NOT MINE 70 Hurst ON FB Rockford IL 10K

azblackhemi

Old Man with a Hat
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
8,769
Reaction score
13,098
Location
Waddell AZ
Feedback: 3 / 0 / 0


hurst.jpg
 
I know the owner. I've never seen this car but would go see it for anyone interested.

The guy does beautiful paint and body work and had a large collection of fuselage cars for a long time.
 
Thanks @david hill but that's too much of a project I'd want to take on.
Saw the car a couple years ago when my NYer got painted.
It's a big project just as the seller states.
 
The facts of the size of the project is true. In its current state a close inspection and cataloging of parts would be a first step. More photos would be needed to establish the quality of the hood, deck lid and fender extensions. Those items can make or break any kind of restoration. They are simply unobtainium. For those willing w/ the skills to do the work the rewards are how high is up. The overall costs all in are about what I paid for my Hurst 300. The survivor numbers being so low a skilled craftsman would end up w/ a true example Chrysler history. Reproduction items for the interior (seats covers, dash pads , headliners) are available. Other parts can be found on base 300 hard tops.
 
I believe my phone was slipping from hand and I accidentally brushed the disagree while trying not to drop it.
 
The problem with the 300-H is that there is nothing great about it. Many found a nice 300 with a 375hp, found a fiberglass hood and deck and Presto! They got a 300 Hurst.

Chrysler (for some odd reason) thought they were going to make these for 1971. So Hurst made 1000 extra hoods and decks. There's a lot of clones out there but who cares? Done right, there's no difference.

Car was way too expensive in 1970 and nothing like the car show prototype which had a six pack, upgraded suspension, moonroof and hurst shifter. I believe its the only car Hurst did that doesn't have a hurst shifter.

When I was kid in the 70's, 300 Hurst was considered a beautiful car, but somewhat of a joke, clown car. However it was the first car I know of that uses a bunch of stripes, paint, goofy visual things to make a car look faster than it was. Many car companies did the same thing after that.
 
Last edited:
The problem with the 300-H is that there is nothing great about it. Many found a nice 300 with a 375hp, found a fiberglass hood and deck and Presto! They got a 300 Hurst.

Chrysler (for some odd reason) thought they were going to make these for 1971. So Hurst made 1000 extra hoods and decks. There's a lot of clones out there but who cares? Done right, there's no difference.

Car was way too expensive in 1970 and nothing like the car show prototype which had a six pack, upgraded suspension, moonroof and hurst shifter. I believe its the only car Hurst did that doesn't have a hurst shifter.

When I was kid in the 70's, 300 Hurst was considered a beautiful car, but somewhat of a joke, clown car. However it was the first car I know of that uses a bunch of stripes, paint, goofy visual things to make a car look faster than it was. Many car companies did the same thing after that.
Interesting, I'm certainly no expert but I always thought they had some kind of Hurst automatic shifter. That show car must have been something, was it a four speed? Only problem with the six pack or Hemi, (if that was ever considered), is they couldn't have A/C, at least not without modifications. I think it was due to clearance for the compressor with the air cleaners and/or mounting holes on the manifolds.
 
Interesting, I'm certainly no expert but I always thought they had some kind of Hurst automatic shifter. That show car must have been something, was it a four speed? Only problem with the six pack or Hemi, (if that was ever considered), is they couldn't have A/C, at least not without modifications. I think it was due to clearance for the compressor with the air cleaners and/or mounting holes on the manifolds.
I would made it fit or die trying.
 
Back
Top