11-27-2008, 02:27 AM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 448
|
Huh......?
__________________
1978 GMC Jimmy 454bbc Turbo400 NP205 3.73 gears 4inch lift 33's |
11-27-2008, 02:40 AM | #2 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Palmer, Alaska
Posts: 13,821
|
Re: Huh......?
__________________
CHEVY ONLY |
11-27-2008, 03:36 AM | #3 |
Still livin the "dream" in '54
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 2,656
|
Re: Huh......?
OMG, is that thing for real??
I'm not sure if I like it or not, in the meantime, I'm gonna go stand over there... Don
__________________
Current build. 1954 Chevrolet 3800 "Ella" SOLD! My '67 stepper "Tangerine Dream" "Anything worth doing is worth doing right" James Dean “When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Sherlock Holmes "There is no spoon." Neo |
11-27-2008, 03:50 AM | #4 |
64-66 CHEVY JUNKIE
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Cypress ,Texas
Posts: 1,516
|
Re: Huh......?
__________________
1966 C-10 Fleetside LWB, 350 Lt1 4l60-E 2008 Silverado Crew Cab, 4.8 4l60-E 1998 GMC Yukon 4x4 L-31 Vortec, 4l60-E 2017 GMC Serra 4x4 5.3 Vortec, 4l60-E Do It In A Chevrolet |
11-27-2008, 04:14 AM | #5 |
Its Deja Vu time again
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Marysville, North of Seattle WA
Posts: 815
|
Re: Huh......?
I think I just threw up a little in my mouth.
At least its hood is in better condition than mine. hahahaha |
11-27-2008, 08:48 AM | #6 |
Account Suspended
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kansas City, KS
Posts: 3,906
|
Re: Huh......?
I have seen those kits before. If the fellows that developed them spent as much time creating replacement parts for the period-correct era, the aftermarket truck parts available for these trucks would be superior to what is currently available today. If that make any sense to anyone.
The front clip looks awesome and the rear portion looks good, but together, they just don't look right, to me. I believe those are know as RetroKits and they were recently featured on Speed channel...Truck Universe. There was a recent thread here on '67-'72 about them. |
11-27-2008, 09:15 AM | #7 |
Account Suspended
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kansas City, KS
Posts: 3,906
|
Re: Huh......?
Here is a link to one of the previous threads:
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=218508 |
11-27-2008, 09:19 AM | #8 |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Jane,Missouri
Posts: 844
|
Re: Huh......?
it just looks odd..
|
11-27-2008, 09:22 AM | #9 |
Account Suspended
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kansas City, KS
Posts: 3,906
|
Re: Huh......?
|
11-27-2008, 10:36 AM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Greenwell Springs, Louisiana
Posts: 2,882
|
Re: Huh......?
[QUOTE=LILRED66;2994945]I have seen those kits before. If the fellows that developed them spent as much time creating replacement parts for the period-correct era, the aftermarket truck parts available for these trucks would be superior to what is currently available today. If that make any sense to anyone.
I agree 100%!! |
11-27-2008, 10:49 AM | #11 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Moose Jaw sk Canada
Posts: 12
|
Re: Huh......?
Now this is a sweet ride!!!!!!!!!!!
|
11-27-2008, 10:54 AM | #12 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Palmer, Alaska
Posts: 13,821
|
Re: Huh......?
^ just doesn't look "right" to me either
__________________
CHEVY ONLY |
11-27-2008, 11:07 AM | #13 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Moose Jaw sk Canada
Posts: 12
|
Re: Huh......?
I like this one. 57 front end 58 middle 59 ass end.
"Named for the three years represented in the overall design, the 789 Chevy is instantly recognizable by car buffs from around the world. With a price tag of $135,000 you can get in and go anywhere, drive a speeds of up to 190 MPH and get 25 miles per gallon while cruising on the highway. All 789 Chevy's are equipped with Corvette standard equipment including the 400 HP V8 engine" |
11-27-2008, 12:08 PM | #14 |
Hey Y'all!!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bay Minette, Alabama
Posts: 1,755
|
Re: Huh......?
The Retrokit is just a bad combination. I agree with what Tony said a little further up.
One would think that there would be a larger market for the original trucks for someone to produce a kit like this. IDK, maybe this style frontend could be modded by the manufacturer(i.e. fenders and hood redesigned to match original contours, inner mounts redone to bolt up, etc.) and marketed to the 60-66 group. As for the 789... horrible, imo. Basically, 4 automotive styles have been ruined to accomplish this. Any of the 4 (57-8-9 fullsize and the late model 'vette) are awesome in their own ways but as a combination...no thanks! |
11-27-2008, 12:49 PM | #15 |
Airport Bum
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Propwash (16Xray) D/FW, Texas
Posts: 320
|
Re: Huh......?
For the time and money spent to convert a "run of the mill" late model, you could build a sweet 64-66.
Then you would have a truck that drove as good as a new one and didn't look hodge-podge. Kinda like those Shoebox/Thunderbird kits. :vomit: Too bad none of those parts will fit OEM.
__________________
1964 Chevrolet C-10 1941 Chevrolet coupe 1962 Thunderbird 1959 Edsel Villager 1963 Skylark |
12-01-2008, 03:53 AM | #16 |
3DrDwn--the 'burb not the band
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: missoula, mt
Posts: 598
|
Re: Huh......?
another one for the automotive Bulemic
Josh
__________________
Slo and Lo that is the tempo. '72 burb build page here: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=259256 '89 GMC Dually crew build page coming soon. 88 4x4 crew DD duallys past/present pics here: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...46#post4001246 89 1 ton Dually rear flip kit install here: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=354327 |
12-01-2008, 08:37 AM | #17 | |
One day...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tuttle, Ok
Posts: 9,240
|
Re: Huh......?
Quote:
Last edited by scotts62; 12-01-2008 at 08:38 AM. |
|
12-01-2008, 09:41 AM | #18 |
Tot Roddin'
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mid-MO
Posts: 24,461
|
Re: Huh......?
To each their own.... but that doesn't make it right!
__________________
-Nate 1969 CST SWB - Project Blank Slate (4.5/6" ECE Static Drop, 6-lug disc brake upgrade (manual), Billet Specialties Vintec 20x8.5 255/40 (F) 20x10 295/40 (R), 250 I-6) 1960 AMF Skylark - Tot Roddin' (Lowered with custom frame; soon to include custom push bar and interior) 2008 Silverado CrewCab 1LT (5.3L, 3:73, 4x4, LT1, Z-71, Towing Package) |
12-01-2008, 10:16 AM | #19 |
Airport Bum
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Propwash (16Xray) D/FW, Texas
Posts: 320
|
Re: Huh......?
Nah, this is a hybrid Miata! :vomit:
__________________
1964 Chevrolet C-10 1941 Chevrolet coupe 1962 Thunderbird 1959 Edsel Villager 1963 Skylark |
12-01-2008, 10:56 AM | #20 |
One day...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tuttle, Ok
Posts: 9,240
|
Re: Huh......?
now thats ugly!
So what is the other thing... |
12-01-2008, 11:53 AM | #21 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Satsop, WA
Posts: 606
|
Re: Huh......?
__________________
1963' Chev Custom Cab 502, 67' 435hp 3X2 intake, 9" 4:30 Posi 1961 Impala SS 348/350 4-speed 3:70 Posi 1961 Bel-Air Bubble Top 283 Turboglide soon to have a 348 3X2 4-speed 1950 17' Fairliner twin cockpit barrel stern 312 Y block 1X1 intake Borg Warner 1:1 gear 1957 Fleetform 14' twin cockpit barrel stern 1969 BP-125 Merc 1949 Transitier 3-wheel forklift Crosley 4-Banger 98' FXD 2002 2500HD |
12-01-2008, 12:16 PM | #22 |
One day...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tuttle, Ok
Posts: 9,240
|
Re: Huh......?
|
12-01-2008, 07:33 PM | #23 |
Hey Y'all!!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bay Minette, Alabama
Posts: 1,755
|
Re: Huh......?
|
12-01-2008, 08:01 PM | #24 |
Its Deja Vu time again
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Marysville, North of Seattle WA
Posts: 815
|
Re: Huh......?
Yeah make them parts so they would actually fit my 65 so I could order a factory like hood opposed to building that nonesense for guys who have to much money laying around to make their 89 look like a 60.
|
12-01-2008, 09:01 PM | #25 |
One day...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tuttle, Ok
Posts: 9,240
|
Re: Huh......?
ya and it took the wrong trun, and for the worse
|
Bookmarks |
|
|