who is this

Topic: who is this (Read 3370 times) previous topic - next topic

Reply #15 – February 16, 2009, 06:34:56 AM

Quote from: atariman;256904

Yeah. like another 4 eye Thunderbird would be real nice. 84 or 85 or whatever is available. I even thought about an older late 70's model, but the wife thinks they are ugly. I see potential.

I have to agree with your wife, here. Those Thunderboats had all of the potential squeezed out of them from the factory.

who is this

Reply #16 – February 16, 2009, 08:56:31 AM

Quote from: oldraven;257059

I have to agree with your wife, here. Those Thunderboats had all of the potential squeezed out of them from the factory.

ever driven one? :flame:

who is this

Reply #17 – February 16, 2009, 11:10:07 AM

Nope, but I can't imagine any kind of power being able to make up for those kind of looks, that kind of bulk, and that type of chassis. If you love it, have at it. I hear plenty of people say similar things about 80's Thunderbirds, so this is all relative. I'm just saying I agree with his wife.

who is this

Reply #18 – February 16, 2009, 11:16:37 AM

Yea just heads and gears really lol like I was lookin at some guy's car domain for his 79 monte carlo or whatever, he's like "non-posi rear end has 2.31 gears stock" Im like :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: NO WONDER they couldnt go effn anywhere...

who is this

Reply #19 – March 15, 2009, 12:05:47 AM

best 2:35 I've ever spent on youtube

Beautiful car

who is this

Reply #20 – March 15, 2009, 01:04:30 AM

are those late 70's box birds like a 71ish chevelle? i always thought they were heavy cars b/c they were so big. but then i saw a chevelle stripped to be made into a drag car. theres a lot of "air" behind the fenders making it much lighter than it looks.

who is this

Reply #21 – March 15, 2009, 08:11:23 AM

Well there is alot of steel there and they are a large car so yeah they are a bit hefty but then again our muscle cars of today all weigh over 3500lbs. so...... It's all do-able.

who is this

Reply #22 – March 15, 2009, 03:21:12 PM

Chargers,300s and challengers of today all weigh right around 4000lb's.
With the 392 hemi they haul a**.
There was a post around here recently of a 78-79 cougar(identicle chassis,different sheet metal here and there)with around 500hp and it probably hauls a**.
All depends on how much money you want to throw at it and how what you want to do with it.

who is this

Reply #23 – March 20, 2009, 02:34:53 PM

Quote from: ZondaC12;257082

Yea just heads and gears really lol like I was lookin at some guy's car domain for his 79 monte carlo or whatever, he's like "non-posi rear end has 2.31 gears stock" Im like :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: NO WONDER they couldnt go effn anywhere...

Think 2.31 is bad, try 2.14 and a 301 with a 2bbl. Slowest thing I ever owned.

who is this

Reply #24 – March 20, 2009, 03:38:52 PM

Whats that in?

who is this

Reply #25 – March 20, 2009, 05:25:35 PM

My '78 Grand Prix. You can see it in the background in my sig. I didnt believe it at first but after talking to one of the guys junkyard by me he said you could get that gear in them, werent very many though. That car may have been gutless but it did good on the highway.

who is this

Reply #26 – March 20, 2009, 06:15:03 PM

Bet it has pretty good top speed too.

who is this

Reply #27 – March 21, 2009, 08:47:16 PM

Speedometer didnt work half the time so I couldnt tell ya lol. I can say this though, that car was a handfull at anything above 75 or so. Man I hated that car.

who is this

Reply #28 – March 21, 2009, 09:50:32 PM

I always liked those to a certain degree.