Car pics too cool not to share

More dangerous for me were motorcycles. People on bikes always worry about other drivers (and rightly so). However, every bike wreck I was ever in back then was a "single vehicle accident" and related to some sort of fooling around:rolleyes:.

I got my motorcycle license at 16. Nowadays, I know that's too young, especially since I have children who are just like me. :sneaky: I fully understand the saying "there are two types of riders, those who have been down, and those who are going down". Personally, I’ve never been down on a street bike. A dirt bike, oh yeah I’ve been down, but never on the street. Of all the guys I've known to be hurt on a street bike, there's really no specific rhyme or reason to them all. A few have been hit by cars, a few have had an accident because of their own actions, and a few have had freak accidents beyond anyone's control. I love riding, but often the odds seem to be stacked against you. You really need some angels to help guide you.
 
I looked into this last time we talked about it thinking along the lines of commercial or special purpose vehicle, but I think I just had an idea and found something to back it up. I think with these Dodges, and maybe some other vehicles, it simply comes down to the build date of the specific vehicle.

Here's what I found;
"Side Marker Lights
Effective January 1, 1968, all passenger cars built for sale in the United States were required to display amber lights or reflectors on the sides of front fenders, and red lights or reflectors on the sides of rear quarter panels.

Standard No. 108 - Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment - Passenger Cars, Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles, Trucks, Buses, Trailers, (except pole trailers and trailer converter dollies), and Motorcycles (Effective 1-1-68 for vehicles 2,032 mrn (80 or more inches) in width and effective 1-1-69 for all other vehicles). This standard specifies requirements for original and replacement lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment. Its purpose is to reduce traffic crashes and deaths and injuries resulting from traffic crashes, by providing adequate illumination of the roadway, and by enhancing the conspicuity of motor vehicles on the public roads so that their presence is perceived and their signals understood, both in daylight and in darkness, or other conditions of reduced visibility.

Confused yet? Basically, what this says regarding side marker lights is that effective on all vehicles made on January 1, 1968 or later, amber side marker lamps or reflectors that can be seen in profile are required to be included near the front of the vehicle, and red side marker lamps or reflectors that can be seen in profile are required to be included near the rear of the vehicle.

Initially, the regulation for 1968-1969 required lights or reflectors, which is why some cars in 1968 had amber lights in front and red reflectors in the rear (1968 Ford Motor Company cars, for example). Chrysler vehicles used lights in 1968 and reflectors (on most models) for 1969. This regulation was later amended to require lights and reflectors on all vehicles made on January 1, 1970 or later, which is why most lines had changes to their side marker lights for the 1970 model year.

The regulation required that the side-facing lights and/or reflectors make the vehicle's presence, position, and direction of travel clearly visible to other drivers approaching the vehicle from the side, or at any angle where the headlamps or tail lamps of the vehicle being overtaken cannot be viewed. In other words, other drivers should be able to see your car in darkness regardless of the direction from which they are approaching, and from the color of the light or reflector, be able to tell at a glance which direction your vehicle is facing or moving.

The amended regulation for January 1, 1970 also included the requirement that the parking lamps remain lit during headlamp operation, and that side marker lamps be illuminated whenever the vehicle's parking and tail lamps are on. The parking light revision to the regulation was to make vehicles with a non-functioning headlamp more noticeable to other drivers, and lessened the chance that it might be mistaken for a motorcycle by oncoming traffic.

In 1970-1971, most Ford Motor Company vehicles were equipped with flashing side marker lights that corresponded with the turn signals flashing in the direction of a turn. This was eliminated for the most part for 1972, although many General Motors cars utilize a flashing front (amber) marker light to correspond with turn signals to this day."

Thanks for this. I knew a lot of this but the clarification is nice. And it's always interesting to see how the different manufacturers delt with changes in regulations. While I might agree to a point that some of these things make us safer I don't totally agree. A lot of European countries didn't or don't have these regulations and they are as safe or safer than us.

I'm sure you're right about that. There are likely a few new drivers who would both appreciate a car like that and keep out of trouble. But probably not too many and as you say the are more than few adults who should just take the bus :LOL:.

By the way, I would include my 16 year old self in the group that shouldn't get that Nova. I had several unplanned high speed offroad adventures as a teenager. Fortunately I grew up in the midwest and only a few rows of corn were injured. More dangerous for me were motorcycles. People on bikes always worry about other drivers (and rightly so). However, every bike wreck I was ever in back then was a "single vehicle accident" and related to some sort of fooling around:rolleyes:.

I only had dirt bikes as a teenager and am the only person in my family who rides a motorcycle. I grew up driving in the mountains and snow so I had to learn throttle control. I had a 67 Cougar in AK and I did a couple of 360* spins by applying to much throttle when the roads were slick. It had a built 289 in it so I can't imagine having a big block.
I did own a Chevelle with a 396 in it & could get the front tires off the ground. Never got caught but one of the local PD in Snohomish had a "talk" with me about it.
 
1977 Ford F350 Crew Cab 514cu 4x4

_nc_ohc=R0TyMKu-zaAAX8INRWM&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.jpg
 
'68 W300, 318, 4 speed

View attachment 411181

Interesting that this 68 has marker lights or reflectors?

My old '67 D300, after I sold it and he converted it to a W300. Used to be a factory dually 9' step-side. Runs a freshly rebuilt 383 that I swapped on some magnum heads to. Got the name "Big Mo". My buddies said it stood for "Big Mother", but my wife said it was more like "Big Money"! :ROFLMAO:
DD28435F-D3D5-41E1-B14A-764C67F8CBB3.JPG


IMG_4184.jpg


IMG_1810 (1).jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorba and reddvltj
And it's always interesting to see how the different manufacturers delt with changes in regulations.

Talking about dealing with changes like that, I have an early build '65 Chrysler that has clear tail light lenses with red bulbs (early build New Yorker only). Well, apparently that became an issue with the regulators and 5-6 months through the model year they had to change that to red lenses. That's an elusive and expensive piece of plastic now that I can't find for a reasonable price. :rolleyes:

IMG_9881.JPG
 
Talking about dealing with changes like that, I have an early build '65 Chrysler that has clear tail light lenses with red bulbs (early build New Yorker only). Well, apparently that became an issue with the regulators and 5-6 months through the model year they had to change that to red lenses. That's an elusive and expensive piece of plastic now that I can't find for a reasonable price. :rolleyes:

View attachment 411199

This is the type of stuff I LOVE learning about older rigs. These are just those things that make some different/special.
 
This is the type of stuff I LOVE learning about older rigs. These are just those things that make some different/special.

I can tell you this, unless you like headaches never buy a change-over-year vehicle, they tend to be a one-year-only type of vehicle. A '65 Chrysler is one of those vehicles. :rolleyes: :LOL:

My buddy told me that '63 Ford trucks tend to be one-year-only type of trucks.
 
Talking about dealing with changes like that, I have an early build '65 Chrysler that has clear tail light lenses with red bulbs (early build New Yorker only). Well, apparently that became an issue with the regulators and 5-6 months through the model year they had to change that to red lenses. That's an elusive and expensive piece of plastic now that I can't find for a reasonable price. :rolleyes:

View attachment 411199

I know it wouldn't be an "original equipment" part, but couldn't someone 3D print replacements?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squatch
I know it wouldn't be an "original equipment" part, but couldn't someone 3D print replacements?

I'm hoping that becomes a possibility. Mine are in useable condition, but I'm looking for spares which are old plastic now (and in the $1,000 range for a pair :rolleyes: ) I don't know much about 3D printing, so I don't know if it's possible to make some yet. The chrome strips should be easy enough to take care of if the lenses could be made.

65 ny lens .JPG
 
I'm hoping that becomes a possibility. Mine are in useable condition, but I'm looking for spares which are old plastic now (and in the $1,000 range for a pair :rolleyes: ) I don't know much about 3D printing, so I don't know if it's possible to make some yet. The chrome strips should be easy enough to take care of if the lenses could be made.

View attachment 411204

Yeah, I'm not versed in the 3D printing world at all, but it looks as though the tech is available to print clear projects...

https://www.3ds.com/make/solutions/transparent-plastic-3d-printing
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wildman
I can tell you this, unless you like headaches never buy a change-over-year vehicle, they tend to be a one-year-only type of vehicle. A '65 Chrysler is one of those vehicles. :rolleyes: :LOL:

My buddy told me that '63 Ford trucks tend to be one-year-only type of trucks.

I've been told that '68 model year GM products tend to have "one year only" parts that are a pain to locate. Heard the same about '78 GM models, as well...:unsure:
 
I've been told that '68 model year GM products tend to have "one year only" parts that are a pain to locate. Heard the same about '78 GM models, as well...:unsure:

Interesting, are you talking trucks or cars?
 
Speaking of Ford trucks, here's a unibody. One of my dad's friends has a '63 unibody that his dad won new at the local county fair. I don't have any pic of that specific truck though.

View attachment 411205

He really needs to lower it a little more, though...:sneaky:
 
Interesting, are you talking trucks or cars?

Cars. Some Chevy guys I was trying to avoid hanging out with were talking about switches and stuff unique to the '68 Chevelles and Vettes, and such. Also, the '78 Monte Carlo had something to do with the brakes and/or wheel bearings not interchanging with the '79, though the cars look practically identical. 🤷‍♂️