power disc brakes and an engine freshening. And of course Vintage AC.
pushrod36 said:
Even after this is accomplished there is still the issue of the bespoke or made-to-order parts required for such a car. I cannot imagine ever selling my car and not worrying about the next owner being able to service the hodgepodge of parts. I suspect this is the case for even the nicest resto-mod cars.
I think that this is a topic worthy of its own thread. I have a friend who is winding down from years of custom and kit builds. He's got five very interesting cars in his backyard, but is somewhat scared to sell them - well the custom builds anyway. They are all fast as hell, and require a certain sort of owner to appreciate them, keep them running, and use them the "right" way.
I don't understand this. This seems to me that it's nothing more than throwing money at something that looks cool to make it drive remotely like a modern car, which by every single measurable criteria are superior, safer, cleaner, and reliabler. I feel like this is the exact opposite of my own personal values when it comes to cars - keep them reliable, keep them safe, and don't change anything until it either needs replacement or you have completely maxed out its performance.
I am positive I've told this story here before, but I'll do a quick recap of how all of this seems to me. I had an E30 M3 that I replaced with an E46 M3. I sold the E30 to a friend of mine who was just getting started doing track days. He took it out twice (both times to Gingerman Raceway), had the same instructor both times, and at the end of the second day he came up to me, very excited, and said, "My instructor said that I really should put coilovers and swaybars on the car because this suspension is really holding me back and I could go a lot faster with a new suspension!" He'd had the car for two DEs and he was ELEVEN SECONDS SLOWER at Gingerman than I was in the very same car. Why in the WORLD would you modify something when you haven't reached its potential yet?
I've had a crash now and I can't imagine pushing the performance of a car without crumple zones and airbags and all of that good stuff. A brand new Camaro 2.0t is going to be cheaper than any of these cars and will outperform almost all of them. It will most certainly out-safety any of them.
This is very honestly not a rant and not an "I'm right and this is stupid" post. I really want this explained to me because I've never understood it and some of you are super passionate about it. I just can't grok it. What am I missing, other than "old Supras look cool" and "3rd gen Camaros look cool"? I recently drove a 3rd gen Camaro and it was AWFUL! What am I unable to process about these cars? :)
In reply to Lugnut :
Old cars are cooler than new cars, end of explanation. That 2.0T Camaro might be faster, safer, stop better, get better mileage and be more comfortable... it could be better in every single way, but it will never be as cool as a 1969 Camaro, even a base model.
Now take all the things the modern car does better- give that '69 base Camaro a modern drivetrain, suspension, brakes, and niceties like A/C and comfortable seats, and the coolness factor is off the charts.
I understand it comes down to preference, especially "cool factor", and so you're not really "wrong", you just have an "unpopular opinion".
In reply to Lugnut :
It's about being an individual in a sea of sameness. It's about analog having character that digital lacks.
In reply to Lugnut :
Continuing along what the last couple of folks have said, older cars have two things off the top of my head that new cars can't seem to get for love or money:
Looks. Not that new cars aren't sometimes gorgeous, but they do it differently, and often not at all. The difference may be best illustrated by the neo-retro cars (Mini, Beetle, T-bird, Mustang, Camaro, etc...); the newer ones lack the detail. They certainly reference the originals, but they look like a Duplo Lego version. Sometimes they're spectacular in their own right, but usually not as pretty. A car from the '60s is hardly heirloom handcraft, but there's something closer to personal design to them.
Feel. I honestly don't know what feel you get if you replace all the high-tech oil-filled bushings on a modern car with urethane or delrin, and avoid ones with the extra numbness of electric power steering, so maybe this is something that modern cars could do better than they usually do. But my Mini's form of "feedback" in the steering is really just "weight", and it's not very good at that. The '12 WRX was a little better, and the '13 Leaf was just as bad, but at least in character for the smartphone of cars. My BMW 2002 never struck me as harsh or buzzy, but I could feel nuances of the contact patch through it in a way that the newer cars I've had totally lacked. And honestly, if I'm not spending three hours on an Interstate, I prefer a car with a bit more "life"; a little rumble, a little vibration. So some of the feel thing is about tactile feedback that helps you drive and enjoy the driving, and some is just basking in the sounds and feelings of a mechanical thing.
In reply to Lugnut :
New cars hold zero appeal for me. I find nothing whatsoever that excites me in a new car, except exotics that I'll never be able to drive anyway. So why not take a car that does excite me and upgrade it with components and the knowledge gained with technological advances over the last three or four decades that have passed since the cars were built? Safety is not even a consideration for me.
Lugnut said:I recently drove a 3rd gen Camaro and it was AWFUL!
What if it didn't have to be?
I think it really has to do with a persons reasons for owning a given car and what they want to do with it. For primary use type cars, I generally agree with you. However, they are still almost exclusively appliances to me at that point. Even if not soul sucking, the vast majority generally seem devoid of true personality and character. For secondary use cars though, the key to me lies in the belief that better is not necessarily better. There is a balancing act that needs to occur between too-bad and too-good.
I have to say I like Detroit speeds John greenwood bfg Stars and Stripes tribute resto mod car. With c3 the bigger wheels and lower profile tires can go either way in terms of me liking it or not it takes the right wheels etc to make it work.
However year one makes 17 inch version of Chevy rally rims which look awesome on a c3.
Datsun310Guy said:1960 Cadillac and it would play this song all the time.
Mine is for sale in the $2018 Classifieds- auction ends tomorrow, bid up to $610 right now.
Lugnut said:I don't understand this. This seems to me that it's nothing more than throwing money at something that looks cool to make it drive remotely like a modern car, which by every single measurable criteria are superior, safer, cleaner, and reliabler. I feel like this is the exact opposite of my own personal values when it comes to cars - keep them reliable, keep them safe, and don't change anything until it either needs replacement or you have completely maxed out its performance.
I am positive I've told this story here before, but I'll do a quick recap of how all of this seems to me. I had an E30 M3 that I replaced with an E46 M3. I sold the E30 to a friend of mine who was just getting started doing track days. He took it out twice (both times to Gingerman Raceway), had the same instructor both times, and at the end of the second day he came up to me, very excited, and said, "My instructor said that I really should put coilovers and swaybars on the car because this suspension is really holding me back and I could go a lot faster with a new suspension!" He'd had the car for two DEs and he was ELEVEN SECONDS SLOWER at Gingerman than I was in the very same car. Why in the WORLD would you modify something when you haven't reached its potential yet?
I've had a crash now and I can't imagine pushing the performance of a car without crumple zones and airbags and all of that good stuff. A brand new Camaro 2.0t is going to be cheaper than any of these cars and will outperform almost all of them. It will most certainly out-safety any of them.
This is very honestly not a rant and not an "I'm right and this is stupid" post. I really want this explained to me because I've never understood it and some of you are super passionate about it. I just can't grok it. What am I missing, other than "old Supras look cool" and "3rd gen Camaros look cool"? I recently drove a 3rd gen Camaro and it was AWFUL! What am I unable to process about these cars? :)
I'm going to skip over some of the topics addressed here as they don't seem to really relate to the whole restomod / custom thing.
Why would I want a restomod or custom IROC? Because I like the look of the car and it has some level of nostalgia for me. They don't really make anything that looks like that anymore. I'd want a car that looks like that on the outside, but that actually performs nicely and is nice inside. Were I to do this, it would not be a car I would daily drive or take out as a race car so safety, while certainly a priority, isn't a huge priority.
More pics of that DSE Camaro at the link below.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/detroitspeedinc/sets/72157681290828273
Lugnut said:
Why in the WORLD would you modify something when you haven't reached its potential yet?
I'd guess that the vast majority of people who modify old cars have almost zero interest in how fast it can go around a race track. For some modifying the car is The thing they are trying to achieve. Whether it's a certain look or sound or feel or the way it drives and they have no intention of ever taking it in a race track but like the fact that it could do it if they wanted to.
I've modified plenty of cars and have never driven on a racetrack in any of them.
In reply to pushrod36 :
Even after this is accomplished there is still the issue of the bespoke or made-to-order parts required for such a car. I cannot imagine ever selling my car and not worrying about the next owner being able to service the hodgepodge of parts. I suspect this is the case for even the nicest resto-mod cars.
This was a big design requirement for the Molvo project. There is no one-off custom machined parts in the car beyond what was required to build the tub and mount the drivetrain.
Beyond what has already been said about "why" and I agree with it all, but the other reason is that I can do the work myself. I could not imagine trying to get an LSX into a 2018 MX5 and have to deal with all the computer/CAN/imobilizers, etc... involved in such a swap (but that is what Flying Miata is for), but for many of these cars, the technology is very simple and we are just adding the technology to make it better. In my first "restorod" I put the rover V8 into the TR4A, which since it is a carb, was mainly a mechanical swap. For my Spitfire project, this involves fuel injection, aftermarket ECU (Hydra), turbo, new rear suspension, etc.... but underneath the stock body. Car will weigh 1800 pounds and have 220 HP. Will I drive it to the limit? Not likely, as Spitfires become pretty light at over 100 MPH, but it will be a fun street car and capable of taking out most modern cars. Is my 2008 MX5 a better sports car and safer? Sure it is and that is why it is my daily, and it is also fun to drive, but the classics are fun to drive as well and with more power and improvements are not only cool, but can be built in my garage.
I have to add that to get what I wanted in the Spitfire, there are some "one off" custom machined parts. GT6 rear uprights machined for MGF hubs, Rover 100 shortened and re-splined axles and the Subaru R160. But that is what was necessary to build a working rear suspension capable of handling the power but not requiring me going into the "grey" area of designing my own rear suspension solution or cutting up all the rear body work. I am not worried about this during my ownership or the next owner, as this will be used for a weekend play toy for the next 10 years and not likely to see me put 30,000 miles on it. Unlike a classic Mustang or Camaro, where doing a restomod and using a crate motor will still hold it's value, on a car like a Spitfire, you will not see any return on your investment so you build it for your needs, not for the next buyer.
Nick Comstock said:An early Pontiac Grand Am.
Ooh, a GM Colonnade car would be awesome for a restomod. Should be easy to keep it comfortable, but dial up the handling, speed, and interior options. I think I’d start with a Chevelle Laguna or a 76-77 Cutlass Supreme.
My wife is incapable of finding the looks of a car “sexy” or “cool.” “CUTE” maybe, but never sexy...which is fine. I can’t get all excited about furniture or granite counter tops. “Different strokes” & all that.
Also, my longing for a turbo slant six 4-door dart has a lot to do with the “sleeper” factor...and a bench seat.
You'll need to log in to post.
