What do you all think of this one? Poll

[Deleted]

This Corvette was entered in this month's M.O.M. sorry I don't remember who entered it and I didn't see it until late last night. I went ahead and deleted the entry from the thread pending the results of this poll and discussion. What do ya'll think about it? I'll give this a day or two before moving forward with M.O.M. poll. Thanks.

[randfink]

To me, the tunnel ram and velocity stacks sorta scream '80s. But that's just me.

[junkyardjeff]

I do not know,its kind of on the line.

[draggon]

I agree on the induction. I know the tires came from the Jo-Han Pro Stock kits, but were Firestone Drag 500's made before 1969?

[dakotajohn]

Looks more 70's or 80's style to me.

[Bernard Kron]

The first commercially available cast tunnel ram manifolds in this style were introduced in early 1968 by Weiand (the Hi-Ram with patented D-Ports) and Edelbrock (the TR-1). By early 1969 they were common on Super Stock and Modified Production drag cars, but they were almost invariably covered over with scoops or hood extensions. The "standing proud" aesthetic shown on this car, with the carburetors polished and exposed and the tall wide mouth velocity stacks used to add additional height to the look, is most definitely at the earliest a mid-70's thing, and is currently enjoying a revival as part of the Nostalgia Rod street gasser fashion. The car "passes" on the date cutoff technicality but, as is typically the case with these things, remains unconvincing on the subjective level.

Ron, I think putting it up for a vote is a good approach, although discussion is also a good thing, since the history can be researched alongside the subjective aspects, as I have tried to do. And yes, it's mainly the induction aspect that would cause one to question this car - and it is most definitely a nicely turned out model, TRaKable or not.

[lo51merc]

It's the induction system that I noticed at first look. That undid it for me. Sorry to the builder because it is a nice Vette.

[Mr409]

Yes, the Tunnel Ram together with those polished carbs give it a bit too modern look in my opinion too. Anyway, I have to say that it's a very nice looking Corvette no matter what!

[krassandbernie]

I say it's fine. Cars like this were definitely built in the late '60's despite what half of you think of it when you see a build like this. I knew someone would say something as soon as I saw it posted though! LOL!

[jbwelda]

Tough audience tonite.

jb

[vsrn]

IMHO -

If the tunnel ram was available, then this car could have been built, so it's TRAKable in my eyes...

vsrn

[Deleted]

OK well I thought there might be some controversy on this and I'd rather sort it out now than after I set up the poll and have to put out fires and redo everything. I was hoping Bob would chime in here and make the final call as he usually does in these matters.

While I can clearly see both sides here I am going to remain objective and let the forum decide so I will leave this thread and poll open until later this afternoon and see how it ends up. Fair enough? Thanks all for your input and thoughts!

[krassandbernie]

That's all you can do Ron. After looking at the Vette some more the 'tubbed' appearance of the slicks being tucked inside the wheel wells gives it more of a '70's look even though they were starting to mini tub drag cars by the late sixties. I guess it is one of those 'fine line' deals here where you can't build anything that close to the cut-off time frame without arousing suspicion or back lash. This is why I changed the rules for the TRAK Autorama to a cut-off year of '65 (model year) so we don't have any squabbles over these matters.

[Koolkat]

It's not drag, even though it's modified, it's not a custom, it's not what is normally considered a hot rod. It's a street machine. A nicely done one, but still a street machine.

[Deleted]

Nicely built, but everything about it screams "70s street machine" to me, so I voted accordingly.