So I've decided, being the exclusive arbiter of taste, that we need to start and automotive fad of some sort.
I'm think the GRM Squat No Dozer.
So what will it look like?
A lowered car or truck with a famous race paint job. The wilder the better.
Possiple examples:
V8 Pinto wagon in Gulf livery.
Porsche Cayenne in pink pig livery.
CAM-T truck in JPS black and gold.
Rotary pick up truck in Renown green and orange.
Sunoco Vega.
My pick for my Datsun is the Jordan F1 Buzzing Hornets sponsor theme.
That's not really a style or a fad though, is it? Manufacturers release homage cars fairly consistently if not constantly. To be a fad we create, its gotta be somewhat unique right?
If you are going to name it after one the dumber fads to come around, it's gotta be dumb... so only lower one side? Or has that been done, and I missed it?
Porsche Cayenne in Mary Kay pink.
My thought was iconic liveries on not so iconic cars.
Like Rothmans liviered Toyota Starlet.
What if we bring back the antiCarolina squat? Bring back the extreme rake. Big tires in back, little tires in front, huge ride height and slammed in front.
03Panther said:If you are going to name it after one the dumber fads to come around, it's gotta be dumb... so only lower one side? Or has that been done, and I missed it?
I like this idea. Other than lowriders on hydraulics I've not seen it done.
Tom1200 said:My thought was iconic liveries on not so iconic cars.
Like Rothmans liviered Toyota Starlet.
So far all the cars you've listed are ones I'd consider iconic. Maybe not from their success in motorsports during their production period though.
Pete Gossett (Forum Supporter) said:03Panther said:If you are going to name it after one the dumber fads to come around, it's gotta be dumb... so only lower one side? Or has that been done, and I missed it?
I like this idea. Other than lowriders on hydraulics I've not seen it done.
This isn't new or unique! I had a 1970s FIAT that broke a spring mount (well, more like rusted off) and leaned on one side. Most of these "new" ideas and technologies were around in the 70s and 80s. I regularly had (Italian) cars that deactiviated cylinders and turned themselves off at traffic lights. They didn't always restart, though.......
Pete Gossett (Forum Supporter) said:03Panther said:If you are going to name it after one the dumber fads to come around, it's gotta be dumb... so only lower one side? Or has that been done, and I missed it?
I like this idea. Other than lowriders on hydraulics I've not seen it done.
See "chevy lean"
Its only an inch or two usually.
914Driver said:
I mean, if our gripe with Carolina Squatted Brodozers is basically that it ruins the functionality of an otherwise inherently practical vehicle, then we should be aiming for the opposite right? The ultimate in functionality, while still trying to look good.
Lift kits and big tires hurt fuel economy, make loading more difficult, and increase wear on suspension components. Aggressively lowered trucks kill ground clearance and lead to bottoming with a load. Fancy paint jobs look great, but then do you really want to dump a load of gravel in the bed?
So, hear me out on this. What if you took a pickup truck, 2wd or 4wd depending on individual usage and needs, left it stock height or maybe just slightly lowered for improved aero/mpg, possibly throw in some mild power adders (intake, exhaust, tune, maybe a mild cam or something if you're feeling extra spicy) and just used it as a truck was intended? Or leave it the hell alone and do the same.
I think Duster's black truck is actually a near perfect example. I've gone a similar direction, sort of, with my own gmt400, although it's WAY uglier (unfortunately I don't have any pics handy, but picture lots of primer and rust) and one could argue that LS swapping it was a poor use of resources and added potential failure points, thus hurting its practicality.
03Panther said:If you are going to name it after one the dumber fads to come around, it's gotta be dumb... so only lower one side? Or has that been done, and I missed it?
Or maybe you just hugely lift one corner and lower the rest.
Call it The Sneer
Furious_E (Forum Supporter) said:I mean, if our gripe with Carolina Squatted Brodozers is basically that it ruins the functionality of an otherwise inherently practical vehicle, then we should be aiming for the opposite right? The ultimate in functionality, while still trying to look good.
Lift kits and big tires hurt fuel economy, make loading more difficult, and increase wear on suspension components. Aggressively lowered trucks kill ground clearance and lead to bottoming with a load. Fancy paint jobs look great, but then do you really want to dump a load of gravel in the bed?
So, hear me out on this. What if you took a pickup truck, 2wd or 4wd depending on individual usage and needs, left it stock height or maybe just slightly lowered for improved aero/mpg, possibly throw in some mild power adders (intake, exhaust, tune, maybe a mild cam or something if you're feeling extra spicy) and just used it as a truck was intended? Or leave it the hell alone and do the same.
I think Duster's black truck is actually a near perfect example. I've gone a similar direction, sort of, with my own gmt400, although it's WAY uglier (unfortunately I don't have any pics handy, but picture lots of primer and rust) and one could argue that LS swapping it was a poor use of resources and added potential failure points, thus hurting its practicality.
You get me. You really get me!
The thing is, theres a difference between a toy and a vehicle. I have both. But, the toys make bad vehicles. Take the red truck: its berkeleying LOW. load capacity is only due to the bags. It scrubs, rubs, and bottoms out. Loud. Rough riding. But its FUN and looks great. Great toy, bad vehicle. The black truck looks good, mostly stock, and just freaking works like a stock truck. But igs not really fun, you know? Its a vehicle for doing vehicle things.
Maybe the dirt track stagger?
The opposite of adding aesthetics to ruin a perfectly functional vehicle would be making a vehicle as practical and functional as possible, to the complete detriment of aesthetics. Sounds pretty GRM to me, actually.
volvoclearinghouse said:Maybe the dirt track stagger?
The opposite of adding aesthetics to ruin a perfectly functional vehicle would be making a vehicle as practical and functional as possible, to the complete detriment of aesthetics. Sounds pretty GRM to me, actually.
So we all need to buy Astros, 1st gen xBs, Elements, and Mazda5s?
This requires that the type of people who jump on automotive fads to understand iconic racing liveries.
Never. Gonna. Happen.
Meth Karen will never see Vaper Kyle's 1st gen Prius rolling past the bar at Daytona Beach and think "Wow, he dropped some coin on that John Player Special livery! I wanna swing with THAT!"
May I introduce you to my friend Matt. He is way ahead of you guys on this one. He also just picked up an old Thunderbird and is going 80s Motorcraft scheme on it.
Gulf scheme:
Valvoline:
Next up:
My dream for one of these is to get a 75/76 Camaro Z28 and build a replica of the first IROC Camaros (real ones that raced) ala:
But probably not AJ Foyt. I don't remember him being particularly nice to kids. I really liked Bobby Allison a lot though when I met him and he competed in the IROC too. Not sure if he completed in 75/6 though.
Furious_E (Forum Supporter) said:I mean, if our gripe with Carolina Squatted Brodozers is basically that it ruins the functionality of an otherwise inherently practical vehicle, then we should be aiming for the opposite right? The ultimate in functionality, while still trying to look good.
Lift kits and big tires hurt fuel economy, make loading more difficult, and increase wear on suspension components. Aggressively lowered trucks kill ground clearance and lead to bottoming with a load. Fancy paint jobs look great, but then do you really want to dump a load of gravel in the bed?
So, hear me out on this. What if you took a pickup truck, 2wd or 4wd depending on individual usage and needs, left it stock height or maybe just slightly lowered for improved aero/mpg, possibly throw in some mild power adders (intake, exhaust, tune, maybe a mild cam or something if you're feeling extra spicy) and just used it as a truck was intended? Or leave it the hell alone and do the same.
I think Duster's black truck is actually a near perfect example. I've gone a similar direction, sort of, with my own gmt400, although it's WAY uglier (unfortunately I don't have any pics handy, but picture lots of primer and rust) and one could argue that LS swapping it was a poor use of resources and added potential failure points, thus hurting its practicality.
Just what you need, nothing you don't. Base model all of the things:
Dusterbd13-michael (Forum Supporter) said:Furious_E (Forum Supporter) said:I mean, if our gripe with Carolina Squatted Brodozers is basically that it ruins the functionality of an otherwise inherently practical vehicle, then we should be aiming for the opposite right? The ultimate in functionality, while still trying to look good.
Lift kits and big tires hurt fuel economy, make loading more difficult, and increase wear on suspension components. Aggressively lowered trucks kill ground clearance and lead to bottoming with a load. Fancy paint jobs look great, but then do you really want to dump a load of gravel in the bed?
So, hear me out on this. What if you took a pickup truck, 2wd or 4wd depending on individual usage and needs, left it stock height or maybe just slightly lowered for improved aero/mpg, possibly throw in some mild power adders (intake, exhaust, tune, maybe a mild cam or something if you're feeling extra spicy) and just used it as a truck was intended? Or leave it the hell alone and do the same.
I think Duster's black truck is actually a near perfect example. I've gone a similar direction, sort of, with my own gmt400, although it's WAY uglier (unfortunately I don't have any pics handy, but picture lots of primer and rust) and one could argue that LS swapping it was a poor use of resources and added potential failure points, thus hurting its practicality.
You get me. You really get me!
The thing is, theres a difference between a toy and a vehicle. I have both. But, the toys make bad vehicles. Take the red truck: its berkeleying LOW. load capacity is only due to the bags. It scrubs, rubs, and bottoms out. Loud. Rough riding. But its FUN and looks great. Great toy, bad vehicle. The black truck looks good, mostly stock, and just freaking works like a stock truck. But igs not really fun, you know? Its a vehicle for doing vehicle things.
It's taken me quite a while, but I've come around to this philosophy as well. And this pretty much sums up the existential crisis in my fleet at the moment, the truck is really neither a fun toy nor a practical vehicle, it's kinda got one foot in each camp. I mean, it's way better in daily errand running, I drive it to work usually a day or two per week, and I can actually make use of a passing zone on a two lane road now. BUT it's got that project car "always needs something" thing going on and do I really trust it to haul 3+ hours to an event with 5k lbs of race car and trailer on the hitch? Eventually something has to go wrong, right?
Anyway, that's a topic for another thread I've been composing in my head for a while now. /threadjack
In reply to STM317 :
Oh man, I would rock the hell out of that!
volvoclearinghouse said:Maybe the dirt track stagger?
The opposite of adding aesthetics to ruin a perfectly functional vehicle would be making a vehicle as practical and functional as possible, to the complete detriment of aesthetics. Sounds pretty GRM to me, actually.
Ooooohh, I think that's it:
We bring back old school tricks that work, like raked stances and massive tires. If the car doesn't need it, it doesn't have it- literally no fat left at all. But we need a good name for it, more than "GRM Dork", something tougher, with strong phonemes like in words like "CRX" "MR2" ect.
914Driver said:
Yes this.............
In reply to Pete Gossett (Forum Supporter) :
I think it has to be cars people know.
You'll need to log in to post.
