Questionable modifications: pictures inside!

  • Thread starter -Fred-
  • 38,887 comments
  • 2,907,383 views
TheCracker
Looks a bit like a George Barris creation to me.

Had it been something actually rare i would have agreed, but they made E-types by the shed-load.

A ****ed up E-type is still better than an E-type rusting away to nothing in someones back yard. Just.

They may have made them by the shed-load, but stands a chance you won't see them by the shed-load, as they're now endangered.
 
Nowhere near the same level as the "Jaguar", but yeah...
r34supra.jpg
 
I would say its a Skypra, cause its a Skyline front the 'Sky' comes first in the name.
 
I'm inclined to say it's PS'ed, actually... it looks warped... and the shutlines are all jaggy in the front, while they're smooth everywhere else.
 
And the white Skyline front bumper and white Supra fender colour don't match.

Actually yes I am sure its been PS'ed.

r34supra11tw.jpg


^^looks like they tried to smudge the colours to match.
 
GT4_Rule
Well I believed it first time around. Doesn't look too bad - until you see the rear, I guess.
Well, seeing as the back is still curved like a normal Supra, the only thing with the back would be seeing Skyline tail lights.:scared:
 
stumpydino
(Like Mclaren said)
Please tell me those arn't California liscense plates...

Why is it that I NEVER see the usual ricer car here... Like Kias..

I saw a few ricers... One was the new Z06... Which I already not like looks.. So I guess i don't really care.. But I pissed my pants when I saw a M3.. and then an AMG all riced out.. Poor Merc, and BMW....
 
a bunch of uglys:




the one with the cardbord parts has to wait, imageshack is messed up:nervous:

From,
Wall51
 
Wallrunner51
a bunch of uglys:




the one with the cardbord parts has to wait, imageshack is messed up:nervous:

From,
Wall51

Not only is that picture a very, very, very old one (one of the very first "ricer pics" to float around the internet), that RUF is also hillclimb racer, where downforce and not flying off of the side of a cliff are good reasons to ignore aesthetics.

That cardboard parts car of yours is probably another one of the very first "ricer pics" to float around the 'net.
 
Wallrunner51
a bunch of uglys:




the one with the cardbord parts has to wait, imageshack is messed up:nervous:

From,
Wall51

that is a tall spoiler, though...i think it's a little higher than...gulp...the Charger Daytona's.
 
Why not? They both make about as much power anyways, and ones just silly lighter. And if you want to play "fake scoops," than almost evey Mustang ever sold should be in this thread.
I do, however, question how he put an SR20DET in it and got a 2.4L engine. Maybe he is just stupid and actually put a KA24E in it. In all honesty, the only problem I see with it is the hood, which would cost $10 to fix.
 
Toronado
Why not? They both make about as much power anyways, and ones just silly lighter.

Sure they make about as much power, maybe not the KA24, but the SR20.
But think about it if you had a '90 mustang would you prefer a 5.0l V8 or a 2.4l 4 cylinder? without even hearing both the engines i can tell you the original V8 would definatly sound a hell of a lot more threataning, and the torque would be there too. i know the sound isnt everything, but i personally would like to hear a thundering V8 under the bonnet of an american muscle car, rather than a 4 banger pushing around all that wieght.
Surely a V8 is built to be a bigger engine to push a bigger load, you dont see big trucks with 4 cylinders. (unless theyre pretty old...)
Anyway, i wonder how many people will reply to this useless post :lol:
 
Back