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

Very well said. I've noticed ads in local classifieds referring to T bodies (coupes, roadsters, doesn't matter it seems) as 'T buckets'. Drives me nuts.

 

Hey, Chip;

"George. you and I usually agree 99% of the time, but I do have to make small exception to the thought that all Modifieds had narrowed bodies. I do know that the early pictures of the cars I have seen from the thirties did indeed have narrow, narrow bodies. But dig through a Don Montgomery book, or sit to an old timers scrap book from the era and you start to see lots of them with full width bodies. I don't know when this thought changed, but it seems that all of the full width cars that I see have Ford solid steel wheels on them, so this would probably have been an immediate pre-war or post war kinda deal. I also notice in these old shots of Modifieds, by the time I start to see full width bodies, you stop seeing three spring chassis, too. It all seems to go to typical Ford stuff about the same time.

It would seem strange to me that this formula changed as late as it did with SCTA pulling the plug as immediately as they did in '46, but stranger things have happened in this world."

From my studies on this, it seems that the narrowed bodies, & 3-springers, were from an era of the 20's->'30's styled dirt-trackers [not oval/sprint-trackers](& occasionally board-trackers). Some had tails, some not. When run at the lakes, pulling the tail off got you out of the streamliner class, & vice-versa. Didn't narrow-bodied rigs eventually get you put into a streamliner-type class, as would wheel-pants, etc., so using std bodies became easier, cheaper, & more competitive in (your) class? Rule changes by SCTA, et-al? W/the full width bodies, there was the look of the earlier Modifieds, that could also be somewhat practical, due to the dual-usage issue (race & daily-driver), single seater being somewhat impractical for, well, more than one person.

Marcus...

 

Absolutely! Funny, I have to admit here and now that while I am fairly well versed in SCTA history, I'm not in roundy round stuff as much. Furthermore, I was shocked a couple of years ago when I saw a video posted here on the board of narrowed three spring Modifieds going round and round at Ascot from the early or mid thirties. I had always thought of them as straight line lakes cars only.

I'm not sure when SCTA started placing narrowed bodies in the streamliner class, but if it was a year or two before WWII then we have our answer as to what changed these cars around. I had always attributed this more to the dual usage kinda thing, but that never really flew completely in my mind either. I mean, my modified is narrowed 6", yet Judy and I can indeed fit in it together. If you have room for a female passenger, what else do you need?

 

"correct terminology" dose vary from cost to cost and time by who,but after enough talk we know what we're saying to each other,part of the fun. I do get a bit bugged by primer being called a finel finish vs temp tell it gets shiny,but hay after some talk we find out now they think it was if there young enough.

 

Wow we are really splitting hairs here.

While we are at it read the caption below written by the late Gray Baskerville in '96 and tell me why my roadster is a T Bucket and Grabowski's and Ivo's cars are "lakes modifieds.

 

So what are you saying.....all the stock width bodies in that "modifieds" thread should not be in that thread, because they are not modifieds?

I also see quite a few stock width body cars that have 4cyl. motors, just to mix things up a little more.

 

A generalization:

"T" bucket = higher windshield, no hood, engine in your face!

Modified "T" =lower windshield, usually has hood, or at least is configured to be able to have a hood.

 

For whoever it was that was asking about '26-'27 T-Buckets a page or two ago...


DOH! Second shot I just noticed the hood!!! Damn it, painted my self into a corner...

 

As Larry says, we ARE splitting hairs here, and getting down to brass tacks, but essentially, yes. My definition of a "modified" is a forties or earlier T based race car with a narrowed body. I'm not saying everyone has to agree with that, and if someone wants to call thier "bob-tailed T" a "modified", I'm not gonna tell them they are wrong, any more than I am gonna say someone calling a T with a heavily chopped, steeply raked windshield a "T-bucket" is wrong, but when I look at it, I think to myself "thats not a modified".
To me, these definitions have nothing to do with giving a car "period cred" or any other such ego driven bullshit. A car doesn't need a convenient handle IMO, but I came to this deal "pre Barrett-Jackson", so I dont always fit in.
When I use a one word phrase like "T-Bucket" or "gasser" or "modified" to describe a car, thats because the car fits the template closely enough for a one word description to explain what it is. I dont even really give a shit who does or doesn't accept my definitions.
My current "Hamb friendly" car is a channeled, cycle fendered, Desoto powered T, I dont have a handy catch-phrase that describes it. I guess a lot of guys would call it an "east-coast" style rod, but thats bullshit, the build style was popular all over the country in the fifties, and its a phrase that has been "invented" in the last 15 years or so, so I dont use that phrase. I don't feel the NEED to attach some cheesy buzz-phrase to what I'm building, its a hot rod. If a guy is interested enough, I'll sit down and describe it in detail, if he's not, que sara sara.

 

see, good example, I would NEVER in a million years call that car a T bucket, and if someone was describing it to me and said "its a yellow T bucket, this

is what MY mind would see.

 

I didn't say anything, except here's a thread on modified's. I don't know anything about them or care for that matter.

 

Chip, like you said, these buzz phrases are about communication, end of story. They ARENT about "cred" or any other dumb-ass BS. Leave that crap for the mini-truckers. Just my opinion, but if communication is the goal, and the phrase in question isnt gonna give an accurate mental picture, then it shouldn't be used for that car, because its not serving its purpose of communication. Hands up, who on this thread sees a '26/'27 when they hear the phrase "t-bucket", and who sees a pre-26? Nuff said.

 

Okay after some thought I think I came up with an answer to my own question. When Norm and Tom's roadster were built the handle "T Bucket" hadn't started being used yet and "lakes modified"was the closest description that could be used to describe their roadsters. But when Baskerville wrote the caption under the photo of my roadster that is the term all traditional styled T's were all lumped into. Gray knew all that better than any of us. I'm just thrilled he didn't call it a "Fad T". Nomenclatures change over the years as our whole language does.

Gary

 

Falcon, I saved that yellow T Bucket. Great point and great pic. Look how tall that windshield is!!!

This is coming close to being my new signature.

"I don't feel the NEED to attach some cheesy buzz-phrase to what I'm building, its a hot rod. If a guy is interested enough, I'll sit down and describe it in detail." <!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

 

I just flat can't think of a better way to "teach" what is what to the guys that are in question about the subject. As I write "this is this" and that has that", I can think of 37 exceptions to the "rules". Yet, when some says, "Is a modified a T-Bucket?", NO! It kinda all goes back to the judge that about 35 years ago said something to the effect of, "I might not be able to describe porn, but I know it when I see it"...

Ya, and I agree with the statement that it's not an ego driven thing at all, it's simply descriptive and a means to end.

But ya, Say T-Bucket and I don't necessarily NOT see a '26 '27 type car... Especially my buddy Dave's car above. They just weren't as common.

 

My brain is hurtin'! I think I'm gonna go out for a ride...

 

The cam in my new engine is getting broken in as I type this. I miss taking a spin. But it's going to be SO worth the wait.

 

That should only take about twenty minutes at about 2000 rpm.

After my heart surgery I too can't drive anything without power steering for another couple of mounts which includes my roadster and the weather is PERFECT here today.

And Fred about your post on last page about the '50s and early '60s I agree with you completely, they wasn't what young people who watched "Happy Days" think they were. Without going into gory details and I don't think this isn't the place let's just keep it at that.

Gary

 

We are all multi-tasking here. Thats so "new-age" of us! Now that I FINALLY have my motor on hand, I am piecing together several slightly different cardboard hood side panel templates. Thats why I had that Chrisman photo so close at hand!

 

"I am a bit weird about the correct terminology in just about everything I am involved in simply because in my opinion, it's what we communicate with. When that communication is lost, you end up with your history lost."

I liked this comment by Chip so much, I actually tried to make it my signature, but its too long! Bummer!

 

My engine friend just called and let me know he was going to fine tune and give her a test drive afterwards. The weather here is 78* and it's days like this that I miss driving. I can't pick her up until tomorrow. I just wish you getting better sooner.

I agree about the gory details, as much fun as diving under a school desk looks, I'm glad I didn't live thinking I'd have too.

 

Well said.

 

Chip, that was me. And the very reason I brought up the 26-27's was made an example in Falcongeorge's post about the yellow pickup.
At the risk of playing devil's advocate, I have a hard time thinking of the 26-27's as T-buckets, even though groups like the National T-bucket Alliance, for instance, include them in their ranks.
I think Fred does a great job of putting it in perspective.""I don't feel the NEED to attach some cheesy buzz-phrase to what I'm building, its a hot rod. If a guy is interested enough, I'll sit down and describe it in detail."
When I was in H.S., class of 66, We all referred to Mike Motley's T as a "bucket". The car was built on the style of, say, Monogram's "Big T".
But more important than the fact it was a "bucket", it was a hot-rod.
I think the (sorry,) "new guys" are trying to understand jargon we grew up with, got comfortable with, and understood between us that they are encountering in their research. One old magazine they look at labels a car one way, you might find the same car in another mag. with a different moniker.
We were used to that, but it confuses newer generations.

 

I quoted that saying from Falcon. Credit where it's due.

 

I think you're dead on right on that one! Just like a generation ago when you were talking about a hot rod and used terms like "it's '32" "It's '40" and you didn't feel the need to explain you were talking about a Ford, it was a given. Other wise you said '40 Chev... Yet there was a thread that went ten pages guys bent out of shape because nobody was saying what make something was. We'll get 'em there... Just about in time to explain it to the next group of new guys!!!

 

I'm just glad there's gonna be new guys......

 

"I don't feel the NEED to attach some cheesy buzz-phrase to what I'm building, its a hot rod. If a guy is interested enough, I'll sit down and describe it in detail."

Enough said. If that whole phrase doesn't sum up this hobby then I don't know what does.<!-- / message --><!-- sig --><!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

 

There are at least a couple of 26-27 T's done like similar to this over here in NZ which qualify as T-buckets. This one was originally built in the late sixties before fibre bucket bodies were readily available.

 

Hahahaa, that would be the thread I started just about that.

 

Here's another 26/27 from NZ - Harry Wright's bucket in 1973 ...