Blue deuce

[lizzard62]

Mar 14, 2011 19:45:57 GMT -5 aaronfurlotte said:

I personally think it should be allowed. Take a look at the vintage photos in the September 2010 issue of Hot Rod magazine, those rods have wide tires and huge slicks just like just like the ones on David's sedan. The pictures all date from '65-'67. Not allowing this build to be posted would be total BS. Also, about the 4 bar, Ed Roth's Outlaw had a 4 bar and it was built in the late '50's. The Ram Charger's High&Mighty Plymouth had a home built 4 bar rear, it was also built in the late '50s. I think this build is totally TRaK-able. Wicked build David!

Thanks , you get where I'm going with these. sorry about the chessy exaust , I'll have to fix that , again ,Thanks!

[lizzard62]

So is it yeah , or neah ?

[RodBurNeR]

Mar 15, 2011 17:45:02 GMT -5 @vtwin88 said:

Isn't that wheel and tire combo in the classic Revellogram '55 Chevy "Bad Man" kit?

Yes they are in that kit.

To all:

JUST because so many of us think they are ugly, doesn't mean they aren't TRaKable.
My personal opinion is not that of the rims, but instead of how they "look" with them tires and on this style of car. It's just not what I would imagine being "traditional".
By all means....the damn guidelines say pre 1970...meaning 1969 and earlier parts and styles. Use the wheels if you have to...even if the majority thinks otherwise..it's your model but don't expect a lot of loving comments..obviously.

[krassandbernie]

Although I don't care for the front tires much; they were being used pre '70...........perfect example.....the McMullin roadster. I liked the thinner tires that were on the McMullin roadster when it was featured on the cover of Hot Rod magazine in '63, but that's just me. Can't get much more traditional then this roadster! LOL!

Also, after thumbing through one of my Hot Rod pictorials from '69 I saw many rods with the wider slicks on them.......such as this yellow '32 deuce. That being said, the slicks on the blue sedan in question might be a hair larger.........need to look at them again to be sure.

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

[RodBurNeR]

It's these types of topics that make me wish I had made the cut off '65 which is the true traditional cut off. I only made it through '69 because I believe some cars can be made with the same flavor.

[Jody Michielsen]

I like that black car. Only wish I knew what the rims looked like? The yellow car sucks in my opinion!

[krassandbernie]

It's these types of topics that make me wish I had made the cut off '65 which is the true traditional cut off. I only made it through '69 because I believe some cars can be made with the same flavor.

Quite frankly, I think that comment was kind of rediculous. There were tons of traditional cars built between '65 and '69 that did not look like they were from the '70's. I understand where your frustration comes in Bob.........really, I do! LOL! None the less, I don't think you have much to worry about since most of the guys here don't build late sixties rods anyway. Personally, the late sixties stuff is my most favorite; but I like the more refined stuff. So, you won't see builds from me that push the "'69" trends cut off.

[RodBurNeR]

Mar 16, 2011 10:38:46 GMT -5 krassandbernie said:

It's these types of topics that make me wish I had made the cut off '65 which is the true traditional cut off. I only made it through '69 because I believe some cars can be made with the same flavor.

Quite frankly, I think that comment was kind of rediculous. There were tons of traditional cars built between '65 and '69 that did not look like they were from the '70's. I understand where your frustration comes in Bob.........really, I do! LOL! None the less, I don't think you have much to worry about since most of the guys here don't build late sixties rods anyway. Personally, the late sixties stuff is my most favorite; but I like the more refined stuff. So, you won't see builds from me that push the "'69" trends cut off.

I'm not frustrated. I just hate to see so much confusion among you all. I think it's more frustrating to you guys trying to figure it out. I hope that makes sense? Off to work...have a good day.

[krassandbernie]

Ah, o.k............yeah, I agree......the 'lines' do tend to get blurred a LOT around here with what people think or perceive to be traditional.......again, I suggest just looking through the old magazines to find proof and to be sure. If you don't find a particular wheel or part on a car in a magazine from '69 on back then don't use it........pretty simple! LOL!

[dodgefever]

I'm not trying to figure anything out, I just find those rims ugly - but, my tastes are more towards earlier styles in any case. Just my opinion, no offence meant...

[Deleted]

Mar 16, 2011 16:17:35 GMT -5 dodgefever said:

I'm not trying to figure anything out, I just find those rims ugly - but, my tastes are more towards earlier styles in any case. Just my opinion, no offence meant...

[Deleted]

Mar 15, 2011 18:40:14 GMT -5 lizzard62 said:

So is it yeah , or neah ?

Its a yeah, but remember what bob said, don't expect much from it.

[lizzard62]

Thanks fellas , I'm sorry everytime I post a car we have to go through this. I'll try to keep it more traditional like Bob said. Thanks again.

[kh58ford]

I don't usually get into discussions like this one and this is Bob's sandbox and he just let's me play here. That being said, a cutoff date does not make a car traditional. It's all in the right parts and the final overall look. There were cars built before 69 that weren't traditional and cars built after 69 that were. I think we all pretty well understand what has the look and what doesn't without getting hung up on a cutoff date. I wouldn't use chevy rally wheels (came out in late sixties) on a rod and call it traditional, would you?

[krassandbernie]

If you are deferring that question to me Kevin......no, I wouldn't! LOL! My comment was to be taken as it stands........if it was popular (a trend) enough to end up in the magazines with in the time periods allowed here then it should be considered traditional. That's all I was clarifying.