4 Door Plymouth Barracuda

[ECS]

What was the purpose anyway?

MANY people posting here have used the word "NEVER" more times than a person telling the story of Peter Pan & Neverland.  I simply wanted to show that there are possibilities that exist in the Automotive Industry, beyond the short sighted opinions being expressed here.  Look at the progression of what has transpired to this point.  I mentioned doing a 4 Door Concept tribute to the vehicle that Roger Johnson wrote about.  I was immediately attacked and accused of trying to present a "fantasy" for something that "NEVER" could have taken place or existed.  Roger Johnson's account of the car somehow became MY "fantasy" because I shared his story and we decided to build it.  These same naysayers are now giving details and possibilities for something they initially said "NEVER" could have occurred.  Quite the turn around!

I knew the protocol regarding Concept/Prototype Cars, throughout the ENTIRE Automotive Industry, was being mis-represented here.  I've known about the XP-833 since I was 15 years old and the story behind it.  The only reason I shared the various data and images about different Concept Cars was to show how the closed minded views (towards Roger Johnson's depiction of the 4 Door Barracuda) could be wrong.  Every objection given for why the 4 Door Barracuda would "NEVER" have been built, could also be applied to ANY of those Concepts but they do in fact exist.  I never cared about finding pictures of the 4 Door Barracuda that Roger Johnson described.  With all the skepticism that has unfolded, I am resolved to find whatever information is out there.  In the mean time, we are building the Car!  

[chargerjy9]

WAH, WAH, WAH.   give it up, man, all this nonsense over the word "never". It is obvious that you aren't going to give up until someone cries "uncle" All this diatribe amounts to nothing more than a hill of beans. It means nothing, has nothing to do with the topic in question. Read what we are trying to tell you. No one at Chrysler who would have to have been involved has heard of or has knowledge of the property in question. It was a small place, someone would know, especially those involved with Styling or Engineering.

The proof is in the pudding. The burden of proof that a running prototype of a 4 door Barracuda which was sanctioned and built by Chrysler falls on the claimant. Please, for your own sake, and your own credibility, find the appropriate proof before putting that out to the world.

                  "UNCLE" !!!

[Just 6T9 CHGR]

Ah, do I suspect another product that came about from a build of a car?

California Style, Turn Down Mufflers!   Very perceptive Master B!

I'm guessing it will have the accurate spot welds and indentations on the resonators and mufflers unlike the competition? 

OMG Brian, ya gotta stop bro....definitely not a good look   

[resq302]

Ah, do I suspect another product that came about from a build of a car?

California Style, Turn Down Mufflers!   Very perceptive Master B!

I'm guessing it will have the accurate spot welds and indentations on the resonators and mufflers unlike the competition? 

OMG Brian, ya gotta stop bro....definitely not a good look   

And here I thought everyone liked the stock look.

[bill440rt]

I can't grasp why, but this song has been stuck in my head all day.     

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8sZcmQr6KY

[TUFCAT]

Ah, do I suspect another product that came about from a build of a car?

California Style, Turn Down Mufflers!  Very perceptive Master B!

I'm guessing it will have the accurate spot welds and indentations on the resonators and mufflers unlike the competition?  

Resq302 has certainly done his part for ECS's infomercial business....much like the guy in the sweater who asks all the obvious questions  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1vUrHKvH3o

[ws23rt]

I can't grasp why, but this song has been stuck in my head all day.     

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8sZcmQr6KY

Sorry to hear about the song in your head but did you have to share it? Now I have to look for something to erase it from my head

[held1823]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0U2zJOryHKQ

[ECS]

WAH, WAH, WAH.

It's obvious that you are very upset to find out that you were not the center of the Universe for Chrysler and they didn't seek your approval for everything they built.  Please accept my apology for having a difference of opinion regarding  Roger Johnson's recollection of this vehicle and for actually building it.  Hopefully your retirement will ultimately provide the directive necessary to keep my project from being such a negative hindrance in your life.  

[ECS]

Resq302 has certainly done his part for ECS's infomercial business....

Tell your buddies that they still lost......nothing's gonna change that!  

[resq302]

Resq302 has certainly done his part for ECS's infomercial business....

Kinda like what you did for a certain Muscle Car thing and a parts vendor, no?  Sorry, but when someone makes a kick @$$ repro part that is dead on, I support them.  No different than me supporting my kids, my car club, or even my volunteer fire dept in what they do.

[ECS]

Kinda like....

I "kinda like" looking at some of the first pictures that were taken at the beginning of the project.  Here are a few showing the test fit for the Firewall & Floor sections of the car.

[JB400]

I was starting to think pix of this car project didn't exist.

[ECS]

I was starting to think pix of this car project didn't exist.

Here are some old pictures that I just stumbled across the other day.  They show some of the alterations we had to make to the B Pillar Post in order for the shape to fit the inner Door Frames.  Ironically, the wind-lace lip had to be shaped the opposite direction of its original configuration.


BEFORE - PASSENGER SIDE


BEFORE - PASSENGER SIDE


AFTER - DRIVER SIDE


AFTER - DRIVER SIDE

[AKcharger]

Still...ya' gotta admit...Chrysler NEVER built that car

[chargerjy9]

 

"Some of you know that ECS is involved with building a "ONE of a KIND" Plymouth Concept Vehicle that involves both Chrysler and the DMV. We are assembling an OE type Four Door 1970 Plymouth Cuda. The concept was taken from the ONLY red vehicle that was ACTUALLY built (and later destroyed) by Chrysler in 1969.     (  how do you know "it" was destroyed BTW.)
We're building the "real" version of the only Concept that was ACTUALLY made in 1969.
Chrysler ACTUALLY made a running/driving prototype of this car and we are building a tribute to that particular vehicle.

Thanks for the input!  I have said quite a few times that this car is being built around the comments made by Roger Johnson and his recollection of a 4 Door Concept Barracuda.  We decided to undertake the project based on his story regardless of whether a picture exists!  It is a "What If" scenario that I have stated from the very beginning.  We are not saying that this is the car that Roger wrote about or that it is an exact representation of what he says he saw.  "
YOUR QUOTES

Now it is just a "what if" scenario?

you have problems with NEVER, I have problems with ACTUALLY!!

I have no problems with the build. I kinda like the idea, actually.  I am not in favor of  the fake VIN number as that passes it off as something it isn't. i.e. that 4 door was not built at Hamtramck Ass'y as the VIN code suggests.

[resq302]

I am not in favor of  the fake VIN number as that passes it off as something it isn't. i.e. that 4 door was not built at Hamtramck Ass'y as the VIN code suggests.

Is it a fake VIN if Chrysler approved / authorized the VIN number?  Maybe we need a picture of Dave and the President / CEO of Chrysler shaking hands and holding the VIN tag together singing Kumba-ya.   After all, it isn't real unless we have a picture of it to back it up right? 

[ECS]

YOUR QUOTES.....you have problems with NEVER, I have problems with ACTUALLY!!

I guess you didn't see (below) where I admitted that I should not have assumed the car was a running/driving prototype?  For the record, I still believe it was "actually" built based on the commentary given by Roger Johnson.  You don't believe him and I do!  

My Quote you chose to ignore from page 10: "First, I would like to say that I should not have said the car that Roger Johnson saw was a running driving prototype.  I have no idea if it even had an Engine or Drive Train installed.  It could have been a rolling Concept just like the Barracuda SX.  If my presumptuous assessment caused confusion with this topic, I apologize for that."

[ECS]

I am not in favor of  the fake VIN number as that passes it off as something it isn't. i.e. that 4 door was not built at Hamtramck Ass'y as the VIN code suggests.

This gets better by the minute!  Now you want to complain about the FICTITIOUS VIN that we assigned to this car?  How can something be passed "off as something it isn't" when you claim it never existed in the first place?  

What would you like to do next?  Complain about the exact size and weight of the Tooth Fairy's Wings?      

[bill440rt]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZbtAFq7dP8

[ECS]

After all, it isn't real unless we have a picture of it to back it up right? 

I think I found a video with one of "The Breakfast Club Engineers" giving his explanation. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSGmsXRDjcA

[chargerjy9]

I guess you didn't see in page 18 where I agreed that nothing is absolute. For the record, I still don't believe it was actually built by Chrysler, based on  commentary
from people who were there, in the thick of things, people who held positions of responsibility in whose hands a project such as that would have passed. you don't believe them and I do.

"Now you want to complain about the FICTITIOUS VIN that we assigned to this car?  How can something be passed "off as something it isn't" when you claim it never existed in the first place?  "

where is the logic in that statement?

[ECS]

"Now you want to complain about the FICTITIOUS VIN that we assigned to this car?  How can something be passed "off as something it isn't" when you claim it never existed in the first place?  "

where is the logic in that statement?

Exactly my point!

[ECS]

Is it a fake VIN........Maybe we need a picture

 

[held1823]

YOUR QUOTES.....you have problems with NEVER, I have problems with ACTUALLY!!

I guess you didn't see (below) where I admitted that I should not have assumed the car was a running/driving prototype?  For the record, I still believe it was "actually" built based on the commentary given by Roger Johnson.  You don't believe him and I do!  

My Quote you chose to ignore from page 10: "First, I would like to say that I should not have said the car that Roger Johnson saw was a running driving prototype.  I have no idea if it even had an Engine or Drive Train installed.  It could have been a rolling Concept just like the Barracuda SX.  If my presumptuous assessment caused confusion with this topic, I apologize for that."

dave, one simple question. how is YOUR backtracking any different than other people that you keep rehashing over and over and over and over? you make an apology for your "assumption", and come across like it's somehow different than other assumptions that you keep grinding on about.

you continually repost articles/photos/etc to "prove" others wrong, while ignoring the possibility that the same articles/photos/etc do more to build their case against johnson's observation, rather than build credibility to back it.

you create fantastic projects, second to none according to the judging sheets. you offer incredible reproduction pieces, yet repeatedly end up banned from the very places that could showcase them. i've seen you say you don't care, but what about the guy who might need one of those pieces, yet won't know you offer it, if you/ecs are persona non grata on the forum the guy looks to for help.