To be totally honest, I initially hated all Continental kits, and thought they had no place on a custom... Apart from the stock 40s-era Lincoln equipped with it's namesake, my... <BR><BR>To read the rest of this blog entry from The Jalopy Journal, click here.
The 1953 and 1954 Packard Caribbeans had an attractive add-on Continental kit. The bodies were shipped to Mitchell-Bentley for modification. The rear wheel openings were fully radiused (only the 1953 model) and the trunk lid shortened so the Continental kit would not require a full extension of the bumper. Sorry, no photos to illustrate this. (o{}o)
"Sam Barris ’55 Chevy Convertible: It was essentially a mild custom with Packard taillights..." I believe the taillights are Chrysler. I read that Barris didn't want to put a Continental kit on Larry Ernst's Chevy. Maybe the results helped change Sam's mind.
I think it depends on the car, and for me, what I grew up seeing in the neighborhood. A 55/56 anything looks like shit with one, except on a Crown Victoria they look good, IMHO. Some of the 52/53 Ford mild customs I remember from my town had them, and I loved the look when I was a kid. I wouldn't put one on a car now, but that blue 59 Impala with a continental kit that ran around here in the 60s made me stop in my tracks when it went by.......
The LaJolla Chevy and both versions of the Ernst Chevy are proof that a continental spare can look really good on a car. And there is a good chance my '51 Chevy coupe will end up with one because of those cars. And of course we can't forget the '56 Thunderbirds looked pretty swank. But 9 times out of 10 (maybe 99 out of 100) they look terrible so I can understand the people who hate them. But when done right they just add a certain flair that is hard to pin down but you know it when you see it.
Like a lot of guys, I think very, very few cars actually look good with one of these cancerous growths protruding from its anus.
1. I can't think of any car ever built where a continental kit made it better. 2. in 1936 they were not called continental kits, they just called them spare tires.
Heres one i recently put on my boss's 53 ford custom. It has been moved down and sectioned a little. Not my style, but my boss, who is 84 years old, loves it. Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!
Not quite. Coronado kits seen on 52 and 53 Fords are by far the ugliest, in my opinion. It violates all custom design rules. Yet it looks ok on 56 and 57 Lincoln Continentals.
2. in 1936 they were not called continental kits, they just called them spare tires.[/QUOTE] X2 and that's not a rumble seat either it looks like just a trunk lid missing the handle.
The 53 Packard Caribbean looks naked without it. In person you can see that the 1/4 panels are extended (or the deck recessed) and the tips of the taillights are nearly even with rear face of the cover. And Rat Fink is correct, all the cars prior to the Lincoln Continental with the spare in the rear? Standard equipment. Sort of a personal peeve when someone says they saw a Model A with a "Continental kit", or when they see a rear spare on a 30s Packard. Not to pick too hard about it but I figure this as good a place as any to mention things to those who just may not know the difference. No harm, no foul, just sayin...
90% of them are ugly as f***,the other 10% work.Nothing I hate worse than going to a car show,like the Pavillions in Scottsdale,and seeing 300 57 Chevys and 55 'Birds with them on.Worse,the owners always profess that these abortions are OEM...when monkeys come flying out of my a$$ :0
Interesting to me that this forum is for the history of the custom car regardless whom built it or what style as long as it falls into the proper era, again for the history and we get people on here that does not like what they see....ask yourself why are you here?
Because sometimes, history is ugly. I can agree that the Continental kit has a history, but that doesn't mean I have to agree that they were in good taste. So, now, I know why, when and where they were used and I still think they were a bad idea.
Naw, that's a tongue wagging member. They get some kind of pass. Unfortunately, the Continental kit doesn't.
Yep.Very few cars look good with a continental kit.The same way that some cars look like crap with one color,BUT put a different color on and they look like a million bucks. Good luck.Have fun.Be safe. Leo
This is why so many notable custom builders have left this site. Don't take it personal Fred because I have to help moderate this forum and it is becoming very hard when there is so much negative on the positive. Again this custom forum is designed to preserve the traditional custom era in a positive way from my understanding with Ryan.
Not everything clicked when it came to customs or hot rods. That's a fact. We appreciate the history lesson, but if people don't like something, it's their opinion and right to express it. Otherwise, there would be a bunch of locked threads. It sounds like the folks who left, took it personal.
Never been fond of the ones that are 5 miles of bumper off the back of the car...they look plainly stupid. You'd showed some tasetfull ones...
I like continental kits. For me, it`s similar to liking 57 Chevys. Some I like more than others. Traditional in 1957 is different than traditional in 2014. Sad to say.
That is sad. Continental kits are part of the custom car tradition like them or not. Just like spotlights, skirts, chopped tops etc. It's the combination of these treatments make the car look 'right'.
The impression I get from a lot of stuff built after, say, 1975, is that the Continental spare has become something like the steel sun visor, that is, something someone somehow got into their heads was an absolute requirement for a custom "back in the day". Unlike the visor, though, there is enough evidence that historic customs did have Continental spare tyres from time to time - though as with any other aspect of these cars, some were better executed than others. It is a design element that is by no means exhausted. One approach not mentioned yet on this thread is having the spare lie in a circular depression in a long deck: the trick would be to get the depth of the depression just right, i.e. so the edge of the tread sits level with the surrounding sheetmetal, and the gap tight. This is sometimes seen on coachbuilt '30s cars, but the spare invariably sits just a bit too deep in the hole. Another approach, perhaps for a '60s "futuristic" build, is a horizontal spare peeping out of a shelf or slot and acting as an auxiliary bumper. This would, of course, require relocating the fuel tank on many cars. I could go on brainstorming all day: rear sidemounts on a long-tailed '36? Now there's an idea ...
The Jalopy Journal
