Technical Can cars look too low

I see nothing wrong with having adjustable suspension on a car. For my tastes, the lowest setting should be the point where you normally drive the vehicle. When you encounter an out of the ordinary condition .......like large speed bumps, sharply rising driveways, and even a trailer if need be, then raising the vehicle to accomodate that impediment and avoiding damage is logical. Adjusting the rear of a truck that you have a load in, or raising the rear of a Kustom because your "mother-in-law' is in your backseat seems logical. Setting a vehicle so low that it obviously can't be driven and is only being lowered for display purposes seems rather rediculous to me. My personal taste is that a car should not be displayed at other than the height you normally drive at. Not meaning to offend anyone here, but I think a car should be built so that operational height gives it the best stance (whatever stance the builder likes) for the type of vehicle. Changing its stance just for display doesn't enhance a vehicle .....it should look like it does when you drive it.............

 

Too bad I can only do 1 Like!! THIS^^^^^^^^^^ is priceless!
6sally6

 

Speaking of driveability and function, is there a magic number for ground clearance that looks good and doesn't hinder it's usability?

Sent from my SM-G930T using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Must be aware of the scrub line--I see many that won't pass the test

 

It's going to vary with the length of the vehicle and the placement of it's wheels. An old 30s Coupe protrudes only a little ways behind the rear wheels and only slightly,if any ahead of the front wheels. An early sixties Chebby is going to have a lot of overhang. That makes a big difference when you try to turn into a driveway.

 

5” mostly
But I still see mashed oil pans and other body damage. 5” though, seems to not tear the shit off just rearranging it.

 

if it looks goofy it probably is.
If it’s goofy it probably looks it too.

Dragging around a full depth truck bed that has 4” usable looks goofy

parking with jacked up camber looks goofy

wheels that you have to deflate or disconnect shocks to remove is goofy

ripping off your oil pan makes you look goofy.

driveline angles ohhh good Lord ! 3’ down and driveshaft up with pinion parallel..,, oh yeah that is goofy

Dumbo stance and tires up to the windows,,, yeah that is goofy too.

Can’t drive a city street that’s not smooth as glass is relatively goofy

Building a car to ride like shit on purpose is goofy

Waiting for your leaky crap to air up before you can leave while everyone listens to your compressor ... yep goofy

Not understanding how an arched spring gets longer when it’s forced flatter is goofy

having blocks on your springs looks goofy

Sectioned control arms look goofy

 

A nicely Zd frame that sits low and keeps proper geometry. Not goofy
A bag system that works properly. Not goofy
A bed that’s been modified yet still retains its ability to haul. Not goofy
An engine that’s been raised and or a 2 piece drive shaft set up that keeps angles in a happy arrangement. Not goofy
Exhaust tucked up to the body and crossmembers raised to keep from dragging. Not goofy.
Quality aftermarket or custom built suspension parts that work. Not goofy.

Having to trailer something cause it can’t function no matter how it sits . That’s goofy.

 

I don't like when the cars are "laying frame" and the front wheels are all cocked in at the top. That looks broken to me. I prefer cars that are driven at their static height. But do what you want.

 

Hello,

It was sad to see some burned out cars that were by the side of the road in 1957-58 due to the lowest part of the vehicle below the low rim level. If the lowest was the gas tank, that was not a good sign. Instant sparks and a resulting fire was next. But, it was the unsuspecting teens in the cars that were legal and the lowered tank hit the ground causing sparks and fire. Throw in a tire blow out going fast on a road and the rim does nothing to keep the tank from hitting the ground.


If the normally lowered car was full of teenagers, it too gets below the rim, it will cause fires from the gas tank. My brother had a 1951 Oldsmobile that was lowered to legal specs. But, there were 6 teenage boys in the Olds and it was not legal. Being teenagers and the distance to get to where they were going was not bothering them, they drove happily away. Lucky teenagers doing dumb things. There were no limits as to how many could fit in the back seat, so if a ride to the local drive-in was necessary after a school event, (and there were girls to be included, ) the lowered car was overloaded and not legal.

The local police in Bixby Knolls did stop a lot of "Cal Rake" cars because the overloaded teenagers made them illegal. It is not just the Lowrider element in the custom car field, but normal teens with cars on a lowered rake that are unsuspecting cruisers, while driving around.

When we were riding around after we gave my friend’s 1957 Chevy Bel Air the lowered Cal Rake stance, it just looked very cool. That stance made the Chevy look stealthy, plus, it was fast, too. We did not know it, but when we did take several other teens to an event or school, it was technically illegal. Someone mentioned it to us and we just shook our heads. It was a lowered car that was meant to look menacing.

So, we thought nothing of it. A week or so later, we got stopped in Bixby Knolls and the police stopped us. They told us to get out and started measuring the distance of the lowered Chevy to the ground. It cleared easily and we were all happy. But, the policeman told us to all get back in the Chevy and then remeasured the lowest part and the tank was lower than the bottom lip of the rims.

It was not a speeding ticket, but a fix it ticket that could be signed off by any policeman or CHP officers. A cousin’s boyfriend was a CHP officer, so we asked him to check the ticket. He looked/measured and gave us the ok to continue driving the 57 “Cal Rake” Chevy. He did tell us to not have more than 6-7 people in the car, otherwise it would be illegal.

Jnaki

So, we did learn our lessons from seeing lowered cars on fire, getting a warning for being too low and knowing anything can happen to anyone. We were not Lowriders, but ordinary teenagers with our fast hot rods and cruisers. We were aware of our cars, but not to the point of view from the local police and safety from the written laws.

Jump up two years ago. On our way home from our granddaughter’s house, we saw some black flames up ahead on the side of the road. As we approached, there was a CHP car about three car lengths behind with his lights flashing. In front was a 4 door 55 Chevy sedan with the trunk lid open and it was on fire. On the side walk was the family, a bunch of camping gear, beach stuff, coolers and those items from the trunk were blackened. The whole rear of the 4 door sedan was on fire and no one was using any extinguishers. Other people had stopped to help, but, the CHP was just letting it burn out.

It was a clear case of a lowered sedan that is normally used as a daily driver. But, if it was overloaded with extra people and accessories in the trunk, clearly it was too low, the tank got hit or scraped and now was on fire. It is a "Circle Game"… what we saw as teenagers 60+ years ago, happens again in today’s world of modern technology and family cars.

 

Is this accurate? I thought the Low Rider style among Hispanic's came along a lot later, like late 60's - early 70's maybe; that in the 50's and early 60's there were "Customs", which were pretty much built by and appreciated by folks of all heritage, not a Hispanic thing. Am I wrong? Having grown up in that era here in So Cal that is what I remember. But since I was young I may have just been unaware of things, and still am?

 

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Here is (in my opinion) the ultimate stance on the ultimate vehicle.
I realize people will like other cars that due to their design features will look good with slightly different stances.
The point is that the picture shows a vehicle that was put together in a manner that all the components compliment each other. In effect, it looks perfect (to me) in concept and execution in its driveable condition.
If I take this car and drop it on the ground when I park it, no one will get to see how perfect it looks. It will completely destroy the look it was built to personify.
Anyone can build a car that can be lowered to the ground, but it takes a lot of effort to make a car look super in its natural usable stance. Again, not trying to offend anyone but I think that is what is lost when you display a car in an artificial manner.

 

That's pretty good. I think the rear end could come down a little, maybe too little sidewall on the front tires.

 

Exactly! While I love this car as is, you look at it and say "if I built it, I would do "these things" and make it suit my idea of what a car should look like. If its sitting on the ground, you would have no idea what you would do differently.
Perfect comment...............

 

Perfect stance for my favorite style

Sitting a car in a static stance is much easier than properly setting up an adjustable suspension.

 

Taking note.
Don't be goofy.
Don't look goofy.

Resisting the urge to post a picture of Goofy.

 

Goofys friend had a cool ride

 

Winning comment. Close the thread!

 

Thank you.

I am getting tired of being told that all this stared in the Midwest, in the 1990s.

 

It's exactly accurate.

 

Here is a little hydro history. Definitely fits the forums cut off date
http://kustomrama.com/wiki/X-Sonic

And a brief history
https://www.google.com/amp/s/timeline.com/amp/p/2847be00ac30

Great article here on the subject
https://kustomrama.com/wiki/Lowrider

A slammed T bird. Pic taken 63/64.

Kustomrama photo.
So I guess this ain’t nuthin new.

 

I do not know. The text was taken from the 'History' section of the Wikipedia page for "lowrider." So the "It" in "It began ..." refers to lowriders.

My comment was partly and indirectly in response to the minitruck comment because lowriders pre-date minitrucks.

 

I grew up in Inglewood in the 50's. ALL races had lowered cars but Hispanic (today's word not back then) owners had more lowered cars than the rest especially the rear. 30-40's Cheebbies were the most popular and 99% of the cars up to 48 had full rear fender skirts. 4 doors (not more doors) were very popular with families and still are. The more options the better.
My wife wife and I both like them and complement them at the cruise nights and always talk to their owners.
Find old photos with Zoot Suiters in them and you will see them... They wore fine fedoras......a great style today too.

 

I have always liked the stink bug look and applied it to my old pickup, HRP

 

Geee, it would be nice if you had some actual documentation to back it up.

Apparently, the situation is closer to what I described above, as indicated in this article from kustomrama: https://kustomrama.com/wiki/Lowrider (thank you @anthony myrick )

 

Hudson always looks good when parked and on low setting. Comes up 4-5 inches in the rear for driving. No bags in the front(at the moment).

 

I was alive when the guys who built the first ones were still around. I am going to take their word, over anything else.

You have the words some unknown rando wrote on the internet.

I had 30+ old dudes, who started the movement.

 

The article was referring to the term“Lowrider” beginnings, not the style.
And was speculative.
Logic says the other terms using “bean” to describe them in the late 50s would also indicate the style would have had been started before then.

 

Yep, that is how it was done. If one wanted to be really accurate trolley jacks were used. Set the jacks under the bumper and heat the coils until the bumper sank onto the trolley jack. It worked best with two torches at once.

One had to like the results of the little operation. Once it was down there was no way to raise it.