1953 Burnside Special

Literally did you look at the 2nd pic in the link I put.

Actually here's a better one from sort of the side and front.

So tell me how can this car not pass as a Hudson Hornet, cause if you literally just make those wheel skirts or whatever they're called long enough to be flush with the bottom of the body and move the ridiculously fat for whatever reason part in to be flush with the side, you have a Hudson Hornet. Also you may have to curve the back a bit more for it.

Otherwise it could totally pass as a Hudson Hornet.

 

Make all your points in one reply or dont post at all., Its annoying and takes up space

 

Well sorry (honestly not trying to sound sarcastic), but it's not like I would of made much sense if i'd put all that in one reply anyway.

 

Sure it would've made more sense if it was one post. This argument has already been done a few hundred posts ago, but since I am too lazy to go find them, I will leave that up to you.
The body of this reminds me of a early 50's GM. The Internet Car Data Base thinks its a 53 DeSoto Firedome based on a general appearance and the thread mentioning it as inspiration behind the vehicle. In the comments of this vehicle in the IGCD say it might be a 53 Pontiac Chieftain. All of these are cars this car could pass for... But a Hudson? Come on now. Just look at all of this;


The Hudson Hornet;


The 53 Burnside;




A Desoto Firedome;




And a Pontiac Chieftain;



The Chrysler and GM models have the most features that would resemble the Burnside.

To me, Almost nothing about the Hudson resembles the Burnside.

 

I think you are confusing the standard looks of the era for a resemblance to a specific car. When you look at pictures of '50s sedans you will find that they all look to be generally the same, just like cars from almost any era. The defining features of a car from a specific era are the small things (barring completely era unique vehicles that is... though even then you will find that they tend to adopt the style of their time).

For example, here is a picture of a Mercury Eight from 1950

See how this car looks roughly the same as the Burnside and every other 50's sedans at a distance, but nothing alike when you look for the little things?

When you get more acquainted with cars of an era you will notice that while similar, it shares almost none of the little stylistic cues of the Burnside, and actually looks more like the Hudson you referred to. Not enough to confuse it with one if you knew what you were looking at, but similar.

The same thing can be said of the Burnside and the cars that Driv3r1142 posted (which the Burnside is actually based on); similar, but not so much so that you would confuse them.

 

Do you people really not know that the Hudson Hornet wasn't just a coupe, there was in fact also a 2 dr convertible, a 4 dr SEDAN, a 2/4 dr racing edition which had a special engine, and then the 2 dr coupe that apparently is the only version of it anyone knows about, there was also a choice of 2 tone or single tone paintjobs except in racing there was one livery that was "insert number at front and back Fabulous Hudson Hornet here" generally.

 

Except if you look at those other models, every single panel is still completely different from the burnside, just look at the rear flanks alone.

 

First is Coupe (apparently the only one other people know is a thing), Second is the Sedan, Third is Convertible, Fourth Marshall Teague's Fabulous Hudson Hornet (that's the racing one), Fifth is 2 Tone painted, Last is about as bad as wreck in it got.

 

the proportions aren't right the best thing to do is get a photo of the hornet (side shot) and place it on a render of the burnside you would find its way off

 

So look at the racing one (the one with the 6's on it) that's about right isn't it.

 

besides we don't even have a full on side view of the burnside yet and if we did it would have to be from the left side view.

 

I DID NOT SAY "the proportions aren't right the best thing to do is get a photo of the hornet (side shot) and place it on a render of the burnside you would find its way off."

 

Thought I'd end this idiocy and crudely highlight some details that show how completely wrong @tjm2000 is


Basically all of it

 

and besides at the start of this "argument" I specifically said that this looks almost exactly like a Hudson Hornet Sedan, not it does look exactly like a Hudson Hornet Sedan so you guys started an argument for no reason.

 

also @SixSixSevenSeven you missed like half the car.

 

and that picture of the Hudson still wasn't at the right angle if you'd wait til it's in game I can show you what I mean better.

 

look at the entire rear of the hudson, its an aerodynamic teardrop and a *TOTALLY* different shape from the burnside, something addressed in the cars others have claimed it to be styled after and a point that you are either blatantly ignoring just to be a troll or a point confirming you to be completely blind in which case I am wondering how you can read this post.

 

Hasnt this point already been proven in this thread?
As much as I would love to see a hudson in BeamNG, the burnside is far from being a hudson!

 

He might be car blind.

 

Oh My God I didn't say they looked exactly the same I said they looked almost exactly the same, besides at the time I wrote that I was tired (I was either still waking up or was getting ready to go to fall asleep).