just wondering... i was looking at the pics Stevesgalaxie took at billetproof of some seriously channeled rods. it got me thinking ,even tho it looks pretty damn cool is it too low? where hot rods channled this low back in the 40's and 50's? looking at pics in old hot rod mags and old pics in the rodders journal most of them sit up with a few inches of ground clearance. im just wondering if this was popular back then too? ( here are a few pics i borrowed from ponchos site and stevesgalaxie just as an example of what im talking about,im not picking on either car,as a matter of fact i really dig both of them.) reason i bring this up is cuz im getting back to work on my lil bastardized truck,and wondering if my cab is TOO low.the floor substructure is in,but i loosened it and the bed from the frame and shimmed it 1" to get an idea,most wouldnt notice i guess,but to me its a big difference.i kinda like the look,cuz it seems a lil more ready for haulin ass down the country roads.i think im going to cut the floor substrucure out and go ahead and raise it,anyways ill gain an inch of legroom.which is needed(btw ,if you think an extra inch doesnt make a difference go ask your girlfriend if she can tell! hahaha,sorry) anyways just wondering what your thoughts on severly channeld rods???
I channeled an A way too much like five years ago and I regretted it. I thought it looked stupid. My dad (God rest his soul) wouldnt even ride in it. My 34 is channeled just enough for the people who know to notice but more than that, just draws away from the car. honestly, I think that A looks "broken". The T for some reason looks pretty cool. Only trucks (like Rudy builds) look good on the ground in my opinion. The deck lid of an A just doesnt stand on it's own real well alone and on the ground like that.
Channelling more than the width of the frame is a waste. Leg room is important. If you want it low make it low with the suspension. I hate seein a cool car then seeingthe driver sitting halfway out of it. I like sitting low in a car. Just my opinion. Clark
I think the first one looks lower than it is because the huge motor is so high.If he had a flathead mounted lower in the rails,the car would look entirely different.
I like channelled cars a lot, but way too many of them are getting "STUPID CHANNELLED". The thought process seems to be if some is good, more is better and it aint neccessarily so!! Yeah, I think a few of these radical cars look kinda neat, but a lot of them are way too extreme and just look out of proportion. My car is channelled about 4-5 inches and it looks good and is comfortable. Perhaps, like punk rockers with giant bobby pins thru their cheeks, these fellows build for shock value rather than true aesthetics?? The engine sits too high in that Model T roadster and the car looks a little too long for my taste, but each to their own.
My '33 pick up was channeled back in the 60's. it was dropped 9.5" over a uncut A-bone chassis. It's got full fenders, and actually looks well in proportion with the whole design of the truck.. But, i drive it a lot and because of the channel it can get very uncomfortable in a short time.I can do about an hour and a half in it before i gotta get out and stretch. I think if your gonna drive it, make sure your gonna be comfy in there for long periods of time. I know that i'm going to Z my frame front and back and unchannel it about 4-5" when i tear it down to go through it.. just my own experience.. kinda funny ya called it "lil bastardized" truck.I had "little bastard" painted above the back window on my cab at the begining of this year! Rat..
My 33 pickup was channeled the width of the frame [5"] and then I chopped it another 5.5".... seemed ok to drive for about 2 hours at a stretch.....
my truck is channeled 7 INCHES! I didnt do it, it was done in the past sometime. I dont think I am going to chop it...
Back in the 40'S and 50"S there wasn't one road in the whole country you could'a drove em on. So the answer is no they didn't do em that low back then. But that was then and this is now. If ya want to stay with the old look keep em up, if ya want to go with the new look take it down. It's all in what ya want for yourself and what anybody else thinks is immaterial.
When I was 15 and planning the channeled hotrod I have yet to build, I had hard fast rules about what was "right" and what was "wrong" and what was "ok" only in certain parts of the country. It was apparent that Left coast cars were usaually highboy with black magick performed on the suspension to make the frame scrape and chopped. All the while, right coast and mid country cars were more likely to be channeled with the suspension not necessarily so low, "because of the roads" well, I think that's bunk because the roads here have drainage dips at intersections that make a joke out of the grand canyon and required a lot of the lowered cars to slither around the corner up aginst the curb in the level concrete gutter area, which took great knowledge of the cars width to keep from loosing a pristine whitewall to the curb. To me, a car looks "broken" if the cowl area hangs down lower than the bottom of the frame rails. The typical fad T got it right. The frame should make a continuous visual line with the bottom of the body when looking at the profile. I see a lot of cars with split wishbone mounts hanging down 3-4" below the frame and the bottom of the body channeled down to the bottom of that mount. I don't see any logic or reason for that and it looks awkward to have the frame exiting the cowl at some arbitrary location that has no rational or logical purpose, other than being low, man... As has been stated, it looks silly to have the car only 3 feet high but the top of the driver's head being 4 feet high when he sit's ON the car. Take a look at a "California Deuce Highboy" with the driver in it. All you will see of the driver is his head from the sideburns up. the car is low, at the frame,and the seats are low so the driver sits down IN the car body. not sitting up on the raised floor of an over-channeled car like a Roth cartoon monster. If you want the frame at mid body, consider a rolled pan that goes all the way to the track nose grill opening. And a hood. Then it will have some design continuity and logic of design. Of course there's always exceptions. I've always liked Gary Heliker's Nail head powered channeled T. It's the Burgundy metalflake car on pages 8-9 of Andy Southard's hotrods & Customs of th 1960s the picture with Norm Grabowski behind it checking it out. If I remember right the body was welded to the bottom of the '32 frame, and gary didn't like the finish of the joint so he welded some valences on the sides, '59 Chevy I think, to hide the welds making it look like it had a rolled pan/apron on the bottom. Anyway the rear was Zd so far the tires and cycle fenders were higher than the trunk lid, yet the body was actually only channeled to the bottom of the rails. Some one mentioned the '35 era trucks looking ok channeled farther. That's probably because they were partially channeled stock and ther isn't a flat bottom edge to visually line up with anything anyway. This will make them look "ok" no matter how far you channel them or never "ok" regardless of the channel because of this, and only look good with the running boards on as designed. That's personal taste I guess. I think If I channeled a '35-'36 Ford car or truck I would reshape the bottom line of the car straight(er)... Hey, but that's been done too, by Boyd. Yep he had reason in his money making madness
In general, I think channeling any more than the height of the frame is too much. In specific, I personally think that the top of the tire should never be above the top of the fender well relief. Some famous east coast cars did this, I know, but I'm just not into it.
great input guys,thanks for the replies. i took all of your advice . and raised the cab up a lil more by lowering the floor,but i went 2 inches instead of the one inch i said i was.so now the bottem of the cab is pretty much in line with the bottom of the frame. i have decent leg room and its easier to get into now,plus the grill shell lines up with the cowl,so all in all it worked out for the best. anyways the bed is just shimmed right now,but the floor rails are done(pretty much). i hope i didnt kill the evil looks of it.but atleast itll be a lil more drivable here's a before pic,(hope i didnt fuck up ) thanks again
I tell you one thing the second picture is my friends Charles car I have crused in the car and I have to say "Death trap" I love the car it looks awsome ..and it would work if you 5'1" its channeld 6inch Chpped 6Inches I was litteraly laying down in the car....you can't see street lights at all. but all in all I like the look its mean as hell I don't think I would ever go that crazy concidering im 6"2'...I know I was'nt to much help but screw it. L8 evel
Truck looks thought-out now...before it looked kinda tossed together. IMHO I think you did REAL good! The truck kicks major ass either way but I prefer the added height! Bill
My cab and bed are both at 6" (frame thickness)..I think going anymore than the frame thickness is 9 times out of 10 to much.
Butt, That looks right on to my eye.... Can you lower the top of the radiator shell about two inches without major surgery?That would line it up with where you hae the cab now. Maybe mount the radiator mounts at the bottom of the rails instead of the top?
DrJ,you talking to me, you talking to me,, (in my best robert dinero voice)hackerbillthanks,34truck,your truck looks bitchin,(just chop it!)
I am setting up my Merc at 4-1/2 clearance on the frame, no channel. Using air suspension I can drop it 3 inches or raise it 6 from the "normal" ride height. I have seen the "channels gone wrong" cars and it's not a pretty picture watching 200 lb men trying to get in and out of these cars. I've often wondered why guys didn't lower the frames more on their "A"s to get the stance they're looking for rather than moving the frame rails up so high into the cab...
Butt... this is the profile I'm trying to werk to for my trauck project...(planning stage atm) 38 cab...channeled to bottom of rails. High Model A bed (lengthened)... maikI
here's mine with a CrAzY channel. like i said, i think because of the fenders, it hide's the amount it hangs over the frame. But thats a little over a 9" channel. The cab is basically set on the boards. sorry, i can't find a true profile shot Rat...
my roadster is the epitomy of over doin it. don't have a photo right now but it's the A in bare metal painted like a fighter pilot plane. we z'd it 9" and chanelled it 7". it looks great sittin alone but when i drive it the door top comes up to my lowest rib. i really don't mind because it's still reasonably comfy. when the car was built (it was a club effort done in 3 weeks from frame up) we had a simple rule. sit it on 4 rims an build it so nothin is touching the ground. we also stretch the frame almost a foot. it has a 4 bar and coil over rear end with a vega box and it handles like a go-kart. it's been up to 140 on bias plies no prob except the gearing wound out. i guess what i'm getting at is even though my car has wheels way above the deck lid it doesn't bottom out (most people are surprised when i go up driveways) and even though i look like an ed roth character when i'm drivin the thing it is by far the best built and best handling car i've ever owned. my car is low for a reason, not just to be in the weeds.stevo
DrJ,i can prob lower it with out too much work.now that you mention it i see what your saying,even tho its "even" with the cowl,it doesnt keep the same flow of the rake that the cab and bed have. ...i wish you wouldnt have said anything ,now its gonna bug the hell out of me.LOL
I was having a seance in my car last night. I and Sister Rosalee were trying to get in touch with my long dead Uncle Tri-Bar (RIP). Would this be considered channeling?
I wouldnt go below the bottom of the frame, I like all the room I can get inside a car, and it is amazing the difference an inch or 2 will make. If its something you dont plan on spending alot of time in at one time, who cares about comfort as long as it looks cool.....To
Thanks for asking this Question Butts, I was wondering the same thing. Because I'm thinking about channeling my ride. But really didn't know how much would be to much and what would be safe and comfortable to drive in. Great reasons and replies on this one .....Thanks guys , Later
what about sinking the floor, kinda like a unibody...??? is that a viable option...??? or do you guys do that already...???
Butt, you didn't ruin the looks of it at all. I think you got it right. The proportions of the original set-up were too exagerated and cartoonish -- not mean. I like looww customs, but low hot rods look silly. I agree with DRJ and if you can get the top of the grille a little lower, it will balance out the front. Of course, I don't know how dangerously low the point of that grille is to the ground already, but it's worth considering.
haring,your right,it looked to cartoonish before. now that ive had a day or so to look at it ,i like it alot more. i studied the grille and its 3 3/4 of the ground,which may seem alot to you city slicker folk,but living in the country its about all i can get away with,the pic i posted is actually a lil bit distorted,in real eyeball perspective its not noticeable,and flows. anyways ,its just a pile of shit im trying to make into a hotrod.
The Jalopy Journal
