Looks like a lowrider

Discussion in '2001 Ford 49 Concept' started by sniper, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    Me and u both man...
     
  2. This is one beautiful car. If you should put some hydraulics under the body you would have one need ultra modern lowrider. By the way, if you look close, you will recognise the Thunderbird Concept in it. Nice car, really.

    keep the faith
     
  3. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    You think this car needs Hydralics? Mhhahhnan! Thats the craziest thing ive herd! This car is a Crusier not a LA Car show.<!-- Signature -->
     
  4. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    touch this beauty and you lose all sense of what the car was designed for.<!-- Signature -->
     
  5. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    I think it could be an LA show car too,
    or a cruiser,
    whatever a person pleases,
    cadi's weren't built for LA show cars but they became em.
     
  6. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    I see what your saying about Hydros man. But to me it has to serve some purpose (Hence the name anaLOGIC). Hydros are cool to look at but they do lots of damage to the car plus added weight of 10batteries in your trunk! Part of the Caddy was also to have lots of luggage space. Now you have no luggage space.

    Hydrolics are tradition for similar looking cars but that tradition does more damage to the car than its usefulness. I didn't spend $40,000 just to add another $10,000 on uselessness.<!-- Signature -->
     
  7. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    Thanx man. People, you should read it trough good before starting to laugh at someone. And by the way, lowriders are strenghtened all over the place, so a bounce doesn't really hurt them...

    keep the faith
     
  8. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    Leave it as it is; it is allready the best looking car in a while
     
  9. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    Ford did not build this to be a modern Lowrider. They built it as a continuation of the success with the Thunderbird<!-- Signature -->
     
  10. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    Chevy never built their cars to be lowriders either. But look at the Impala, there are more of them with hydraulics than without. It's what you do with the car that counts, if it becomes ugly or not, or if it becomes a lowrider or not, that's your choice...

    keep the faith
     
  11. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    I agree 100% with sniper. It's really cool to see Ford going back to it's roots.<!-- Signature -->
     
  12. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    this is an amazing car when u take a long look at everything. I would love this thing... I wanna hang the poster on my wall or buy it some day...<!-- Signature -->
     
  13. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    Yo HOTROD & SNIPER!: Did I laugh at you? Don't think so. Did I read your comment before I commented myself? YES!! I always read the comment before I myself comment ALWAYS!!!!!!

    ANSWER ME THIS:
    How many batteries do you need for a full lowrider system? To do a 3 wheel motion? How many batteries do you need for the front and back to hop individualy?

    If you can make a hydro system very light weight and doesnt compensate vehicle performance then I'll say sure! But until then it hinders vehicle dynamics, uses up lots of enegy resources, takes up usefull trunk space and adds needless weight to the car. Give me an example of Hydrolics usefulness for a regular driver or driver enthusiast (anything other than winning at a car show). Some PRO's that out weighs the CONS. Show me that and I'll give you your deserved props.

    DON'T GET ME WRONG, AGAIN, THIS CAR IS SUPER BEAUTIFUL I LOVE IT.<!-- Signature -->
     
  14. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from sniper</i>
    <b>Chevy never built their cars to be lowriders either. But look at the Impala, there are more of them with hydraulics than without. It's what you do with the car that counts, if it becomes ugly or not, or if it becomes a lowrider or not, that's your choice...

    keep the faith</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    indeed...
    that's why there's an after-market for cars... to customize them to their owners desire...

    I dont think Ford or GM design a car to be the next... Lowrider, neither Honda designs its car to be the ultimate rice rocket toy for the auto industry that loves to modify them, they just happen to become of that fame because of their owners... <!-- Signature -->
     
  15. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Analogic</i>
    <b>Yo HOTROD & SNIPER!: Did I laugh at you? Don't think so. Did I read your comment before I commented myself? YES!! I always read the comment before I myself comment ALWAYS!!!!!!

    ANSWER ME THIS:
    How many batteries do you need for a full lowrider system? To do a 3 wheel motion? How many batteries do you need for the front and back to hop individualy?

    If you can make a hydro system very light weight and doesnt compensate vehicle performance then I'll say sure! But until then it hinders vehicle dynamics, uses up lots of enegy resources, takes up usefull trunk space and adds needless weight to the car. Give me an example of Hydrolics usefulness for a regular driver or driver enthusiast (anything other than winning at a car show). Some PRO's that out weighs the CONS. Show me that and I'll give you your deserved props.

    DON'T GET ME WRONG, AGAIN, THIS CAR IS SUPER BEAUTIFUL I LOVE IT.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Okay man, I'm sorry for that then. But I don't really agree on the lowrider-issue. First of all, I like lowriders, so I will talk good of a lowrider.

    Now for those questions. I know someone who has a 1963 Impala. That beayty's got two all-chrome Homies pumps, three dumps, 6-inch and 8-inch D&H cylinders, four switches, and only FOUR batteries. And all the time, those batteries are used, for a three-weeler, the hoppin' and when it's scratching the surface. Every system is different, so another brand, let's say Red's could use another way, I don't know.

    And the trunk space, he's got a lot of space left, we're talking about a Impala u know, not the smallest car ever made. And the space left all depends on how many batteries, how many cilinders,... you've got.

    I don't think you use a lowrider as a daily driver. At least I won't. And a lowrider was never ment for that purpose. You've got to make a difference between a lowrider and a sportscar. A lowrider is for cruisin', not going fast. And a sportscar, well I guess I won't have to tell you that. So you can't compare those.

    So euhm, don't brake a lowrider down, they are ridin' the globe so respect them. I think u can't say they are ugly...

    keep the faith
     
  16. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from sniper</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote>
    Okay man, I'm sorry for that then. But I don't really agree on the lowrider-issue. First of all, I like lowriders, so I will talk good of a lowrider.

    Now for those questions. I know someone who has a 1963 Impala. That beayty's got two all-chrome Homies pumps, three dumps, 6-inch and 8-inch D&H cylinders, four switches, and only FOUR batteries. And all the time, those batteries are used, for a three-weeler, the hoppin' and when it's scratching the surface. Every system is different, so another brand, let's say Red's could use another way, I don't know.

    And the trunk space, he's got a lot of space left, we're talking about a Impala u know, not the smallest car ever made. And the space left all depends on how many batteries, how many cilinders,... you've got.

    I don't think you use a lowrider as a daily driver. At least I won't. And a lowrider was never ment for that purpose. You've got to make a difference between a lowrider and a sportscar. A lowrider is for cruisin', not going fast. And a sportscar, well I guess I won't have to tell you that. So you can't compare those.

    So euhm, don't brake a lowrider down, they are ridin' the globe so respect them. I think u can't say they are ugly...

    keep the faith</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    indeed... but this lowrider stuff is a bit off-topic if we are discussing about stock cars... I'm not saying they are ugly,... but then u don't get to see many of them in Mexican roads anywayz...

    <!-- Signature -->
     
  17. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    I know about the off-topic stuff. But you know it just popped in my head first time I saw it: This would be a really cool lowrider. That's why I made a topic about it, to see if there were more people thinking the same way about it. But still, even if you don't put hydros under the body, this Ford is and will always be a beauty... I repeat myself: it's what YOU do with your car that counts, not what oyher people think.

    keep the faith<!-- Signature -->
     
  18. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from sniper</i>
    <b>I know about the off-topic stuff. But you know it just popped in my head first time I saw it: This would be a really cool lowrider. That's why I made a topic about it, to see if there were more people thinking the same way about it. But still, even if you don't put hydros under the body, this Ford is and will always be a beauty... I repeat myself: it's what YOU do with your car that counts, not what oyher people think.

    keep the faith</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    yeah that's so true.
    Its what you do with your car what counts... after all its YOUR car, and NOBODY ELSE's, and u are going to customize it the way you want it.<!-- Signature -->
     
  19. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    I'm glad someone finally agrees on that.

    keep the faith<!-- Signature -->
     
  20. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from sniper</i>
    <b>I'm glad someone finally agrees on that.

    keep the faith</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    if this car went into production
    would you buy one?
    and how much would you be willing to pay for it?<!-- Signature -->
     
  21. Re: Looks like a lowrider

    I wouldn't buy it no... Considering I live in Belgium. Taxes are so expensive for a V-8. Actually starting from a 2liter engine taxes are ridiculous. I drive a 2 liter car, just because I can't afford anything with a bigger engine...

    Suppose I would live in America, I would seriously consider bying this car yes. Because I don't know, it's something different. I always liked older cars, and this reminds me of those long cars, just for cruising. That's what I love about this car. It's nostalgic...

    Would you buy this? Judging from your avatar pictures, you like extremely fast cars...

    keep the faith<!-- Signature -->
     

Share This Page