After a discussion with some guys I decided to post a question on this here. Can you build a "Traditional Hot Rod" using the Shadow Rods XL-27 body or is it too "ST***t Rod" ??? Thanks for your input, ScottV
It'll look too big, if you're a skinny dude. If you're a plushly padded guy, it'll look fine. Make sure you run tall tires.
Depends on what your definition of the,"T" word is.If you want to build something that has been done forever you would be better off going with either a clapped out steel body or a 'glass version.If you like the style of the 26-27 roadster bodies but need a bit more room than they normally allow then I would opt for the Shadow Rods body.The quality is unquestioned and the price while it may seem high doesn't even begin to reflect the developmental costs that went into building them. If you don't know Jon you have to understand that he is a perfectionist.Anal doesn't even begin to describe his attitude toward building a high quality product. I have seen several completed cars and they are just drop dead gorgeous. BTW I do not work for Jon or anyone affiliated with Shadow Rods;this is just my opinion.
when i first heard of them i thought they were a great idea, but i dont see too many of them being built, and i cant figure out why. around here everyone complans that 26-27 t's are too small and compact and most guys build brookville 32's because of that. now these tall t's are offered and everyone bitches that they aint original? wtf?
I think they look grotesquely out of proportion. If you can't fit in a stock '26/'27, then build a model A.
I think it can be done with the right parts and the right stance. The biggest issue to overcome is how tall the body is, if you can get the car low enough to get the tire closer to where it is on a original T, it hides a lot of it. Here's a quick photoshop of their high-boy lowered and a couple of others for comparison. The body is significantly bigger so it has to be done in away to hide it.
The Shadow Rod is a flawless body as far as workmanship goes, however, if you want the "Traditional 'T'" look, as stated earlier it looks like it's on steroids. I prefer the smaller size of the original and that's what I would build.
Anyone have a different or new idea regarding this body? Got a idea in my head about building one next year. Looking for additional opinions. thanks mike
Lets see, it's okay to chop, channel,section a rod till it becomes the size of a squashed gnat, but you can't add 2 inches because it won't be traditional. Give me a break.
Build it like the bare metal one above on the frame table, use those wheels (whatever they are), and I'll like it!
Just considering the practicalities over the asthetics or traditionality for a moment......... I sat in what i think was the first body in 2006 - ran fenderless and baremetal. I'm 6'3" and about 250. I fitted it / it fitted me just perfectly. I sat really low and snug in a spacious kinda way. My '32 roadser is built around me and i'd like to think it's about as good as it can be, and it's comfortable, but not in the same league as that steriod 27. Hope that's of some help / interest. Chris
im sorry but for the money you could almost buy 2 model As from brookville, or a 32. so my question would be why?
i'm 6 foot and 250. I really like the idea of the shaddow rods body. I think you can pull it of with careful attention to detail.
we are working on one at the shop i work at the owner would have never fit in an original 27 so were building a shadow rod for him. the fit and finish on them is far better than my brookville model a. so if you had to pay the labor on the fit and finish it is cheaper in the long run to get the shadow rod. i was at the same opinion dakota till i seen the quality of the shadow rod.
It is a quality piece for sure. I'm less with the size being too big comments and more with the proportions concerns noted above. If you look at it in profile, the tub section is just about square to the eye, but the original has the look of longer than its height. A few folks have been close to successful in disguising the proportion thing with stance and wheel/tire combo, but it still looks just a bit off. Section it an inch or two and it would be there. Zipp pulled off making that body style fit a bigger guy without losing the proportions much better with his first iteration modified.
O/T of this but weren't these guys trying to make an aluminium flathead block? Or was it another company?
Blatantly obvious that its not a T. End of story for me. If it did, they would probably sell more of them as well.
Jon Hall, the designer of the Tall T, has been a hot rodder since the 60s. He still has the first hot rod (a T bucket) that he built (and drove the hell out of) back in the day. Jon's idea was to build a T styled body for guys who like the style of Ts but can no longer fit in them. Jon's first prototype was an original T body that he had modified to fit on a 32 frame that older (larger) guys could fit in and be comfortable in on long rod runs. I'm a wide bodied guy but Jon and I sat shoulder to shoulder in that prototype and were as comfortable as we would have been in a 32 roadster. That was Jon's goal and he had accomplished it. He didn't design and build it to get rich because he already is. He did it because he wanted a quality body that older hot rodders could drive and be comfortable in and I think he accomplished that.
It looks better to me full fendered or channeled like the one on the table. I've had a 23 T bucket that was actually stretched a bit and have the front half of a 27 tub out back and both were/are cramped for anyone of any size. It's out of my price range at any rate so it doesn't matter to me how big it is.
I had the chance to sit in one at the NSRA Nationals a couple of years ago. I was very impressed. My 6'2" body fit with ease. Much better than my 32 roadster with the 2" stretch. For me, the fit is worth the visual compromises. If you are gangly the body is something worth considering. Detail it the way you want and enjoy.
Well, I've gained 10 pounds since graduating high school back in '68,so a stone stock Henry built body still fits me just fine.
As far as fit & finish absolutely outstanding, you won't find better. As far as proportions.....I personally like it but it's completely up to the individual.
Every time I see Jon Halls red XLT,driving into Bakers, I think its a 32. The body is wider,longer,and taller,it just looses its identity. Its a great body I just wish he had made it to scale.
As they say in the car business, there's a ass for every seat. If folks want an oversized T because they are oversized, let 'em have it. You don't need it if you don't want it and they want it because they need it, so...
I think, it's just fine, let small guys have the compact original T and the bigger guys the luxury T version of the same. CRUISER
The Jalopy Journal
