FAQ |
Members List |
Social Groups |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Jason |
The Following User Says Thank You to Jason67 For This Useful Post: | ||
#22
|
||||
|
||||
I like what Squidtone did with his but the factory look has a slight George Barris feel to me. I feel the same about the 68/69 tips.
Sent from my moto g stylus (2021) using Tapatalk
__________________
Greg Reid Palmetto, Georgia |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Wow, to each their own I guess. These look terrible to me.
__________________
1966 Pontiac GTO (restoration thread) 1998 BMW 328is (track rat) 2023 Subaru Crosstrek Limited (daily) View my photos: Caught in the Wild |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
Can't imagine those lasting very long going in and out of some of the parking lots.
Ruins the whole lines of the car. |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Ah c'mon, they look awesome! I love the way they look on that car. To each is own is right
__________________
Jason |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Looks like a cute girl…until she smiles with a snaggle tooth
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
Just go to any GTO show and you will see well over half the cars with the extensions have them incorrectly installed/positioned.
No offense but IMO those extensions aren't placed per the factory spec, they're turned down too far and appear angled out to the sides. The Blue '66 in my first post is set up nice, again IMHO. What makes them look out of place is the '70's high jack stance. JM2C
__________________
When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did, in his sleep. Not screaming like the passengers in his car. |
The Following User Says Thank You to Jeff Hamlin For This Useful Post: | ||
#28
|
||||
|
||||
For 67
Jeff, you're absolutely correct for 66, I do not have a 66 assembly manual. The shot you have off the 66 on the assembly line and the installation drawing prove you're right. But for 67, the assembly manual shows them angled outward. My bad for not doing the research and just showing the pic of the 66 I believed correct.
I still like the way they look on my 67...
__________________
Jason |
The Following User Says Thank You to Jason67 For This Useful Post: | ||
#29
|
||||
|
||||
From "Accessories By Pontiac 1966":
|
#30
|
||||
|
||||
Again, for 67 not the same as 66...
__________________
Jason |
#31
|
||||
|
||||
Kenth, strange but that car appears to have a blacked out tail panel.. Illusion???? Trumpet style exhaust tips look good on that one for a change..
__________________
Greg Reid Palmetto, Georgia |
#32
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
the license plate frame. I'm leaning towards GM's artists worked their airbrush magic and added those extensions to pitch the new extensions |
#33
|
||||
|
||||
I have to admit I never really took full notice of the change in '67.
Clearly not the same. I just wish these drawings gave more precise details. 1966 1967
__________________
When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did, in his sleep. Not screaming like the passengers in his car. |
#34
|
||||
|
||||
I believe they were angled outward for sure on 4 spds without the resontator for 67 (2 1/4" tailpipe) but for 67 autos that had the 2" resonator, probably just like 66 (angled straight down like in your pics)
All depended on what factory tailpipes they had.
__________________
Jason |
#35
|
||||
|
||||
I believe they were angled outward for sure on 4 spds without the resontator for 67 (2 1/4" tailpipe) but for 67 autos that had the 2" resonator, probably just like 66 (angled straight down like in your pics)
All depended on what factory tailpipes they had.
__________________
Jason |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|