This was a very nice compliment to receive at the 2017 SEMA Event. Early in the morning on last day of the Show, we were interviewed by a Velocity Product who said they had been trying to talk with us throughout the week. Our booth had constant traffic, so it was hard to have a dedicated interview or discussion. One of his jobs was to cover the “most customized cars” at the Show and do a video shoot on the construction of those vehicles. He told us that the 4 Door Barracuda exhibited the most customized appearance of ANY car that they had seen at the 2017 SEMA Event.
Some have said that his statement was only his “opinion”. While that is obvious, consider this fact. He was at the 2017 SEMA Show and one of his jobs was to investigate all the other “custom” cars. I would say his judgement holds more validity than those who weren’t at the 2017 SEMA Show and base their “opinion” on nothing more than jealous disregard.
For those who allow a stranger’s project to bother them, has no financial responsibility in its construction or allocation of its build time, they should be regarded as a 3 way loser. Besides, why would any sane person allow something that has no influence on their life to become a personal problem? Get over it! Life is short! Enjoy it while it’s here.
Our “Show Tour” concluded for the 4 Door barracuda at the MCACN event. Bob Ashton did a fantastic job of coordinating the Show and the selection of cars was stunning as usual. Next on the horizon is the Television coverage that was generated during these various Show events. We also have a few additional Magazine publications coming that will help round out the publicity. One of the more comical comments made during the Show was when someone stated that we had incorporated “the wrong rear seat design” in this project. It was said that the rear seat should have been made like the front bench seat. For the record, the rear seat IS designed like a bench seat but it is located in the back of the vehicle. We used the “stock” setup that was designed by Chrysler for their front bench and rear seats. I guess the “wrong” aspect should be directed at Chrysler for introducing this particular design in their E Body vehicles.
Here are a couple of photos showing the seats in a side by side comparison. They look as correct in this 4 door concept as they did on the actual Assembly Line 2 door vehicles. Other than some extra padding and “custom” components that surround the seat configurations, they look as Factory correct as they did in the production cars. It just goes to show how some people will fabricate imaginary complaints, in order to facilitate their vain position of self relevance.
I’ve had a couple of Enthusiasts that forwarded me a link from a forum. The discussion centered around the “awkward roof” and why we didn’t lower the side door frames & glass configurations. First let me say that I welcome any constructive criticism or inquiries about the build of this car. The frustrating part is revisiting topics that have been discussed and explained over & over again. I would like to address the question about the side glass and the height as it relates to the windshield. We did not take the “easy way out” and construct something using shortcuts. Many of the “suggestions” that people have provided were considered LONG before they were made by the critics. We thought many of the same things until we become involved in the engineering and physics of the project. I learned that sitting in a chair verbalizing the “obvious” was nothing like building and engineering the real thing. While the light blue/gray Artist’s rendering of the 4 Door Barracuda looks appealing, that appearance would never work in actual design. It’s like painting a nice looking humanistic Robot where the internals are not shown or functionally illustrate the actual creation. It’s a just a fictitious painting that represents a hypothetical idea. (The back glass would never roll down into the door frame that is shown in the painting of the 4 Door Barracuda.)
I would like to once again explain the engineering process of our design and why we built what we built. From the start, we realized that we had to work with what was available. Even with the parts that we had access to, there was a tremendous amount of fabrication and alterations to make those components work. First, we had to engineer a realistic design for the cowl, dash frame, windshield, A pillar and door frames, in order for them to work in unison. Since a B Body windshield would not work with the cowl frame of a Barracuda, the windshield frame of a Barracuda had to be morphed with a B Body roof and A pillar. The inner half of the A pillar on this car is a 1970 Barracuda design (for the proper fitment of the windshield with the cowl) and the outer half is a B Body A pillar design. The A pillar tapers towards the Cowl because the outer section still has to line up and door seal of the B Body door frames. It is IMPOSSIBLE to lower/shorten the door frames and still use the stock configuration of the B Body glass. Many have suggested that we perform that type of alteration but they do not understand the physics of what they’re suggesting. If you cut and alter the door frames to lower them by 2 inches, the front edge of the frames will have to be moved 2 inches back from the cowl. That would leave an 2 inch gap from the front of the door frame to the area that seals against the A Pillar. It will not work. The roof would also have to be cut apart in 4 sections and widened to accommodate the door frames being shortened and lowered. That would cause a domino effect of design changes with the cowl width, the dash width, the headliner width, the vinyl top width, the window regulators, the door seals, the weatherstripping, and the glass. Many of you have no idea the changes that would need to be made from simply removing a couple of inches out of the door frames. It sure is easy to write about in a sentence or two but extremely difficult to apply in a real world build.
Some of you don’t like the design because it’s different and you’re not use to seeing it. Had the car been offered in 1970, there may not have been so many negative comments that are made today. Having the real 2 door Barracuda makes it that much easier to criticize this 4 door design because we are use to seeing the actual Factory version. There were many cars built that have “odd” appearances but they are accepted because they are “real” cars. No one has to like ALL the different variations and designs. That’s why the Manufacturers made so many different makes & models. I know this car is polarizing and unappealing to some people. That’s fine and can be expected with a project like this. One thing I can assure the critics is that ALL of your suggestions and solutions were considered by us LONG before you ever thought about them. I have an Engineering background I can assure those “critics” that many of you would have given up had you been faced with the complexity of this project. You remind me of those who stand at the bottom of Mount Everest and ask those descending from the top, “What’s the big deal? All you had to do was walk up the side of that Mountain and then walk back down!” I guess it’s true that those who complain from the sidelines, typically think they’re more accomplished than those who actually master the Game.
Here is the December HOT ROD Article on the 4 Door Barracuda. The Magazine will be given out at the 2017 SEMA Show. Next stop…….Battle of the Builders.