Opinions

[Avatard]

I was thinking of doing a 70 Chevelle custom.

Crude photoshop of a fully frenched frontend:

http://poopnugget.com/files/pic2.jpg

and cruder still, with '90 Chevy C truck lights:

http://poopnugget.com/files/pic1.jpg

[squidward]

No and no.

[Adeptus_Minor]

Yeah, not a big fan of either of those.
Not on that car, at least.

[Avatard]

Yeah, not a big fan of either of those.
Not on that car, at least.

Meh, the design isn't sacred. Even Chevy "customized" it themselves a bit, as a Monte:

http://www.themotleycruisers.com/images/DougMonte71.jpg

[Rider]

Looks like shit.

[CasterTroy]

If it's what YOU like.....screw what everyone else thinks :idk:

[Homeslice]

Does the first have hideaway lamps, or just no lamps at all? Looks a lot better than the second photo.

[Rider]

Does the first have hideaway lamps, or just no lamps at all? Looks a lot better than the second photo.

Chevelle's never came with factory hideaways but with a little fabrication I bet you could fit a set of 68 Camaro hideaways in it.

[smileyman]

First pic reminds me of a late 60s Cougar for some reason but it is better than pic 2, which just looks strange. I cant quite place it. Both look out of place after so many years of recognizing the OEM grille on that silhouette. In the end make yourself happy, good craftsmanship always shines thru a design.

[karl_1052]

No and no.

Don't you mean "NO and NO"?

[goof2]

I don't like either option at all, but I think the factory quad lamps on 70 GMs look "right" (LeMans/GTO, Skylark, Chevelle). As Troy said though, your car your choice.:shrug:

[Particle Man]

If you are set on one of them, the second is better than the first...

[shmike]

I don't like either option at all, but I think the factory quad lamps on 70 GMs look "right" (LeMans/GTO, Skylark, Chevelle). As Troy said though, your car your choice.:shrug:


Agreed.

I'm not against resto-mods but I think the front end looks great from the factory.

Not digging the square-lights. Wrong era.

[Dave]

the squares were better than none but i still dont like either

[squidward]

Don't you mean "NO and NO"?

Yelling is never constructive.

[Particle Man]

Yelling is never constructive.

unless you REALLY mean it.

[TommyHotWheel]

No...and no...please no. I have had 2 of these and I was conceived in the back seat of one. I have been searching for another for 7 years. But extending the original grille and using a first gen Camaro RS type hide-away set up might look nice.

[Avatard]

I've had 3. I've owned Chevelles all of my life (since 18). Two '70s, and a '71 (now rusting peacefully in the back yard).

I'm liking the fully frenched one. The lights could go behind the grill. To me, it looks very RS-like, yet unmistakably Chevelle - perhaps a show car of the era. I dunno...I've always loved hidden headlights.

This came off my head as a doodle last night because, I was considering building my 3rd Chevelle (a 1971) back up, and I started thinking...I have to redo all the panels anyway; should I just make it cosmetically a '70 SS tribute car instead? Then I started thinking some more, and realized that I kinda like the '71 front, and the '70 rear the best.

The fact is, the back of the '70 has single, square tail lenses, and quad round headlights.

Where the '71 has single headlights in a square bezel, and quad round tail lenses (?).

It seems almost like the stylists got those two years fronts and backs confused.

So I thought about making it a mutt; '71 front, '70 back bumper...then I started thinking about maybe making hidden headlights...

[TommyHotWheel]

Larger square headlights would look better I think, the truck lights are too small and out of proportion.

[101lifts2]

God make it stop.

That Monte is hella nice.

[t-homo]

hate to say it, but I'm not a big fan or either of those.

[Avatard]

Originally, I inserted the C truck lights because I had positioned them to "extend" the line of each grill slot (the C truck headlights have matching parking/signal lights below).

http://media.motortopia.com/files/883/vehicles/44c26b0577f95/Truck11.jpg

Everyone here (my peeps) thought it looked better with just the headlights (one row), so that's why I mocked it up like that.

Personally, I like the hidden lights. I'm thinking this: http://www.inwthunderbird.org/77_tbird_champagne/77_tbird_cham1.jpg
...would make a good donor for the headlight mechanisms/doors.

I think this mockup looks very R/S-like, yet still fully like an A body (Chevelle).

http://poopnugget.com/files/pic2.jpg

...Although mine isn't a convertible.

[karl_1052]

I've had 3. I've owned Chevelles all of my life (since 18). Two '70s, and a '71 (now rusting peacefully in the back yard).

I'm liking the fully frenched one. The lights could go behind the grill. To me, it looks very RS-like, yet unmistakably Chevelle - perhaps a show car of the era. I dunno...I've always loved hidden headlights.

This came off my head as a doodle last night because, I was considering building my 3rd Chevelle (a 1971) back up, and I started thinking...I have to redo all the panels anyway; should I just make it cosmetically a '70 SS tribute car instead? Then I started thinking some more, and realized that I kinda like the '71 front, and the '70 rear the best.

The fact is, the back of the '70 has single, square tail lenses, and quad round headlights.

Where the '71 has single headlights in a square bezel, and quad round tail lenses (?).

It seems almost like the stylists got those two years fronts and backs confused.

So I thought about making it a mutt; '71 front, '70 back bumper...then I started thinking about maybe making hidden headlights...

I am not a fan of the 70's lights. I prefer the front end of the 71-72 best(then the 68-69)

[shmike]

Originally, I inserted the C truck lights because I had positioned them to "extend" the line of each grill slot (the C truck headlights have matching parking/signal lights below).

http://media.motortopia.com/files/883/vehicles/44c26b0577f95/Truck11.jpg


I've always loved the C1500 454SS. :boobs:

[goof2]

I've always loved the C1500 454SS. :boobs:

I was a fan too. It says something about that time that ~250hp was considered "performance".

[karl_1052]

I've always loved the C1500 454SS. :boobs:

Sexier than the lightning. Too bad they were so slow(stock).

[Avatard]

I am not a fan of the 70's lights. I prefer the front end of the 71-72 best(then the 68-69)

The light thing is what got me even on this thought. I too like the '71 front better, but I like the '70 rear better. I thought about doing a "mutt", but then I thought I could just cover the '70s headlights, and keep the sexy '70 back bumper.

[karl_1052]

The light thing is what go me even on this thought. I too like the '71 front better, but I like the '70 rear better. I thought about doing a "mutt", but then I thought I could just cover the '70s headlights, and keep the sexy '70 back bumper.

I also preferred the 4 rounds in the back. Looks more corvette/camaroish. I though the 71-72 were the whole package for the chevelles.(with an LS6 of course)

[Carolina]

i love those cars my dad has a 66 chevy chevelle and two 64 thunderbirds i gonna get a 67 one day all the chevies from 65 to bout 72 were mean looking good luck

[wildchild]

those type of mods are better done to some ricer/poser car. no one cares about those things. LOL

it's your car do what you like but since you asked for opinions, I do not like either of those options. old amer muscle cars look good hot rodded a little but not much fab work on the bodies. shaved handles and frenched tails are about as drastic as most "like"