"Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2" (pompei426)
03/03/2015 at 09:52 • Filed to: None
3
16|
"Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2" (pompei426)
03/03/2015 at 09:52 • Filed to: None | 3
| 16 |
I'm sorry, these alfas should remain pure. This JDM'd thing is disgraceful. I don't like this at all. What do you guys think.
Louros
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 09:54 |
|
I think this is fucking awesome.
Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 09:55 |
|
Put it out of it's misery.
Twingo Tamer - About to descend into project car hell.
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 09:56 |
|
Less camber and a bit more sidewall and I like it.
Sir_Stig: and toxic masculinity ruins the party again.
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 09:56 |
|
Functional camber, yummy!
E. Julius
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 09:57 |
|
I think I'm ok with a couple of these running around. If it gets out of hand I'd be a little upset, but just the fact that this one example exists isn't making me angry. I think it's pretty neat, although not something I would drive.
My citroen won't start
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 10:01 |
|
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
NO NO NO NO NO
NO NO NO NO NO
NO NO NO NO NO
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
472CID
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 10:01 |
|
Fucking stance. Loose the camber and obnoxious exposed lines and it'd be a looker.
misfitmascots
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 10:10 |
|
Not a fan of the car or stanced BS so it doesn't bother me
|
Sir_Stig: and toxic masculinity ruins the party again.
> 472CID
03/03/2015 at 10:15 |
|
It has stance, but it's not "stanced", as the rear wheels have minimal camber. "Stance" is recognizable in that the rear wheels have more negative camber than the fronts, almost always to the point of reduced performance. This looks like the opposite.
Sam
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 10:19 |
|
Ditch the stupid exposed lines (what are those even for?), lose a bit of camber on the front, and add a bit to the rear to make them look somewhat even.
Scary__goongala!
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 10:21 |
|
gross
Baeromez
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 10:26 |
|
That's not what JDM means but okay.
DeLM
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 10:51 |
|
WTF. I bet there is some dumb JDM engine swap in it too. another classic lost to "dumb".
BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 12:23 |
|
Not sure how I feel about this. I don't think I like it, but not for the same reasons as you.
Something I'm a little bit envious about, being someone that predominantly likes classic Brits and Italians, is that there seems to be a lot more freedom to modify with other nationalities of classic car. People are doing lots of cool things stylistically and with the ongoing mechanical development of cars like the S30 Z and the 911, but there seems to be a stronger attitude of 'just keep it as it is' when you come to Brits and Italians.
That means that there's also a lot of people trying to do something cool with these cars but utterly failing and creating something crap, which is lamentable I suppose, but I like that people feel like they have the freedom to experiment.
I like that people are doing new and exciting things with Zs and 911s, and it makes me want to do the same with Spitfire and GTV6s and the like.
No, the reason I don't like this car is because it's derivative. It's very cleanly done, and I like that, but it just seems like it's had a cliche slapped onto it. Even then, I'm not sure whether I like it or not. I keep thinking 'nah, I'm not sure on it', but then I picture it belting round a corner like the first driving shot on Urban Outlaw and I can't help but think 'that looks so damn good'.
Conflicted.
swaptastic
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/03/2015 at 15:04 |
|
This runs a SR20
pip bip - choose Corrour
> Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
03/04/2015 at 02:17 |
|
i don't mind this to be honest.