| Home | Keaton Car | Kilmer Car | Clooney Car | Tumbler | 66 | Animated | Miscellaneous | Collection | Discussion | Links | Guestbook |
You are viewing old version of our website. Please click on HOME link to be redirected to new site. Thanks.
Batmobile Forum
 89 vs 92 |
||||||||||||
From: Jack
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:43:58 PM
| 
|
||||||||||||
On the Markside
Posts: 1947 |
RE: 89 vs 92 NO I'm not starting over. Again great attention to deal Rusty. |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: DonC
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:45:01 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
Posts: 159 |
RE: 89 vs 92 Good eye Rusty...they look way better fatter....guy might have to modify them rear quarters...probably explains all those hard angles up there cause if it was wider the lines would smooth out instead of abrubtly end.. Last Edited by DonC: 3/31/2006 9:48:13 PM |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Jack
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:46:45 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
On the Markside
Posts: 1947 |
RE: 89 vs 92 DONC kiss off and give me an update of Bat 3.0.... Oh and that window flang info. 
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: DonC
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:49:44 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 159 |
RE: 89 vs 92 Well you coulda emailed me boy...I didnt wanna post all me secrets ya know. 
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: rusty
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:50:29 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
Posts: 915 |
RE: 89 vs 92 looks good but you would have to haul it on a consruction trailor like the wb does...i bet it was one of those deals where you are building it inside and when you go to get it out... it wont fit threw the door Last Edited by rusty: 3/31/2006 9:50:51 PM |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Jack
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:50:49 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
On the Markside
Posts: 1947 |
RE: 89 vs 92 I just did ol' great one. 
Last Edited by Jack: 3/31/2006 9:51:00 PM |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: rusty
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:52:54 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 915 |
RE: 89 vs 92 and another mess up is when you buy them 33x 21.50 mickey thompsons before you get your body 
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: DonC
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:57:10 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 159 |
RE: 89 vs 92 there's that trailer word again..... we dont need no stinking trailers...'cept of course when we gotta haul it from florida to texas i guess. I'd just cut the fenders to fit Rusty.. |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Justin
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:58:30 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
"Tumbler"
Posts: 1355 |
RE: 89 vs 92 Have you been drinking again, Jack?
------------------------ For more information on replica Batmobiles and "kits", check out www.thebatcave8k.com 
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: rusty
| Posted: 3/31/2006 9:59:08 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 915 |
RE: 89 vs 92 hey don i think nate did get the 21.50's and 18x15 rims with a deep dish so you might have to do him a favor...but nate said he got the right 89 batmobile frame so we can see if them will fit |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Jack
| Posted: 3/31/2006 10:01:04 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
On the Markside
Posts: 1947 |
RE: 89 vs 92 That's one of the mysteries that I don't get. The real deal had the 33x21.5-15LT and the Tallahassee car had 33x19.50-15LT but I could get anything near that wide under mine. I finally went with 31x16.50-15LT. Probably could have gone a little wider and up to the 33 on the height. So what else is different? |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: rusty
| Posted: 3/31/2006 10:04:34 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 915 |
RE: 89 vs 92 i wont say the trailor word ..but 8 foot wide door comes to mind and 10 would have to be dead on |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: DonC
| Posted: 3/31/2006 10:15:39 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 159 |
RE: 89 vs 92 Ya mean a 15x15 rim right? Thats what Nate got...I think. That would be a bit a work tho...widening's ez enough but then modifying those air intakes to fit the curve...ya that'd be another week...each..lol But Eddie Paul always was one of my all time favorite car customizers...maybe he wouldn't mind if I worked on ole Nates ride. |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: rusty
| Posted: 3/31/2006 10:21:27 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 915 |
RE: 89 vs 92 your proably right i was just thinking he said that but i looked back on his posts and didnt see it |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: rusty
| Posted: 3/31/2006 10:27:36 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 915 |
RE: 89 vs 92 jack have you got any pictures with the wheels on yours ..i dont think i will have a problem with my 33x19.50 because my frame is narrower and the wheels on it right now are 11 inchs wide and i have all kinds of room and my 19.50 really only measure 16 wide Last Edited by rusty: 3/31/2006 10:27:56 PM |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Kevin
| Posted: 3/31/2006 11:38:15 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
"Not"
Posts: 906 |
RE: 89 vs 92 I am running 33 265/75R 15 
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Kevin
| Posted: 4/1/2006 12:14:51 AM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
"Not"
Posts: 906 |
RE: 89 vs 92 Those photos are from a magazine then scanned and reformatted. A lot can be lost or altered in the process. Magazine photos are often resized to fit the article. Photos can be deceiving, cameras cannot see in three dimensions as the human eye does. To get a true to life photo the camera has to be set to a specified setting and photographed 90 deg. parallel to the subject. The normal setting is 50 that are what the eye sees. When I shoot 1 to 1 photographs I use two specialized lenses mounted to the main lens to get the proper image, a measuring devise is used in the photographs to properly reproduce the true image. Just looking at different photos made with different cameras and at angles cannot represent a true image at times. Lighting, reflections, paints all play an important role in photography. |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: rusty
| Posted: 4/1/2006 12:42:36 AM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 915 |
RE: 89 vs 92
Last Edited by MOD: 4/1/2006 1:31:35 AM |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: rusty
| Posted: 4/1/2006 12:50:45 AM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 915 |
RE: 89 vs 92 heres the number one at about the same angle..look at the gas cap...i agree pictures can play games but theres just to many of the rear fenders to say everyone of them's off...kevins car looks wider at that angle but the no. 1 looks even wider at that angle |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
From: Dee
| Posted: 4/1/2006 5:23:31 AM
|
|
||||||||||||
No KITT Allowed
Posts: 1409 |
RE: 89 vs 92 I wish I had one to compare to. 
Sláinte is táinte
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Nitro
| Posted: 4/1/2006 7:43:18 AM
|
|
||||||||||||
Number 3
Posts: 741 |
RE: 89 vs 92 Lets all feel bad for Dee with the new house and shop and a ferrari.And from what I hear a pot of gold. All though I know people, that have been to his shop and not seen any signs of the gold or the molds. 
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Jack
| Posted: 4/1/2006 7:45:48 AM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
On the Markside
Posts: 1947 |
RE: 89 vs 92 Give it up Kevin. The pictures I posted with the body line proves the rear quarter panels are wider on the movie cars than on the replicas. |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: DonC
| Posted: 4/1/2006 2:40:24 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Posts: 159 |
RE: 89 vs 92 I'd have to agree....they're wider! |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Jack
| Posted: 4/2/2006 3:30:45 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Luv the Don
Posts: 1947 |
RE: 89 vs 92 Looks like Mark is down to 11 1/2 hours his time to post the pix. Will Mark make it??? |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
From: Dee
| Posted: 4/2/2006 6:16:27 PM
|
|
||||||||||||
|
No KITT Allowed
Posts: 1409 |
RE: 89 vs 92 Nitro ya mad man. That cracked me up. It is unfortunate that the Ferrari is actually gone and has been replaced with another more practical car.
Sláinte is táinte
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Copyright © 2004-2005 chickslovethecar.com "Chicks Love The Car"
Batman is a registered trademark of DC Comics and Warner Bros.
This is a purely fan based site. No copyright infringement is intended. Click here for privacy policy