Features traditional t bucket

"Those without sin cast the first stone". Yes Whip that is an alternator on a middle '60s Mustang engine in my roadster. Like I said I've been spending 30+ years trying to take the ugly and maybe the '60s out of my roadster. I like most, built my roadster on a shoestring and the Mustang engine was a gift. That's the engine I put the most milage on. It wasn't until the turn of the century that I decided to go all '50s and close up those "ugly gaps" between the engine and firewall and radiator. I guess I just have it in for disk brakes and independent front suspension on a fenderless hot rod.

 

With the solid rotors and such, if ya squint and hold your tongue just right you could almost claim they were roundy round stuff from the early sixties as long as the calipers weren't too modern looking. There were a few Gas Class drag cars out of the era that ran discs up front too. Ohio George Montgomery's Willys is the first to come to mind. Hurst/Airheart was making their "175" caliper by about that time, and it is ideal for cycle spoke type wheels. The Bantam that I posted on my thread yesterday has a pair of 175s on small solid rotors on brackets I made earlier this year and the thing stops on a dime. Oh, and by the way, AirHeart has reissued their 175 calipers in magnesium! These are a brand new pair.

 

"Well, a kid could have walked into a parts store and bought ________ disc brakes." Yea, he could have, but they didn't. That's the thing, if you're going to play traditional or period correct, you can't make up rules to fit anywhere you like. Like people have said, just because it was available, doesn't mean it was used or used enough to qualify as a trend.

My cars not traditional and I'm not going to pull the, "Well, radial tire designs were patented in 1915.", to justify my radial tires. I hate when people do that crap. Don't go grabbing at straws to justify your lack or inability to find the correct parts.

That's why a lot of my friends are starting to laugh at the Traditional crowd. There are too many people adjusting history, so they can fit in. If your car isn't traditional, either fix it or call it something else.

It's like when Ryan announced the new changes. All of a sudden, the posers, who had been getting by for a long time, started whining and asking if their car could still fit in. Honestly, if you had to ask, it probably doesn't.

Just because your T Bucket isn't traditional or period correct, doesn't mean it's a bad build. It's probably a great build. Just stop trying to squeeze it into a niche it doesn't fit. If you want to play in that game, get the right gear.

Like I've said for a LONG time. This hobby was fun, when all everybody had was a damn hot rod. No labels. No bull shit. Just hot rods. Be honest and ask yourself, before you found the HAMB, did you REALLY car what time period your car fit into? BE HONEST!!! If you found the HAMB and traditional is your new goal, FINE. Just don't screw it up, by trying to squeeze in the off period crap.

 

Well Fred I could have written that in fact I think I did on the last page. Probably not quite as well though.

 

To a very large extent I agree with both of you. There are far more terrible things in life than having a car that is not quite period correct or traditional. And to me that's not even a reason to dislike a car. But, when you really start looking, there was lots of stuff especially in the race car realm of stuff, that WAS indeed out there, and occasionally used on street cars as well. Thing is though, that you better be WAY on your game as far as when what was made to be able to prove it! Pirelli Centuro radial tires were an altered and gas class staple from about '59 on, and look a lot like the Firestone radials I just put on the bucket last month. Discs like I said above with the Hurst/ Airheart calipers were on some of the upper line class cars as well. So there really is SOME historic precedent.

If ya like it, use it. But, know that some know it all will happily tell you that the thing you like so much on YOUR car isn't "traditional". How you take that is up to you. I am anal enough I can usually prove my point. (This has indeed pissed a friend off enough to not talk to me for a couple years 'cause I'm a "know it all"! Hell, he knew that going into the friendship!!!) Another and more realistic option is to have a thick enough skin to realize it's what YOU want on YOUR car and not to let it bother you. The second is probably by far the easier way to deal with stuff. My way DOES win bets though...

 

I think I've said it in one of my threads about when I build the only thing that would make me go away from my era of build is the breaks and safety type of issues.

You bring up a good point of things being on the street before being on a car. I'm a die hard MOPAR guy and if any of you know anything about "The Silver Bullet" the 1967 GTX. That car was a factory test bed car owned by a guy that worked in a garage and raced the car on Woodward all the time.

The only thing I don't like is the Fad T's. I love all hot rods and I do like some of the modern stuff on cars but I think it has become the norm for the next rich guy to buy and show off to his friends.

I like the true hot rods built and owned by the builder. Or I should say build as much by the owner as they can I know things get farmed out.

 

Yep, you two have nailed the coffin shut. I certainly had a year in my head and that was 1965 due to being 10 years of age and having seen a '30 Ford Roadster cruise our small timber town. It was channeled low over the chassis, fenderless and hot, not of the engine, as I am not sure of that, but hot and damn pleasing to the eye of a young fella. It had a flatty V8 and a gog box and it looked real cool. So started my passion for hot rods. I personally don't give a rats shit what people say about my car but am prepared to learn and listen to those that will, can, and are helpfully steering me in the direction I wish to travel in my personal education of the type of car I love, the Ford Model T.. Gary, thanks for posting that photograph up of your T in earlier times as I can now appreciate the work you have done to bring it to the stage you are at, well done sir. Just comparing that photo to the later ones, you could of had a thread named exactly the same as Chip, but, as me, it is an ongoing work of art being transformed as time and funds allow and you are closer to the finish line then myself. So at the end of the day, I'm real keen to learn but that doesn't mean that I will be racing out to the garage and replacing my front discs for drums anytime soon. But if and when I get to build my '28/29 Ford Roadster, I will have the knowledge to get it period correct straight up .

 

If I was more tech savy I'd do it myself, but can somebody scan a pic of Bob Moore's T in the April '63 HRM please. (one of the first color pics in HRM) It was one of the the cars that got me so excited I couldn't think about anything else, and I've been afflicted for about 50 years now. Just talked to him yesterday, and yes, he is still building T's and is as talented as anybody I've ever met.

 

I'll try to remember it tomorrow.

 

Here ya go! Sorry, been a hectic week.

 

That is an awesome looking T and to me it is not only traditional but a family tradition! Enjoy the car and if you have a thread here I need to look for on this bucket. I love the back story on it and the hunt you both went through twice.

Louvers question on the steering of the car. I see the side exit for steering. Can you tell me why this is done on a lot of T's?

I like the looks of it on this bucket but would like to know more about the setup and why they are done this way.

 

Then, Joe, your childhood is your time period. That's MY take on it. The most anyone, who wasn't a teenager in the 50's and early 60's, can do is look at pictures and talk to a few old guys that were doing it back then. That's it and it still might not be accurate.

I can look at all the videos, read all the books and talk to all the old guys I know, but if I wasn't around back then, I'll NEVER get it. Also, time changes perception. Things get forgotten or built up bigger than they were. All you can do is TRY to emulate the period you're after.

As a teen growing up in upstate New York, just beginning to read about hot rods, I thought every street in California was flat, the city blocks were a 1/4 mile apart and everybody owned a hot rod. Perception. All the cool cars I remember had Cragar deep dish wheels. Perception. Remember how your mom put stuff on the top shelf so you wouldn't get it? But years later, that shelf isn't high up at all? Perception.

If I get serious enough to do a traditional ride, it'll be a late 60's period car. To ME that's when all the cool stuff came out. People, who click on the HAMB, think the boundaries of tradition stopped in 1965 and that's true... for the HAMB. I try to respect it, when I'm on, but it's not MY favorite time period or tradition.

And if folks REALLY looked at the 50's to mid 60's, that era may have been good for cars, but it basically sucked. People kill me when they wish they could go back. Be careful what you wish for.

 

That's cowl steering, RT. Yes, it's a very cool way of steering and frees up a whole lot of foot room. Not seen on a lot of T Buckets and I can't explain why. I imagine the bracing to hold the box would take up a little room, but could it be that much? Someone will chime in I'm sure.

 

Thanks Fred, I need to look and do some searching for under the dash pics. I think anything that could give you more foot room is a plus in the bucket. I have seen this a lot on the (I think) 27 cars maybe up to the 30s.

This is just another thing to add to my list to research out.

 

guys the picture of the front end on this T bucket.... i am correct by thinking that the spring hanger is a original from a wishbone cut off, smoothed out and put on backwards to create the spring behind set up right? I have been doing a ton of homework lately for my up coming T project and i think this is something i want to do.

 

Yes, you are right! That's a really good way to do it as long as you keep it close to the wishbone's seem between the forging and the tubular section. If ya go too far back, things get to weak too quick, and even worse start looking "Rat Roddy". This deal sets you up though so you can have nice stance and not need a dropped axle.

 

got ya! thanks, so your saying cut off the wishbone right after the seem correct?

i have a un-dropped early ford axle, a set of wish bones, 42-48 spindles and 53 f-100 brakes,hubs, backing plates. this is the stuff i want to use on the build. Fabrication of the brackets for the hairpin bars wont be a problem, Pickled_asparagus here on the HAMB (and one of my best friends) works at a steel shop with a softworks program, he can draw up anything we need and another guy from our club runs the lazer cutter at the same company! it really has been working out great for our projects...

 

Thanks louvers!

Is that a traditional-enough T for you guys? This was built in '61-'62, before many 'glass bodies if any were available. Real Henry steel, built by a 18-19 year old in a very tight 1 car garage with minimum tools. Brand new 409 bought in a crate. It's still in Pueblo, Co. but now unrecognizable.

 

here are some very early build pics of my T bucket and its story that i told you guys above... dig that kooky roll bar and are those Ford falcon tail lights? ill have to ask my dad.... I just found these pics in a old book, i havent seen them in years..

 

I'm interested in this can you enplane it more if there is a link to a how to section that would be great.

Nooclubejoe that is a great find man.

 

I love the crager wheels and keep thinking of using a pair on a build I just dig them.

 

I had one of the first Total Performance T buckets....about '75? and it was a blast. I'm 6-2" and had no problems with it. Just got this body for 200. It's been hacked on and multiple paint jobs, but anyone recognize the maker? Seems like the holes for the taillights were factory cut for maybe Pontiac tail lights.

 

To me the reversed wishbone set-up looks good with the V-8 60 tube axle as was pretty commonly done in the past.

But if used with an I-beam axle, the hair pin brackets welded to axle just look wrong. Probably the transition from the flat plate hairpin brackets to the I-beam as compared to the transition from flat plate brackets to the tube.

Just my opinion, of course, based on past observations of other hot rods.

 

I'd vote for a Total Performance body, before he opened Total ,Mickey Lauria built and supplied bodies for the Bird Engineering kits.

 

I totally understand what your saying and I would love a v-8 60 axle for this build but I have yet to fine one nice enough for chrome or if I do the guy wants a mint for it. With all the things that can look wrong on a Hotrod I hardly think after grinding,polish and chrome plating that this will look wrong. By the way I seen your t bucket at back to the 50s in 2012, neat car!

 

Their still out there if you want one bad enough. Steel that is. This one was $1,200.

 

In what magazine, month and year did the DeBenidictis car appear? Also in what magazines other than the Sept. 1966 Car Craft did Tom Booths' Torsion T appear?

 

I'm sorry guys, I didn't see this earlier.

There really is two ways of going about his deal. In 1935, Ford changed it's front suspension to place the front spring out in front of the axle rather than where it had been, above the axle. The first way to do this is to take the '35-'40 style axle and wish bones, cut the wish bones off right behind the axle mounts, then turn the spring and front sections of the wishbones to the rear of the axle. You then have to make up some plates and weld them to the axle to pick up a pair of "hairpin" type radius rods. As stated above, this usually looks best when done with a '37 type tube axle, and many times looks awkward with a beam type axle. Not always, though, as I have seen a few done with beam that I though looked okay. Usually the difference is in the details like the angle the radius rods meet the axle and the weld qualities and such.

The other way is what I prefer. With this method, you cut the spring supports off the fronts of the wishbones and grind them smooth. Now you have a long, fairly chunky, clean looking wishbone. You then measure back about 1" behind the seam joining the tubular wishbone and the forging that holds the axle. You need to know the angle the wishbone will be at in relation to the axle at this point, so I usually do the split deal, and mock up the front end where I think it will be and take a measurement. Let's just say it's 7degrees for this exercise. At that afore mentioned spot approximately 1" behind the seam with the forging, you need to drill a hole through the wish bone on the angle we found earlier. I usually do this with the 'bone clamped to my drill press's table, and the table angled to the 7 degrees I noted earlier. You now take a '28-'34 style spring perch and slide it through that hole horizontally, mount the shackles and a '28-'34 type spring to the perches. I always leave everything unwelded at this point, mount it all to the car, and wait until I have all the weight it will carry on it until I do my tack welds, then pull it all apart for finish welding. This method puts the spring behind the axle and drops the front end a good three to four inches all at the same time, and can usually still be done with scrounged parts inexpensively. This unfortunately is the only picture I have of a front end done this way. click on it a couple of times and you'll see what I mean.

 

I'm sorry DMC 3113,

Meant to get back with you when you P.M.d me a bit ago, I just haven't had time to dig out my later sixties stuff. It was also in Hot Rod some time in late '66 or early '67, plus small pictures in a couple of the Peterson one shot Pictorials of the late sixties. There are a couple of very nice construction shots of it in the Rodders Journal from about 7 or 8 years ago that had the feature on the Early Times club. It number 35 or 36 or so.

 

Here's some scans of an article that has some good "how to" pictures.