It's all nostalgia. Go back and drive any of the old chassis any of us ever fondly remember. They're all crap in any measurable way but we love them not because we made them. They are part of what made us.

I've been saying this for years. "I'm going to restore a '67 Camaro and use it as a DD.". Yea, good luck with that.

I like the blasphemous idea of taking old car bodies and dropping them onto electric "sleds" (chassis with a battery and AWD electric motors). They would super reliable with the exception of replacing the battery every 5? years...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I fully get the nostalgia angle and have preached that for decades. Hell I am defending Dodge here!
But...
The Fox bodies were the epidemy of Ford's "We can make complete and total shit and people will still buy it" era. It was cars like those that almost bankrupt them.
I suppose there are a bunch of 50 something's that had a ratty old Fox and now want and can afford a shiny like new one but $40,000 to $60,000 for one? Really?

it's been that way for a quite a while now. they were in decline up until the 5th-gen came out in '05. that tended to revitalize the fox body market.


my sister loved mustangs growing up. so about 8-ish years ago or so, she finally had a steady job, and wanted her own car. had about $6k to spend. she really wanted a '05-'14, but even rental-spec v6 '05s were still going for $12k.

going down the list of mustangs that were in that price range got really sad really quick. i told her no convertibles, which eliminated 95% of the market.

we looked at one '99 4th-gen. it had bad shocks, bad brakes, and cracked tires that were at about 10psi--it needed work just to get it home. they were asking $7k, and we had been hoping to talk them down until i told her how much it'd cost to replace all those parts after the sale price...

she ended up in a mazda 6.

As long as the donor car isn't a functional, matching numbers car, I have no issue with this or a retromod. Give me a '69 RS/SS Camaro body with an alpha platform underneath it and I'd DD the hell out of it.

Dynacorn sells full new bodies licensed by GM. They used to sell a rolling chassis. If I had stupid money to spend I'd just as soon go that route as start with a real '69.

if i had the money, i'd much rather a 'new' '69 without rust

Resto mod is the only way I would own one.

Saw a '69 Chevelle resto once that I would DD in a heartbeat. Complete 4 wheel independent frame, coilovers, rack and pinion, LS with 6 speed. Guy had a ton of money in it, but it was very well done.

Resto mods are the only way to make many classics a great daily driver.
However I personally would not want a new car that just looks like an old car.
It would be all those little idiosyncrasies of the actual classic car that would interest me. If I am going to have an all new car with just appearance of what I like it would defeat the purpose of having what I like.
Make sense?

Sure. But your talking about a car you wax, drive a few times a year, and take to car meets. That's cool too.

Well not really...
Yuo are correct in saying that a resto mod is a better daily driver and if looking for something today it would only be a toy but if I was in the market for a classic DD it would be an actual classic not a classic looking new car. Zero interest in them.

Daily driver 1998 to 2003. All seasons not a toy.

I totally get that, and see the attraction to it. It's also (at least in the short term) the least expensive way to do it.

Honestly, I vacillate between the two thoughts which is why I've never done either, at least in the recent past.

My DD from 1999 to 2005. 1970 Jeep J3000 Gladiator 4x4, factory Buick 350, granny 4 speed. That's when I got used to not listening to the radio. Never had one. It was just like this but red.

So to my point would it be the same if it was just that body slapped on a whole different platform?