Many classic cars were crushed for scrap metal. The CCCA considers any 1948 and older a "classic", while the ACCA says anything 25 years or olde is "classic". Regardless of what terminology you want to use, it's an old car, and LEDs don't look as good on old cars (no offense to you, Frank, love your car).
That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but I don't share it. I like the fact that people can now see my brake lights come on faster and brighter.
To each his/her own I guess. I like the fact that 60s/70s cars have come around to the point where early cars have been for a long time. You can make them what you want. Custom interior? Do it. 17 to 19 inch wheels? Knock yourself out. Custom grills, LED lights, modernized facias with splitters? Go for it! It's your car. If you want to it, do it...but do it as well as you can. The only wrong way is to half-ass it. I can appreciate restored cars, I love to look at them, but I'm not a restorer. I once saw a NOS set of Boss 429 battery caps on Ebay for $170. For a set of battery caps! Yeah, they're special, they're made to vent the cells of a trunk-mounted battery to the outside, but that's stupid money for such a thing. And once you've restored an old car at that level you have something you can't drive. If you drive it in many cases you can't mix well in modern traffic. Wallowy, 60's era suspension makes you effectively a roadblock on cloverleaf interchanges. Good luck with your non-power, all drum brakes not piling into the back of that Civic that just hopped lanes and jumped on the binders. I drove bias ply tires daily, I don't want to do it again. Oh, and I've also experienced the terror of a stumbling carburetor on a cold day, trying to get out of a side street into traffic just as the choke pulled off but before the motor is properly warmed. Fitech for me, please. With the exception of pure restorers who are willing and welcome to put up with the many limitations of 40-50 year old technology and in many cases rarely drive them, very few old cars are "period correct." Do what you want, but think it through and try to do it well. Anyone can appreciate that.
I was always led to believe that...red lens got clear bulbs and clear lens got amber bulbs. backup lens were the exception with clear lens and clear bulbs.
to me... Mav/Comets were sought out to be crushed and classic cars were crushed before they were classic (25 yo).
Then you're gonna love this LOL. I also have LED projector headlights that blow away the H4 halogens I ran for the past 15 years.
Talking about tail lights. They look goofy with the instant on/off when using turn signals or braking. There's no trailing effect. They look out of place and are so obviously not original. I like resto-mods; cars that look original with mods that aren't readily seen. Not into the whole "pimped ride" thing.
Old/weathered lenses become less translucent, the housings(reflectors) dull with age. IF the lenses are NOS or proper reproduction and housings properly restored, I consider a 1157 bulb to give more than enough light. I despise overly bright light on either end of the car.
That's fine. Some folks prefer to stay stuck in the 70's, others embrace new technologies. That's what this hobby is all about, individualism. But don't berate other people's cars just because it's not what you like.
Never berated anyone's cars. I berated LED tail lights. And not every new technology is an improvement.
I don't really care for the LED panels that have severial (8-10) bulbs in them but the 1157 replacements ain't that bad.
To each their own, but i have to say after looking at some headlight modifications, i think ill stick with my old school glassys, never gave much thought to the tail lights til i saw this thread, but i feel like i would feel the same as with the head lights. They are awesome on newer stuff but i personally would go with something from that era. Led bulbs in classic fixtures might work. Im definitely putting leds in my interior sockets
