Questionable modifications: pictures inside!

  • Thread starter -Fred-
  • 38,815 comments
  • 2,752,794 views
1708239050866.jpeg
 
It's so bad, I really don't mind the details.
Well that escalated quickly.
 
At first I thought the front and rear clips were photoshop because of the rear licence plate “cave”. Googled the car and sure enough it is real.

As for the car below:

To me, it just doesn’t work. Of course I haven’t seen this car in the metal, but the modification doesn’t look right from this angle.
IMG_4052.jpeg


This is more subtle.
IMG_4051.jpeg
IMG_4050.jpeg
 
Skyline Crossover.
View attachment 1349051View attachment 1349052
It is well done, but i actually think the standard QX50 looks better. Just stick the GTR engine and running gear into it (and maybe the wheels) and be done with it. No need for the Mitsuoka treatment.
 
It is well done, but i actually think the standard QX50 looks better. Just stick the GTR engine and running gear into it (and maybe the wheels) and be done with it. No need for the Mitsuoka treatment.
Which generation QX50? I seem to recall the first gen was basically a facelifted EX and used the longitudinal VQ V6. The much more striking current QX50 is an entirely different platform and uses a transverse four-pot.

The second gen obviously wouldn't be impossible as the swap was done to a smaller, similarly oriented Juke, but first gen is more of a "just stick it in" candidate given the similarities between VQ and VR engines.
 
Which generation QX50? I seem to recall the first gen was basically a facelifted EX and used the longitudinal VQ V6. The much more striking current QX50 is an entirely different platform and uses a transverse four-pot.

The second gen obviously wouldn't be impossible as the swap was done to a smaller, similarly oriented Juke, but first gen is more of a "just stick it in" candidate given the similarities between VQ and VR engines.
Yeah, i meant to say 1st-gen. It has a nicer profile to the current one. Visually at least, it has a longer, lower nose and a cleaner c-pillar treatment. To my eyes.

I'm not even sure which version this 'GT-R' is based on. The c-pillar looks different to either but the less sculpted side profile on the doors looks closer to the 1st-gen.
 
Yeah, i meant to say 1st-gen. It has a nicer profile to the current one. Visually at least, it has a longer, lower nose and a cleaner c-pillar treatment. To my eyes.

I'm not even sure which version this 'GT-R' is based on. The c-pillar looks different to either but the less sculpted side profile on the doors looks closer to the 1st-gen.
I'd be surprised if the above was based at all on a QX or EX.
 
Looking at some of the build photos in the linked Japanese website, it would appear to be based on a (J50) 1st-gen:

View attachment 1349793
I'm surprised.

:lol:

Okay so I do see it now in the greenhouse and even the haunches are largely unchanged, where I previously saw them [possibly as I wanted to] resembing the R35's more.
 
I'm surprised.

:lol:

Okay so I do see it now in the greenhouse and even the haunches are largely unchanged, where I previously saw them [possibly as I wanted to] resembing the R35's more.
I'm kind of surprised they didn't use the bigger FX/QX70 which i imagine would have been a better fit proportionally.
 
I'm kind of surprised they didn't use the bigger FX/QX70 which i imagine would have been a better fit proportionally.
It may require more extensive modification as the EX isn't nearly so swoopy. The greenhouse is also larger on the FX, and likely out of proportion compared the EX.
 

Latest Posts

Back