Purists

[JOES66FURY]

I hate cutting up museum level original cars, but after that anything goes, especially if it makes it go faster, handle better, and look cooler.

What he said.

[TC]

Yap give me a Yenko, COPO, etc.... and I will tub it every time, if you want a car to stare at, go buy yourself a model car at the hobby store and leave the real cars to the people that actually drive them.......

[38P]

I'm on both sides of this debate. I own some vehicles that I'm definitely a purist about. Others that I've got no qualms about reasonable modifications (Brand loyal, of course)

Many antique, vintage and milestone vehicles should be preserved for future generations . . . not used up by mouthbreathing "dorks" who want to "defile" everything with a lousy "LESS" V8 or whatever else is the cheapskate fad of the day . . or "derby" them . . . or "cut 'em up" to prove their tiny manhood.

And tasteful modification, where and when appropriate, does not destroy the essense or history of a vehicle . . . or make it impossible to restore, if economic conditions and market demand change.

I'm sure this runs counter to the abysmally stupid t-shirt "it takes a real man to cut 'em up" mentality. Disciplined restoration is one of the most challenging tasks in the automotive hobby. Anyone who has ever stood at Pebble Beach or any other concours probably understands this.

But restoration is not the highest and best use for every vehicle. Still, it's just plain stupid to ruin a rare and restorable car or a desirable original because one is simply too cheap or too lazy to build it properly. Nor does it make sense to trash useable stock parts that could be made to perform as well (or even better) than the fadish replacements.

I have no doubt that some reading this won't "get it." That's sad.

[38P]

Yap give me a Yenko, COPO, etc.... and I will tub it every time, if you want a car to stare at, go buy yourself a model car at the hobby store and leave the real cars to the people that actually drive them.......

Thankfully such vehicles are now priced out of the range of selfish, aesthetically-challenged yabbos who fail to understand we're merely caretakers who will rapidly pass from the scene.

[Gary 351C]

My mustang WAS one of a handful when new. But when I bought it the interior was Mis matched and its but ugly tan. Now it's one of one. I'm building it the way I want it. Nobody has come knocking on my door because they want a dessert tan ttop mustang.

My Montego is the same way kind of. My Marti report (yes, I bought one) says out of the 54,010 '71 Montegos only 147 came with the 4V 351 Cleveland which makes it unusual but nowhere near "collectable" so it's getting a color change and some tasteful mods.

[JOES66FURY]

If someone tubbed a true Yenko or a COPO I would be inclined to kick them in the baby maker...

Cut up a clone...most cant tell the difference..

[TC]

Thankfully such vehicles are now priced out of the range of selfish, aesthetically-challenged yabbos who fail to understand we're merely caretakers who will rapidly pass from the scene.

You want to caretake go get a job at a nursing home.... And who cares if a car is all original or numbers matching, I sure know I don't..... Drive the F'n things, be a man.........

[38P]

You want to caretake go get a job at a nursing home.... And who cares if a car is all original or numbers matching, I sure know I don't..... Drive the F'n things, be a man.........

A curious definition of what it means to "be a man."

Apparently the Visigoths and Vandals who looted and destroyed Rome were MEN! . . . Yet those who labor . . . often with minimal rewards . . . to preseve and protect fragile antiquities are something less. Those slaughtered the last dodo bird for sport, or left millions of buffalo dead and rotting on the Great Plains . . . MEN! (according to TC's values) . . . But those who carefully washed marine life with detergents after the Exxon Valdez disaster . . . something less.

With respect to mass-produced machines, the market tends to determine what survives and what doesn't. But that doesn't mean ignorance, stupidity, narcisism, selfishness, criminality, and maliciousness don't sometimes destroy things that ought to be cherished.

Maybe I'm in the minority, but when I do something with a car, I tend to reflect on how it might affect the rest of the hobby/sport . . . including future generations. But then, the World doesn't revolve around me (because apparently TC's the axis)

[milner351]

Purists make me crazy, but they tend to spend stupid amounts of money to quench their thirst for purity, therefore, I will make my '69 428 mach1 as close as is practical - and sell it to one of these types after I enjoy it awhile - and if I can't get my price, I'll keep it, and drive it, with the service block 428 in it - and the "numbers matching" block on the shelf.

The falcon? You've seen what I've done to that car - purists of an inline 6, 2 speed auto falcon 2dr sedan?
I suppose there are some, and God Bless 'em.

[38P]

The falcon? You've seen what I've done to that car - purists of an inline 6, 2 speed auto falcon 2dr sedan?
I suppose there are some, and God Bless 'em.

It depends on the context. If I came across a pristine, low mileage original . . . a true survivor . . . I'd strenuously argue for preservation. Such a car is a time capsule into a type of motoring that's long gone.

On the other hand, if somebody finds a worn-out old 6-cylinder auto Falcon rotting in a field somewhere . . . one that has no particular rarity or market-based rationale for strict restoration . . . one that's in danger of facing the crusher or rusting into obivion . . . I'd support responsible, historically-sensitive, aesthetically-meritorious modification.

Does that mean I'd support butchering it with a grab-bag of trendy, cheap "flavor of the month" bits and pieces. No! But building something that carries forward the indominable spirit of "Total Performance" into today . . . or something that pays homage to the great Ford racing cars of the past (even if it's a phantom, one-of-none), or even something worthwhile that channels the spirit of the days when Falcons were ordinary used cars . . . I'm down for that.

[38P]

One other point . . . perhaps I'm in the minority, but I'm always going to be more impressed with a build that makes something better out of a period-correct engine design and approaches the aesthetic elements with more of a "Day Two" or period-correct competition motif. That's a historically-sensitive, timeless approach to the build.

On the other hand, I see way too many "catalog/grab-bag builds" of cheap, mismatched, "modern" parts, pointless engine swaps (i.e. an uber-boring, belly-button crate mill (almost always a GM lump) where a turbo'd original engine would have done nicely . . . or even better), and other mods that are poorly though-out, badly excuted and will soon be out-of-style.

[TC]

A curious definition of what it means to "be a man."

Apparently the Visigoths and Vandals who looted and destroyed Rome were MEN! . . . Yet those who labor . . . often with minimal rewards . . . to preseve and protect fragile antiquities are something less. Those slaughtered the last dodo bird for sport, or left millions of buffalo dead and rotting on the Great Plains . . . MEN! (according to TC's values) . . . But those who carefully washed marine life with detergents after the Exxon Valdez disaster . . . something less.

With respect to mass-produced machines, the market tends to determine what survives and what doesn't. But that doesn't mean ignorance, stupidity, narcisism, selfishness, criminality, and maliciousness don't sometimes destroy things that ought to be cherished.

Maybe I'm in the minority, but when I do something with a car, I tend to reflect on how it might affect the rest of the hobby/sport . . . including future generations. But then, the World doesn't revolve around me (because apparently TC's the axis)

Your examples all show MEN doing stuff, which makes them men.... But buying a car and letting it sit in your garage for only you to look at and not drive, IMO deserves the person's man card to be taken away...... It's like telling your friend, Hey I got a Yenko Camaro, and your friend saying great lets take it for a drive and you going, oh no, it's just to look at....... IMO why even waste the money in buying it.......

[1970camaroRS]

The only thing I have to agree with is this: if it's rare, as in 1 of 10 or 1 of 1, and the rarity is meaningful (not 1 of 1 that's blue with the optional shoulder belts and AM radio that was built on a tuesday), then by all means preserve it. It's valuable, in terms of money, and you'd be stupid to destroy that value. And it might be of historic value as well. From my other hobby that involves WWII airplanes, some airplanes simply will never fly again because they are the only of it's type left in the world, or one of very few. However, something like a P-51 or a Spitfire? Fly the snot out of those things, it's what they were meant to do. Even if that means making non-stock modifications to keep them flying (that's one reason why they all fly under experimental tickets).

The same goes for cars. A 1966 Ford Thunderbird? Not rare by any means. Throw a new engine in it, some modern rubber and enjoy it. A 1964 Corvette? Lets go racing! A Ferrari 250 GTO? Keep it under lock and key. Have an old slant-6 Duster? If it doesn't end up tubbed with a big horsepower v8 in it, then give it to someone else! (unless you're trying for some obscure LSR record)

In the end cars should be improved and driven whenever it makes sense to do so. Those that get upset and start calling people names need to go seek out professional help.

[Thumpin455]

One other point . . . perhaps I'm in the minority, but I'm always going to be more impressed with a build that makes something better out of a period-correct engine design and approaches the aesthetic elements with more of a "Day Two" or period-correct competition motif. That's a historically-sensitive, timeless approach to the build.

On the other hand, I see way too many "catalog/grab-bag builds" of cheap, mismatched, "modern" parts, pointless engine swaps (i.e. an uber-boring, belly-button crate mill (almost always a GM lump) where a turbo'd original engine would have done nicely . . . or even better), and other mods that are poorly though-out, badly excuted and will soon be out-of-style.

For a nice reference of this you only need to look at any late 80s early 90s Pro Streeter. Huge tires, drip and splatter paint, garish (dare I say ultra-feminine) colors and a TPI 305 or 350 in them. Seriously? A 15 second $40k car because they want to put a wimp chevy in it? A blower or turbo would have made them more interesting, but not by very much. Its like they wanted to change everything for the sake of changing it and ended up with something that was dated two weeks after it was finished.

[1970camaroRS]

For a nice reference of this you only need to look at any late 80s early 90s Pro Streeter. Huge tires, drip and splatter paint, garish (dare I say ultra-feminine) colors and a TPI 305 or 350 in them. Seriously? A 15 second $40k car because they want to put a wimp chevy in it? A blower or turbo would have made them more interesting, but not by very much. Its like they wanted to change everything for the sake of changing it and ended up with something that was dated two weeks after it was finished.

I agree, and since I'm on a Thunderbird kick lately, let me use them to illustrate a little more. A modified car done in good taste will be timeless and loved for a long time. One done poorly will quickly look dated and made fun of in the future.

Example A: A 1963 Thunderbird done well. It's usable, modern, yet not garish or cartoon-like.



Example B: A 1957 Thunderbird done poorly. Way over the top. Looks like a cartoon and is already dated even though it's a recent build!