|
Post by Dennis on Nov 2, 2010 2:40:09 GMT -5
Searched first but didn't see anyone else ask.
Would an early, 60's style, Corvette rear suspension fly around here? Not talking about any high-tech, street rod style bullshit. Just a straight forward, no flash, paint detailed installation.
The rest of the rod: fenderless '29 roadster pickup with dropped axle, split bones, flatty motor, vintage Halibrands and other vintage rod stuff.
Verdict?
|
|
|
Post by Bryce on Nov 2, 2010 4:24:22 GMT -5
Why not? It certainly could have been done in the period.
|
|
|
Post by roddratt on Nov 2, 2010 6:42:25 GMT -5
Should be okay. Jag indy rear suspensions were popular back in the day. I don't make the rules here and I don't presume to speak for Bob, but if it's pre '70 it should fly...
|
|
|
Post by Dennis on Nov 2, 2010 9:33:02 GMT -5
Just to clarify, I am talking about '63+ IRS, not the '53-62 straight axle.
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Kron on Nov 2, 2010 10:03:22 GMT -5
Tognotti's King T won AMBR in '64 so absolutely no question that IRS rear suspension is deep in the pocket of the TRaK window. Interesting, however, that we should even be discussing this. It shows that there an is even more strict and narrow POV possible regarding what is "tradtional'...
|
|
|
Post by Koolkat on Nov 2, 2010 13:06:19 GMT -5
Tognotti's King T won AMBR in '64 so absolutely no question that IRS rear suspension is deep in the pocket of the TRaK window. Interesting, however, that we should even be discussing this. It shows that there an is even more strict and narrow POV possible regarding what is "tradtional'...
|
|
|
Post by RodBurNeR on Nov 2, 2010 13:55:38 GMT -5
I don't have a problem with it.
Bernard brings a good point.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisV on Nov 2, 2010 14:12:33 GMT -5
I fully agree, that a '63+ Corvette rear axle and suspension can be used on a TRaK'able model.
However, I think it would be stretching the rules way too far to consider (pre-'69) Corvette rearends TRaK'able in general.
I think the determining factor is the overall style of the build: The XR6, which I consider completely TRaK'able, was a "hi-tech" purpose-built show rod and as such, using the (then) modern rear suspension seemed like a natural choice.
Compare this to the recent reissue of the (ex. Monogram) '37 Ford Coupe or AMT's '34 Ford 5W Coupe (2'n1 version) - Both of these kits feature what appears to be Corvette rear suspensions, but I don't consider any of these kits to be "traditional" (except for the '34 if it's built with the stock axles and vintage speed equipment) - In these cases, the use of Corvette suspensions just screams Street Rod to me.
Of course it's important to remember the "If we can't see it, we don't care" policy at TRaK, but if you plan to build a visible (Corvette-) suspension, please keep in mind that the overall impression of the car has to be traditional, so we don't end up watering out the traditional theme with Street Rods "disguised"as Hot Rods .
I hope the above makes some sense...
Edit: While I wrote XR6 in the above, I actually meant Tognotti's "King T" - The XR6 had a "Trailing arm" (read: 4-link) rear suspension - I'm not gonna open that can of worms....
|
|
|
Post by RodBurNeR on Nov 2, 2010 14:58:35 GMT -5
sure does!
|
|
|
Post by Dennis on Nov 2, 2010 15:17:32 GMT -5
Thanks for the input, guys. I generally don't consider a Corvette IRS a traditional hotrod item, but that's not to say a few guys didn't do it back in the day, I'm sure they did. But, it takes more than a "few" to make something a tradition. For that reason I wanted to hear other's thoughts on the subject.
The project I'm proposing to use the 'Vette IRS on isn't going to be a fancy show-style rod, nor will the focal point of the chassis be the IRS. Rather, it will be painted to match the rest of the chassis parts and blend-in. It's main purpose is to get around packaging constraints I didn't consider when I constructed a custom frame for my '29 Roadster Pickup project currently "on the bench".
So I guess the general feel is that it's cool and I will proceed unless instructed otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by zenrat on Nov 4, 2010 19:17:05 GMT -5
I suspect this is another can of worms but excuse my ignorance. What's the difference between a Hot Rod & Street Rod?
|
|
|
Post by ChrisV on Nov 4, 2010 19:36:07 GMT -5
I suspect this is another can of worms but excuse my ignorance. What's the difference between a Hot Rod & Street Rod? There's no reason to apologize - the only stupid questions are the ones left unasked... The general pre-'49 rule applies, so it all boils down to the overall style of the car (particularly if modern speed equipment has been used) - A picture tells a thousand words, so here's a couple to explain the difference: (Pics from Dave Lindsay's Fotki-page) Hot Rod: Street Rod:
|
|
|
Post by gmckid on Nov 4, 2010 20:24:41 GMT -5
To add to the confusion I believe the definition of either term is in the eye of the beholder. Originally the term Street Rod was used to describe a street driven hot rod, and that definition dates back to the fifties, if not even earlier than that. At that time a guys hot rod would also double as his daily driver...thus street rod. A hot rod was a car that was built for racing.
As with any other term its difficult to categorize what is what because everyone has a different viewpoint on the matter. If you want proof just look at the type of cars Street Rodder magazine features in comparason to the majority of cars Hot Rod magazine covers. Or ask a non car person what a hot rod is, and they probably picture a 68 camaro with a big blower, then ask what a street rod is and they will probably think of a fad T. I could be wrong, but out of the picures Chris V posted I bet that only the primered A coupe, the full fendered 34 and the A panel see street duty, while the others are mainly for show. Does that make him wrong? Nope, ultimately what it boils down to is perspective...
|
|
|
Post by sdrodder on Nov 4, 2010 21:49:04 GMT -5
i think again with the corvette suspension if it was done in the day then do it. We arent talking about farging street rod shit, dennis is talking about a straight forward out of the vette rear not a pocket book streetrawder thing. So yeah go for it.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisV on Nov 4, 2010 22:18:31 GMT -5
i think again with the corvette suspension if it was done in the day then do it. We arent talking about farging street rod shit, dennis is talking about a straight forward out of the vette rear not a pocket book streetrawder thing. So yeah go for it. If I'm reading your reply right, it's kinda contradicting my point... The Rods and Customs that had 'Vette suspensions back in the day (at least the ones I've seen pictures of) weren't just "out of the 'Vette, into the rod" types of cars, but in most cases advanced custom rods (like the aforementioned XR6). A plated 'Vette suspension would be perfectly acceptable on a car like this: trakinscale.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=on&action=display&thread=9748, whereas I'm having some problems seeing the "traditional" aspect if it's hidden away under a full-fendered rod. (Of course, if it's hidden so well that it isn't visible in the posted pictures, there's no problem either...)
|
|