I saw one on the road yesterday. Metallic blue with white stripes, and the wing on the trunk.
What little I could see of the interior had the white vinyl upholstery.
No idea if it was an automatic or 4-speed manual.
Chip H.
I saw one on the road yesterday. Metallic blue with white stripes, and the wing on the trunk.
What little I could see of the interior had the white vinyl upholstery.
No idea if it was an automatic or 4-speed manual.
Chip H.
Former owner: 2012 Honda Civic LX, 2006 Honda Ridgeline RTL, 2000 Honda CR-V EX, 2003 MINI Cooper S, 1992 Honda Accord LX, 1999 Mercedes ML-320, 1995 VW Jetta GLX, 1991 Mercury Capri XR2, 1981 Mercury Zephyr, 1975 Chevrolet Impala
Chip,
Nice!
What year was it?
With the 1970 Olds 442 W30s, I remember reading there are more in existence now then were produced in 1970. Seems there are quite a few folks restoring 1970 442s and adding on the W30 stuff to make a W30 clone/tribute car. Seen a few of these the last few years.
I like "clone" a lot better than "tribute" - which strikes me as very cheesy.Originally Posted by Pete
I think turning a regular Cutlass into a 442 (or W-30), or for that matter, the base version of any muscle car into a clone of the real-deal, is inherently suspicious. These cars are often very hard to distinguish from the real McCoy - and the prospects for a rip-off are high. Especially down the road, as the car goes through owners.
I would like to see every clone come with a sticker on it someplace that reads: "Not an actual 442 (or whatever). This car is a clone."
I don't know enough about them to tell the difference between a '70 and '71. I would gues it was a 1970, based on the color. But that's just a guess.
Chip H.
Former owner: 2012 Honda Civic LX, 2006 Honda Ridgeline RTL, 2000 Honda CR-V EX, 2003 MINI Cooper S, 1992 Honda Accord LX, 1999 Mercedes ML-320, 1995 VW Jetta GLX, 1991 Mercury Capri XR2, 1981 Mercury Zephyr, 1975 Chevrolet Impala
Eric,
I used to get pretty upset when the clones started popping up, now they are so common I have softened my position on them. Now I don't mind them unless someone is selling it like the real thing. Then I get upset.
Chip,
Not much cosmetic difference between the 1970, 1971 and 1972 W30:
1970 442 W30:
1971 442 W30:
1972 442 W30:
The 1970 W30 is the best performer of the three however I like the looks of the 1971 and 1972, it's a cleaner look.
Yep, me too - and I think that's the big problem. It is very easy to produce a completely authentic looking clone - down to the "correct" stampings on the block and paint marks on the chassis, etc. I don't mind an obvious fake - or when a base car is updated with, say, the real-deal's wheels or a high-performance engine. What I really don't like is when someone goes to great effort to make a base car look exactly like the real thing, down to decals and trim and so on. To me, this is fraud - at least, implicitly. Because unless the person who owns it keeps it forever, at some point it's going to get sold - and I would bet you a six pack of you favorite beverage that the car will be represented as "real" - either by the first seller, or the second owner down the line.
At minimum, it ought to be heavily frowned on - if not outright illegal - to do things such as create the "correct" stampings on heads/blocks to make them look "right."
And in cases where the car's VIN doesn't clearly show the car is not real, there should be some other mandatory "warning label" to keep people honest...
If it was real, then I think convertibles with manual transmissions were produced in single- or double-digit quantities. Chances of it being an automatic are almost infinitely higher.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
