Projects The bucket of ugly! A de-uglifying thread...

SWEET! Late fifties rods are the red-headed step-children of the current history-revisionist "traditional" hot rod thing. Go for the full wheelcovers, just do it! The cones on the red T above are being re-popped by Night Prowlers, Olds Fiestas and 15" long bar Lancers are available as well. Short bar lancers are a little tougher, I have 3 usable ones, still looking for one more for my Coupester.

I'll be putting long bar lancers on my '39 convert, just like the Lil' Coffin on the cover of Car Craft...


or if you can find them, '56 starfire caps are pretty killer on a hot rod...


I'll make you a deal, do it, and ten years from now, we'll park my finished coupester and your finished RP side by side at the Ocean Park show.

 

Hmm;
The RoadRod/T-Mobile strikes me a street version of the 'sports-rod', kinda popular in the mid 50's. Also seems to me, that it has a lot of the 'Eastern' look, even if it seems to be in/from CA. I agree, not a 'bucket'.
Also, the '53/'54 Stude wheelcovers would look good there, but no spinners on them.
Marcus...

 

Scary just how many of those "East-Coast style" rods were from the west coast...

 

I cant remember that i have seen any streetdriven hotrod from the 50:s
in the magasines that not have hubcaps or wheelcovers.
And i would say that all of them have whitewalls after 55.
At least 50% of them have fenders and problaby more outside the shows.
My model T coupe will be in 59-62 range. Well a sort of anyway.
Swedish rules to make it streetlegal force me to do some compromises.
So whitewalls, wheelcovers and cyklefenders it will have.

 

I'm glad more guys are building cars that are in the late fifties style that that was in the magazines from the late fifties, rather than the style that most under forty HAMBers like to imagine cars looked in the late fifties...

Have you late fifties guys seen this? Scroll up to the top...
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/...ur-new-shop-truck.643851/page-3#post-10642757
Have mercy!

 

I think the problem you mention comes from the younger crowd being "told" what the 50's were like by the media rather than doing a little bit of homework on their own. We were fortunate that car magazines were abundant back then, with color and everything! No need to guess what the early hot rodders and customizers were building, it's all right there between the covers of the various publications. But then, there's always the greybeards adding to the confusion with their "the older I get the faster I was" kind of input.

Interesting book reference, Blownfuel. I knew both Stewart and Wells pretty well but didn't know they had collaborated on a book. I'll have to scrounge up a copy.

 

Deal. I really like the '57 Plymouth covers.
That lil '35 is stunning!

 

Well said. It just baffles me how we always have guys on here asking whats "traditional" for thier era, yet I see Fifties/Sixties Hot Rod mags for $5-$10 at virtually EVERY swap meet I go to, and they generally dont even seem to sell that well. Maybe the young guys that are always asking have already spent thier allowance on Hot Rod Deluxe and Ol' Skool Rods???
Seriously, you want to build a traditional hot rod? Nail down a year, go to the next swap meet, buy half a dozen mags from that year, and if you dont see it in there, it dont belong. Seems so simple, yet most of the cars we see on here would look COMPLETELY different if that simple rule of thumb was followed. I have been buying old Car Crafts, Hot Rods, and R&C's since the late sixties. Got four big stand-up filing cabinets full, and yet nothing gives me a bigger thrill than finding an old issue I dont have yet. Yet, when I find a big stack at a swap meet, its always me and other guys on the dark side of fifty that are looking through them. Most of the young guys dont seem interested in the least.

 

I really like the cones as well, theres just so many other great wheelcovers I like, and not enough time/space to build cars for all of them!!

And man, that truck is beautiful, just beautiful. I loved it when I first saw it in primer, with the paint, nerfs and ripple pipes, MY GOD! This place SHOULD be FULL of stuff like that. THATS the way they looked, not some goofy deal with no fenders, Kelsey Hayes wires, a big double Z, "lakes headers" all the usual crap we see. And its such a clean, classy restrained look and 100% dead-on late fifties period-correct.

 

In the early '50 they started importing European sports cars and all through the '50s guys were trying to build "the American sports car." Thus all the low small bodied roadsters with fenders. Full wheel cover hubcaps were pretty new then too and were a popular upgrade. Then in the mid to late '50s Norm came out with the Kookie Kar and everybody wanted to build their version of it. Throw out the fenders and hubcaps and uncover the biggest engine you can find.

 

What they want is to have it now or sooner - that means they want someone else to do the leg work and simply provide them all that history in a format they can "peruse" on their phones...

 

The more things change...(thanks H-Steve!)...the more they remain the same.

 

Bravo! I have a couple boxes of "Little Books" and breeze through them often. I have gotten PM's from members that basically said, my opinion or advice isn't worth crap because all I have is a T Bucket.

If I didn't own a car at all, my opinion and advice wouldn't change. The fuel for my fire comes from RESEARCH. I hit antique shops, garage sales and even Ebay and get all manner of car magazines from the 50's and 60s. My only regret, is that I didn't do that, when I first built my T. WOW! I get goose pimples, when I imagine what could have been.

Hell...... it's so cold, now I've got shrinkage.

 

The TRUE history never changes; the rest is just BS opinion. Yeah George,those 4 drawer file cabinets work real good!

 

Well I STILL get clueless bozos on here telling me I should STFU because I own "musclecars" (I know, I could just update the list of cars I own on my profile, but honestly, I LIKE baiting those kind of assholes) frankly I dont see that really has anything whatsoever to do with it. My "traditional hot rod IQ" didnt rise one fucking point after I bought a T, not that I could notice anyway.
But I'll tell you what, when I bought my copy of October '61 Car Craft back in 1973, and saw Bill Neumans '31, Jack Lentz' & Jack Page's Dueces and Gary Coopers T, THAT was a full-blown REVELATION. Seriously, a life-changing experience. Funny this was, I had already seen Bryans '29 Highboy and the Doane Spencer '32 in R&C and thought, yea, ok, those are cool, but when I saw those circa late fifties channelled, full wheel cover roadsters in the midst of the whole resto-rod thing, it was like a Catholic having a vision of the Virgin Mary.

Jack Page deuce, check the rolled pan with the exhaust tips exiting through it, and the Corvette wheel covers.

Figure everyone knows Neumans '31.

Jack Lentz Goldenrod


This one is special to me, because its from Vancouver. An icon to me now, but when I got Oct. '61 Car Craft back then, I didnt even know about it. And it was featured in Car Craft AND Hot Rod.

 

This is a traditional hot rod forum. That I get totally. As far as the question on what is and isn't "period correct" or traditional, I just don't care.

IMO what was or wasn't done on hot rods depended a lot on where you lived in the world while you were growing up and what influences shaped your taste in the automotive hobby.

Did you live and breathe from the little pages and other car magazines of the era ? ( which I have a large collection of )
or were you also influenced by local car guy heroes ?

My taste in cars runs the gamut all over the map. From muscle cars to hot rods and a lot in between.

When I was in high school the guys has panel painted tri-five chevs and bubble top Belairs and the like.

There was even a little English ford with a flathead installed. Crude but somehow cool at the same time.

I just turned 60 years young and the RPU (all steel 26 T RPU) I am building has lived in my head for a very long time, way back from when I was a kid.

It's my first ever total build from scratch fabricating everything including the chassis.

As it goes it has evolved over the years and is still doing so.

I'm building what I see as right for my vision regardless of period correctness or tradition.

And if I get some parts right along the way ,great.

If other parts are just "wrong", ( an example of so called "wrong" is the fact that in building the body I stretched it 4" behind the doors for my legroom and comfort )

I could care less

When I finally drive it the smile will not be erasable
Larry

 

I own a '66 chevy II, a '67 falcon, and am about to add a small-block S-10 to the stable, that doesnt mean I get to re-write history. Either its a traditional hot rod, or it aint. For me, I dont WANT anyone re-writing the definition to fit my cars in. Either it it is, or it aint. Doesnt have anything to do with relative "value" or importance, "traditional" hot rods are just that. Hell, I dig jag-rear, full fendered resto-rods, but I dont consider them "traditional" any more than a "rudy" is traditional.
If people REALLY dont give a shit what other people think, they really wouldn't care about whether their car was called a traditional hot rod or not, and they wouldn't need to make excuses. Dont anyone hold their breath waiting for me to make excuses for my non-traditional cars.

 

So... Getting back to T-buckets for a moment, here are a few from the Goodguys DFW event this past weekend for your viewing pleasure. Now...guess which one is my personal favorite.

 

Arin Cee : The Green one ???

 

Bingo!

 

I'm betting on "Starsky & Hutch"!

 

George...I think you just made me throw up in my mouth a little bit........(!!!)

 

I admire the guys, who go the distance and build a 100%er "traditional" Hot Rod. That's some hard shit to do. But I'll probably never own one. I just like Hot Rods. It seems like the guys who try to build a 50's car and end up sliding an S-10 rear behind it, are also the one's who can come up with all sorts of reasons and arguments to justify it. They are the one's who attempt to rewrite history, so their car will fit in with the "cool kids".

What the hell happened to the days, when you built what you could, to the best of your abilities, and were proud to just own it?

My vehicular addiction is satisfied seeing ANYTHING done well. When R&C died, I started getting Motor Trend in it's place. I'm cool with that. I can dig a new Vette and still appreciate a bitchin' Deuce with a tricked out Flathead. I just fucking dig bad ass rides.

I'm on 4 or 5 forums. ALL different styles and taste. When I'm on the HAMB, I try to respect the pre '64 rule. It's what THIS forum is about. If I start a thread about my T (I rarely do) and it gets deleted, no worries. Ryan and the Mods are kinda loose with the rules, so a well done car usually gets a pass. The problem comes when that person pulls an excuse out of his ass to explain the mini hi-torque starter or air bags.

When I read a thread about some guy trying to "age" his engine, I laugh my ass off. It's pathetic! Stop pretending and just build a nice ride. Shit. All this, "What color should I paint my car?" or "Will WWW's look okay?", is just that, SHIT. Who picks the clothes those guys wear? Are they asking their mom's? Some people would have their cars on the road a lot quicker, if they'd just stop faking it or trying to rewrite something that NEVER even had a hand book.

Here's a message to the lemmings.......Stop worrying about the other guy and build YOUR own damn car, YOUR way.

Sorry for the rant. I'll check in tomorrow and see if a Mod has deleted it.

 

If you like BC cars you should look at Irv Ross' channeled 29 roadster. I still remember it from the BCCCA show in the PNE building from 1960 or 61 along with Fred Welsh's 40 mordor sedan. Those 2 cars are responsible for me chopping up more perfectly good cars than should be allowed.

 

For those who don't give a shit about tradition or what looks good or ugly on T buckets I think you are on the wrong thread. That is just what this thread is about. Taking the UGLY out of a traditional early '60s T bucket. So take your "do my own thing" rants somewhere else and leave this thread to the people who care what the cars they build look like. Yes their are rights and wrongs and if you don't care enough to study the right looks and more importantly what makes a rod UGLY than just drive around in your ugly cars.
Sorry but this thread needs to get back on track.
Gary

 

Sorry Chip I didn't want to kill your thread. And everybody was having so much fun talking about everything but "Taking the ugly out of an early '60s T bucket".

 

Agree fully. 98% of the HAMB may not give a shit, but if you are in the "fuck period-correct" camp you have wandered into the wrong thread. This is the "lions den".
Kills me to pm some of the people on here that really know thier shit, and realize they haven't been active on here for 8-9 months, and are gone. The last one I noticed was "Little Wing". Wondered why she hadn't showed up on my "syncro-loc" thread, went to send her a pm, her last activity was early last winter. One more person who just had enough. Its really getting down to the last stand at the Alamo around here. Pretty soon you wont be able to tell the difference between the HAMB and Canadian Rodder, which will make most of the membership happy.

 

It's Funny what every body reads from the same post.

I read a guy who claims it's stupid when some uses fake patina on engines, or run a rear end that only used on 1981-and up S-dime. But still thinks it okay, because So and So.
Or claims that it's a 50 build and some visuable parts is clearly 80 parts but still claims it's a 50 "style" build, and the guys in the fiftys would have used the S-dime rear, if it was avalible.

I got slammed/bashed the other day for saying stupid shit, or not in line with someone belive of right or wrong.
That is aparently traditional.

But please tell me of I'm out of line. But I really like this threat, because almost every claim is backed by a picture! And some damn good pictures.

 

This is a great thread and it has been off and on about removing the ugly from a T bucket.
It has also been about a lot of other neat stuff.
It's all been fun and entertaining at the same time.
I think it will continue to be that way
Lions den LOL
I can tame them, here kitty kitty

 

You know guys I've been on this thread from the beginning even though I build '50s cars. The reason is I feel Chip really knows early'60s T buckets. Before the ugly really started. I really don't mind the chatter but when some start ditsing (is that a word)? Traditional when they don't even know what it is, that was it for me. Yes their is right and wrong things to do to a bucket. Royal shifter knows it Von Franko knows and I believe Chip knows. If you want to learn stay tuned if not and you just want to "do your own thing" we don't need you.