found on facebook....

[Greg]

Just gotta be a jerk and get political. *****.

Exactly. If some doesn't want to be called a bad name don't act bad. We have a right to respond when someone soils this site. We should never be complacent with politics here and just ignore it. Probably thinks someone who decorates with fake gold and fake Louis the 14th furniture has better taste than an original owner of a very tasteful 67 Corvette. I can go on with many examples, but that isn't going to accomplish anything. Funny how some think you are of one political party for pointing idiocrasy of someone who can't keep their politics off this site which is always one side who starts it here and one side who will attack the one's pointing out the idiocrasy. Remember, NO starting politics on this site unless you want to appear less than. No good will ever come out of it. Some of us will respond with extra passion.

 

[Greg]

Hey Irish, you could have just as easily ignored it, rather than joining the fray and letting us all know where you fall on this by calling someone names. By the way, have you seen Hunter's art? It really does look a lot like this car.

Or maybe you should have responded to the person who started this as they did far worse than Irish who was simply stating facts as some of us see it here. This is why some are so passionate about keeping politics off this site. Sure, pick on the one who did less wrong than the other. I would have responded to Rio and say see what you did, now people like Irish are calling you out changing the topic. Why is it so hard to follow a simple rule? It isn't a sign of intelligence.

 

[Spike Morelli]

Well, I personally don't care for the re-styling. The builder even got as far as painting it, which tells me he didn't realize the proportions are off, even whilst still in primer. Customizing is an art, and, as a professional artist friend of mine always says, "Art, is knowing when to stop". Custom show cars in the Fifties have a great many examples of over-modifying for modification's sake. George Barris comes to mind with all the non-functional gee-gaws Barris slapped on many of his cars. Detroit too, got into the business of adding useless embellishments on Muscle cars.
Personally, I look at body refinements as, How would that effect drag, or aerodynamics, in a wind tunnel, with smoke wands showing the effects? Was that modification an improvement, or not? The "Art" of hot rodding, as opposed to customizing, has always been to strip off the un-necessary BS, smooth of the body, form and function, enhance the available power, and K.I.S.S.
Now, where's my '32 Ford Highboy..........

 

[1973 Mach-1]

Moderator- ????

 

[Chuck Swamphammer]

Not really my thing, but I have to admit I am always intrigued by attempts to give the quarter panel more relief off of the c pillar.

How's this?

 

[detritusmaximus]

Not really my thing, but I have to admit I am always intrigued by attempts to give the quarter panel more relief off of the c pillar.

Funny you should say this...I've always loved the idea of a 69-70 coupe with 69-70 fastback quarter panels below the belt line. Makes it a little more muscular below that coupe roof/quarter window. I've seen pics of it done.

 

[Chuck Swamphammer]

Funny you should say this...I've always loved the idea of a 69-70 coupe with 69-70 fastback quarter panels below the belt line. Makes it a little more muscular below that coupe roof/quarter window. I've seen pics of it done.

I want to see that

 

[detritusmaximus]

Some pics, but not the ones found years ago. Unfortunately the person who did this, went thru all the work and then decided to just convert it completely to a fastback. And there are two convertibles, one done by Foose, but its black and hard to really tell, and a copper colored convertible.
My thought was change the tail panel and trunk to match the leaning slope of the 69-70 tail end....and then a Shelby front end.

 

[Lazarus]

How's this?

Yes, something like that.

I think the way I would do it is actually move the C-pillar outer skin back in just a bit at the window, so that the little bump-out crease/line just to the rear of the quarter window was not there. That way the quarter line from the top of the trunk would meet the line at the bottom of the quarter glass.

Not sure that’s a very clear description, but that’s how I’d do it. Most who try it move the quarter hip out like a first gen camaro, but it kinda messes the line up on our cars due to how the swoop starts before the door ends. I just think it’d be easier to tweak the c-pillar in a touch to make it flush with the low part of the “routed” channel behind the window.

 

[Chuck Swamphammer]

Yes, something like that.

I think the way I would do it is actually move the C-pillar outer skin back in just a bit at the window, so that the little bump-out crease/line just to the rear of the quarter window was not there. That way the quarter line from the top of the trunk would meet the line at the bottom of the quarter glass.

Not sure that’s a very clear description, but that’s how I’d do it. Most who try it move the quarter hip out like a first gen camaro, but it kinda messes the line up on our cars due to how the swoop starts before the door ends. I just think it’d be easier to tweak the c-pillar in a touch to make it flush with the low part of the “routed” channel behind the window.

I have tried that before but the problem is if you smooth that line inwards, you'll actually sink part of the fastback skin and then the roof will look like it has a big dent in that area.

 

[Chuck Swamphammer]

Yes, something like that.

I think the way I would do it is actually move the C-pillar outer skin back in just a bit at the window, so that the little bump-out crease/line just to the rear of the quarter window was not there. That way the quarter line from the top of the trunk would meet the line at the bottom of the quarter glass.

Not sure that’s a very clear description, but that’s how I’d do it. Most who try it move the quarter hip out like a first gen camaro, but it kinda messes the line up on our cars due to how the swoop starts before the door ends. I just think it’d be easier to tweak the c-pillar in a touch to make it flush with the low part of the “routed” channel behind the window.

I have always thought it would be cool to use a convertible qtr panel on a fastback because the hip line continues all the way instead of terminating up behind the qtr window on the fastback.

 

[Lazarus]

I have always thought it would be cool to use a convertible qtr panel on a fastback because the hip line continues all the way instead of terminating up behind the qtr window on the fastback.

That’s pretty much exactly what I am describing. The problem is if you tweak the top of the quarter out, it quickly conflicts with the swoop in the top of the door. i think sinking the front of the c-pillar is the superior approach but to your earlier point, you’d have to cut the whole triangle almost to the trunk to do it right.

I spent a lot of time once with a junker taking measurements and planning to try it, but I ended up getting distracted on a different project. Here’s two of the pics I took at that time that sort of show what I was thinking. It was totally inspired by the continuous line of my vert. I think the C-pillar bulges enough, as seen in the third pic, where it could afford backing up a bit towards the front. I am aware that might take some tweaking to framework behind the panel.

 

[Chuck Swamphammer]

That’s pretty much exactly what I am describing. The problem is if you tweak the top of the quarter out, it quickly conflicts with the swoop in the top of the door. i think sinking the front of the c-pillar is the superior approach but to your earlier point, you’d have to cut the whole triangle almost to the trunk to do it right.

I spent a lot of time once with a junker taking measurements and planning to try it, but I ended up getting distracted on a different project. Here’s two of the pics I took at that time that sort of show what I was thinking. It was totally inspired by the continuous line of my vert. I think the C-pillar bulges enough, as seen in the third pic, where it could afford backing up a bit towards the front. I am aware that might take some tweaking to framework behind the panel.

yes exactly. the whole c pillar panel surface would have to be pulled in tighter to the roof-edge-line. i think it could be done!