"A " Question of Style?

[Pancho]

Why do so many people use 32 rails on an A body? Is it to move the gas tank from the cowl to the rear of the car? Is it to gain frame rail width? Is it because guys like the look of the apron behind the body shell? Is it to use leaf spring setups? I'm just too ignorant on all this stuff and probably if I lived to be 300 years old I still wouldn't have learned everything I want to know. Enlighten me, All Knowing Rod Dudes!

[Smokin Joe]

It all started because the 32 frames came already set up for V-8's and A roadster bodies were cheap, light and available. Instant hotrod, straight from the bone pile. Just yank off that cheapo heavy bulky 4 door deuce body and swap on the A roadster & head to the lakes or the strip...

Any high school kid could do it. Cheap, Fast, Not much skill involved. Think of it as the ricer of the 40's & 50's! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Bet that answer pisses a few off. Sometimes the truth hurts! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Tim]

alot of guys use a unchanneld A body on a duece frame because of the nice shape of a 32 frame and the reveils in the side....in short it looks nice

[Psychobilly Boi]

Hey,

Id have to agree with Tim - i think its all asthetics these days. The curly frame looks nice. But like all things that have become the "norm" I really dig A's on A chassis. Somehting different and more...utilitarian looking...like all speed.

Danny

[MattStrube]

Psycho, got anymore pictures of the 29 A. I'm going for the same look utilyzing a 29 grill shell. Solid color and blackwalls though.

[Unkl Ian]

The '29 Roadster bodies are shorter than the '32,
so the aerodynamics would be better on the dry lakes.

[29EHV8]

I think the ugliest thing about a 32 is the god awful gastank hangin on the back of it.Yeeeesh!.....Shiny

[InjectorTim]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the ugliest thing about a 32 is the god awful gastank hangin on the back of it.Yeeeesh!.....Shiny

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree.

[C9]

[ QUOTE ]

The '29 Roadster bodies are shorter than the '32,
so the aerodynamics would be better on the dry lakes.


[/ QUOTE ]


Much as I hate to disagree with my favorite Unkl . . . the bodies are just about the same length.
The early hoods are shorter. (27 3/4" for the 28-29's vs. 31 5/8" on the 30-31's.
32" for the Deuce hood length fwiw.

I imagine the 28-29's were chosen for lakes duty because of the shorter grille shell. 30-31's are about the same height as the 32's - maybe 1" shorter.
The 28-29's are about 4" shorter.

In the end though, it was the T roadsters with their small frontal area that took over the roadster classes at the lakes.
To the point where the sanctioning body made the T's run in one class and other roadsters ran in the other class.
Frontal area is where it's at.

Far as the 28-29's popularity over the 30-31's on the street I'd say it was due to the more extreme sloping downward cowl and lower hood.
28-29's to my eye have a most classy side view and the 3/4 front view ain't too bad either.
More extreme compared to the later A's anyway.
The 28-29's really look good when the hood is extended to the 32's length or slightly longer.
When the 28-29 body is plunked down on the Deuce frame anyhow.

Not trying to be a know-it-all here, just an opinion. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[coupeHEAD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The '29 Roadster bodies are shorter than the '32,
so the aerodynamics would be better on the dry lakes.


[/ QUOTE ]


I think Unkl Ian was referring to the height of the model A vs the 32, not the length, making it more aerodynamic.