Raised roof???????........NOT !

[resq302]

The quality of the work that's been put into this is nothing short of amazing.

That said, the disconnect for me, as others have mentioned, is the total change to the d-pillar profile. The angle is much more vertical (which I suspect contributes big time to the appearance of a taller roof) and its a rounded corner vs. the much sharper original.

To me, the angle/shape of the d-pillar is a HUGE part of what makes the 'Cuda's profile and it has gotten totally lost here.

Still... amazing work.

Its actually called the C-pillar but the angle HAS to be much more vertical in order for people to easily get in and out of the back of the car.  Again, look at the pictures of the blue 2 door B-body vs. the 4 door B-body.  Imagine how many headaches people would get from smashing their head on that angled C-post.  With a two door car, you have the luxury of folding the front seat forward to gain extra space to get into the car.  With a 4 door car, the front seat back is fixed.  Granted, the rear door on the 4 door has a different window frame vs. the one that Dave used.  That could be why the angle seems different on the 4 door cuda.  The window frame is the stock B body window frame that Dave had re-used so the angle of the window did not change. 

[TUFCAT]

This is basically a modified 1971 Satellite 4-door Sedan with a Barracuda front and rear end.  The sedan roof doesn't flow with the Barracuda design at all. 

You don't use a sedan roof on a hardtop car and expect it to look good....which is one of the biggest faults of this design study.   

The photographic example you've shown with 1970 B-bodies is erroneous and mis-leading.

Its incorrect to compare a 1970 Plymouth B-Body 2-Door Hardtop (or pillared hardtop in this case) with a 1970 Plymouth B-Body 4-door sedan like you have done.

If you wanted to correctly compare B-Body Plymouth's, then you need to go all the way back to the 1963-1964 Fury and compare 2-door hardtop Vs. 4-door hardtop.

Here are some other good examples of what Plymouth was doing with their 2-door and 4-door hardtops on C-bodies. 

{EDIT}  Chrysler stopped building the B-body 4-Door Hardtop in 1964, so I showed the C-body 2-Door Hardtop vs. 4-Door Hardtop in my comparison - -  I don't see anything wrong with doing that.     

[resq302]

This is basically a modified 1971 Satellite 4-door Sedan with a Barracuda front and rear end.  The sedan roof doesn't flow with the Barracuda design at all. 

You don't use a sedan roof on a hardtop car and expect it to look good....which is one of the biggest faults of this design study.   

The so called "examples" you've shown from 1970 are totally erroneous. 

Tom, why do you keep coming out, repeatedly, making false comments when Dave has already addressed those issues to YOU on another forum.  Here is what he replied to you if you can't remember.

Thanks for your comment! Someone would have to be insane to call this project a "re-body". We used A & B Pillars from a junked B Body shell. We also used the back sides of the Door Frames. That's it! ALL of those pieces had major re-construction work done to them to make them fit. Not a single "stamped" body part from another car was used or altered to build this vehicle. EVERY Body component of this project has been completely cut apart & altered. Not one body panel on this car could be bolted or used on ANY other stock B or E Body vehicle. Little tommy has done his best to throw a wrench in the cog by making "anonymous" calls claiming un-true things like "grinding off numbers" from other vehicles. I should thank him because all he did was help to expedite our direction and process.

Had I used floor pans from a junked Lamborghini, I wonder if this project might be confused with re-bodying an Aventador?
 
Last edited: Nov 29, 2015
ECS, Nov 28, 2015

[TUFCAT]

Tom, why do you keep coming out, repeatedly, making false comments when Dave has already addressed those issues to YOU on another forum.  Here is what he replied to you if you can't remember.

Thanks for your comment! Someone would have to be insane to call this project a "re-body". We used A & B Pillars from a junked B Body shell. We also used the back sides of the Door Frames. That's it! ALL of those pieces had major re-construction work done to them to make them fit. Not a single "stamped" body part from another car was used or altered to build this vehicle. EVERY Body component of this project has been completely cut apart & altered. Not one body panel on this car could be bolted or used on ANY other stock B or E Body vehicle. Little tommy has done his best to throw a wrench in the cog by making "anonymous" calls claiming un-true things like "grinding off numbers" from other vehicles. I should thank him because all he did was help to expedite our direction and process.

Had I used floor pans from a junked Lamborghini, I wonder if this project might be confused with re-bodying an Aventador?
 
Last edited: Nov 29, 2015
ECS, Nov 28, 2015

I'm correcting the topic of your picture comparison.  Its totally inaccurate.  You're comparing a sedan to a hardtop which is like apples and oranges.   The C-body examples are far better comparisons because Chrysler stopped making the B-body 4-Door Hardtop in 1964.

[dfrazz]

Here we go again......Mods will have this thread locked down any moment.

[resq302]

I'm correct your comparisons because they are inaccurate.

The "so called examples" you show from 1970 are erroneous and mis-leading....

What is misleading and erroneous, Tom?  There is a picture of a 70 roadrunner and a 70 satellite 4 door.  It is what it is.  You can't argue with hard actual pictures.

Actually, Tom, its a perfect comparison.  The two door hard top roadrunner compared to the 4 door sedan satellite is the exact same comparison as a 2 door hard top cuda compared to the 4 door sedan barracuda that Dave and crew built. 

[TUFCAT]

everything I said here has been factual.  I can have an opinion right?   

[resq302]

Everything I said is factual.

Well, I guess if erroneous opinions become fact, then you are right on target !  Forget the fact that you said above that they retained the 4 door center section of the b-body.  Dave replied to you in the other forum that they pretty much modified every part of that donor core.   Lol.  And here I thought cats had good eye sight.   

[AARTA340]

Thanks for the update and the new pictures of the progress. 

[TUFCAT]

Well, I guess if erroneous opinions become fact, then you are right on target !  Forget the fact that you said above that they retained the 4 door center section of the b-body.  Dave replied to you in the other forum that they pretty much modified every part of that donor core.   Lol.  And here I thought cats had good eye sight.

I merely pointed out that I thought your picture comparison was incorrect.   

[js29no]

Waiting for padlock symbol in 3 2 1. 

[TUFCAT]

Why do you say that?  The thread has been on topic since page one. The first post was "I came across this on another site and remembered that there was some questions about this car having a raised roof or not" and people responded.   

[tipster]

exceptional work

but why was it built?

usually customizers build cool custom looking cars like barris or foose, or boyd coddington. 
apparently the same skill set was required, I think.  but the end product imho is not an exciting car
it just looks like what it is, a 4-door b-body with cuda front and rear on it

I think there was a couple from new England that built 71 superbirds and daytonas off of the clay models,
those cars look kewl!

this, not so much

so I wonder why?

[roadman5312]

Here we go again......Mods will have this thread locked down any moment.

                                                                            

[msbaugh]

If negative comments aren't welcomed then don't post it on an online forum.  It's a 4 door ebody, take it as it is, the reactions are as expected. From what I see there's just as many positive remarks here. The man has the right to post his feedback