Classic Mustangs (Tech) Technical discussions about the Mustangs of yester-year.

Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

Old 06-05-2007, 10:27 PM
  #101  
gothand
5th Gear Member
 
gothand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: North Fulton, GA
Posts: 2,287
Default RE: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

ORIGINAL: 66GTKFB

<snip>
But I DO NOT LIKE THE IMPLICATION THAT I AM WRONG OR FOOLISH IN MY PERSUIT OF RESTORATION.
<snip>
Is this a common occurance Jim? Perhaps I'm completely oblivious, but this is the first I have time I have seen this concern raised on this board.

Although I've seen plenty of the get that POS Holley, Edelbrock, et al, carbs off of there and get the Autolite that came with it (never mind the fact that the engine itself may be far from stock) but have yet to see anything along the lines of get that POS Autolite off of your stock engine and put on a throw-me-down double pumper Holley.

I will certainly keep that in mindfuture postings.
gothand is offline  
Old 06-05-2007, 10:48 PM
  #102  
Norm Peterson
6th Gear Member
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 7,635
Default A couple more

With respect to topics that might better fit into a separate forum

Probably most of the suspension swap discussions would fit there as well. They all 'work' somewhat differently than OE (particularly the rear), and generally require different spring/shock/sta-bar tuning to work properly. In the rear, I'm talking about 3-links, torque arms, laydown coil spring sort of stuff here, as opposed to different leaf springs. IRS is a given. There has been talk of a DeDion, and at least one oddball street rod kit. Up front, there are tubular control arms, Mac struts, Mustang II-based swaps,etc. Several kits already exist, and others are still under development. These threadscan get rather heavy on theory.

Extensive chassis mods probably belong there as well. These tend to be one-of-a-kind or extremely limited production. If you're even thinking along this line, you should know that you're way past simple bolt-ons and standard-ish rebuilds. It might be a coin toss, but tranny swaps that require lifting the tunnel probably qualify here, as the tunnel is a major structural element in these cars, particularly in the convertibles.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline  
Old 06-05-2007, 10:55 PM
  #103  
NorCalTroy
3rd Gear Member
 
NorCalTroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 542
Default RE: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

ORIGINAL: hity645

So then why don't we have a concorse section for those who want to go strickly OEM. OEM subforum where people can find information and ask specific questions relating to OEM parts. And leave the current section the way it is for all general sort of questions?

The majority of people want to perform upgrades to brakes and other safety upgrades. Then there are the people who want to go show car OEM style.
That makes sense to me. Glen can handle the OEM sub-section and someone else can handle the other section. That would be a good solution to the problem also.

Instead of:
Classic Mustangs (presently one mod for all)

or:
Stock and Restomod (as suggested in this poll, with two different mods)

or:
Stock and Modified (my original suggestion, with two different mods)

how about:
Classic Mustangs (as it is now except with a new moderator)
with a sub-forum for concourse/OEM (moderated by Glen)
NorCalTroy is offline  
Old 06-05-2007, 11:14 PM
  #104  
Celtic37
3rd Gear Member
 
Celtic37's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location:
Posts: 542
Default RE: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

You guys can't just basically demote Glen because he can be aggressive about what he believes in. By saying that you are taking a low blow, insulting his moderating skills and saying he should be gone.
Celtic37 is offline  
Old 06-05-2007, 11:27 PM
  #105  
JMD
6th Gear Member
 
JMD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: AR
Posts: 5,469
Default RE: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

ORIGINAL: 66GTKFB

My turn.
I getpissed off when
I get pissed off when
I get pissed off when
I DO NOT LIKE THE
I will make it a point NOT


I enjoy the antic of
We need less negatives,,,, and more positives,,,,

We need to quit picking at the scab..............
JMD is offline  
Old 06-05-2007, 11:36 PM
  #106  
hity645
2nd Gear Member
 
hity645's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 485
Default RE: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

I stick outta the threads when heat starts to pick up or I get the tail end of it. I don't know what Soarings stand is on stock vs. non-stock but it sounds like he is all for stock cars. With an OEM subforum we wouldn't need a new moderator. He can mod both, like said previously he's knows alot about mustangs. If the owners of the site decide to get a new mod then its their decision. We have no right to choose who, what and where people mod.
hity645 is offline  
Old 06-05-2007, 11:38 PM
  #107  
Norm Peterson
6th Gear Member
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 7,635
Default RE: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

Jim - Agreed. We're starting to drift from the original topic a bit.

And the art of compromise is that everybody gives a little in order that everybody wins.


Jim - This topic has been moving too fast* for me to acknowledge that you were probably right about "equal footing", and that I probably reached a bit too far with my phrasing. Would you agree with "reasonably equal footing"?.

* see what I mean


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline  
Old 06-05-2007, 11:47 PM
  #108  
JMD
6th Gear Member
 
JMD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: AR
Posts: 5,469
Default RE: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

ORIGINAL: Norm Peterson

Jim - Agreed. We're starting to drift from the original topic a bit.

And the art of compromise is that everybody gives a little in order that everybody wins.


Jim - This topic has been moving too fast for me to acknowledge that you were probably right about "equal footing", and that I probably reached a bit too far with my phrasing. Would you agree with "reasonably equal footing"?.

see what I mean


Norm
I can agree with you on both points, and I want to ensure that there is no friction between the two of us even though we see things a littlebit differently on this particular issue. I have always enjoied your posts and admiredthe depth and expression of your automotive knowledge. Thank You!!
JMD is offline  
Old 06-05-2007, 11:47 PM
  #109  
Celtic37
3rd Gear Member
 
Celtic37's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location:
Posts: 542
Default RE: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

ORIGINAL: Norm Peterson

Jim - Agreed. We're starting to drift from the original topic a bit.

And the art of compromise is that everybody gives a little in order that everybody wins.


Jim - This topic has been moving too fast* for me to acknowledge that you were probably right about "equal footing", and that I probably reached a bit too far with my phrasing. Would you agree with "reasonably equal footing"?.

* see what I mean


Norm
I agree with that part. It started as whether or not we wanted seperate forums, then turned into a "cyber war", with Soaring vs. Restomods
Celtic37 is offline  
Old 06-05-2007, 11:48 PM
  #110  
Galactusz
4th Gear Member
 
Galactusz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,168
Default RE: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote

Good grief, bitching, bitching, bitching, lol.

Hey, Glen rubbed me the wrong when when I first started here (he hates my "restomod" seats), but now I love the guy, yes, he's a cranky ol' Texan, but I'm a crazy ol' Californian, so we are all even now.

Galactusz is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Restomod and Classic separate sections vote



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:29 PM.