I don't know if this has been posted already, but what the heck? Why??? https://bangshift.com/general-news/...orker-wagon-comes-up-a-bit-short-in-our-eyes/
A lot of work may have gone into it, but that thing looks like a death trap. lol The proportions are really weird and the door window frame is essentially a triangle. I would have much preferred that as a stock 1957 Chrysler Town & Country. It's a shame it got hacked up.
I've never understood the motivations behind shorty cars. Maybe this car was wrecked and otherwise would have been scrapped. I haven't seen one yet that looks good to me. There is a shorty VW bus at a body shop I see on my way to work in the mornings. It cannot be more than 6 feet long (shrugs).
I think where most of them go wrong is that the other proportions are (rarely) modified to fit the shortened section(s), so they just wind up looking weird. But part of the problem is that even if you do shorten the back end, the front end can't be shortened because of the engine bay, so they just wind up looking odd and disproportionate.
It's simply the weirdness factor, nothing more, nothing less. A 'shorty' '57 Chevy wagon isn't as disproportionate, but it's still weird.
If the builder would have gone with a normal hardtop length door and gone more along the "what if Chrysler Nomad" route this could have been a neat car. As it is though, it's not. Just bizarre.
Agreed. I think if the builder had gone that route the results would have been infinitely better. Looking at pics of a '57 Town & Country as a reference, it looks like they spliced the rear doors onto the front doors, but they also changed the radius of the rear wheel opening (i.e. sectioned it and changed the curvature), and by doing so, the dogleg area just looks weird and the lines don't match. With that said, I would have much preferred that car to remain as a factory Town & Country wagon instead of it being hacked up. It would have been a much prettier car as a result. Chrysler got it right in '57. ^What a beautiful car.