Subframes gone wwwillldddd!!

What makes people do crazy things like this?

Found this poor little gem on the auction site. Seems to be a nice car, but whats up with the subframe? Its a Nova clip under a shoebox, figure 2.5" difference on each side. WOOF!



And that beautiful 4x4 stance...

 

Maybe he lives on a dirt road and doesn't want to get it dirty when it rains

 

Measure twice, weld once.

 

Know this isn't what the thread is about, but how bout them taillights, talk about a square peg in a round hole!

 

It really only needs a new front clip stubbed in and different set of tail lights... with a little lowering job!

 

What the h*ll? I have a friend with a Nova clip under a '50 Ford and his front wheels don't stick out like that. Maybe it's a Monte Carlo clip or something?

 

He must have the formula 1 version. Extra grip around tight turns.

 

Mild G***er!

 

Sub frames ****, one of the WORST things you can do to a car.

 

Look harder man......both wheels aren`t sticking out....

 

Holy ****! You're right! Crooked as hell!

 

Or is it the angle of the picture?

 

Looks to me that the front clip is on wonky.

Is that the reason for the 4x4 stance? The tyre is now directly under the wheel arch lip, so needs a little clearance.

 

Just because someone along the line said that subframing a car isn't "traditional" doesn't make it the worst thing you could do to a car. However, this could quite possibly be the worst thing to do to a car, I wonder if it is off or if its just the picture angle.

 

it always amazes me when someone can operate a welder...but not a tape measure...

G.M. clips kick *** in the right application. this, clearly, is not one of them.

and as far as width is concerned...I would bet that's a caddy clip. they are about 3 inches wider than the camaro.

damn.

either that, or his wheel choice is waaaaaay ****ed up.

 

Sub framing was done before the M11 came along. Done right there's certainly nothing wrong with it. Height can be set by the way the subs put in. People I've talked to that have had both claim the sub framed car rides better.

 

Man I hate sub frames, most of the time they look horrible, people pay tons of money to make their merc or what ever ride like a 70s car. I can say i kind of understand in the 80s why people did it but now they offer kits to go to the stock ch***is disc brakes/power steering/ motor mounts/ power brakes for most cars and have the wheel where they belong not sticking up in the wheel well or almost sticking out of it. im sure people charge different prices but around here they go about 5 grand, but since one of my friends knew the guy hit did it for less than half and still thought that was a huge waste of money. Theres nothing wrong with stock front ends they offer lowered coils or dropped spindles if you want to lower it. I guess theres nothing wrong with a sub frame if the tires in the right spot but I dont really see an advantage to where you have to cut the front of your frame off

 

Unless you have something really uncommon or that no one offers parts for. Subframes are starting to sound...not so good.

 

I could care less about what anybody said regarding what is or isn't traditional, bottom line is, if it wasn't done from the 40's to the 60's it isn't traditional from the standpoint most of us here view as tradition...that being said, sub-frames **** ,are are absolutely one of the worst thing you can do to a car, they are completely unnecessary, and this abortion pictured above is the poster child for how they **** up an otherwise good looking car(except for the taillights in this case)...the problem is, this isn't a rare sight, many sub-framed cars i've seen look almost as bad, some just as bad as this one.....someone tell me why it is necessary to sub-frame a car, please...

 

Done right there fine....but just like ANYTHING else....all it takes is one bad apple to ruin the bunch! It`s not a new fad,people have been doing it since the late `60`s/early `70`s...and I`m sure if someone thought of it or was able to do it in the `50`s it would have been done!!

 

Now days I wouldnt sub a car....back when I first put my truck together the first time in the early 90's it was a darn good idea and done right works supurb...with the new PST bushings and air ride the 58 Y/O truck rides like a caddy and handles great....that said like a few of the others have mentioned the newer and wide range of offerings with the MII aftermarket front ends is the way I'm going to go on the 47 buick....why? I dont feel like going through the h***le I went through to make the subframe look good like I did with the 49 (that and the front frame of my subbed 49 was tweeked) lots les time involved for a more desirable result....time is money eh?

about that car.....I cant tell if its the angle of the pic of the sub is wonky...either way it looks like chit....

 

Isnt that one of those new fangled circle track specific subframe setups ?

 

okay.
lets say you've got a straight axle chevy pickup-mid fifties and you want it LOW. like reeeal low.

explain to me how to do it without a straight axle running through the motor, and we will see if that works for ya.

 

The Camaro/Nova/Caddy Seville subframe has perhaps the best front end geometry any factory ever put under a car, with the '65-up Ford Galaxie and all of it's deritives through '79 a very close second.. These were the front ends that the NASCAR 'Cup cars were patterned after. Were I to build a '50s car, if any of the above would fit under the fenderwells I'd use it because I expect my cars to handle! I'm not arguing whether it's the traditional way or not, but reporting what I know.

I'm betting that this one was welded on crookedly.. Oh well, not my car....

Jan

 

Absolutely, there just weren't any suitable subframes to use in the 50's. I bought my 39 Pontiac coupe in the late 80's from a guy who subframed it and thoroughly screwed it up. The wheelbase was almost 3 inches longer on one side!!! How does someone do that? And to make it worse , it sat like a g***er, the subframe actually pointed down. This thing was done by a guy who made his living as a mechanic! I got the car dirt cheap cause nobody wanted it. I took it home and immediately removed the subframe (what a ***** that was) and reinstalled it the right way, since I really had no other option at the time. I still own and drive that car everyday for about 8 mo's of the year every year since 1990, and I LOVE that subframe. The car rides, handles, and stops great, and sits very low. I wouldn't want it any other way. I know there are a lot of options available today, but I don't know of any expensive kits as beefey as my nova sub, and I somehow feel that installing a sub from a junk yard car just seems more "hot rod traditional" than ordering a mustang 2 kit from a catalog. But to each his own.

 

Hmmmm, I guess I do not belong here then, sorry my bad. later shawn

 

uh... mustang II. anybody who clips a 50's chevy truck did not do thier homework.

 

my `51 Ford has a MII front end......it came that way.....i`m not gonna change it.......it was also tubbed with a narrowed 9".....i pulled that **** right out!!!

 

first off, i said "most", not all...and if ya don't think you belong here, than hit the high road, what do ya want me to tell ya???

 

well, how low do you want to go?? I'm of the opinion that cars, or trucks for that matter, with the bumper s****ing the ground look ridiculously stupid anyway... find yourself some little book from the era, plenty of lowered pick-ups there, and no subframes.....gee, how'd they do that???