ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Chewbacca · 4 January 2017, 01:40 PM

.

Slippy Chips · 4 January 2017, 01:43 PM

My rear end has done about the same thing...

AF_Rob · 4 January 2017, 02:05 PM

It's amazing on how things have gotten bigger over the years. I watched an interesting show on nexflix a couple weeks ago on how the US in particular has gotten a lot bigger in material aspects over the same amount of time... Pretty interesting.

cop414 · 4 January 2017, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slippy Chips

My rear end has done about the same thing...

Butt do you have dual exhaust?

themast · 4 January 2017, 02:15 PM

Are they scaled properly? (Don't have the resources to check right now)

Abdullah71601 · 4 January 2017, 02:32 PM

The cabin size looks unchanged. It's still small in the cockpit.

Contrast that with US cars over the same period. In 1964 cars were cavernous inside. Now even the full size cars are compact in comparison.

armen34 · 4 January 2017, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slippy Chips

My rear end has done about the same thing...

BNA/LION · 4 January 2017, 04:13 PM

The evolution of the 911 and many great cars is awesome to see. From electronic to new materials and performance! Love it!

Old Expat Beast · 4 January 2017, 05:42 PM

Rolex watches have gone much the same way.

Kingair · 4 January 2017, 05:50 PM

Nice cars . . .

Love the fat ass especially from the 930 🖒

Sent from my SM-T377T using Tapatalk

OmegaJJH · 4 January 2017, 06:18 PM

I'm sure it would be a similar story for most car brands.

Chewbacca · 5 January 2017, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Rolex watches have gone much the same way.

(finger on nose.)

well done adam

KBM · 5 January 2017, 01:15 AM

Wow! If the scale is the same, that's really impressive. And agreed on the watches, not just Rolex!

themast · 5 January 2017, 09:41 AM

I suspect somebody had a go with Photoshop...

This is a very similar image that I have found online. I verified the proportions according to the published vehicle width and the two cars are roughly to scale (the 1964 seems to be a tiny bit smaller than what it should be but they are close). For reference, the modern 911 is approximately 71.2" wide (Porsche website) while the 1964 is 63.4" wide (carfolio.com)
8466819014_4d60fee345_c.jpg

Here I did a dirty overlay of the two images and you can see that the 2016 911 is much wider. I don't know whether it is a special model, just a different perspective, or a photoshop job.
new 911 fat ass_comp.jpeg

SemperFi · 5 January 2017, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cop414

Butt do you have dual exhaust?

4 January 2017, 04:13 PM	#8
BNA/LION 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: May 2011 Real Name: Larry Location: San Diego, CA Watch: ROLEX Posts: 25,661	The evolution of the 911 and many great cars is awesome to see. From electronic to new materials and performance! Love it! __________________ ✦ 28238 President DD 18K/YG ✦ 16610LN SS Sub ✦ 16613 18K/SS Serti ✦ 16550 Exp II Non-Rail Cream Dial ✦ Daytona C 116500 ✦ 126710 BLRO GMT-Master II ✦ NEXT-->? ⛳ Hole In One! 10/3/19 DMCC 5th hole, par 3, 168 yards w/ 4-Iron.

4 January 2017, 01:43 PM	#2
Slippy Chips "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2016 Location: Dirty South Posts: 629	My rear end has done about the same thing...

4 January 2017, 02:05 PM	#3
AF_Rob "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2012 Real Name: Rob Location: Virginia Watch: Sub/Polar/OP/BB Posts: 4,674	It's amazing on how things have gotten bigger over the years. I watched an interesting show on nexflix a couple weeks ago on how the US in particular has gotten a lot bigger in material aspects over the same amount of time... Pretty interesting.

4 January 2017, 02:15 PM	#5
themast "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: US Posts: 2,707	Are they scaled properly? (Don't have the resources to check right now)

4 January 2017, 02:32 PM	#6
Abdullah71601 Banned Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Calumet Harbor Watch: ing da Bears Posts: 13,568	The cabin size looks unchanged. It's still small in the cockpit. Contrast that with US cars over the same period. In 1964 cars were cavernous inside. Now even the full size cars are compact in comparison.

4 January 2017, 05:42 PM	#9
Old Expat Beast TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Adam Location: Far East Watch: Golden Tuna Posts: 28,826	Rolex watches have gone much the same way.

4 January 2017, 05:50 PM	#10
Kingair "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: USA Watch: Not enough ;-) Posts: 21,232	Nice cars . . . Love the fat ass especially from the 930 🖒 Sent from my SM-T377T using Tapatalk

4 January 2017, 06:18 PM	#11
OmegaJJH "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2013 Real Name: James Location: UK Watch: Rolex & Omega Posts: 6,668	I'm sure it would be a similar story for most car brands.

5 January 2017, 01:15 AM	#13
KBM 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: K. Location: 780 Posts: 10,460	Wow! If the scale is the same, that's really impressive. And agreed on the watches, not just Rolex!

5 January 2017, 09:41 AM	#14
themast "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: US Posts: 2,707	I suspect somebody had a go with Photoshop... This is a very similar image that I have found online. I verified the proportions according to the published vehicle width and the two cars are roughly to scale (the 1964 seems to be a tiny bit smaller than what it should be but they are close). For reference, the modern 911 is approximately 71.2" wide (Porsche website) while the 1964 is 63.4" wide (carfolio.com) 8466819014_4d60fee345_c.jpg Here I did a dirty overlay of the two images and you can see that the 2016 911 is much wider. I don't know whether it is a special model, just a different perspective, or a photoshop job. new 911 fat ass_comp.jpeg

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)