History So, you think this is not Traditional?

Oh man, I ran out of popcorn.

 

The Vette rear was installed in '67, didn't say which year rear end...could still be the same one, which is a '65.

 

Bingo. This is what I have come to appreciate about our rather narrow definition of traditional. It (the definition) becomes a reference benchmark by which an accurate comparison can be made. And I am the guy who is putting a tuned port EFI into an old car, with 4 disc brakes and other non-traditional stuff. And that is what we are hearing in this thread a lot already, that we appreciate and respect the definition, but at the end of the day, we are going to assimilate our eclectic and individual tastes in cars and do whatever the hell we damn please. And THAT is the spirit of hot rodding, even if the cars are not traditional.
But we desperately need the benchmark. God bless the Boss for seeing the need for this, the man has vision!

 

Yea, I know, but not everyone on the board has been privy to all the old conversations. I agree with this guy:

 

After I got "fried" as "non-trad" for suggesting using 4-wheel disc brakes on a Ford 'A-A' truck(Crosley 'Hot-shot' had them in '51-'52!), I kind of 'backed-off. I really do want to thank ALL of you who've been my instructors on how to do(or not do!! LOL)things to make what I wanted to build "work"(& find the 'low-buck- ways to get there!!!) Sure I've thrown my 2-cents in from time to time(most of us do), but the HAMB family has been a source of inspiration & education, as well as a 'yardstick' to measure my efforts against!! So, again : "THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR HELP"!!!

 

I was making the point that no matter how period correct you try to make something, there will always be some exceptions made. I tried to explain this in the most ridiculous way possible to bring home that point. I think this place is great, and completely agree with what it stands for. Traditional and period correct cars are why I'm here, I just think that sometimes people on here can get a little carried away what is and what is not.

 

To those that 'want' to expand the site to be more and more inclusive, why not start your own web page?

 

How do you know your're a perv?
When you enlarge the avatar photo in @slammed

 

It's always interesting when this comes up..... Ask any two random rodders and you'll get two different interpretations as to what's 'traditional' and what isn't. Mine is loose; I don't care if you're sporting an alternator, a T5 or disc brakes, they don't (to me) take 'away' enough from most cars to lose the 'flavor' of the 'traditional' look. Some folks like to obsess over these details, and there's an occasional whiff of elitism (my car is more 'trad' than yours!) involved, and that's ok. But it's a good thing that Ryan doesn't rigidly hold to a 'narrow' view or this place would be a ghost town; not very many of the builds here would fit that rigid narrow view.

Not to say I don't appreciate a 'pure traditional' build; I applaud those willing to do the research, track down vintage parts, and obsess over those 'details'. But the problem (for me) is this tends to stifle creativity, you have to follow the 'script' already set out for you by your forerunners. To me, a huge part of the hobby is personalizing your ride, extremely hard to do in a 'pure traditional' format, it's much more of a restoring thing. I'm sure many will disagree with that statement, but everyone should be allowed to have their own vision. And not to sound harsh, but for many I think that a 'pure trad' car represents a bit of a 'safety net'; the builder doesn't need to have as much creativity, you already have the script. Keep in mind that many of the now-'traditional' cues and details were created by the innovators of the era, not the 'me-too' builders. Some think that well is dry, but there may be some goodies in there yet...

I do agree with the '65 cut-off pretty much but I won't obsess over driveline/engines as long as they're still carbureted; by '66 nearly every manufacturer was selling a 'big motor/small car' combo and the hot rodders were now faced with the reality of stock Detroit iron that could blow many of them into the weeds and many reacted. Some good things came out of this, but there was also a lot of wretched excess, culminating in roadsters that look like bloated F1 cars and needed laptops to tune.

One last comment; I personally feel that the 'true' start of the Musclecar era was 1960. That was the year that Ford introduced the 360HP 352, the first engine out of Detroit designed from the block out as a true performance motor. Everything prior to that was based on stock production blocks, with factory hi-po cam, carbs, and maybe a set of special heads added to it. This motor was somewhat unheralded at the time (a big handicap was the car's weight), but GM and Chrysler noticed, with special 'Super Stock' options that eventually ended up on the streets.

 

Not to say I don't appreciate a 'pure traditional' build; I applaud those willing to do the research, track down vintage parts, and obsess over those 'details'. But the problem (for me) is this tends to stifle creativity, you have to follow the 'script' already set out for you by your forerunners.

Crazy Steve, this ^^^ Is what the site is about, a script as you put it.

 

Two VERY different things. many runs, clubs etc. followed the original NSRA edict that only allowed Pre 1949 cars. This was the established definition of a Street Rod before that became a dirty name to some. Many of us considered it the same for a HOT ROD, but since HOT ROD had been so bastardized to include basically anything that wasn't stock, we accepted Street Rod. but NOTHING in that Pre '49 concept said anything about the style of build. Boyd's cars were just as accepted and Tardell cars. And everyone got along just fine.
Now the HAMB looks at things a little different. The current '65 and older is not just the year model of the car, but more importantly for the die hards on here, it is the Build Style being of what was done no later than 1965.
So you see you can't really compare the two. The HAMB is both more open (year model) and More restrictive (build style) than the pre '49 rule.
Hope that helps you understand - one really has nothing to do with the other

 

One last thought on the original topic - The guy in HOT ROD claims that he installed the First Vette rear in a T-Bucket in 1967. Well, Ted Brown, considered by many to be the Godfather of T-Buckets once told me that although he much preferred Jag Rears, they did do a Vette IRS not long after the 63's came out and some clown put one in the wrecking yard. He thought it was probably in early '64

 

I haven't seen anyone say that want to expand the site to be more inclusive. Maybe you could cite that.

 

You've done it again, after looking at your avatar I have no idea what you said.....

 

Ha ha This is like doing the hokey pokey. I guess they're in again. Unless he was a chicken eater.

 

I'm pretty tired of the term "Period Correct" most folks that use it weren't even around in the period.
Another term I hate is "Thinking outside the box" Fuck! there never was a box.

 

Not always, but all too often a get-out-of-jail-card for those stylistically challenged, or for things made out of inappropriate parts while drunk.

 

Check out a Wayne 12-port head on a GMC and you'll see. ☺. Or, I suppose you could look at an Ardun also. ☺

 

Dig up a street rod book from a scant 5-6 years ago. Actually, try 10 yrs old. Compare it to now when you breeze the show coverage. And how about those wheel ads? Look at how few "dub" style rod wheel ads appear but the Rocket, Coker, ET ads? Clearly dominant now. Look at how few hi-tech components are showcased unless it's LS related (the latest engine craze). The visual fiber of a more vintage look dominates even the current street rod landscape, not just dedicated events with a year/component limit. Those dedicated events are becoming more prevalent too.

Crazy Steve brought up restoration and guess what? You follow a year cutoff in a total build and that's exactly what you did. It's not a bad thing, in fact that takes a lot of discipline and stamina to pull it off to the max, to really nail it. If that's what someone wants to do that's awesome, but that one doesn't have to earn that builder a group tug from his peers because of it. It's just a current art form that works as well today as they did in the past.

 

Well I do not think it is a grey line at all, talking about pre-65 style vs. post-65 component manufacture, there is no line drawn there at all (both are perfectly acceptable). I think it is safe to say that our enlightened Administrator and his thoroughly capable posse of moderators are all, to a man, of the style-driven mindset, and are not hung up on nit-picking dates when components were manufactured. Safe to say that, thank the Lord.
I think that where the line gets grey (and maybe this is what you meant) is what theHighlander was referring to, that the late '60s on into the early '70s produced some incredibly cool hot rods, and so if a bitching old-school Topolino built in '71 makes it onto the HAMB, nobody will flinch (because we know it when we see it). But the official cut-off is '65, so that Topo would be a technical violation . . . grey line here.
Alright, now I am getting a headache. Anyway, I do think it is helpful for us to periodically renew this general discussion about the upper time limit of 1965 and what that means. Thanks for a healthy, hearty discussion.

 

I am so glad that this thread has continued to be filled with thoughtful, insightful dialogue and hasn't devolved into the piss-fest that so often happens when this subject is discussed. Carry on.

 

Chaz as much as you don't like the term Period Correct is very important here as it is defined as a requirement for posting information. 1965 and down whether its correct or inspired. That means from the dawn of hotrodding and customizing to 1965. That is the period. Yes there was the teens, 20's, 30's, 40's etc. But these are specific periods within the larger period as a whole. If your ride doesn't represent this it really is up for scrutiny by the board and to some degree the members...

 

Well while I was not around for the advent of the A V8 or the gowjob prior to that time I was around for half of the '50s and the '60s. I was actually quite impressed by the cars from that era or "period" which is probably why I tend to build things that would have fit well into that place in time. I have been known to bend the rules a little bit though so while my cars are close to being correct they will probably never count as being "period perfect".

For those of us who remember hot rodders being lumped in with bikers by the establishment there actually is a box. The box is the status quo and not only did we think outside the box we lived outside the box. Some of us still do, not because we want to we just don't fit in.

 

I understand your point Stogy, but perid correct would have folks putting hula dolls, winking cats, dingleberries, curb feelers , lead ,and wolf whistles everywhere.
I grew up in the "period" and very few cars today are done the way they were back when. We have a real bastardized version of what is correct. Cars back when were VERY seldom the sanitized versions we see here.

 

I have a pony with a brown spot on it's nose. Would anyone care to discuss that ?

 

Don't know if I really agree with that first sentence - the Junk that you list were not used by any of the Real Hot Rodders, but rather by the guys who didn't make the cut and had cars that couldn't really stand on their own merit as a Hot Rod. The go fast guys didn't use all that crap, at least not here in So Cal - it was the poseurs and the Custom Crowd that did that. Maybe it was different somewhere else ......

 

I have to agree to a point here. Curb feelers and the little doggy with the woggly head were not so much part of hot rodding as they wee the custom/bomba scene though.

Hot rods were seldom as refined as we see and that is a fact, that is "newstalgia". But they were seldom the rusted out pieces of shit that we see either. To fit the period, pretty much any of them for a driven car we need to find some middle ground.

Something else that really does not fit "traditional" or "period correct" is weekend drivers. Cars got driven to and from. I am probably the exception to the rule because I am sure that most of the older guys on here grew up in upper middle class homes, but I don't really recall many people who were not working class and who had more then one car.

 

I am glad Ryan sticks to his guns so hard on this issue. As already mentioned, the NSRA used to take a staunch stand at the '49 model year break. Look what happened when they relaxed it. Last year at the NSRA Nats in Springfield, MO I had a black primer, 1980 Malibu Wagon back in and park beside my Model "A"..... need I say more.

 

I still dont know where this stands on the HAMB. I knew Ted Brown (RIP) quite well we conversed for several years before his death. On a few occasions we discussed the term Hot Rod and what that defined.

He sent me an email of his PC screen where the desktop wallpaper was a picture of my T, which he called the Yella Fella. He said it was 100% Hot Rod. This car was originally built in 1972 and has been 'refurbished over the last 4 decades. Yep it has disk brakes (1912 was the first use of them I believe), LED light (home made) and most everthing on it has been crafted as a one off by hand and manual machining.

So where does it stand as a Hot Rod and with regard to the HAMB?? I have been told it doesn't fit in a few T related threads.

Just wondering, thats all.

 

How many times do you need to hear that this T aint Hamb friendly?
But its sure a real hotrod.
But if you put on bias ply or cheaterslicks in the back it could look
like something Ed Rooth could have built.