History So, you think this is not Traditional?

Great thread.Thanks to all who have posted.
Good luck.Have fun.Be safe.
Leo

 

Viewing the hot rod scene as a timeline is a helpful idea. For each of us there is a segment of the timeline that interests us. Some of you may have segments larger than mine and some may have segments smaller than mine. And some may even have segments that don't intersect mine. There is no point in arguing who's segment is better or more "correct" than another or that somebody should change their segment dates to better suit your tastes. My segment is fairly close to Ryan's. That's why I'm here.
But dates aren't the total picture. When I was fooling around with hotrods in the late 1950s, some guys were interested in winning car shows, some at winning at drag races, and some on driving on the street. And some on more than one of these. So a forum or event that is primarily on only one of these will likely attract fewer people than one than has a mix. So far I like the balance here.

 

Steve one of the things that just frosts my butt is that we agree far too often. I just want you to stop it.

I still remember the first GM I changed from a genny to an alt in 1969. I did not know anyone who knew how it was done. A friend had captured a GM alternator from the wrecking yard from a '65 Impala to put on his '61 Belaire. He couldn't get it to work and called me I pulled my hair for hours then finally went to the yard and got the regulator from the Impala. DuhOh. I guess it was not a common thing to change them out.

I have a tendency to do things the way that I do, some of them are considered to be wrong and some are tolerable but I still do things the way that I do them. No ne really minds I don't think.

There were a lot of cars still even when I was in high school in the later '60s that were cross overs, for lack of a better term. Someone would find a car that had previously been a hot rod and update it, but it would still be basically the same. perhaps it would have a later mill or wheels and tires or the like. I remember buying a Hudson Coupe from the local wrecking yard that the owner had purchased new, he had changed it a bunch over the years and I just picked up where he lefty off. His last change was in the late '50s with a 265 and a GM rearend. I didn't bother with anything but the engine and transmission, I had a 283 and a power slip. The 283 had an alternator and so it went in that way. Under the hood you could see the later 283 but other then that it was pretty much the same as it had been the last time it was on the road.

When the raven first built his '27T it was a build along those lines, he built it like a car built in the later '40s with an upgrade to an SBC. Just like it had been a flathead car before wire wheels, banjo airplane seats etc. his plan all along for the car was to do just that and it came out just that way.

 

Speaking of crossovers, in my opinion, the cars that have been crossover from stock to hot rod to custom to lowrider, back to hot rod, to stock, back to lowrider, I think you get the picture, is the 5,6, and 7 Chevy.

 

Touche'.
It is not the mindset I have, mind you, just sayin' that there seems to be one.

 

Good to still see you kids playing nice. My 39 won't have much in the way of "new" or repro parts, except maybe the Mallory dual point. I don't know what they looked like in the early days (did they have em?) but mine's all nice and new aluminum body and crab cap. Oh yeah, it's getting a Powergen too. What I won't do is claim to be spot on with regard to "period correct" because of those 2 items, but with a flatty, belted tires on wide 5s, original Henry Ford black for the most part, and a vinyl interior with rolls n pleats I'd say it's gonna be close. Still, by the time I woodgrain the moldings, the new vibe to the interior may make some cry foul without ever opening the hood. Why? Because it might just be "too nice" inside. This summer the restored Pierson 36 was at the St. John's Concours of America. It was gorgeous. How nice was it when new? Show of hands, was it that nice? Stopping right there for a moment, I can't say enough positive about it, and I couldn't take this observation going negative in any way were someone to misunderstand. In raw language, that fucker was beautiful. Still, it begs the question or discussion, even with period parts, new or old, where and when does actual quality bump a traditional car out of play? If I knock my moldings outta the park and the dash panel too, will I hear "...never was that nice..." from a few? From many? I plan to do just that, apply one of my special skills to one of my own for a change. I know my dear departed Dad refinished the moldings in his car back in the day but our materials are just better today. Do we just accept more quality and craftsmanship? Frankly I don't give a fat rat's ass what anyone else might say about em when done because it's for me and Mrs. Highlander, but there is that "thing" about a higher measure of quality.

before any response to that, my opinion is that in the past those cars had a freshness to them that made excess paint texture or the occasional crooked stitch just go away. A pro today wouldn't do such work, maybe just due to better equipment as well as product. It's like this, I couldn't sell a client on an absolute copy of a Packard open car interior even with factory photos to prove the lack of quality vs the standard demanded today, even in judging (go figure). Do we see that which is new now, or today, carries the same freshness from back when? This is tough to verbalize...

 

Highlander brings up yet another point... what level of finish is 'traditional'? It's funny, I was looking at some prewar/early postwar pics from the dry lakes and a majority of those cars would be diverted over to the 'rat rod' section at a show these days if they were a recent build. All many of them lacked was the extraneous crap welded on them that seems to be a feature of the rats. But the really fun part was realizing that there really weren't any 'rules' in those days; my favorite was the one where the builder flipped his roadster body front-to-rear for better aerodynamics and ran 11 MPH faster.... Would that be a 'traditional' build?.... LOL

But I get what he's saying. The originals had a rawness, a no-nonsense manner about them, proclaiming that 'I'm fast! And ready to go!' that has disappeared from too many of the recreations/'restorations'. The innovation/excitement that originally created them is now 'studied', the raw 'prototype' feeling that these cars had is gone. The other thing that's amusing is that when these recreations/restorations are done, it seems the 'early' version (if the car was modified later for more performance) is chosen as it's deemed the more 'pure' vision. This is much more of an issue on the hot rod side of the hobby; the custom side paid more attention to fit/finish but mods later rarely improved the car.

A crystalizing moment about forum attitude from some for me was a car posted here a while back. A totally authentic, built-in-the-day chopped '34 Ford coupe with some interesting features (out of Detroit IIRC; definitely the Midwest). Heavily channeled, bobbed/cycle fenders, modified bumperettes used as 'nerf bars', several other things that weren't 'mainstream'. I'd say fit/finish/design was above average. Several apparently hard-core 'traditionalists' started nit-picking the car apart, saying this or that wasn't 'traditional', trying to apply their version of the 'rules' of what's 'trad'. Reminded me of the story of Ak Miller (of Pikes Peak and road race fame among other things) getting booted out of his club in the early 50s for building 'non-traditional' cars. But this illustrates the danger of getting too caught up in the 'rules' and ignores the fact that much of the history of hot rodding was/is 'let's try this!'

All of us are looking back at this era through a window of time and no matter who you are, that window distorts things. It's still possible to recapture it's essence, but using only a rigid set of rules won't get you there....

 

Amen to the Highlander and Crazy Steve. Count me among those whose hot rod satisfaction ranges well into the "Anything Goes", or "No Rules" camp. Now this is a tricky point, one which requires some finesse and context. Hear me out. Across the entire timeline of hot rodding, Anything Goes can get you into some seriously horrendous shit, some really god-awful crap. But within our 1925-1965 snapshot, Anything Goes gives you a marvelously fascinating world of Yankee ingenuity and creativity. Some of the Chicken Eating, hell most of the Chicken Eating, I find interesting and cool. There are a ton of examples, but I will give you three to illustrate my point.
The original Bug:

Would probably end up in the rat rod section today. Think Dick Kraft might have been eating chicken.

My 2nd example is Art Arfons' original "Green Monster", powered by an Allison aircraft engine.

Art was definitely eating chicken.

And so here we go . . . are these two examples traditional? Personally, I emphatically say "Yes". They are both examples of many cool cars and builders who raised the bar by Eating Chicken.
Of course, I am fairly confident that somebody can dig up a hot rod from back in the day that most of us would deem ugly. Maybe this one:


But you know what? All 3 examples are definitely hot rods. All 3 come from within our timeline snapshot. To me, and I suspect, the majority of the old-timers on this board, I claim that all 3 should be considered traditional. You are on a very slippery slope if you start to create a long list of rules designed to weed-out the truly (in your opinion) traditional from the imposters. For all 3 of these examples above (and for many, many more hot rods), from back in the day, there was a very talented and creative, mechanically-gifted, pioneer hot rodder behind it.

So, there you have it. I know there are plenty of HAMBers out there, and many who are much more knowledgable about the era, or much more talented (or both) than me, who will disagree with me. And that's OK, this is a healthy debate. This is where the nuance and finesse comes into play. It appears that I am saying:
If only one chicken-eating yahoo from Nowhere, USA stuck it on his hotrod back in the day, the mere fact that it was done makes it traditional.
Versus:
Just because some Buckwheat from Georgia fashioned a steering wheel, in 1952, from a table top that his Grandpa made, does not make it traditional.
The true answer lies somewhere in the middle. Maybe it really does come down to "You know it when you see it." And that's OK, too. In fact, maybe that's the definition of a true Old School Hamber.

 

With all this being said, if it wasn't done before 1965, it's not "traditional". If it was done before 1965 but not on a "regular or popular" basis, it's not traditional.

Post 1965 SBC's- not traditional
Powder coat- no traditional
Bobble head dogs- not traditional
Fiberglass T's- not traditional (even though they were molded in the late 50's)

In the past on the board, cars with all of these get a pass as long as no one says any thing.

What about the guy who is building his car in the spirit of rodders from years past? You know, the one who built his car/truck on a very limited budget with parts he could source from wherever.

If I'm out of line, it won't be the first time.

 

Perhaps "spirit" is the best gatekeeper of what is acceptable here. If this forum is true to its spirit, you can't justify Wilwood 6 piston calipers and drilled/slotted rotors on the basis that "disc brakes existed before '65". Same for Mustang II suspensions, crate SBCs, EFI and turbochargers. etc., etc. as that stuff heads into Street Rod and Restomod territory.

This thread has focused on Hot Rods. Is there another discussion to be had regarding acceptable Customs, Cruisers, and Jalopies, too? Isn't Jalopy another word for a Traditional Rat Rod?

 

See? This guy gets it.

 

Here are two classic statements from those trying to justify their parts choices, have seen these comments more times than I can count.

" hey, the parts were made before 65"

"it's traditional to use whatever parts are at hand"

 

Words to live by, right there!

 

Yup, well said. I have been here for 16 years now and have seen the weak arguments many times.

 

And I've also been here long enough to see the so called "weak arguments" as well as the sanctimonious stabs that are made in retaliation.

 

I'm still confused. But that's traditional and I was built before 1965.

 

Jalopy has a venerated place in the hot rod lexicon. Here is an excerpt from a Colliers magazine article from the '40s:




We are conversing on the message board of the Jalopy Journal, correct?

As far as customs, etc., yes this discussion has focused on hot rods. Anyone is free to dive into customs, although they should be prepared to be accused of beating a dead horse. But the horse is only dead for folks who have been around here a long time, and that would exclude a number of folks. You know what else is beating a dead horse? Reminding all that if the thread is bugging you, then click to something else! You bring nothing but a pesky distraction to the discussion.

 

The definition of Jalopy is "dilapidated old car", this is inarguable. Your Colliers article was an attempt to defend race cars from being called "Jalopy" (he called it a misnomer), it was not an attempt to redefine the word. So, that leaves us with the question, what Jalopies are acceptable here that evade the definition of Rat Rod? Consider the question rhetorical, else we may be reviving the dead horse, or worse yet, finding a new horse to beat.

As far as pesky distractions, I didn't start the thread, but instead of the dead horse being revived and rebeaten, perhaps threads like this serve to eulogize the horse for the benefit of those that weren't here to witness the official beating to death.

 

Nothing is traditional.

You saw something that inspired you. You built something based on your inspiration.

Unless you were building a clone, what you built was inspired, not traditional.

As for this board, tradition does not matter exactly. Ryan has set standards. His house, his rules.

The horse is not dead, for there is no horse.

 

OH NO can only speak for myself , but my rods start as jalopies get it running and drivable start having fun. ah its rusty da wooden top bows are showing and now days everyone calls it a rat rod. I don't realy care I know better . I try and tell them its just an unfinished old rod or jalopy. And some day it will be finished. When its a rat rod You may see late model stuff, a plastic rat more of a art statement and that's ok But not a traditional Rod . theres lots of room for everyone but the hamb should be for small group who loves the pre 1965 style Rod and Kustoms THATS JUST ME

 

Well said, I'll drink to that (I am right now).
Of course, I may be drinking in vain (not the first time):

 

Spoken like a true rules-follower. I recall a conversation I had with an engineer on a job when I was still working. The blueprints were pieces of crap in terms of following them and getting a successful install and he didn't want to hear that. So after a few minutes of listening to this guy, I turned to my crew and said 'Guys, never let a print stifle your imagination'. Took the guy a full minute to think that through and get pissed.... LOL.

Let's take a stab at Customs. Now, I don't agree with breaking the 'types' down any further than 'Rods' and 'Customs' (the ol' R&C mag got it right IMO) as there's very, very few cars that don't have elements of both with the possible exception of pure race cars. As soon as the vehicle is modified, it's 'custom'. So let's just say that a 'Rod' is a vehicle with an emphasis on performance, and a 'Custom' is one where the emphasis is on style. I'll leave it to the viewer to decide what's what. If you think that a custom has to be lowered and have skirts, that's fine; just don't insist that everyone else agree with you.

So what's 'traditional' for customs? Here's where trying to apply 'rules' can get impossible. Customs were all over the map, with some being beautifully designed/executed, some that were gawd-awful, sometimes both from the same builder. Beauty is very much in the eye of the beholder here. Parts? This is where literally 'whatever is at hand' could be true; bits were sourced from everywhere. Lawn chair buckets, hand-fabricated stuff, plastics, you name it, it was probably tried. A lot of times, a particular 'shape' is wanted; I recall a shoebox or Merc here recently that used a modified late Mustang bumper as a grill bar. A non-trad part to get a very trad look. Does that make that car non-traditional? If the builder had kept his mouth shut about the source (or lied), there wouldn't be any question...

So I submit that a 'traditional' custom isn't so much the parts or their 'correctness', but the style (and truthfully that's at least partially true for rods). When you see customs with post-'65 parts on them picked apart, it isn't so much that the parts are 'wrong' as it is that they don't have the right style for the build. Get the overall style or 'vibe' if you will right, and few will notice (or care) if the parts are 'correct'. This is very much a subjective thing, YMMV. Even using all 'correct' parts doesn't guarantee that you'll end up with a 'traditionally styled' custom... or a good looking one. It's really about the builders 'eye' and not many have that. Which is why you see so many nearly identical cars (copying or refining a 'safe' design), and is the 'proof' the hard-core traditionalists use to declare what's 'trad'.

One other thing about customs. While the rodders generally at least pretended to pay lip service to practicality/drivability (and as time went on, safety), many custom builders didn't. And I'm not just talking about the show rods, but many supposedly street-driven ones. Case in point.... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/more-info-on-55-pontiac.1003693/#post-11329969
Now, I really like this car. Very traditional styling/build (after all, it was 'built in the day'), well executed (except...), nice car. But several people who were around the area where the builder lived at the time remarked that they never saw it. If you read the print, you discover that it only had 1.5" of front ground clearance. No wonder it was never seen; it must have been all but undrivable. Even Jivin' Jer remarked on this in his faithfully recreated Lopez Ford coupe. So does fitting airbags or a modern suspension to either of these cars destroy their 'traditionalness'? Or are you going to be limited by the 'rules' and have a car that can only be used in limited places and/or be a trailer queen?

 

5 pages gone by so I figure it's been long enough to share an observation. Until the switch to the multiple dedicated hot rod and custom pages I never found an actual year (1965) in the guidelines, with the exception being the classifieds. Frankly I never thought back then that anyone needed a year, a root if you will, for what it is to continue to grow or spread (as in a gospel). I'll show you a picture of something here and describe it fully and in earnest.

38 Dodge PU, started life as a 1 ton with a 9' box. Side pipes were made from big diameter E.M.T. then chromed, the interior was a red, black and yellow scotch plaid cloth combined with black "distressed" looking vinyl. The complete drivetrain was from a donor 65 Cadillac Sedan DeVille. Even the front wheel/brake units were used, Dad weld-mated the Caddy spindle to the Dodge kingpin boss and we even used the power brake cylinder and booster. The power steering and tilt/tele column came out of the car too. I may have some more detail build pics somewhere but they're not going to be easy to find so this single shot will have to do. I drove it the weekend I graduated H.S. and that was...? 1975, the year it was completed, fully 10 years past our founder's cutoff. Anybody see, or hear in the description, anything that doesn't belong to what the collective members are about? Is there a point to be made even worth making? To some of us, most likely no, to others, it's that this could be a car, or truck, that showed up late to the traditional hot rod party by that full 10 years but fits the spirit to a tee. Nothing was newer than that Cadillac engine, trans, rear axle, steering, full brake system, even the wheels and wheel covers. Instead of calling it late to the party I'd rather think of this example as what some of us have always done regardless of the time. Think of mid-70s hot rods (street rods?) and this doesn't really show as particularly fresh thinking back then, does it?

There's no time or cutoff as to how certain things are approached in order to create what we appreciate here. There's no age, old or young, that imagines how to do it, becomes motivated, that can see a way to make it work. I figured out the power steering pump mount during history class. Drew a picture of what I thought would work in my notebook, couldn't wait for dear ol' Dad to get home so we could get to it. That single aspect alone...what, where, how, to mount that pump and close the hood...might fill volumes of that spirit found here. Is that getting through, making sense? That too may be hard to verbalize, perhaps words aren't really needed except that "...get it..." thing, maybe? No, not trumpeting some degree of superiority or extraordinary understanding, this is a sincere personal share from my past. Enjoy...

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought "Jalopy" defined loosely meant "HOT ROD" in Spanish. A kin of Jalapeno, meaning HOT.

 

@CrazySteve
You just rattled my chain.
Where I worked we had the engineering dept. directly above the machine shop and it was real handy to just walk up the stairs and chat with them when something on a print didn't make sense. I did that a lot in my younger years, but I just couldn't get the back of my head to heal up from BMHATW.
Two things happenened simultaneously when I stopped going up there; I got parts done faster, and my head healed up.

 

Nothing sanctimonious here, just speaking the truth, hurts a little?

 

No hurt feelings here. This is not the member you are thinking of, move along

 

Stop using those big words guys.

 

Makes a person wonder why so many try to fit everything in a box.
Makes me think they can't think outside one.