[DeTomaso] Autoweek online Mention

Fri Feb 7 21:10:15 EST 2014

Kirby - time for a 4.00" crank, 10.5:1, 6.25 lift and 305 duration??
My drag racing customers say they're happy up to 650 - 675 HP before 
they start worrying.
(Oh yah - your SVO block won't split like a Cleveland, so no worry)

Just checking for full-on craziness.
dave

On 07/02/2014 4:26 PM, Kirby Schrader wrote:
> Very well said, John. I agree.
>
> I remember well the last time I was at Pocono and was right on the 
> tail of a 360. I just couldn’t pass him.
> I'd be right on him going down the back straight coming up behind him 
> and when I pulled out to pass…. nothing.
> I’d just sit there next to him.
> Not enough ponies… so, I just stuck with him the rest of the session.
>
> Once in the pits, three ‘Ferrari guys’ came up to me and said I 
> shouldn’t be on the track.
> Didn’t deserve to be on the track. I was dangerous.
> I asked them why and the reply was that my car was too old and it 
> didn’t have ground effects or good handling.
>
> Hmmm… I didn’t have any problem with handling… I just didn’t have the HP.
>
> Oh, well….
>
> Kirby
>
>
> On Feb 7, 2014, at 18:14, John Taphorn <jtaphorn at kingwoodcable.com 
> <mailto:jtaphorn at kingwoodcable.com>> wrote:
>
>> My perspective on modified Panteras is as such.
>>
>> In the 80s and 90s, one could mildly modify a Pantera and be among 
>> the fastest production cars on the street or on at the track. It was 
>> a sports car whose performance could rival or exceed almost any other 
>> production sports car regardless of cost. We could humiliate more 
>> expensive Ferraris, Lambos and Vettes at the track. How could one not 
>> give into temptation. I took pleasure believing that I had a higher 
>> performance car for a fraction of the cost and the pride knowing I 
>> contributed to making it possible. I believe that all who actually 
>> used their cars, modified them to enjoy a fuller capability. As I 
>> have gotten older with my racing experiences behind me, I can see how 
>> older owners may not have been as performance motivated and more 
>> financially so. It always seemed to me the stock advocates were 
>> always motivated by a sense of value appreciation rather than driving 
>> enjoyment. Nothing wrong with that, til it becomes evangelical in 
>> their persuasion of others.
>>
>> Sometime in the 2000s, new production car horsepower and handling 
>> began to improve demonstrably. It takes a lot more effort and a very 
>> good driver to make a Pantera competitive with modern sports cars. 
>> IMHO, they simply do not handle as well as modern production 
>> sportscars. Thus, many give up trying.
>>
>> As a result, new comers to the Pantera arena wonder why people did 
>> not leave them stock and appreciate them for what they were. My 
>> response is that "You had to be there."
>>
>> JT
>>
>>
>> On 2/7/2014 8:11 AM, cengles at cox.net wrote:
>>> Dear Lashdeep,
>>>
>>>
>>> Your points are well taken. I would point out that the passion and 
>>> enthusiasm of the this group for Panteras and modifications thereof, 
>>> are related to the belated market appreciation of stock original 
>>> Panteras. We have modified and maintained them and kept them 
>>> driveable and usable. As Charlie McCall says, "raising Pantera 
>>> awareness."
>>>
>>> I own two Panteras. Both were bone stock when I bought them in 
>>> twenty five years ago. Each modification was a definite incremental 
>>> improvement in the car's performance. I wouldn't go back.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, a good friend, who owns two Diablos, finally 
>>> succumbed to my influence and bought a Pantera. As he says, " I have 
>>> all the horsepower I want. I want a low mileage stock Pantera." He 
>>> bought a Pantera that was ever so slightly misrepresented as a low 
>>> mileage stock Pantera. He has proceeded to spend the last several 
>>> months correcting things and restoring it back to stock original.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, for whatever reason, it does seem to be the "Second Coming of 
>>> Panteras". They are wonderful cars.
>>>
>>>
>>> Warmest regards, Chuck Engles
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 8:28 PM, LS wrote:
>>>
>>> We all have our ways of enjoying our cars and are entitled to do 
>>> whatever we please obviously.
>>>
>>> There is a quantitative way to measure the world's perception of our 
>>> beloved Detomaso cars...sales prices.
>>>
>>> Many of you equate the fixation or study of sales prices with cold 
>>> greed, sterile investment, or outright snobbery.
>>>
>>> It is, in actuality, the easiest way to determine what the world 
>>> (including us) thinks of Detomaso.
>>>
>>> A simple observation here is that cosmetically stock cars are 
>>> bringing strong money. It appears that even the slightest cosmetic 
>>> modification detracts in some way from the sales prices.
>>>
>>> Even a simple change detracts from this ultimate fact and will 
>>> potentially devalue the cars.
>>>
>>> I have no problem with modifications but we still need to realize 
>>> that we all have started with one of the most perfectly styled 
>>> exotics (including the original wheels) ever created.
>>>
>>> I have a suspicion that some of you long time owners don't want to 
>>> believe this.
>>>
>>> LS
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> */central /*
>>> */wines-spirits est 1934 /*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> */625 e street nw /*
>>>
>>> */washington, dc 20004 /*
>>>
>>>
>>> */_centralwines.com_/* <http://centralwines.com/>
>>>
>>> */_facebook.com/CentralLiquors_/* <http://facebook.com/CentralLiquors>
>>>
>>> */202-737-2800 /*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___________________________________
>>>
>>> *From: *Stephen Nelson <steve at snclocks.com>
>>> *To: *detomaso at poca.com
>>> *Sent: *Thursday, January 30, 2014 1:47 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [DeTomaso] Autoweek online Mention
>>>
>>> I would think the best thing to do is acknowledge that we might not 
>>> get any monetary benefit to all those mods we put into the cars. 
>>> And, in fact, if we start with a highly original car, we will be far 
>>> less likely to get any monetary benefit. But, is that why we modify 
>>> the cars? To make money? If so, well, then we ain’t all that bright.
>>> Flip side, given the surprisingly poor quality of many of the mods I 
>>> have seen on cars I looked at when finding 5332 – including 5332 – 
>>> the reality is that all too many modified cars are poorly done and 
>>> really don’t deserve any premium – in fact – they deserve 
>>> significant devaluation.
>>> Do great work, and drive these great cars!
>>> Stephen Nelson
>>> ___________________________________
>>>
>>> *From: *DeTomaso [mailto:detomaso-bounces at poca.com] *On Behalf Of 
>>> *michael at michaelshortt.com
>>> *Sent: *Thursday, January 30, 2014 10:18 AM
>>> *To: *detomaso at poca.com
>>> *Subject: *[DeTomaso] Autoweek online Mention
>>>
>>>
>>> In a story about aJan auctions, Mecum vs BJ.
>>> *DeTomaso Pantera *At Mecum, _you'd have paid $49,500_ 
>>> <http://www.mecum.com/auctions/lot_detail.cfm?LOT_ID=FL0114-172060&entryRow=2893> 
>>> to take home a 1974 example of the increasingly desirable Pantera. 
>>> At Barrett-Jackson, a 1971 car _would have set you back $48,400_ 
>>> <http://www.barrett-jackson.com/application/onlinesubmission/lotdetails.aspx?ln=1650&aid=525>. 
>>> The difference is originality -- the early B-J car is tuned, to put 
>>> it mildly, with flashy five-spokes and a nitrous-oxide system. 
>>> Depending on your perspective, this is either a huge improvement or 
>>> an unacceptable desecration. Compare that to the “highly original” 
>>> Mecum car.
>>> *Winner: * We'd vote for the unmolested car at Mecum, but that's 
>>> personal preference at play. This one's inconclusive.
>>> Michael Shortt
>>> -- 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Michael L. Shortt
>>> Savannah, Georgia
>>> www.michaelshortt.com <http://www.michaelshortt.com/>
>>> michael at michaelshortt.com 
>>> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('michael at michaelshortt.com')>
>>> 912-232-9390
>>>
>>> This email is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy
>>> Act, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally
>>> privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
>>> notified
>>> that any retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this
>>> communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender 
>>> that you
>>> have received this message in error, then delete it. Thank you
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>>
>>> DeTomaso mailing list
>>> DeTomaso at poca.com 
>>> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('DeTomaso at poca.com')>
>>> http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>>
>>> DeTomaso mailing list
>>> _DeTomaso at poca.com_ 
>>> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('DeTomaso at poca.com')><javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('DeTomaso at poca.com')>
>>> _http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com_<http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>>
>>> DeTomaso mailing list
>>> DeTomaso at poca.com
>>> http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>
>> DeTomaso mailing list
>> DeTomaso at poca.com <mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com>
>> http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>
> DeTomaso mailing list
> DeTomaso at poca.com
> http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com