Hot Rods What's wrong with a channeled hot rod?

The source of this discussion is from the thread about a 32 coupe that was for sale for what most thought was about twice what it was worth and someone mentioned that it was a channeled car and since it's missing the original floors, that hurts the body's value. While a lot of 32 purists feel that way(particularly those from the west coast), having the original bumps and lumps that Henry put in the floor of my 32 three window isn't that important to me. My car had been channeled and the floor in it when I bought it was a 3/16th steel plated riddled full of holes and tied together with "farmer welds". I cut it all out and made a new floor out of flat 18 gauge and built a new chassis to but the body on top of. I'm just glad that the planets happened to align and I was able to find one at a time that I actually could afford it. So IMHO, channeled cars are just a matter of personal taste and a a little practical considerations for leg room added in.

 

I suspect that a lot here don't think about what it was like before mig welders. If you were doing OK you could buy a buzz box and stick weld frames and heaver stuff. But other than than you were going to use Oxy-Acetaline. Among lots of other things that are now almost considered entitlements.

 

let's just think about this for a minute. what's wrong with a channeled car? if you could only have one car, there is a whole list of "wrongs" but i would bet if money was no object and space wasn't a concern there would be one in every paddock/collection/fleet. i love my 33 coupe restorod-hotrod-streetrod or what ever you call it but i wouldn't need more than one. i want a channeled car, a convertible, a pickup etc....

 

I had a chopped and chanelled 32 5window in the 70'S .It was chopped 31/2 inches,chanelled 6 inches.Had 36inches from floor to headliner.I'am 6ft 3 it was ok when I was 18 and could crawl in to it!Never again.My current 32 5 window is chopped 3 inches that's enough for me to drive at 63.

 

I think you missed my entire point.
I know you know everything on that list and could probably write a book on most of it because building a car one needs to know that stuff .
My point was the driver.

Why worry about a few thousands, a 1/2 degree or the right bushings on the hard metal and machined mechanics and completely ignore the drivers needs.

Just to put it very plainly My point is why completely ignore the human drivers mechanics?

They can be accommodated, but it takes more work. More work doesn't have to be a bad thing.

Here's just a small excerpt from a study.
http://www.car-seat-data.co.uk/ananlysis.htm

The Bucket Seat: As previously mentioned, lowering the roofline of cars reduced the space available for the passengers and required a modification of the seating position. The author is 173cm (5ft 8in) tall and requires 132 cm (52in) to sit upright in a dining chair i.e. with hips and knees flexed at 90 degrees, but reference to the appended tables will show that this figure for overall interior height is not available in saloon cars, and is only acheived in some four wheel drives and people carriers.

To accommodate the driver in this reduced space, the seat is lowered and tipped backwards. This will have two basic effects. Firstly the knees will start to extend, straightening the leg. This will create a pull on the hamstrings which in turn pull on the ischial tuberosities and tend to roll the pelvis backwards, forcing the lumbar spine into flexion (forward bending). In this position the intravertebral discs of the lumbar spine are subjected to increased pressure and are susceptible to damage. Secondly, with the straightening of the legs, it becomes








A worst-case scenario in which which wheel offset,

wheel angle and pedal offset are shown. The

pelvis and the shoulder girdle are set at an

angle to each other. The right foot has come

across to the mid line and the righ leg has been

forced into external rotation.



uncomfortable, (indeed impossible) for the driver’s body to be in the vertical position, and so the seat is tipped backwards, typically to an angle of 20 degrees from the vertical, which means that in order to look straight ahead the driver must flex the cervical or cervicodorsal spine by 20 degrees to compensate. The head must be held stable in this position and, although it may seem quite a relaxed posture, there is a large amount of jolting and vibration to counter, which means that the cervical musclature may have to work relatively hard and will inevitably exhibit increased tone and possibly shortening of the muscle groups after long periods of driving. (Remember that a rotation of the cervicodorsal area has already been described and you will begin to appreciate the complex nature of problems which may arise.)

 

I fired up my torch the other day and tried to do some gas welding , but them damn plastic coat hangers now days are a bitch to weld with.
I remember working at Midas muffler in Miami , Fl. in the 60's and the uniform man would bring in our uniforms and we would straighten all the coat hangers so my cheap ass boss would not have to buy welding rod.

 

This is word for word a post I was going to make.
My 32 PU will be 4" channel 2" chop. It was at just a 5" channel but I took it apart and changed my mind.


Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

I think we need to chase the restoration weenies back to the vintage car clubs. Chop it! channel it! Or buy a four cylinder four door and put cowl lights and mohair on it.....

 

My 32-4 build(Hubba Hubba) is becoming a heavier and heavier chop. The 32 portion(the front end) is un-channeled "hi-boy". The 34 section(A-pillar to rear panel is channeled by 32 standards which seems to be more than a 3w but may less than a 33/34. I am making the floors. Using steel under the front seats going back hopefully looking factoryish. But I am adamant about using plywood in the front 32 style. I have carpet for it but can see covering the wood so a may just use it in the back.
As for its hiding some of the 32 frame rails? It's going to sit perfect.

I have thought a big chunk of the current channel hatred comes from people being so bitter about people hiding a 32 frame reveal. Plus the high boy high value effect. So many people concerned with how much money these cars will be worth later. Did this only start once they started to become worth something?


Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Hey! I love mohair! But that's just cause I think it's old, reminds me of some weird blankets from when I was a kid, and am nerdy about wool.


Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Wool is great stuff, mohair has a creepy rat fur feel and usually smells to match.

 

My T has wood floor inserts in it, im not anti-wood floor, but the car in question looked pretty crude in its execution. I don't feel like it was the fact it was channeled that held it back, or the choice of floor material, but the weak level of craftsmanship against the $40k price tag.

Forty thousand dollars is a lot of money to me.



Sent from my LG-M153 using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

The Andy Kassa East Coast Classic from New Jersey. I got to see it a few years ago when it was on a trailer, the whole effect was lost, but it was easy to look inside at the interior layout. Bob

 

Wow 31vicki,
I understand the chopped and channeled car is not the perfect car for comfort if you are a tall guy. My 34 chevy has a serious channel, but the floor attaches to the bottom
Of the frame so it has miles of head room. This post was just a rant about how people see a channel job as automotive lepercy, when in fact it is very traditional and when done correctly it is a very time consuming and artistic way to bring out the tough look in a car.

 

Does anyone have a copy of the dry lakes or Bonneville racing rules of the forties or fifties, and the definition of "stock" "modified" and "streamlined" classes? My recollection is that any alteration of "height width or contour" takes a car out of the "stock" class and puts it in the "modified" or "streamline" class but apparently a lot of people doubt this. Does anyone have a definite answer in black and white? I did a search but didn't turn up a rule book/

 

Comfort be damned, I'm building a channeled T roadster hot rod. Channel them all! I think it's funny about the not channeling over '32 frames because that's exactly what I want to hide, frame looks too tall. It all really is subjective as been said before. If you want to be comfortable, you wouldn't be driving a hot rod anyhow. You'd be driving an old Cad or Lincoln or something.

 

The drawing is a spot-on one of the drivers position in my '36 Speedster, channeled a bunch, sectioned, and chopped. It looked like it should be comfortable (I had a lot of guys look at the cockpit and comment "You can stretch right out in there..."), but it was, even for me at 5'4" and 150, very uncomfortable after an hour. It was a "bar hopper" kind of car, not one for any long distance trip. Miserable.

 

My daily has 47" from floor pan to headliner , I don't use about 5" it. Since I can drive it all day everyday and even have been know to take a nap in there I'd say it's pretty comfortable. Math says 47" minus 5" is 42" from floor pan to headliner is a good target.

This one has a wedge channel,
3/4" at the front and 6" in the rear. It's chopped a few inches too. It has 45" roof skin to floor pan. And the 33 grill lines up and isn't dragging the pavement.



This one is channeled just 2", plus the doors were extended 2" and the floor was dropped 2". That got me 44" floor pan to roof skin.


im trying to find pics of a 34 5w I owned for a while. It was channeld over 8". I could just slip my boot under the rocker. 35" inches or so headroom. Yeah it looked cool but nobody could drive it and as cool as it looked nobody would drive it a second time. The grill was too low to not be damaged and way to high to look right. My pics from the last 1/2 of 2013 are missing. I posted it here before so I'll find them.

Channel jobs are traditional as can be.
Visually they look cool.
Sadly most are done with the least amount of efforts and about next to nothing of concern for the interior changes.

 

I ran into that one too, looking for something else. Orthopaedic surgeons can be a bit hardcore —I'll damned well slouch as and when I see fit— but this is quite informative.

Have you seen the driving positions in F1, sports prototypes, etc. these days, with the feet higher than the seat level? - presumably done for under-car aerodynamics.

 

heres my chaneled 4 inches and chopped 3 inches and pancaked 1 inch jailbar....
i am about 5 foot 6 inches?...when setting up for the chanel job i did a lot of measuring but when put together for the last time i was a bit surprised at how "snug" the cabin had got....have done about 2000 km so far and am quite comfortable when driving....i guess the bottom line is ...it depends on how you set them up ,as to how comfortable they are

 

Your right.

 

After reading this complete thread,I don't understand how many of you guys can build anything..
I built my channeled A roadster back in 1951 just using a hammer and chisel...you young guys have all the equip that was not available to us poor boys of long ago.

 

AMEN Brother !
This is why I have always loved the creativity of the REAL early Hot Rods and race cars.
True vision, passion and not afraid to do whatever they saw in their minds.
NO 'cookie-cutter' cars then, they did it all their way.
Glenn

 

The last 2 posts made me smile. I believe the hot rod mentality has been lost for the sake of perfect gaps and flawless finish. I firmly believe in doing the best work you can with the tools and ability that you have. Safety is king, but with that said, some of the coolest cars ever built were not perfect.

 

I don't understand how many of you guys can build anything..
I built my channeled A roadster back in 1951 just using a hammer and chisel...you young guys have all the equip that was not available to us poor boys of long ago.[/QUOTE] woa! you had hammers and chisels, you were spoiled compared to us guys. we had to ruff it ...

 

In an opinion or open question like this one you'll get plenty of stuff. I don't believe the hot rod mentally is lost at all. I built this one with just a few requests from the owner.

He wanted as much of the original 1916 natural ageing left in place. And originally thought he wanted it channeled. What he really wanted was for it to have a low ride height. He wanted to be able to drive it without issues- mechanical or physical. And a bed that can work. Granted it's a roadster but there was no way to channel it and keep is few requests.

Here's the mockup, a pile of parts I had laying around, his 100 year old body & grill and his 105 year old truck bed.


Here's what he drives

109% hot rod with nearly every part custom fabricated. Certainly not perfect as fit and finish but it's function has been flawless. Every part made with care and with intent to look like it belongs there. All the way down to the stand offs for line clamps. From 50' it looks like a rat, from 20' it appears more and from 5' the details do not stop. Plenty of car guys, builders and show judges have been at loss when they see it. It is what it is, he has exactly what he wanted. He can drive it for as long as he wants and not be a crippled ball when he gets where he's going. It's obviously raw, rough, and primitive and pretty damn cool. I'll tell you that you can't drive it anywhere without waves or horns or stop without someone commenting. The guys wife loves riding in it too.

There is phrase that goes like this, "Form Follows Function" - it's used pretty loosely but there's history behind that phrase. It's not "Form before function" , which would be a really good description of art. The phrase is 3 words boiled down from a complete design concept encompassing volumes of text.

I've seen beautiful and beyond cool "rolling art" that some would call a car. The function is simply lost and without the transportation or drivability it's art. Lots of cool art, lots of traditional art, lots of primitive art. Nothing wrong with that type of art at all, I'm glad we have it.

 

^^^^ Nice dusty !!!!

 

My coupe is channeled 3 inches over the frame and the engine /trans combo sits about 4 inches higher than it should.


While there is not tons of interior room, it is still comfortable to drive. Here is the interior

 

My channeled five window from back in the late 60's/early 70's. I dropped the floor down half way in the frame and used Sunbeam tiger bucket seats and it was very comfortable to drive. You can see the floor in relation to the frame in this shot.

VW square back gas tank mounted in trunk.

Me doing some stick welding.

 

Some more channeled hot rods from Connecticut back in the day. First one was mine.

Jimmy Gombos' Channeled 3 window next to mine!
Bogies Roadster!

Jerry Harold's nailhead powered A coupe.

Bogie again solving a parking problem and keeping dry!