About 15 years ago, I looked around my shop and saw I had a bunch of parts I had ac***ulated over the last 30 years. I decided, given the nature of the parts, that the only reasonable outcome of this was to build a low-buck hot rod. So, I started to piece things together. Because of experiences I had had in the '60's with a "T-Bucket" I had put together, I decided to build a "T" touring. I wanted to have enough room for a reasonable sized gas tank, a battery, a good sized lockable storage compartment, and room for a couple of suitcases. I figured a 2-seater touring would fill the bill. I tack welded up what I thought would work. This project has set for several years while I finished a few other things I had going. Well, I'm about done with most of the O/T work, and have decided to go back to the "Tub". I rolled it out of the shop last October and took this picture. After looking at it for 6 months, it seems the whole car is too high to have the correct stance. I think that after it is completed and driven a bit, it will drop about 2 inches all around. I think this will be enough in the back, but will leave it still too high in the front. I think I can get another 2 inches in the front by replacing the 2" drop tube axle (aftermarket) that's in it now with a 4" dropped beam (which I should do anyway given the front suspension setup). What do you guys think? (Photoshops appreciated)
lots of little tricks to lower them . I agree it would be nice down a few more inches but I wouldn't let it stop me from getting it on the road.
From my point of view, that frame looks level. Try a kick up in the rear and then see what the 2" dropped axle looks like.
Do you want the rear end up into the p***enger compartment ? Seams that's where it's got to go and that eats up dome of your reasons for a touring. You could try some visual trickery. Add a few inches to the bottom of the frame or a wedge. Bunch of things like that decrease the amount of space from ground and make it look lower.
I appreciate the input. The best thing so far is that nobody says it looks terrible. I think I'll do this in stages. Looks like everyone agrees it's too high. I personally think it's more of a problem with the front end than the rear. I think I will go with a dropped axle and change the 6.70's to 5.60's. I'm also thinking adding a little more to the mock-up (carbs, radiator, windshield, etc.). Might make it easier to visualize where I am. I am coming to the realization that the most important thing in cars like this is stance; if that ain't right, no amount of gee-gaws will make it look good. I like the way the rear of the body sits in relation to the rear wheels, even though it makes the rear door unusable. I don't want to get too much farther down the road in case I have to do some major frame/suspension mods. Yeah the body is fibergl***. I picked it up years ago for a pretty good price. The plan always was to get it running and then try to find a steel one. A few years on the HAMB made me realize that if the stance ain't right, I may as well save my money and stick with the fibergl***. bct, the thread you're doing on your tub is what finally moved me to post this. I think yours looks spot on, and from what I can see, the frame is only 2 or 3 inches further off the ground than mine. I think I'm going to have to stack some weight on it to simulate the final loading on the suspension and see where I really am. Stay tuned.
Yeah! And the body looks wedged to me. Sectioned but added pie shape front to back. What catches my eye is how or where the lowest visual line of a car bisects the rear tires. Then the front tires, then the top of tire to body lines.
A lot is going to depend on whether or not you run running boards and/or fenders. I'm thinking it's going to take quite a bit of weight to drop the rear as much as you want. If body width to rear end width is what's keeping you from dropping the rear, get a wider rear end. I still say a kick up will cure the rear height problem. Maybe if you showed an example of what you're trying to achieve, it'll be easier to get good feedback.
That 32 frame automatically gets you a visual 6" drop, plus the rear kick up and minor front sweep add up to about "looking " lower by 7-8 inches easy and the rear tire is pretty close to where it belongs. Flat crossmember, dropped axle and that's another 4" or more. In the first pic, lets say that's a 30" rear tire - then there's about 20" ride height there. Jacked up 4x4 type ride height.
I don't think T's need to be super low since they are super tall to begin with. I'd like see the frame shortened about a foot though.
Fred, I think you're probably right when you say this is going to take some frame work in the rear. I like what "31 Vicky" said about the lowest line on the body/frame bisecting the rear wheel. The car in #11 looks right to me, and it looks like it meets that rule. Mine looks like it intersects the tire at about bead level. That means it has to come down 6 or 7 inches to be right. The frame already has a kick up, so I'll have to completely redo it or maybe remove some spring leaves and/or modify the mount. I think I can get enough in the front with a combination of dropped axle, mount modification, and smaller tires. Looks like I've got my work cut out for me. As I re-read this, it seems that I am trying to quantify aesthetics, which usually doesn't work. Wish me luck. Oh, no fenders or running boards, and the rear axle is wide enough for everything to come down, so there s no problem there. I think the thing to do is get the front end down where I want it and then remove the rear wheels and block it up until it looks right. Then I can make the final decision on frame work.
I'm 6 ft, 235#, and I've had a "T" bucket before. The main idea of the tub is to get interior room, if I can pull it off without it looking silly.
Looking at it that way, you may be right. From the very beginning, one of the objectives was to have plenty of room for everything. If I can get a decent ride height, I'll have to think about the length.
The Jalopy Journal
