Welcome to the THE H.A.M.B. forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

Go Back   THE H.A.M.B. > General Discussion > Traditional Hot Rods

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-13-2012, 08:50 AM   #1
Ryan
Administrator
 
Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1995
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 14,453
Default "T" For Two



The April, 1958 issue of Car Craft Magazine called it the "'T' For Two" because the rendition featured was actually the result of a second rebuild. A guy named Wally Olson out of Fresno originally hot rodded the little '25, but when William Scott bou...

To read the rest of this blog entry from The Jalopy Journal, click here.
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 09:07 AM   #2
Jimmy B
Old School HAMBer
 
Jimmy B's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tweed Valley, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,425
Default Re: "T" For Two

Yep! Awesome T roadster, up there with Paul Schiefer's, Spalding Bros & Rico Squaglia T roadsters. It started as the Wally Olson T featured in Hot Rod September 1954. Richard Riddell restored it shortly before his death.

http://www.hotrod.com/hotroddeluxe/h...ford_t_bucket/


__________________
I don't paint by numbers.

Hot Rods of the Dry Lakes Era


jimmy
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 09:14 AM   #3
Ryan
Administrator
 
Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1995
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 14,453
Default Re: "T" For Two

I'll be damned... I hadn't put one and two together this morning. The car still looks great.
__________________


Ryan Cochran

"Skating the same line since 1976..."
.................................................. ....
www.jalopyjournal.com - www.garagejournal.com - www.gearjournal.com - www.fordbarn.com - www.DOGFIGHTmag.com
offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
Old 07-13-2012, 09:15 AM   #4
casper
Senior Member
 
casper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Fresno, Ca.
Posts: 1,043
Default Re: "T" For Two

Awesome car !! As a resident of Fresno, I am always looking for an old survivor like this. A lot of nice cars were built in the central California area.
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 09:15 AM   #5
Jimmy B
Old School HAMBer
 
Jimmy B's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tweed Valley, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,425
Default Re: "T" For Two

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/s...d.php?t=340629

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/s...d.php?t=193699



__________________
I don't paint by numbers.

Hot Rods of the Dry Lakes Era


jimmy
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 09:19 AM   #6
Jimmy B
Old School HAMBer
 
Jimmy B's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tweed Valley, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,425
Default Re: "T" For Two

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
I'll be damned... I hadn't put one and two together this morning. The car still looks great.
Yep she sure does! Personally I favour the Wally Olson version as it has that purposeful appearance like if Frank Kurtis had of built a Track T. No nonsense all out racer with style and class.
__________________
I don't paint by numbers.

Hot Rods of the Dry Lakes Era


jimmy
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 09:21 AM   #7
Ryan
Administrator
 
Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1995
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 14,453
Default Re: "T" For Two

I had no idea that was the same car. I actually have the earlier version pinned on my bulletin board in the office. Hell, I like the earlier version the best.
__________________


Ryan Cochran

"Skating the same line since 1976..."
.................................................. ....
www.jalopyjournal.com - www.garagejournal.com - www.gearjournal.com - www.fordbarn.com - www.DOGFIGHTmag.com
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 09:40 AM   #8
Rolleiflex
Member
 
Rolleiflex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 581
Default Re: "T" For Two

That thing is a beauty! I'd take either version, but I agree the first version is a much cleaner and more purposeful looking car.

The stance is just awesome!
__________________
Email or PM me for prints
www.cullipherphoto.com

Last edited by Rolleiflex; 07-13-2012 at 09:48 AM.
online   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 10:02 AM   #9
JeffreyJames
Old School HAMBer
 
JeffreyJames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SUGAR CITY
Posts: 16,571
Default Re: "T" For Two

Hot damn I love me both versions!!!! I love how racy the earlier version was and how kitchy the second was. Can we just talk about how awesome hood sides with no top is? I thought that was just something that was whipped up in Weez's mind.

Ryan, bite your tongue on the headlight placement. High and mighty rules!!!!
__________________
I PLAY WITH TIGERS
WWW.SUGARCITYSPEEDSHOP.COM
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 10:09 AM   #10
dana barlow
Senior Member
 
dana barlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Miami Fla.
Posts: 1,745
Thumbs up Re: "T" For Two

I like both ways on that "T",but lean to the first build style of most rods,
The fenders I also had to deal with back in the day with my own rod,cop's would hate or love a hot rod,and so depening on what cop was running my part of town,I'd have to put the fenders on or not,I hated the fender look,but it was one of things we had to play with in Miami fl. in the late 50's to the 60's.
Photo in my album on this site
As for head lites,now days most look pertty weird to me on rods,having done this stuff in the 50/60 time,we did a lot of running around town at nite and sealbeams was the only way to see any good,plus the higher they were mounted the better,ya some looks came into play=we tryed to get small sealbeams [7in.]that were nicely shaped,but big old style lights low down were not on any rods then,nor would they of worked for crap=we did not have high power bulbs.
__________________
Dana Barlow
Miami Fla. not done tell it's shiny
AKA"The Bat"out of hell

Last edited by dana barlow; 07-13-2012 at 10:21 AM.
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 10:15 AM   #11
GARY?
Senior Member
 
GARY?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,707
Default Re: "T" For Two

"Fordster" Never heard that one before.
One of the best.

Last edited by GARY?; 07-13-2012 at 10:28 AM.
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 10:27 AM   #12
goetzcr
Grenade Inspector
 
goetzcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Springfield, VA
Posts: 116
Default Re: "T" For Two

First off, sorry about the long post, but I've been wrestling with a design predicament for some time, and this particular post raises some questions.
I need some guidance here from someone more knowledgable than me. (That's probably most of you)

I am formulating my upcoming project (29 A roadster) and have been trying to determine the proper period for the car. I plan to run a Nailhead because I dig the looks and the torque. The year of the engine pushes me up to the late 50's at the absolute earliest. I generally like the late 50's/early 60's aesthetic as long as it doesn't go to far into the wild show-car look. But looking at these photos I'm amazed at how drasticly this particular car changed in under 4 years. Just from these few pictures I see the following changes: carbeuration setup, white walls, fenders, hairpins, headlights, windshield, and exhaust. Did the design trends really change that fast in those 4 years?

I've got to say I like the earlier version more. It looks damn tough. I'm looking to combine a early 50's aesthetic (or at least a no-nonsense one)with my power plant of choice. Is there a way to gracefully blend what appears to be a mish-mash of periods. What IS the correct period for a Nailhead in a model A? If the correct period is the 60's, are there any good examples of no-nonsense (but streetable) model A's from the 60s? Most of what I see are show cars from that period. I want look of the car to be coherant.

Thanks in advance for any guidance.
Cory

Last edited by goetzcr; 07-13-2012 at 10:58 AM. Reason: typo
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 11:05 AM   #13
-Brent-
Old School HAMBer
 
-Brent-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 4,153
Default Re: "T" For Two

I like the earlier version best, too. The fenders on the restored version bug me. The cycle fenders on the '58 version look rounded unlike the trailer looking ones on the update.

However, overall, a timeless (and awesome) custom hot rod.
__________________
Pre-war 1920 Model T build Reassembly has begun!

WANTED:
- 1933/34 Drive Shaft and Torque Tube
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 11:38 AM   #14
Don's Hot Rods
Old School HAMBer
 
Don's Hot Rods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: florida
Posts: 6,893
Default Re: "T" For Two

[QUOTE=goetzcr;7960961] But looking at these photos I'm amazed at how drasticly this particular car changed in under 4 years. Just from these few pictures I see the following changes: carbeuration setup, white walls, fenders, hairpins, headlights, windshield, and exhaust. Did the design trends really change that fast in those 4 years?


A lot of factors could have been the reason for the difference in those 4 years. Trends were changing a little, maybe the influence of show cars. Stuff like white walls, custom wheels, more chrome, etc started showing up in the 60's, I think. Also, cars were in a constant state of improvement. Lots of guys drove their cars to work during the week then made changes and improvements on the weekends.

Since we didn't have the internet hot rod magazines were our source of information. Every time the latest issue hit the stands we couldn't wait to find out the latest and greatest new trick so we could try it on our own cars. The reason so many old car magazines are dog earred is because we didn't just read them on the couch, we took them into the garage and laid them out as a roadmap.

I actually like the second version of that T better. It looks more finished to me, but that is just a personal thing.

Don
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 11:46 AM   #15
need louvers ?
Alliance Member
 
need louvers ?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: phoenix, az
Posts: 10,873
Default Re: "T" For Two

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy B View Post
Yep she sure does! Personally I favour the Wally Olson version as it has that purposeful appearance like if Frank Kurtis had of built a Track T. No nonsense all out racer with style and class.

Thank you Jimmy B!

I had hoped someone would post that article of this car. It was sooooooo much cooler in Wally Olsen's original build than what happened to it later down the line. I just could never stomach something so pure hot rod being turned into something "showy".
I actually spent a good portion of the nineties searching for this car, 'cause I had heard rumors through a well connected friend that it still survived. Didn't get real lead on it until it was way too late. That's okay, being the perpetual broke dick, I probably could have never afforded it anyway.
The first version of this car is on my short list of cars that I would very much like to at least loosely clone. I'd even put up with a flathead for this one!
__________________
HOT ROD CENTRAL LOUVER CO.
602.881.0175
louverguyquinn@yahoo.com
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 12:03 PM   #16
Gator
Old School HAMBer
 
Gator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: White House TN
Posts: 4,020
Default Re: "T" For Two

Perfect!

__________________
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough...
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 12:08 PM   #17
need louvers ?
Alliance Member
 
need louvers ?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: phoenix, az
Posts: 10,873
Default Re: "T" For Two

Quote:
Originally Posted by goetzcr View Post
First off, sorry about the long post, but I've been wrestling with a design predicament for some time, and this particular post raises some questions.
I need some guidance here from someone more knowledgable than me. (That's probably most of you)

I am formulating my upcoming project (29 A roadster) and have been trying to determine the proper period for the car. I plan to run a Nailhead because I dig the looks and the torque. The year of the engine pushes me up to the late 50's at the absolute earliest. I generally like the late 50's/early 60's aesthetic as long as it doesn't go to far into the wild show-car look. But looking at these photos I'm amazed at how drasticly this particular car changed in under 4 years. Just from these few pictures I see the following changes: carbeuration setup, white walls, fenders, hairpins, headlights, windshield, and exhaust. Did the design trends really change that fast in those 4 years?

I've got to say I like the earlier version more. It looks damn tough. I'm looking to combine a early 50's aesthetic (or at least a no-nonsense one)with my power plant of choice. Is there a way to gracefully blend what appears to be a mish-mash of periods. What IS the correct period for a Nailhead in a model A? If the correct period is the 60's, are there any good examples of no-nonsense (but streetable) model A's from the 60s? Most of what I see are show cars from that period. I want look of the car to be coherant.

Thanks in advance for any guidance.
Cory
Hey Cory,

I hear what you are saying. I'm kinda in the same boat with my roadster pickup project right now. I'm certaimly no expert at this deal as far as styling, but I know what cues work for what eras. I prefer to look at my little trucklet as "evolutionary" more than a specific period in time. It started out Looking very late forties with the lack of fenders on an "A" frame, so that is what the vast majority of the details of the truck will follow. I HATE flatheads (sorry, I have had them and although they are beautiful, they are low touque, hard to cool 'round these parts and I'm just flat over them!) So a 283 chev in mid fifties garb (steel Chevrolet valve covers, steel air cleaner, canister filter, etc.) will do for power. I just sold my soul to a good buddy of mine for a set of no hole 16" Halibrands, so that stays congruent to a car built after the war but slightly updated as the owner had more money to throw at it. I'll peg it's date somewhere in the mid to late fifties, nothing newer than say '57 or so. By picking that date and studying what was what then, I have a date... Make any sense?

As far as the subject car goes, hell yes there were allot of changes in what was up between the original build and the re-build. That's why so much more "stuff" was hung on the car. The other thing with this particular car was that there was some indication that Wally never really built the car to be a truly streetable, driver kinda car. Notice in the first form it didn't have a windshield. The flatty that was in it was something outrageous like 300 inches and the radiator tiny. I haven't read or re-read the original article in years (probably should have done that before i wrote this long answer!) but if I'm not mistaken it mentions something about building this car with his sons "to keep them out of pool halls". The 1958 rebuild might have been based in the subsequent owners desire to make the car more streetable, then taken over board. Hence the windshield and fenders...
__________________
HOT ROD CENTRAL LOUVER CO.
602.881.0175
louverguyquinn@yahoo.com
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 12:09 PM   #18
Muttley
Old School HAMBer
 
Muttley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Fresno, Cal.
Posts: 16,358
Default Re: "T" For Two

Neat car, the fenders need to go though.
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 12:19 PM   #19
need louvers ?
Alliance Member
 
need louvers ?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: phoenix, az
Posts: 10,873
Default Re: "T" For Two

Sorry to disagree, But PERFECT!!!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Twallyolson3.jpg
Views:	94
Size:	50.3 KB
ID:	1689539  
__________________
HOT ROD CENTRAL LOUVER CO.
602.881.0175
louverguyquinn@yahoo.com
offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 12:35 PM   #20
Jeem
Alliance Vendor
 
Jeem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: ....in the Valley of the SUN.....
Posts: 5,870
Default Re: "T" For Two

The blackwall, fenderless (earlier) version is AWESOME! Bad ASS'd...

Funny, but I don't much care at all for the parade version with the whitewalls and cycle fenders.
__________________
Galleria de Smeeth
http://www.facebook.com/GalleriaDeSmeeth
offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:06 AM.