Car Photo of the Day: Name That Car.

It has been customized a bit, and I’d bet you all a sushi lunch that there’s a small-block Chevy in there, but a lot remains of this car’s original “look & feel”… you can almost see a Thompson Gunner on that running board, speeding through Chicago in a pin-striped suit, no?

Can you name this car?

Bonus Points available for ID’ing the car on the left! 😉

11 thoughts on “Car Photo of the Day: Name That Car.”

  1. I *really* enjoy rods done this way: They leave the body essentially untouched, but just drive a modern chassis underneath it. That way, you get the best of both worlds..the *cool* styling, plus you can actually drive it comfortably.

    Having *suffered* thru a cross-country trip in one of THE most beautiful American cars ever made –’36 Auburn Speedster– I can attest to the fact that after a few miles, you begin to wish for a modern car…oh, like a 1966 Bug!!!

  2. Now that you’ve signed off on the answer, here’s how I figured it out: I twigged on the hood ornament, after I’d misguessed Packard.
    THEN (and slapped my forehead, at the same time, ‘cuz I HADN’T seen it at first) I saw the gold “Buick” logo strung across the radiator….so I think I should only get half-points….:):):)

  3. I’m too late today but I would have fallen into the same trap as Vroomie. Sorry you Guys but I hate looking at this car. No matter how well engineered it is, it still looks “rodded” and vulgar. IMHO the paint job alone is an act of vandalism and don’t get me started on the wheels…

  4. Well, MD, it’s what makes the world go ’round, differences in opinions, eh?

    Does looking at the lithe and limber AC Ace, with a big honkin’ 427 cu. in. ‘Murrican V8 shoehorned into it, and bulgy, brutish fenders constitute vulgar? Maybe the unadulterated good looks of a Sunbeam Tiger, “hot rodded” with a SBF is more acceptable? Heck, that goofy looking J-2 Allard that Sydney had the *gall* to stuff a 331 Caddy engine innit, is vulgar, too? The list of ‘hot rods’ is nearly endless, and is an integral and IMPORTANT part of cardom, on both sides of The Big Pond.

    It’s not my purview nor mission to judge your opinion, sir, not at all: THAT’S why I love the car game because, with hot rods, we’re talking ART, and those who do things to make hot rods are, in a very real way, ARTISTS.

    I’d *never* consider tarting up an SS100 with a XK engine (though Mon-n-Dad did it with an Auburn Speedster!) nor would I ever use a Typ 57 Bug as a palimpsest for my warped vision of what the car “ought to” have been but, a 1932 Buick? My 1966 “Jee-Type?”

    It’s FuuuUUUuuun!

    (Standard Mouton disclaimer: YMMV…. 😉 )

  5. Vroomie: It’s a complex subject and it’s hard to define taste. My personal view is that a stately 1932 Buick deserves as much respect as an SS100. Funnily enough, I have not problem with the Cobra as it was a standard period piece. I’m certainly not a “keep it stock” fascist and I also agree that much hot rodding is in the domain of artistry. So it’s a fine line and there is much grey area. But in my view that Buick is all wrong. I’m going to write a book on this subject someday…

  6. The purple on that Buick is *verrrrry* close to the color Tweety’ll be! MD, I hope that doesn’t make your knickers bunch up too much!

    I do have to say this: The chrome heat louvers on the two-tone Buick are *AWFUL. I am impressed with the metal work needed to make the modern wide tires fit into the side mount pockets, though!

Comments are closed.