• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

about That car....

BeatersRus

Well-Known Member
Local time
7:37 PM
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
3,312
Reaction score
4,534
Location
paying it forwards
that whole thread keeps getting toxic.
i thought maybe we could move the debate over the Story here
away from the Build,which is Excellent.


i also would like to ask pardon for copying and pasting your post sir,
but i felt it important to start this topic with.
The project car here is a great example of how things were done for those that strive for correctness of a car of those years.

That the op is sensitive and easily baited to flex is the entertainment part of the thread. There is little doubt that many come back for more than the cars progress.

ECS is advertising himself and his company in his way.

i would like to state clearly for the record,
that i dont know any of the people that comment on ecs thread.

theres only one thing that concerns me,
and thats how history will reflect this car.
as a mopar addict since my dad first let me drive his duster at the elks lounge parking lot :)
it seems like a Sin to try to say this was there back in 69/70 and only one guy saw it.
when in fact,all the Other people that were there,
that actually did work on concepts and clays,didnt.


we are lucky enough to have as a member an actual former designer,
who could and has offered to introduce ecs to talk to all the people who were there back then.

this could very well be worked out easily with just a bit of cooperation??

again,im not here for the drama,
im Very Concerned that history is being rewritten.
with the paperwork and hyped up story,
20 years from now the next generation will believe firmly that this is the actual recreation of a 4 door cuda ma mopar made..
which..is not right,at all.
does anyone understand where im coming from?


i Hope that ecs and others can comment here about the Story
( no rage preferred )
and then his Excellent Build thread can be less off track.......yes...no?
because i Agree its one of the most inspiring threads ive seen.

sincerely,Rob
 
Rus,

Great idea and a gentleman way to approach your concerns about the preservation of factual history. I agree there is no need to detract from the OP's build thread.

Maybe this format can provide a rational discussion than an irrational one that periodically featers in that topic.

As the OP stated in that thread he doesn't care what anyone thinks......so if that's true, I guess he would not show up here....which would finally turn out to be a rational discussion on the factual history of Chrysler...
 
RC, you make a good example in that thread that actually pertains to this preservation of Chrysler history.

Your example was when the OP posted a pic of a pulley with a part number with no explanation. To the lay audience they thought WOW look at that correct pulley for a 70 340. That may lead a person with a 70 340 to search for one for their own car to be correct. Which in fact it is NOT!

Then RC posted what was correct and what was not correct. If you did not call him out on this at what point and time was he going to state that it was not the correct pulley???

This is why Factual history needs to be preserved!

- - - Updated - - -
 
Some of these guys pretend that they're concerned with the "history" of Chrysler and how this project might affect that area.
That,indeed,is My only concern with the entire project.

If they were so concerned with the "history" of Chrysler, where's their criticism for their cronies that scam the Hobby by trying to pass off false paperwork for their Vehicles?
i dont have cronies,and ive never scammed any false paperwork so whatever.

Where's their concern about those who restore components and vehicles incorrectly and then falsely advertise their work as being OE correct?
i have no concerns about that mess,
im here for all the mopars not just the oe Golds.

Their concern is more about "who" is doing this project than "what" they're worried it will become in the future. It'a unbelievable the way jealousy and unsubstantiated hate will cause people to act.

whats unbelievable,is how many times we keep repeating that its Not about you Nor the car its this Story thats getting hyped up with the car.
i cannot see how any of us could be any clearer about this and as a Mopar person Yourself,you should be able to see where our concerns are Valid.

concept car? great awesome perfect its beautiful even for a 4 door.
recreation of a supposed sighting by roger rabbit the mailboy?
verified by no-one,yet now being claimed to be the real deal?
not so awesome.

so,again,i invite ecs to this thread to carry on the discussion or debate of the storyline.
i again hope he can understand where our concerns are,
and be able to provide clear answers so we can move forwards.

Edit:also,i give my Word i wont report anyone for anything said on this thread.
so say what you have to say,but keep it to the topic please.
( just in case that was a limiting factor )
 
....i invite ecs to this thread to carry on the discussion or debate of the storyline.

There is nothing to debate! FACT - Roger Johnson wrote a commentary about a Red 4 Door Barracuda that he claims he saw at the Chrysler Headquarters in 1969. Roger Gibson told me that both Sonny Benson and Larry Saunders (retired Chrysler Employees) told him that Chrysler built 4 Door versions of ALL of their regular production 2 Door Cars. That's it! You can't debate those FACTS with me because you were not part of my personal conversations. The only thing you can question is whether I have accurately presented what they told me. I can assure you I have.

Roger Johnson's written article is quite clear so there is no need to question my interpretation of it. I have personally spoken to Roger Johnson and Roger Gibson about this topic. Have you? You guys don't believe what they have told me. That's great! You don't have to believe it. I know both of these Men and I believe them. Please stop shooting the messenger and telling me that I am trying to mislead everyone. I am simply passing along EXACTLY what they have told me. Nothing more and nothing less. Take up your complaints with them!
 
21bri43.png
 
With You.....ill keep my mouth shut as i have been repeatedly warned to do. Im indifferent to
the history of a production car outfit, keeping my emotinal side to HAND MADE limited production.....ive had three b-bods, i love the cars, but they are not mangustas, AC's, Bizzarinis, ISO's, 33 Stradales, 300 SLR's and so on.....my lips are now sealed.
 
Rob,

Just a thought, but if you are so concerned with the way that history might be re-written, maybe you should start speaking up about the other "history being re-written" restoration threads where people incorrectly restore cars using a different process, such as having paint drips go horizontal vs. vertical on fenders on an OE car that scores Gold. Or about how people are turning out certain restored electrical pieces ( wiring, starters, wiper motors, alternators, etc) which do not follow how they were on the assembly line. That, itself, is technically re-writing history by giving people the perception that if it passed OE Gold, then that must have been how the factory did it, too. If you are concerned about one, you should be concerned about them all. Not just one person.

Again, just my perspective and my two cents.
 
Again, no one disputes the FACT that Roger Johnson wrote an article. NO one disputes THE FACT that you talked to mssrs. Johnson and Gibson. What is not FACT is that Chrysler BUILT 4 door versions of EVERY 2 door car they produced. That is an outrageous statement to make without documentation or photo evidence, especially as this claim is 3rd person hearsay. In order for Chrysler to BUILD these cars, there had to be clay models, engineering drawings, tools, stampings, etc. Where is the evidence of any of that. Was there a clay or fiberglass model of a 4 door Charger, maybe. But that is not a car that can be termed BUILT. Just a styling study,. But again no one in Styling can corroborate such a thing. BUILT implies a running vehicle. The cost to do that would assure that someone would know about it. To BUILD a car under the radar, even outside would not go unnoticed.
 
Last edited:
Now we have the "why don't you guys go after the everybody else" defense. That is funny.


objection.gif
 
So the rules only apply to one person and not everyone? That's funny!
 
Well, if you show/tell us who here on this forum is passing off bogus parts and doing bogus work, they should be called to task. However, there is a big difference between that and what the OP's discussion in this thread is all about.
 
Unknown.jpeg

Okay guys, maybe someone with a machine can provide one of these. LOL!

BTW, leave when your done!
 
Well, gee, I hope you now get a brain freeze the next time I am nice and give them out to people on a hot summer day. Actually...... you're cut off now ! ha ha ha. J/K. Seriously, I offer it to anyone who wants one. Bickerers and all ! LOL.
 
Well, if you show/tell us who here on this forum is passing off bogus parts and doing bogus work, they should be called to task. However, there is a big difference between that and what the OP's discussion in this thread is all about.

You mean with all your infinite wisdom and knowledge, you can't tell the difference between what is real or what is bogus?
 
That's you? Wow, glad you found a new line of work these days being a dispatcher and all....[lol], [jk]

Really, though, don't bother yourself offering me a snow cone....unless you have some Tito's vodka mixed in it!

It's okay you don't have to bicker about it[lol]
 
Again, no one disputes the FACT that Roger Johnson wrote an article. NO one disputes THE FACT that you talked to mssrs. Johnson and Gibson. What is not FACT is that Chrysler BUILT 4 door versions of EVERY 2 door car they produced. .......

So who are you arguing with that said it is "FACT" that Chrysler did anything? I've said all along that I simply believe those Gentlemen and the information they told me. You've constantly tried to get me to agree with you and admit that they are either delusional, senile or liars. I can choose to believe what I've been told based on a collaboration of information conveyed by ALL of the different Automotive Manufacturers. I'm not trying to get you to change your belief to agree with me! Why is it imperative that I agree with your point of view? I've said NUMEROUS times that we were going to build this Car regardless of what Roger Johnson wrote about. Finding out about his article (AFTER THE FACT) was just an added perk.

There's no need to worry about "history" with respect to what we're doing. I have been completely up front with every aspect of this build. Chrysler knows about it, as well as the NICB. Do you hold a superior rank above them that I should be aware of? You're all bugged up about the "history" of Chrysler and my project but they're not! Why don't you ask yourself what the real problem here is?
 
You mean that Chrysler and the NICB isn't worried about this? A car that is scratch built as a tribute to another? Who would have thought? ha ha ha ha ha If they aren't worried, why should anyone else be ?
 
You mean that Chrysler and the NICB isn't worried about this? A car that is scratch built as a tribute to another? Who would have thought? ha ha ha ha ha If they aren't worried, why should anyone else be ?

One of these cretins called Chrysler "anonymously". They claimed that we were transferring VIN's from one car to another and "grinding and re-stamping numbers" while trying to perpetuate fraud. What this goof didn't realize is that he called my FRIENDS within the FCA. They only contacted me to let me know the allegations that were made. At the end of the conversation they said that if I needed anything to let them know. They basically rolled their eyes at the cretin who had placed the "anonymous" call. One thing is for sure! Who ever called had to lie about the project because they knew the truth would have gotten them nowhere.

None of this controversy is about the Car, the Story or preserving History. It's about their dislike and hatred for me. First they complained about the "Story". Then the character of the Man who wrote the Story. Then about whether anyone ever manufactured 4 Door Concepts of their Sports Cars. Then the VIN plate & Fender Tags. Then the "raised" Roofline. Then the "fake" paperwork. Then date coded parts and on and on and on! They can't figure out what they should to be bothered about when it comes to this project. Weird indeed........
 
Auto Transport Service
Back
Top