Questionable modifications: pictures inside!

  • Thread starter -Fred-
  • 38,849 comments
  • 2,867,140 views
%25E7%25A7%258B%25E8%2591%2589%25E5%258E%259FUDX%25E9%25A7%2590%25E8%25BB%258A%25E5%25A0%25B4%25E7%2597%259B%25E8%25BB%258AParking+SnapNO175+%25E3%2582%2589%25E3%2581%258D%25E3%2581%25A8%25E3%2582%2589%25E3%2581%2595%25E3%2582%25933.jpg


I don't even... :lol: Hahahahahah! This has probably been posted before, hasn't it?
Is that a '90s Suburban in Japan? OMG
 
Your main issue here is thinking that the 500 was only offered in 69, when there were late 68 models and there were also 70s Charger 500 (the one that I'm talking about) the version made so famous by the F&F franchise.

There were also early third gen versions as well.
Actually my main issue I guess is assuming you were talking about the 69 500, which is what 99.99999999% of enthusiasts (Mopar guys like me, included) will think of when you just say Charger 500.

There was no 500 for the 68 model year. Yes, it was introduced in Sept 68, but for the 69 model year. Production numbers from 68 back this up and no Charger 500 has the 68 round sidemarker lights, other than the 1 prototype that they built. That prototype is also the only one that has a 68 VIN code.

The 1970 500 was nothing more than a minor trim package and was virtually indistinguishable visually from most other Chargers (except the R/T), other than some badging. And seeing how this car has none of those things from the 500 and all of the visual features of the R/T, this is why I fail to see the mimicry of the 500.
 
Actually my main issue I guess is assuming you were talking about the 69 500, which is what 99.99999999% of enthusiasts (Mopar guys like me, included) will think of when you just say Charger 500.

There was no 500 for the 68 model year. Yes, it was introduced in Sept 68, but for the 69 model year. Production numbers from 68 back this up and no Charger 500 has the 68 round sidemarker lights, other than the 1 prototype that they built. That prototype is also the only one that has a 68 VIN code.

The 1970 500 was nothing more than a minor trim package and was virtually indistinguishable visually from most other Chargers (except the R/T), other than some badging. And seeing how this car has none of those things from the 500 and all of the visual features of the R/T, this is why I fail to see the mimicry of the 500.

You fail to see it for the very reason I pointed out and you agreed to, not all Mopar guys (I'm one too) are going to just blanket state the Charger 500 as a 69 model only due to the limited addition NASCAR relationship. I also pointed out why this is thanks to a certain movie franchise. Perhaps you may be one to think with in the narrow range which is fine, but it was correct to call it a Charger 500 or mimic since it went beyond 69 no matter how you want to split hairs.
 
You fail to see it for the very reason I pointed out and you agreed to, not all Mopar guys (I'm one too) are going to just blanket state the Charger 500 as a 69 model only due to the limited addition NASCAR relationship. I also pointed out why this is thanks to a certain movie franchise. Perhaps you may be one to think with in the narrow range which is fine, but it was correct to call it a Charger 500 or mimic since it went beyond 69 no matter how you want to split hairs.
But it doesn't mimic any features of the 1970 500, only those of the R/T. Anyway, we'll have to agree to disagree, as this certainly isn't the thread for this discussion.
 
smurfee would be ok if it was lower... or atleast level... the raked stance doesnt work with fender skirts... also ditch the coon tail and curb feelers...

and did anyone else LOL at the buisness name in pic of the green NFS cars?
 
@Slash For crying out loud... The one ain't so bad compare to the first one..but Jesus Christ, that may be the absolute worst C3 in my life that I ever wtinessed.

I just keep finding the convertible conversions, although this wouldn't be so bad without the generic lowrider treatment.

DSC02301.jpg

@Doog Though, I'd so aily that sick ride. Questionable maybe but I think it's awesome.
 
Back