Don't see were "stealth" fits in, and agreed, the headlight count needs to be cut in half, but otherwise, very nice car. Mike
I like the fact it's different! Nice blue paint and polished wheels would be a show stopper today, quad headlights and all. It probably got unsectioned and has wires and a frigging flatty in it now.
I wonder where it's at now? If the decklid is still on the car it would be a dead giveaway. That sure is a unique louver pattern.
You´re certainly right from an esthetical point of view. But I just love those oddball details on many 50s and 60s builds... Those guys obviously didn´t have those aquired tastes we been taught from books, mags, the internet. All they had was their creativity and imagination. And that´s exactly why I´m digging the hell out of those awkward quads, haha.
I don't mind the whole package as was...Interesting very smooth wheels many times older than one would imagine when determining period... One thing that makes Headlights easier to criticize is when they are all cock-eyed.........that about says that...and this is not unusual for pavement pounding Hotrods with lights on stands. An adjustment before a picture session or in general anytime is a good walk around detail to look for...The other notable detail that stands out to me is the Rad support in open view without a fairing due in part to loss of the inner fenders and of course a hood side and perhaps a fabbed rad support versus the OEM setup which may tuck into the rad differently...
That car would fit in with the traditional hot rods of today just by removing two of the headlights, the car is darn near perfect. HRP
Ironic. We want to change it to look like we think it should have looked like in ‘62. In ‘62 the guy thought it looked great or he would have tossed a couple of headlights.
The Jalopy Journal
