Mythbusters: an unscientific statistical analysis of rod building styles, circa 55/60

Somehow the "Orange Crate" wound up on that thread as well

 

Well, on two of those photos, Thats a question I just cant answer...WHAT the HELL were they thinking??

 

diversity

 

They were thinking they had it figured out. Like you and a lot of others. Maybe, just maybe, there's nothing to figure out. The standards and trends were set by an individuals community. That's it. Set a cutoff date and build. Build your vision using nothing post '60. But that's my mental cut off date. One day, I'll have the time and money to do one.

 

I'd post one of the photos in question, but Ryan would probably ban me for life...

 

I don't have a 'dog in the hunt' as anything post WWII isn't exactly my "thing", but I think that sums it up pretty well. This has been an interesting & fun thread to read (and take a stab at a couple times as well).

I can sorta see both sides...this sort of history is difficult (at worst) and inconvenient (at best) to document - because of that, I think people are left with loose hand-me-down mental renderings of 'tradition' and are subject to follow along with prevailing [contemporary] assumptions about cars/styles of the era...sometimes it's easier to 'go with the flow' than to do the dirty work of research & documentation. Not saying that, in and of itself, is a bad thing...some of those cars are gorgeous in their own right and worthy of admiration...but a quality 'build' and nostalgic styling does not always truly represent 'tradition' (as I define it, anyway) from a historical (factual) perspective.

Hopefully more work like this will surface and be bantered about...anything that adds to the collective consciousness (body of knowledge) is a good thing IMO.

 

History lessons are kool n all, but do we want to "restore" or build. I mentioned influence a few back. I see nothing wrong with the "best of" influencing a new build. Would a Model A coupe hiboy with a 64 429 Caddy for power be "wrong"? If so, why? Better engine, clearly better trans than the early 331/390 variant, best of both if adapted to a stick shift, and rolling stock from any mid 60s time frame. Fenderless on Deuce rails with a Deuce grille was the start, the influence, the rest of the choices as individual as the the outcome itself. Sounds really fun and scary fast to me. If it was channeled (I never really liked that even as a kid) would it be just as "wrong"?

I only threw that in there as brain food. You could apply a 413 wedge, a MEL, hell even a Mark IV BBC from 65.

Next...

 

can you imagine a conversation taking place like this in the 40's 50's or early 60's? "{hey buddy you have the wrong wheels"......." why is your car not channeled"

where this is going, is your going to have about 100 cars in the country that meet a very narrow definition of what the "true hardcore traditionalists" feel is the right car.


The rest are out having fun with their incorrect hot rods, or Street rods....me included.


have fun you win!

 

That's actually where it is now. The problem is the 100 have a home and don't want the bloodline tarnished. I think they are right to feel that way. They worked hard and did tons of leg work and some yo-yo with a chopped top, WWW radials and airbags wants to join the club. I'd be pissed too. Now, if that guy wants to look and admire, come on in, but he can't go telling the 100 that his car belongs because it has a traditional "vibe or theme". That's faking it and should be excluded.

That's why we have the HAMB. To build, drive and appreciate traditional hot rods and customs. But you've got to know your place. My T Bucket is not traditional and never will be. But it's what I wanted and like. If it has a traditional theme (which it doesn't), that's not the same. It would be fake. I keep a very low profile, unless it's a T Bucket thread. My post are usually updates for my own benefit and those that know me. Even then, I try to keep them relevant to other cars. Like scoops, setting timing, painting headers, etc. Stuff everyone could use on any car.

If I posted my car was traditional, I'd expect the thread to get shut down and a ban warning issued. That's why I sometimes say that there are only 50 REALLY traditional builds on the HAMB. That's probably not accurate, but it's close. The rest of us are guest and need to act that way. Admire and comment accordingly, don't get pissed when your airbag question gets razzed. You're a guest. Sit back and enjoy the view and chime in when it's relevant. A traditionalist doesn't want to read that air bags are traditional because Ala Kart had them. That's a bullshit validation and everyone knows it. No TH 350's, S-10 rears, turbos, EFI or HEI, etc, for that matter. NOTHING AFTER 1965. It's not that hard to understand.

There are tons of sites about contemporary hot rods. There's only one HAMB. That I know of. If I needed info on timing or anything else, I could find it with Google and usually do. I do it here because the guards down. Ryan's let a LOT of shit slide, but that happened before I got here, otherwise I would have been run off 7 years ago. And chances are, a LOT of builds going on now, wouldn't have stayed here back in the beginning. From what I've seen in the archives, the traditionalist left the door open one day and all us strays wandered in. We need to go lay in a corner and be lucky to get a bone, every now and then.

IMO

 

It was probably very common that kids pulled off the fenders and hood and that was the end of the car.


Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!

 

What is your traditional may not be mine or anyones. Case in point, me. I'm in my 70's. My trad would be just before small block Chevys caught on. But mostly after flatheads. Still I like the Bangers. Small blue car to the left ran at Bonneville and set a record in 1958 with a GMC blown 53 Dodge. I have recently set a V4F record with it using a 32 Plymouth engine. But it has had a SBC in it and that was the fastest it ever went. To me right now it's a state of the art lakes roadster. To most HAMB members, who weren't even born when it started setting records, it's not a lakes roadster at all. This is just a way to wast bandwidth.

 

Wow, the things some people take from this...I honestly gotta wonder what thread they are reading.

 

again, please read. This isnt "my definition of traditional" this thread pertains to what was really going on in a specific time frame, specifically the years from '55-'60, and I have been VERY clear about that. If you want to do the same thing for the years from post-war to 1950 or from 1950 to '55, dig up the magazines and knock yourself out. I'll be awaiting your thread with interest.

 

Sorta like alot of Pro-Streets in the eighties, and alot of "gassers" nowadays.

 

Call me stupid or what ever,but every time something like this comes up it goes in so many many directions that is just becomes a mess.Theres a view point for every point and vis versa.I get mad at myself for getting caught up in the messy parts and realize I just wasted garage time sitting here a doing just that.
I love the hamb and all the info,and All there is to learn, but have a hard time following somethings.Not that this thread is dumb,please dont think that but I wish it could be a little simpler,the process itself. .Maybe the changes coming will help us hardheads some.Now slide the mouse away and get back in the garage bubba!!!

 

Go back and read the first post that started this out, and read it thoroughly, and it should become pretty clear what I did here. It really has nothing to do with anyones opinion or view-point, the goal of the process was to eliminate opinion and perception, and I wound up having some of my own perceptions changed by the results. Its a statistical analysis of what was in Hot Rod magazine from 1955 through to the end of 1960. Its math, count 'em, add 'em up, 2+2=4, calculate the percentages. The last few posts have been from guys that want 2+2=5 or 3, it doesnt.
Really, it probably would have been better if this had been closed at the bottom of pg. 3, there really hasn't been anything worthwhile added since then.

 

i guess where we are going is that ok here are the stats, now what?

Are we using them as a yardstick against anyone who builds a 55-60 type of car?

Surely just having the stats is not the end result, it is to be used to back up what "should be" otherwise what would be the point of showing them...

 

I did it just to piss Dooley off.

I think really the purpose is clear, its to clear up misconceptions about what the popular build styles were between 1955/1960, across the country and broken down by region.

 

I'm all good, my build year is 1970 anyway

 

This has been a very interesting thread.

Where to start? If the 'traditionalist' line were drawn hard, as was pointed out the majority of builds here would disappear and this place would be a ghost town. So a few personal thoughts...

Hard-core traditionalists would take a snapshot in time, forever freezing the definition of traditional, and worse yet, with a narrow, distorted vision of it. Seemingly defined by a slavish devotion to having the 'correct' parts, leaving adherents to chase after ever-diminishing stocks of true vintage parts or force you into the arms of the reproduction industry, where quality, accuracy, and affordability are uneven at best. To my mind, this is 'restoring', telling builders that original thought is unwelcome. Hardly a recipe for building the hobby, and the antithesis in my mind of what rodding was/is all about.

There it is.... These builders (and cars) are noted because they didn't follow the 'accepted norm' at the time, but went outside 'the box' and did something innovative. Would Leonardo DaVinci be famous today if his entire body of work consisted of only variations on the 'Mona Lisa'? And this isn't just true of the fifties, the same thing can be said for all eras. The traditionalist view in some quarters seems to be that numbers are important (there were X number of this kind, so many of another, like it's a vote), ignoring the fact that many cars and builders are remembered (good or bad) because they did something different.

 

I think at this point, continuing to post the same responses to the same beefs is just serving to muddy and dilute the content of this thread, as fedcospeed has alluded to in a pm. I am just gonna step back at let the guys that dont like the results go here.
This thread has served its purpose.

 

They built outside the box and the norm, but they did it with what was available in their time. If someone builds a car in their style or time period, they should use the cars and parts from that time.

DaVinci painted different things, but did it with paints and brushes from his time period.

If the time period for this site is '65 and earlier traditional, you can still think outside the box, just make sure the warehouse is '65 and older. People can twist it and try to morph all they want, but '65 and older is just that.

If I go to an antique store looking for a 17th Century table, I don't want an 18th Century table that kinda looks 17th Century. I want what I paid for. And if it's fake, it better be damn good, because when I found out, I'd be pissed.

Don't worry, the people trying to buck the system will start asking, "What about using TIG? That wasn't around." Nit picking, morphing and whining. It's about to get real thick up in here. Looking at Ryan's thread for the day, it actually already has.

'Nuff said.

 

I shortened your post to the part that is somehow forgotten about: Just what WAS the "box"?...

The style coming on so strong in the 50s, was a low car, kind of like a sports car. That is the box IMO.

And as you also said;

..look at the countless ways to get a car lower; Chop or Channel, or serious chassis mods to a highboy, or a combination of channel, and various chassis mods like Z'd or stacked rear rails, dropped axle or Spring-ahead front end, etc etc.


Some of the ways look much prettier, and those get copied today, and the not-so-pretty mods are considered tacky or crude these days. That is why saving a few of the not-so-pretty builds is somewhat a good thing.

I like this tread as it has gotten quite a few people to make a comment, either pro, or con........ At least we are taking about old hot rods.

 

I've never posted a build thread here, because it would have been surly torn to shreds. Now, it would be deleted. Not sure, with the reforms coming, that my advice is even going to be acceptable here, either.

Oh well, back to work....

 

I applaud George for his efforts and believe that his findings are way closer to reality than what most people today think it was like in 55-60. Since that was before my time, I, like George, can only look at the magazines produced then to see what was happening. As anyone who has been audited by the IRS or any other organization, if it isn't written down or documented somewhere, it is purely hearsay. Although George's statistics may not be error proof, it has to be as good or better than 99% of the crap statistics we see reported on the daily news on every subject imaginable. So until someone comes up with a more in-depth study on rods of 1955-60, I'm going to trust George's results.

 

I was with you until the turbo part
Buick tried this in 1964. Olds Jetfire was available in 62 with an aluminum turbocharged V8. And don't forget the Malicoat twins and they're twin turbo willys featured in Hot Rod May 65 so technically they're traditional.

MELTDOWN DRAGS
JULY 19, 20 2014

 

How many showed up on hot rods? Magazine cars or even dailies? Very, very few. That's like the bags on Ala Kart. Done, but not mainstream. Trust me, I would love to read about guys strapping turbos on and cruising back in the 50's, but I have not read about it and NOTHING shows up on a Google search. So, if they were, show a few. I'm sure a lot of folks would enjoy that. I'm not being sarcastic, I'm very serious. With the changes coming, guys will want to know the limits.

 

Actually there was a guy selling turbo kits for Chrysler six and Chevy six cylinder engines around '49 or '50 i believe. His had a specially cast exhaust manifold that doubled as the turbine housing. I never saw one, only ads for them. But just because they existed doesn't really make them "Traditional". Corvair also had turbos at the same time as Olds. Corvair also had a flat six air cooled. Are air cooled flat sixes "Traditional"? I don't think so.

 

Not sure. Maybe none, but the technology was there. Indy cars, drag cars and land speed cars used them so that stuff usually ends up on Hot rods. Even if it didnt they were used in racing and racing is traditional. Just because there's no images on google doesn't mean they didn't exist. I admit its probably a grey area, but being on a production car in 62 and then Corvairs too. Someone was messing with them.

MELTDOWN DRAGS
JULY 19, 20 2014

 

Traditional.