Indy 62 Pics

[tommy d]

Originally Posted by oldskool

"... who would believe a big dog like that!..."

Speakin of Mopar dogs. Some of those early '60's Mopars were REALLY ugly !

BUT, what's that sayin: "Beauty is only skin deep" ?

Other than small aerodynamic differences, it didn't really make any difference what the car body looked like.

It only mattered how much it weighed, how much power it had, & how much of that power could be hooked up to the track. Because of that, there have been some really ugly cars win drag races, especially back in the old days, & especially some of the early '60's Mopars.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". Therefore, people's opinion of which cars look better will vary, greatly. While lookin at pics from the old days, I've seen a few cars that don't look like race cars, at all. Besides the ugly Mopars, there are Studebakers, Hudsons, Corvairs, & even VW bugs. Since I'm a Pontiac guy, I'll say that the '62 A/FX Tempest was one of the ugliest Pontiac drags cars, IMO. I'm also not a fan of the '73-'77 A-bodies. A '77 Can-Am would be the exception.

Those are a few that come to mind. As I run across others I think are particularly ugly, or don't look like race cars, I'll try to think to edit this post & add 'em.

Car makers have sold some really ugly cars, down thru the years. But, no matter how ugly, there have always been people who bought 'em. There have always been some people who just wanted something to get them from point A to point B, & really didn't care how it looked.

Same with some drag racers. There have always been some who just wanted something that could win, regardless of how it looked, especially if it was provided for them, at no cost, or at least real cheap.

Going up I would see Ted's "Chicken Hawk" and Frantic Fred Robinsons Studes every Saturday at Muncie Dragway.