Is it a faux pas

[The Autoad]

...to have a late mk1 sporting the early mk1 look?

Just putting that little debate out there.

[Ryan]

Nah - it'll just look rubbish!

[Tempest]

Define ¨early look¨.

Tempest

[mr.brown]

Well, the only real visual differences are wings, bumpers and indicators? Once those are changed you can't really tell unless you start getting nerdy

Even a hotchpotch can look good. Example -

[Dougiegreenskala]

Hi guys, I have to agree with Mr Brown, the "Hotchpotch" pic looks pretty damned good to me.

[The Autoad]

Define ¨early look¨.

Tempest

As in, a Scirocco with 74-77 bumpers, wings, rear window surrounds, interior and no rear plate Plinth. The only exterior visual clue would be a post-77 number plate. As Mr.B said, it gets nerdy when you look under the car or under the bonnet to tell the difference then I am referring to a facsimilie of an early car by a late.

The hotchpotch look really works, Redroc has been sporting it for years.

[Tempest]

OK, standard definition of facts then, that´s fine.

Also agree that the ¨hotchpotch¨ look works for me, too

Tempest

[Mr Funk]

Screw it, do it.
Anyone not agreeing with "the vision" can come and chat about it in the playground

[The Autoad]

Liking that attitude

[GoKraut]

No I don't think so personally.

I prefer the wrap-around turn signals from 78 onward but the early versions had their place too. TV lights are great but very hard to find in the US. Suppose I did have a pair - I'd probably roc them. I would be deathly afraid of them getting cracked or chipped. Would probably look at one of those laminates to protect them.

-Rob