• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Thunderbird Club

#77,447
GonePlaid said:
I can and do appreciate the muscle cars . Sorry,bowtie, but was never a fan of the plastic pigs after about '62(whenever they went to the "pointy" rear end-I liked the rounded tail):cool:. Just me, I guess. Had an Impala Convertible-327/250 w/ Powerglide (yuck) that could run once ya got it moving. Off the line, a Model T in reverse could eat it up, but from 12 mph up it'd go!:smug:
Click to expand...
First car-during my Navy days-was Almost a Ming green 64 1/2 Fastback Mustang-6 cylinder,automatic, ivory interior. Real nice but the guy wouldn't budge on the price so I bought the Impala-which had a trunk that could hold 4 going to the drive-in.:smug:
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillerup, RedVee, GBassNorth and 3 others
#77,448
Chucky Stiletti said:
383s rev higher and sound better imho. Although as you mention engine weight is the same, ancillary equipment such as manifolds etc. would weigh more. A 440 Charger outweighs a 383 Charger. I could be wrong but would imagine the f/b weight ratio is more even in a 383 Charger. I like straight line performance but we have many mountains and windy roads in CA. Believe it or not, 289 Shelbys/Cobras are more sought after over here than 427s.
Click to expand...
In 1968 the Charger came in a standard model and an R/T model. The 383 was only available in the standard and the 440 was only available as an R/T. The R/T had different shocks, springs, bigger brakes, and dual exhaust. I think that can account for the majority of the 84 lbs. As they are different sub-models I think it's a bit unfair to say that it's due to the engine itself. (curb weights of 383 4barrel auto vs 440 4barrel auto)

I think they are more sought after because they are more affordable. As the 427 S/C's are around double what a 289 goes for. I haven't talked to anyone that would take a 289 over a 427 S/C if money and availability weren't factors. But that's Ford stuff so it's where I bow out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillerup, GBassNorth, Larry V and 3 others
#77,450
TBird1958 said:
We are loose about it to a certain degree, the original Gibson concept was a mahogany/walnut multi ply neck through bass with a pickup that uses neither P nor J to denote itself. The shape of course is automotive designer Raymond Dietricht's work. As time has gone by there have been many variations of the concept involving construction of the neck (i.e. bolt on or set), the shape of the body, Non Reverse and Reverse, as well as multitudes of different pickups. That I've been able to document Gibson alone has used 7 different pickup designs since the '60s. There are lots of great Ho's out there, Greco, ESP, Orville, Hamer, Ibanez, Jackson to name a few - They're all Thunderbirds.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I think this is what I was looking for. Seems most people seem to see the Thunderbird as a brand from Gibson/Epi. Not a style or sound. When I picked up a cheep used Schecter Ultra Bass the other day I mentioned it was a knockoff TBird. The sales person seemed abit miffed at the mention. But its mahogany, neck through, and has EMG TBHZ pickups. And it sounds great, can't wait to string it up BEAD
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillerup, RedVee, GBassNorth and 11 others
#77,451
Rattfink said:
Thanks, I think this is what I was looking for. Seems most people seem to see the Thunderbird as a brand from Gibson/Epi. Not a style or sound. When I picked up a cheep used Schecter Ultra Bass the other day I mentioned it was a knockoff TBird. The sales person seemed abit miffed at the mention. But its mahogany, neck through, and has EMG TBHZ pickups. And it sounds great, can't wait to string it up BEAD
Click to expand...
Don't you mean string it down to BEAD :smug::cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillerup, GBassNorth, kat888 and 5 others
#77,452
Dr_Feelgoood212 said:
In 1968 the Charger came in a standard model and an R/T model. The 383 was only available in the standard and the 440 was only available as an R/T. The R/T had different shocks, springs, bigger brakes, and dual exhaust. I think that can account for the majority of the 84 lbs. As they are different sub-models I think it's a bit unfair to say that it's due to the engine itself. (curb weights of 383 4barrel auto vs 440 4barrel auto)

I think they are more sought after because they are more affordable. As the 427 S/C's are around double what a 289 goes for. I haven't talked to anyone that would take a 289 over a 427 S/C if money and availability weren't factors. But that's Ford stuff so it's where I bow out.
Click to expand...
Nice post. Don't think it's just affordability. I know people that prefer Thunderbird IIs over IVs regardless of pricwe and availability. Your point is very valid but connoisseurs I talk to at The Pebble Beach Concourd d'Elegance for example have enough money to buy 10 of each but many prefer the sports car feel and balance of the smaller engines.
I'm in no way in their category but have to agree with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillerup, RedVee, GBassNorth and 6 others
#77,453
Chucky Stiletti said:
Nice post. Don't think it's just affordability. I know people that prefer Thunderbird IIs over IVs regardless of pricwe and availability. Your point is very valid but connoisseurs I talk to at The Pebble Beach Concourd d'Elegance for example have enough money to buy 10 of each but many prefer the sports car feel and balance of the smaller engines.
I'm in no way in their category but have to agree with them.
Click to expand...
I used to go the Barrett-Jackson in WPB. Watched a '62 Impala Ragtop(OK, Restored)go for $125K. Gaaahhh!:banghead:
 
  • Like
Reactions: GBassNorth, Larry V, theFixer and 2 others
#77,455
Chucky Stiletti said:
Nice post. Don't think it's just affordability. I know people that prefer Thunderbird IIs over IVs regardless of pricwe and availability. Your point is very valid but connoisseurs I talk to at The Pebble Beach Concourd d'Elegance for example have enough money to buy 10 of each but many prefer the sports car feel and balance of the smaller engines.
I'm in no way in their category but have to agree with them.
Click to expand...
Do they provide drool cups or do you bring your own?:smug:
 
  • Like
Reactions: GBassNorth, JJR58, theFixer and 2 others
#77,456
Chucky Stiletti said:
Nice post. Don't think it's just affordability. I know people that prefer Thunderbird IIs over IVs regardless of pricwe and availability. Your point is very valid but connoisseurs I talk to at The Pebble Beach Concourd d'Elegance for example have enough money to buy 10 of each but many prefer the sports car feel and balance of the smaller engines.
I'm in no way in their category but have to agree with them.
Click to expand...
Fair points.
But I wouldn’t necessarily say that a Thunderbird II is more sought after than the IV.

I’ve never talked to people of that caliber, just a bunch of hillabillies (Trailer Park Boys quote) that could only dream of those cars… or they get a kit car :roflmao:
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillerup, RedVee, GBassNorth and 7 others
#77,457
Chucky Stiletti said:
Nice post. Don't think it's just affordability. I know people that prefer Thunderbird IIs over IVs regardless of pricwe and availability. Your point is very valid but connoisseurs I talk to at The Pebble Beach Concourd d'Elegance for example have enough money to buy 10 of each but many prefer the sports car feel and balance of the smaller engines.
I'm in no way in their category but have to agree with them.
Click to expand...
I'm in that category, I love small engined British sports cars, I've until recently always had them. None have been what you'd call fast other than the Lotus Esprit which was only a 2.2L straight 4 with 180bhp but by Christ could it get round corners, on our small bendy roads it was spectacular. I had a couple with bigger engines, a 3L Austin Healy and a 2.5L Triumph TR6 but they were strictly straight line cars and scary on Welsh roads.

These were our last two, a 69 MG Midget and a 72 MGBGT
MG's 003.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillerup, godofthunder59, RedVee and 10 others
#77,459
Dr_Feelgoood212 said:
Fair points.
But I wouldn’t necessarily say that a Thunderbird II is more sought after than the IV.

I’ve never talked to people of that caliber, just a bunch of hillabillies (Trailer Park Boys quote) that could only dream of those cars… or they get a kit car :roflmao:
Click to expand...
Kit car? Is that a Hasselhoff reference?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillerup, PillO, JJR58 and 3 others
#77,460
Christine said:
I'm in that category, I love small engined British sports cars, I've until recently always had them. None have been what you'd call fast other than the Lotus Esprit which was only a 2.2L straight 4 with 180bhp but by Christ could it get round corners, on our small bendy roads it was spectacular. I had a couple with bigger engines, a 3L Austin Healy and a 2.5L Triumph TR6 but they were strictly straight line cars and scary on Welsh roads.

These were our last two, a 69 MG Midget and a 72 MGBGT
View attachment 2996484
Click to expand...
Ever have a "Sprug-eyed-Bite"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chucky Stiletti and Christine

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back