The *Official* Old School Spotters Thread

[cornfused]

A 12a na rx 2 , humm

[wagonrunner]

A 12a na rx 2 , humm

there's a used to be red PX down point side with same.

[Monk BANzai]

pic doesn't do this car justice.
could be a FU shell, but meemcater. Love the way it looks.

*wades through the "oh de wrims not period correct"comments.....looks the business.....always wanted to "Rawle" one of these....

[wagonrunner]

always wanted to "Rawle" one of these....

how much car you really wanna keep off the road fadda?
yuh lucky yuh vehicle doesnt have to be seen by LO every year to keep it's permit. it woulda be a whole lot more JWC investigating which plate?

[Monk BANzai]

^^ lololol...thank Gee for for JWC eh!

[Rory Phoulorie]

*wades through the "oh de wrims not period correct"comments.....looks the business.....always wanted to "Rawle" one of these....

Very nice car. However, the taillights are not period correct. Those are taillights for a 280C, but the registration plate is for a 260C. Also, the bumper overriders are missing.

[wagonrunner]

Very nice car. However, the taillights are not period correct. Those are taillights for a 280C, but the registration plate is for a 260C.

so you're saying the lights are incorrect for that shell due to the certified copy?
according to wiki. it's not a nissan 260 nor 280, it's a nissan cedric.
those numbers were models used in different markets for the same car, albeit 1997 saw the 280c

[Rory Phoulorie]

. . .according to wiki. . .

You have just nullified your argument there.

For your information, on the local market the 260C which was sold from registration series PU to PX did not have the chrome trim around the taillights. The 280C which was sold from registration series PY to PAC did have the chrome trim around the taillights.

So I reiterate, for a PW registration series 260C as shown in the photo, the taillights are period incorrect.

[Mr. Red Sleeper]

. . .according to wiki. . .

You have just nullified your argument there.

For your information, on the local market the 260C which was sold from registration series PU to PX did not have the chrome trim around the taillights. The 280C which was sold from registration series PY to PAC did have the chrome trim around the taillights.

So I reiterate, for a PW registration series 260C as shown in the photo, the taillights are period incorrect.

Accurately said.
Well done!

[Miatabrah]

Very nice car. However, the taillights are not period correct. Those are taillights for a 280C, but the registration plate is for a 260C.

so you're saying the lights are incorrect for that shell due to the certified copy?
according to wiki. it's not a nissan 260 nor 280, it's a nissan cedric.
those numbers were models used in different markets for the same car, albeit 1997 saw the 280c

260C = 230 Cedric/Gloria sedan
280C = 330 and 430 Cedric/Gloria sedan

They were all just lower spec Cedric/Glorias

[MG Man]

gotta love the trans-atlantic............or should that be trans-pacific.....styling on those cars tho

[V8 Boys]

I grew up disliking with the utmost displeasure...the 260c...doh ask me why. The Corona Mk2 and the Kingswood were others I had a dispassionate loathing for...now I own a Mk2, and will NOT part with her for all the Tea in China and have restored and resto-moded a few of the 260Cs. So I guess you could say my "tastes" have matured....somewhat.

Perhaps, my dislike for those "imitators" was due to the fact that the Japs during the oil boom years were desperately tryin to break into the American market with "copying" the big, boxy chrome look of the Impalas, Fairlanes and Cutlasses, with something way less boxy and "chromey" ...but only MUCH more fuel efficient. The 260s, Rx60s, early 60s Crowns, and Coronas were a few of those "alternatives".

Fast-forward to the 20st century and Chip Foose, Dan Woods-Chop Cut Rebuild and Boyd Coddington became house-hold names...and I got inspired. Now, to be clear...it is sacriledge to chop up, bastardize and customize a Super rare car, but in some cases, like the 260c here...it was sooooo far gone (bumpers shot, nickels missing/bent, strips and finishers dry-rotted, and then there was the IMPOSSIBILITY to get good doors and flawless grilles.....so hence the Resto-Mod theme. I haven't buffed it yet, it's still at the AC guy and will do a full story when done....yes guys...on the APPROPRIATE thread.

994611_689463397749453_1167895909_n.jpg (17.39 KiB) Viewed 2310 times

1234563_689463307749462_776431374_n.jpg (16.34 KiB) Viewed 2310 times

1380447_689463317749461_1385505797_n.jpg (16.05 KiB) Viewed 2310 times

14166_689463387749454_1718659403_n.jpg (10.77 KiB) Viewed 2310 times

HERE'S ANOTHER VEHICLE I THOROUGHLY USED TO ILLSPEAK...

One of my Uncles had one and as a kid growin up, I found it was so square and ugly, very uncomfortable, noisy, and SLOW. And my Uncle just venerated them...the 70s and 80s were hard as well, so what you had...YOU KEPT, and kept WELL.

So, it was a new experience, after 30plus years of angst...to drive a Farm Issue-post war...Land Rover....and you know...it was fun!

[MG Man]

to dislike a land rover means you simply missed the point
it was never intended to be fast or comfortable
It was a British engineer's adaptation of the American Jeep, designed so farmers could traverse their fields and look after their estates, and repair easily. Plain and simple, it's a utility vehicle

[V8 Boys]

to dislike a land rover means you simply missed the point
it was never intended to be fast or comfortable
It was a British engineer's adaptation of the American Jeep, designed so farmers could traverse their fields and look after their estates, and repair easily. Plain and simple, it's a utility vehicle

ok den...then I admire, and pay due respect in it's capacity as "Farm Tractor"
but totally abhor it as a means of personal transportation in any "bitumus surface".

Better?

[nervewrecker]

Saw this in debe today

[Morpheus]

^^Put that in the worse parking thread pronto....

[Centric]

^^Put that in the worse parking thread pronto....

x2

[bigchief3679]

Did you also notice that there were no rear brakes on that car too? Geez..........

[dougla_boy]

[cinco]

Doh be in malabar nah dan. He hav more goodies hidden by d jaaaaag

[nismoid]

since when a second gen is old school? or even a spot?

[MG Man]

Five he sellin the yaaaag?
And the other fella, why not a 2nd gen ?
'Old school' is a relative term. I have a magazine somewhere that considers the vr4 galant as old school

[cinco]

It rattan boy mg it gettin worse n worse. That 2nd gen used to belong to the fella who own d tyre shop on d mn rd in arima i was there the day he sold it he wanted to cry.

[dougla_boy]

Yeah, that seconds gen is sex..... With battery operated toys....

He put the Volvo to hide the other stuff.....lol.....

[nismoid]

Five he sellin the yaaaag?
And the other fella, why not a 2nd gen ?
'Old school' is a relative term. I have a magazine somewhere that considers the vr4 galant as old school

relative to a new car i agree but hardly what is generally considered in this thread as old school, 2nd gen ran from 86-91, the model pictured is the latter.
and if a 2nd gen, why not a 3rd gen and scrap the whole idea of old school cause its only one year older(1992) than a 2nd gen. but i guess anything goes

[SiRMX]

Could do with a mild work over.

[trinibuggy]

ImageUploadedByTriniTuner1380407943.971423.jpg

ImageUploadedByTriniTuner1380407967.845605.jpg

ImageUploadedByTriniTuner1380407987.170778.jpg

men scoping out meh house oui!! nothing for sale though fellas, sorry to disappoint.

[trinibuggy]

volvo is actually a parts donor and well as cinco said the jag is rotting but only the trunk and that part where the tail pipes used to be. car cover to be bought for it soon

[cinco]

volvo is actually a parts donor and well as cinco said the jag is rotting but only the trunk and that part where the tail pipes used to be. car cover to be bought for it soon

lol i see the P plate volvo there the other day too

[MG Man]

Five he sellin the yaaaag?
And the other fella, why not a 2nd gen ?
'Old school' is a relative term. I have a magazine somewhere that considers the vr4 galant as old school

relative to a new car i agree but hardly what is generally considered in this thread as old school, 2nd gen ran from 86-91, the model pictured is the latter.
and if a 2nd gen, why not a 3rd gen and scrap the whole idea of old school cause its only one year older(1992) than a 2nd gen. but i guess anything goes

Problem is terms like old school, vintage, classic etc are relative terms. There are guys who think anything after 1950 is not old school either.
Maybe we could define it as cars with carbs, or at best , mechanical fuel injection. That would rule out the. 'New' stuff with electronics