Projects The bucket of ugly! A de-uglifying thread...

One more.

Headlights are a bit funky.

 

That's Hy Rossen's redo of Ivo's/Roland's "T" before the slicks on the front, but after the ugly Barris' upholstery. It's also the picture I have been searching for with a Chrysler alternator hanging off the side of an "earlier" car...

 

No, I'm not thinking chrome reverse, TfeverFred is. I discovered a fairly serious separation in the tread of one of my prehistoric cheater slicks that will probably render it unusable, and I just don't have the jing to buy a new pair right now. So my car will get my Halibrand no holes from my "forever endeavor" roadster pickup for a few weeks until money becomes somewhat happy again. With the dirts on the back and ribbed implements on the front it really won't be correct on this car, but I am looking forward to seeing my Halis on the road for a bit...

 

That profile of Ivo's T. I don't care what era you are shooting for and even if you have no era in mind. That profile is perfect. Looking at it now it is even more perfect than either version of Grabowskis T.

 

I like Ivo's a lot as well,but Norm's had a little better rake that I like even more.
I really don't care for very low ,or long wheel base,or level with the ground or fully above frame bodys,.
There was a short time when those funky Sq. lights were cool,but it passed on,thank goodniss.,But now we got guys that seem to think big old lights are the thing,frankly they were not thought to look good in the 50 or 60's by me or anyone I knew,we liked 7in. seal beams in the smallist nice bucket we could find and with out the little light on top for clean speedy look,part what was liked about that was they really did light the road up when mounted high enough<also to low then looked light you were not to smart about how to make your lights work vs older type were weak just plan bulky older junk. I'm old so they still look that way to me.

 

Hey Chip, I have that pair of 15" x 9.20. M & H cheater slicks for sale . They are really tall and skinny ( 7" wide, about 31 or 32 inches tall), perfect for a '60s t-bucket. I'd give you good deal and you could pay me when you can. Let me know if you are intrested.

Later, Mike

 

Dana

I agree with everything you said above and Norm's "Kookie Kar" version is what I used for inspiration. Okay I just flat out copied its look and rake but that profile of Ivo's car is just perfect and this thread is about looking for what makes a T bucket look right or wrong (ugly). I just can't find fault with that profile. And yes guys and gals you can deviate from that and "do your own thing" it's your car. Just remember to pull it out of the garage and step back and look at it as an artist would and ask yourself it if it is an improvement on that look.

Looking back at the magazine pictures of the gold T with the white frame. If that guy would have done all the "right things" we are talking about he would have ended up with a better looking rod but it would also be pretty generic and probably wouldn't have caught the attention of whoever photographed it and it would have never made a feature in the the mag.

Gary

 

Chip

Again forgive me for posting so much I am not trying to take over the thread and no pressure but it sure has helped me through my heart surgery recovery and I think I can speak for VERDE742 that it is helping him pass the time through his cancer recovery too.

Okay what I am posting about is LANDSEAANDARI,s pictures of the Ivo roadster.I have never seen a photo of the inside of the P.U. bed and it has me puzzled about the chrome things sticking up above his rear shocks. If anybody has any idea let me know.

Gary

 

Ok don't get me wrong I love this thread and I'm not trying to start a shit storm but i have a question for Louvers, why is a 32 grill shell ok to use on a T but not a 28/29. I know you have said that the thread is opinion based but I would like to understand your thinking on this. imho I think the A shell fits/follows the lines quite nicely.

 

Look like banjo Ford shock mounts attached to ears on the frame.

 

They sure do. After I wrote the post I looked at the picture again and thought they must be some kind of shock mount I just couldn't figure out what.

Anyway kool pictures. Thanks for posting them.

 

I don't know about Louver's, but I ran one and it took a cop hitting me, for me to realize it looked goofy as all get out. Now, mine was chrome, not painted and cut down to fit the radiator I had. What I should have done is searched a little harder for the correct radiator size and gotten a T shell.

Yep, I had a WTF moment. I had a mix of some nice things, that added up to confusion. But I was working with nickels and dimes and as I got closer to completion, form took a back seat. I corrected all that with a check from the city of Houston, but the wait wasn't worth it. Maybe if it had been painted, that would have made a difference? We'll never know.

Drive safe out there. I assumed what the other guy would do and got mashed.

EDIT: Since this thread isn't about "what guys have the freedom to do", I won't mention it anymore. Sorry for the distraction.

 

Looks bad azz Fred!

Sent from my XT901 using H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

GARY!! Is that really YOU?? Someone take his temperature!

 

Simple. Chip is going for a specific period look, that being circa 1963/64. The "model A grill shell on a t" thing wasn't really done at that time, its a modern thing. If you are going for a period look, and you start hanging modern styling cues on the car, you will lose that period look very quickly. Theres nothing wrong with a model A grill shell on a T per-se (or guides with integral turn signals, spider caps on painted wheels, current over the counter lakes headers, tunnel rams, ect, ect etc.), its just going to ruin the circa early sixties look hes after.

And going with whatever the popular "HAMB" look is means that you will almost always ruin any period-correct vibe. Its not about going with whats cool now, its about going with what was cool THEN, and the two are usually in direct conflict with each other.

 

That's what it USED to look like. It's a mixture of parts that don't go well together at all. But, it was my first effort and like a beginner, I rushed towards the end, instead of thinking and researching.

You can see current pics in my album. It's not traditional and no where near perfect, but it's simple and clean.

 

A couple of the guys have answered you already correctly, but I'll jump in too. See, the whole '28-'29 grill on ANYTHING but a '28-'29 IS very much a modern thing. It came about with the whole "rat rod" ramp up of the late nineties. Deuce shells and grills are more expensive, for my rat rod I don't care, so the '29 will have to do... That simple.

For the previous sixty years, the unwritten rule was, if you can afford a deuce grill shell for your Model "A", or you have put a V8 in the car, then you do the handsome '32 shell. If not, the '28-'29 style stays. Historically, the '32 has been the only Ford grill shell that has been "allowed" to cross migrate to the various applicable cars. And, I might add, as fool proof as THAT sounds, it's pretty easy to screw it up on say a '29 "A" if you don't get the height correct. "T" have never cross pollinated like that with the exception of the deuce shell as well. As I said last night, if nothing else I strive to keep our history clean...

 

! Are you sure your okay , Gary?

 

Hey guys! Just a quick note. I LOVE HOW MUCH YOU GUYS ARE DISCUSSING T-BUCKETS!!! Please, don't apologize for adding your two cents worth or adding a picture or even asking a question on somebody else's picture.


See, this thread has grown WAY past what I envisioned it to be a month and a half or so ago when I fired it up. I had NO IDEA that there would be this many of us this interested in this subject. I am happy and proud to have this thread be the meeting place on the H.A.M.B. for the T-Bucket faithful. I just ask that we keep it on topic for the era I'm shooting for, or be a question as to whether something is from then or whenever. We have some of the most learned minds in this stuff hanging out here right now, and that is absolutely bitchin'!!! George described this as a shop night at my place, and I am 100% good with that. as some one else stated, all the questions and Tomfoolery in between updates is like a Jazz instrumental solo.... I like that!

My only concern would be if it really was shop night at my place, whether I had enough Gin and limes for gin and tonics for all! Some might just get stuck with NEWCASTLE beer...

 

I don't drink and quit smoking a month ago. So, I need ice tea and all your breakables.

 

Wash my mouth out with soap.

No what I'm saying is as a standard of what is "right" for a T bucket that stance is perfect. The "Lightnin Bug" was a little too flat. The "Kookie Kar" had a little too much rake for some peoples taste but that stance is just right. I do like the more radical rake myself but that's just me.

Or maybe this just another excuse to post a picture if my car.

Oops mine is '50 style.

 

The "ONLY" thing I don't like is the headers. The rest is "TITS"
If any of you guys have access to old books look up "A T named Fred" Built late 60s early 70s. 289, hand made headers, Tilt away factory T steering wheel.

 

Ha
....and I'm the guy that revels in any contribution to the erosion of true historical hot rod correctness by drawing or actually, occasionally, building trad-style cars that satisfy my creative needs!

Run on sentences be damned!!

 

right click,save...

 

I shall give you "another reason" to show yer car,,, Give me a side view..

One (ok Two things) I always was intrigued about the "kookie kar, those goofy looking windshield supports, for some reason, Can't explain, love/hate em. They just sorta grabbed me and never let go. But never saw them imitated.

 

I'd love to "give you a sideshow" of my roadster but I don't think this the place.

As far as the Kookie Kar windshield posts I think they are custom built. I think Von Franko or maybe Royal Shifter could answer that question better than I.

 

steel rebel, what those"things are" they are '48 Ford car rear shock mounts, mounted upside down..very u-neak, using them. why? who knows. But that's what they are. I have two sets, On the '48, one is long, and the opposite side is short. those are two long ones..

 

Ha! you are the mole! I knew it! Scat or I'll start quoting punk song lyrics... Oh wait, that was your thread...

 

I realize the posts were built by Valley Custom after the wreck, its the "struts" going down to the headlites, that I am referring to.

 

heck, i think it's the place!!!