Technical Can cars look too low

[emoji16]

 

It’s a Watson painted ride. One of my favorites.
As far as CHP issues the owner or Mr Watson would know.
Here are some more 56s Watson worked on. Several are very low, some look like your example.
https://www.customcarchronicle.com/...-painter/larry-watson-56-chevys/#.XrrngSVOnYU

 

I drove my truck all over the country and it was low without air bags but you learn where you can go and where you can’t
I like them low as long as they’re built to be driven low Stance is one of the most important parts of the overall look of a vehicle. I’m for low but that’s just my opinion

 

Hell no they can't be too low

 

Many of the new builds look too low to look 100% traditional.

 

@anthony myrick does anyone know what happened to the car or Harvey Buthoff?

 

Don’t know. Great question
Customs seem to either fade away or continue changing with styles.

 

I hate it when people say that!

 

Hey... awesome idea.

Oh.................................
You take the high road
And I'll take the low road...

Wait...
YOU take the low road, and I'LL take the high road.

 

Some cars might be an exception. I'm not sure if this awesome creation would be as awesome at a higher altitude. Somebody might want to photoshop it to see what it might look like? Put slicks on it while you're at it LOL.

 

Well , I’m going to settle this once and for all....yes and no! LOL
Some cars beg to be low! 49 Merc, for instance. Some cars / trucks just look goofy being low. My preference is a tad lower in front, higher in back. And high enough all way around to drive city streets with out banging something!






Bones

 

Here is something to consider about "too low"..........
1: Is it physically too low to be operated safely on the road? Does it routinely scrape and bang as opposed that "once in a great while " you have to take some kind of evasive action? Did lowering compromise steering?
2: Is it (or will it) be aesthetically too low and actually look worse than it does at its ride height?
Notice I haven't said that radically lowered cars are unacceptable, only that there should be a point where any additional lowering has a detrimental result either physically or aesthetically......or both.

Lets look at a couple of the photos submitted above. The first, summitted by John Edge . I think the grass may make it look a little closed to the ground than pavement would have. Its a great looking truck and very similar to one I'm building. Aesthetically it looks great. Depending on whether I'm correct about the grass, my personal choice would be the same stance but maybe an inch higher for driveability.
Also, my personal opinion.........any lower would look wrong and add nothing to either aesthetics or driveability.


In the second picture by RickyBop, I think this is a really well done and well executed car. I assume it sat that low as built. I have to wonder if it is really driveable being that low. I also think that lowering further.......even with hydraulics for display........would be too far (in my opinion). I just think aesthetically this car looks "right" at this height. So (my opinion) dropping it so the frame lays on the ground for display is "too far" astetically.



Earlier, Anthony mentioned going to a Rat Rod Run where many of the cars were trailered in because they were basically undriveable. So they met the "aestetic" (if you can call Rat Rods aesthetic)goals they wanted, but at the cost of driveability. I think I am saying the same thing about a car that is simply displayed in a manner thats undriveable.
One could argue that many "show cars" are displayed in undriveable condition, and they would be correct......but to me, the caveat there is that the car often isn't built to be driven, so they have more leeway.

I just feel that a car that is built to be driven should be built so it can be driven and should be displayed as driven. Then I get to view the car in its natural state. I think the persona (good or bad)of a vehicle is lost when its displayed unnaturally. The low riders are welcome to display their vehicles in unnatural conditions like one wheel hanging in the air, because that "is natural" for that kind of build. Now my opinion is not meant to insult anyone, just to explain how I view the whole idea of incorporating a "stance" into the vehicle at birth, and making it both awesome and driveable at the same time.

 

There are “ trends” in the car culture. Some come, some go, some hang around, like this 80 some year “ trend” lol. But, to each it’s own!
I was at a car event last Summer and saw a 50s Ford Pick up actually setting on the ground! The running boards were on the pavement! When I saw this..... it kinda pissed me off! Don’t really know why..... but it did! It was just a feeling that I had! Then I realized that the owner was trying to be different, doing his thing and going for an effect. Well...... he did it! He got a reaction out of me! I walked a ways and had to smile! I think the guy with the Pickup on the ground won! Lol
Bottom line, it’s yours build like YOU want!








Bones

 

Both of those examples are undrivable as they sit. What good is the best looking car if you can't enjoy it on the road? But the title of the thread is about looks, not about driveability. Do they look too low? No. Are they too low? Yes. Unless your goal is to just park the car somewhere and look at it, then I guess they're fine.

 

I think ANY car with any part of the front wheel in the wheel well looks slammed and terrible!

 

That is just so wrong on so many levels. HRP

 

You can say that again, Danny.

But hey... he can change his rear tires without pulling the skirts.

[emoji16]

 

I agree that that’s wrong...... but when those guys start jacking those cars up and down at odd angles and driving around a corner leaning the wrong way...... I can’t help myself..... I start laughing! It’s funny as shit! Not for me...... but still funny!








Bones

 

You are right, I did say "Look too low". In my mind I juxtaposed that a vehicle "looks too low" because subconsciously my mind is saying to me............"That won't work, thats not driveable"

In the explanation which followed the title I mentioned undriveable and usable. So I didn't do a very good job explaining myself.

I do think your comment "What good is the best looking car if you can't enjoy it on the road? " is exactly right. My feeling is simply that the persona a car has while in motion is the same persona it should display at rest......unless hard acceleration is occuring.

 

I've always felt that when you modify a vehicle, the modification should serve some useful purpose. It may just be an aesthetic purpose as well as handling,comfort,safety,or performance. Raising and lowering a car can also be done in a manner that serves a purpose. I just never " got it" when it comes to radical hydraulic controls, just like I never "got it" when people thought it was cool to wear their hat backwards or their underwear hanging out or smoke their tires till they wore out or blew out. I just don't "get it". And I'm glad I don't get it..........

 

I used to have the Plymouth pretty low.




That's dropped torsion bars - no bags. The Chrysler isn't quite that low.

 

No !, in general looks good IMO.

 

I like the look of this car, is there more info some were? Thanks. Bob

 

Yes...
Unless it can go 400+ MPH

 

Hey, Bob... Do a search for...
"The Dreamster"
1934 Ford Roadster.
Built in Sweden.
-RB

 

This is what I juts did. That’s after 5 years of saying the back was too high. Changed my world. In love with the car like the day I got it. Handles and rides way better. Only complaint is I need to modify the arm on my Rear view mirror cause all I get is street or headliner lol

 

This a beautiful car , BUT the running boards are only an inch or so off the ground. It was built to sit a this height and the boards are a good three inches below the bottom of the rims. Even if the suspension design allows it to rise four to five inches to a safe scrub line, first it will ride like shit and the tire to fender opening will resemble a 4x4 and totally ruin the flow of the car. In my opinion it was built for display and that is fine if that's what you want, but to me a car has to cruise at 70 safely or it is not a car. It is an artistic statement and I enjoy looking at it. It just depends on what you want out of your creation. Larry

 

looks right to me

 

Of course! Laying frame is Laying lame, in my book! I like a low car as much as the next guy. But, to me, laying a car on the frame when you park it, is "Posing". When you have the perfect stance, wether its a Rake or Taildragger, i believe it looks the best when its the same height all the time, parked or rollin. 3wheelin, dragging the rear, hopping is for Lowriders. Not Hotrods oc Customs, IMO.