I saw this point brought up in a Billetproof thread, and as I sift through pictures for work, I'm seeing a growing number of hot rods that are extremely low in the rear. Lower than the front in a reverse rake if you will... I already think over-lowered cars look less functional than their traditionally-stanced bretheren, but now they seem to be drooping in the rear like an old custom. Can anyone explain this to me without getting the thread locked or getting all "it's their car they can do what they like/hippie" on me? Of course they can, but is there a rational explanation as to WHY they would want to? Attached is one such car that would be vastly improved with a few more inches of daylight underneath it. It has good parts, a bitchin' Y-block mill, and it is a Cabriolet, but the rear hairpins are on stands that pop up beside the body and the rear droops.... not as bad as some I've seen but it's not level. What gives?
Can't answer your question, as I asked myself the same. Not to be a "Dick" but where do people get the idea that this is traditional? The SBC dates it to 1955 or so. In the 50s you would be laughted off the street with such a Gookmobile. Don't get me wrong there are enough parts to make a cool rod. This I think is Rod-A-Billy style. Sorry, just my 2c..................OLDBEET
Not ot hijack this thread, but does anyone know anything about those wheels? Are they spindle mounts, or just look that way? Fred
I agree with you guys. Could it be the super low, shock factor?... Just the first thing that came to mind. Malcolm
Here in oz there is a difference in opinion about Kustoms, in that on one side of the fence we have people believing that 'more' modifications make for a 'great' Kustom, whereby, in 'competition' they are rewarded with more 'points', whereas, I think most would agree that they are missing the point on what these cars (Kustoms) are based on the 'package', a 'flowing look' where modifications are done to enhance the overall look, rather than for bragging rights of how many 'traditional' modifications they can squeeze into their project. Similarly, rodding of late seems to attract a similar perspective across 'builders' (and I say that loosely), such that people seem to try and 'tick all the modification boxes' without considering the overall package. How often do we see a build list of 'fashionable' parts, that have been slapped together without embracing the reason for their being? Basically, I really don't think people embrace the reason of 'why', but rather grab at what they believe to be 'how'.....
I got no answer...But...looking through the "billetproof" pics...the same thing occured to me. I had been noticing it, here and there, but...that thread really sealed it as becoming dominant. I don't personally do not like my hot rods and tail draggers to be one in the same. I am curious, though...too. Is that just what is trying to be done here? sled look/hot rod sheet metal? its not for me...
The East Coast guys were more into having a lower rear than the West Coast. As others have said in other threads: hot rods should be lower in the front. That is part of why taller tires are used in rear and smaller in front. Kustom cars (lead sleds) are more likely to be lower in rear. This was in part to help clear driveways, etc. Of course, with air bags the whole thing changes.
Basically, I really don't think people embrace the reason of 'why', but rather grab at what they believe to be 'how'.....[/quote] you put that very well...
You gotta love that since you said no responses that'll get the thread locked, this is already on page 2 I've been trying to think of an iconic car that may have started this trend the same way that Rudy's truck started that one...can't seem to. Bryan
kinda what was said previously, perhaps it is emulating what east coast guys were doing back in the late 50's/60's to their hot rods and race cars. you really have to ask the question to someone that has a car setup like that.... deffinately not my cup of tea. most hotrods look like pancakes with the dude driving "on top" of the car rather than the correct driving "in the car" look.
Blame Jesse James! Just kidding of course but I do remember Jesse saying on the Model A build that he wanted the ass end lower because it was an east coast style and that's were that build took place. Brick
My guess is much more simple. It seems like many of the model A guys like to step the back of the chassis cause thats what everybodys doing, but they don't calculate the needed drop and just go with 8 inches or whatever, because thats what they read somewhere. When it gets bolted together the back is just lower than the front. Instead of well planned it's more like the lack of a plan. just my guess. Hey there is enough room for every style I just happen to like the back end up and the front in the weeds. It's what makes me smile. chuck
Its because people dont know what there doing and just cutting and z'ing and kicking up everthing without realy knowing what they want and when they get the body on its too late or they just say fuck it.
Too many fat chicks in the back? Seriously, that was a popular style the old reverse rake. Look close at a lot of older drag pictures especially the gas and modifed production cars from the mid-west to the north east.
I've been ressurrecting a bad off 50 chevy for about a year now and some how decided on lowering the ass end. This thread really made me think why I decided to do it and I honestly can't remember why. I do like the look and the only answer I can seem to get is I really wanted something different. Noone around here that I have seen does much of that stance and truthfully if it pisses people off it kinda motivates me more. Not to stir the shit pot but thats my 2 cents.
Not racist in use - consult Albert Drake's books about "gookmobiles", or "gookwagons". These are vehicles dripping with all sorts of bolt-on doodads and unneeded extras, looking as though they were covered in gook! The opposite of clean, well defined lines.
When I see cars like that, or extreme rat rods laying on the ground, or even a later car with airbags laying on the frame, I always think it's the automotive equivelant of a teenager wearing all black baggy clothes, black nail polish and a multi-colored dye job on their hair...they're just looking for attention. You've seen them...they pull into a car show, drive to a spot, back in, wait until at least a couple people are watching, then "PSHTTT! PSHTTT! PSHTTT! PSHTTT! Thunk/scrape." They climb out smiling and look around to make sure everybody saw them. We all dig our vintage cars, and we all like the attention they get (you're lying if you say you don't)...but some in the hobby are looking for more attention, and this is how they do it. Rediculous chops, stupid 4-foot long gear shift levers, "that broken look" for the frame (my favorite...looks like the car broke in the middle, with the front and rear of the car angled toward one another, meeting in the middle), and now some screwed up interpretation of "the East Coast Look" that never was. East Coast rods did have a different look...channeled all the way around, lowering the body over the frame, but still having the frame a decent height off the ground. But I don't believe the rods were lower in the rear...customs, or taildraggers were, but not rods. I look at cars like these, and think the same thing as when I see some stupid kid at the mall walking around with tie-dye'd hair or baggy pants hanging off his ass and his hat cross threaded. -Brad
I could see having a rearward slant on a vintage drag-inspired, purpose built car... for traction with crappy slicks to go in a straight line. That makes sense... The PPE comes to mind as a notable car with a back slant, but it's balls to the wall quarter mile.. not a hot rod. But the bulk of the cars I'm seeing this "trend" on are not drag race anything. Most are built in a manner of early hot rods.. just over-lowered and sagging. Does anyone on here, with our legions of hot rodders have a saggy car that can tell me WHY it is set up that way? My real guess is the miscalculation of the Z. Or they saw somebody that did mess up and thought that was the new style and did it on purpose.... That makes sense. I don't buy the east coast thing because that was way more of a custom thing. I can't think of any notable hot rods from the east, or anywhere for that matter, with a back slant that would make a big enough impression to inspire as many folks as I've seen. What gives?
Real (or if you will, traditional) hot rods look the way they do because of the modifications made to make them go faster or handle better. Dropped axles, Lincoln Brakes, chopped screens, etc., all have a reason to be other than looks. Purpose built, form following function again. The style of "hot rod" shown above is generally built to accomplish a "look" and not a function. Many of them end up looking like rolling caricatures of hot rods. That's ok, if that was the intent. Therein lies the difference between a car that is artful because of its intended purpose and a car that is art.
The Jalopy Journal
