Register now to get rid of these ads!

Art & Inspiration Proportions

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Ned Ludd, Sep 13, 2020.

  1. Ned Ludd
    Joined: May 15, 2009
    Posts: 4,072

    Ned Ludd
    Member

    Could I get some gut reactions to the proportions of this?
    1929 Duesenberg J edited.jpg
     
    dana barlow and chryslerfan55 like this.
  2. Maybe the photograph, but from the doors rearward it seems to shrink.
     
  3. 34Phil
    Joined: Sep 12, 2016
    Posts: 226

    34Phil

    The top of the hood should be lowered to door sill and top is too short, would look better if door was lengthened. If hood dropped then body line needs dropping, too.
     
    Chavezk21, RMONTY, alanp561 and 3 others like this.

  4. Just drop the front enough to level or slightly more and the hood will just slope forward.
    Get rid of the rack on the back. Move the bumpers closer to the body, take the top off.
    Then drive the wheels of it! It's a Duesenberg!
     
  5. My gut tells me its perfect
     
  6. denis4x4
    Joined: Apr 23, 2005
    Posts: 3,550

    denis4x4
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Colorado

    The spare tire is a distraction. Otherwise, it's a home run.
     
    1934coupe and Ned Ludd like this.
  7. VANDENPLAS
    Joined: Dec 14, 2009
    Posts: 2,669

    VANDENPLAS
    Member

    I would loose the luggage rack and drop the top down. As in what is can do ! Not a chop .

    Other then that I think it’s snazzy !
     
    chryslerfan55 and Ned Ludd like this.
  8. thintin
    Joined: Mar 24, 2006
    Posts: 223

    thintin
    Member

    too chicago - untouchables era gangsterish looking from the door forward.
     
    Ned Ludd likes this.
  9. VANDENPLAS
    Joined: Dec 14, 2009
    Posts: 2,669

    VANDENPLAS
    Member

    Stupid question maybe
    What is it ?

    please don’t say it’s a dodge :D
     
  10. blowby
    Joined: Dec 27, 2012
    Posts: 6,864

    blowby
    Member
    from Nicasio Ca

    Duesenberg. or not...
     
    VANDENPLAS likes this.
  11. A Boner
    Joined: Dec 25, 2004
    Posts: 5,729

    A Boner
    Member

    Proportions are ok...just needs a dropped axle. It’s a little nose high!
     
    fauj, Tony Martino and Ned Ludd like this.
  12. Barn Hunter
    Joined: Feb 15, 2012
    Posts: 1,372

    Barn Hunter
    Member

    Proportions.....Cut it at the windshield, straight down and......it looks very heavy in the front, lighter in back. Almost like 2 different cars grafted together. Of course at this time and years to follow, designers were at the top of their game. Doesn't mean we can't do some virtual tweaking.
     
    Ned Ludd, chryslerfan55 and Hnstray like this.
  13. It looks great. It obviously has a bigger engine.
     
  14. Hnstray
    Joined: Aug 23, 2009
    Posts: 11,583

    Hnstray
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Quincy, IL

    Totally agree.......my exact thoughts too upon first viewing.

    Ray
     
  15. 19Fordy
    Joined: May 17, 2003
    Posts: 6,922

    19Fordy
    Member

    34 Phil got it right.
     
    Chavezk21 and Ned Ludd like this.
  16. ClarkH
    Joined: Jul 21, 2010
    Posts: 949

    ClarkH
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    The camera lense is at hubcap height, and I'm thinking the angle accentuates the heavy front and door/hood propotions. Regardless, they don't bother me. I like the look of big long hood and a back that dops off (the T-hood on my speedster was replaced with a La Salle hood, so I'm biased :D).

    Agree on the luggage rack. The kind of doo-dad restorers love. I'd like to think that car's original owner could afford to have his people send the luggage ahead.
     
    Ned Ludd likes this.
  17. The hood is higher for reasons. The choices seem to be: remove the reasons to lower the hood (shrink the front), enlarge the rest, or leave it alone. I suspect the rest wasn't enlarged because it was meant to be a smaller car with a bigger engine. A sporty runabout, if you will.
     
    Ned Ludd and VANDENPLAS like this.
  18. oldandkrusty
    Joined: Oct 8, 2002
    Posts: 2,103

    oldandkrusty
    Member

    It's a Duesenberg, therefore it is PERFECT! Can you tell, I'm a bit prejudiced...
     
    Dan Hay, alanp561, mgtstumpy and 4 others like this.
  19. belair
    Joined: Jul 10, 2006
    Posts: 8,530

    belair
    Member

    Proportions are ok, but the hood/cowl is a little too high, as has been said. It is just cluttered at rhe front and especially the rear. Still a beauty.
     
    Just Gary and Ned Ludd like this.
  20.  
    1934coupe, Ned Ludd and VANDENPLAS like this.
  21. jnaki
    Joined: Jan 1, 2015
    Posts: 4,881

    jnaki

    upload_2020-9-13_8-47-22.png

    Hello,

    We are all accustomed to seeing smaller front ends from the cowl forward. Mainly because this large roadster is not a “traditional hot rod” in that sense. Whatever traditional means to the HAMB period Hot rod enthusiasts. Model Ts, Model As, 32 fords and all of the lineage from that time period to 1965. This is a European style roadster and as such not HAMB traditional.

    Plus, since we all like the US factory old cars, the front end looks like a huge barn attached to a bunch of different 33-34 Ford/Chevy roadsters to house a big v-12 or some other monster of a motor. It has been said that the 32 grille was a wind stopper as it was large and upright. This roadster is bigger and should block more wind. But, in the European style roadster days with these large roadsters, the motor were large and powerful. It is just not a traditional hot rod in any definition and the proportions are out of whack.

    Jnaki

    Yes, there have been other European style roadsters and phaetons in the USA hot rod history, but we just don’t want to be the ones that cross the strict HAMB traditional hot rod lines. This one crossed that point and in a big front end way. YRMV
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2020
  22. Hello,
    I didn't find (quickly enough) a suitable right side shot of a black 1929 Ford Model A roadster with the top up to post and say, "I Photoshopped it."
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2020
    Ned Ludd likes this.
  23. 19Fordy
    Joined: May 17, 2003
    Posts: 6,922

    19Fordy
    Member

    Remember, that was "the look" designers desired when those cars were produced.
     
    Lil32, VANDENPLAS and Ned Ludd like this.
  24. 64 DODGE 440
    Joined: Sep 2, 2006
    Posts: 4,148

    64 DODGE 440
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from so cal

    Looks great to me. It could leak oil in my driveway any time it wanted to.
     
    alanp561, ClayMart, Ned Ludd and 2 others like this.
  25. Quick gut response,,,
    Reversed wedge shape and wide end illogically headed forward.
     
    Ned Ludd likes this.
  26. Hey jnaki
    When did Duesenberg become European?
     
  27. drtrcrV-8
    Joined: Jan 6, 2013
    Posts: 1,324

    drtrcrV-8
    Member

    Stop for a moment to enjoy it for what it is & how it relates to it's time period... Besides : how many of us are EVER going to own/be-involved-with any Duesenberg, let alone a Duesenberg Roadster?
     
  28. Looks a bit like it´s leaving it´s back wheels behind, but it´s far from bad.
    Actually my main gripe on a second look is that the bonnet line is much higher than the trunk.
     
    Ned Ludd likes this.
  29. Put the top down....perfect. I’ll take it :)
     
    VANDENPLAS and Ned Ludd like this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.