Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2010 22:31:15 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'... THANK YOU!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by sdrodder on Nov 4, 2010 22:35:45 GMT -5
well chris i see it this way. If the tongottis t had it and it was chromed out then go for it. it wasnt a street rod it was a hot rod so i really dont see an issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Koolkat on Nov 4, 2010 23:27:11 GMT -5
I totally agree with Chris's photos and his 'assessment' of which ones are hot rods and which ones are street rods. For the most part - they are easy to tell which is which! The term 'street rod' wasn't in common use until roughly 1971ish. I'm sorry I don't recall the source, but it was in a magazine --- I'm thinking in the early issues of Street Rodder magazine? And that's about when they started looking like 'street rods'... To be 'traditional' doesn't have to mean 'commonplace'. Some of the 'traditional' cars from the fifties and sixties were cutting edge for the time. For a traditional drag car - the Ramchargers 'High and Mighty' Plymouth was traditonal, but certainly not commonplace - it's one of a kind. It was a true departure from the standard ones you see/saw at the time. I see nothing wrong with a TRAKable year IFS. They were around, cutting edge, but not commonplace. It was generally 'understood' a hot rod could be street driven or on the strip. Then somewhere along the line hot rodders didn't want the term hot rod to apply to fifties style cars - sort of an elitism, IMO. However a forties/fifties look with sixties parts (IFS) is a little incongruent? Just one old geezer's opinion...  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2010 23:52:33 GMT -5
For the Forums sake (ie pre 69) My way of thinking about Traditional, If the parts were available back then its fair game. At least thats what I thought when I joined here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bryce on Nov 4, 2010 23:52:51 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... I couldn’t agree more. This is such subjective stuff that even if I thought I might know the answer I would never be arrogant enough to even attempt to define it! Case in point – I consider this car to be a very tough hot rod, but does the “modern speed equipment” (centreline wheels and tunnel ram) make it a street rod? Would a blower and a set of Cragars really turn it into a hot rod?  Photo courtesy of Carps. The parts don't maketh the car. I think hot rod is all about attitude and street rod is all about comfort and reliability. Hot rods break down, street rods have air conditioning...need I go on? LOL I think in the car scene in general a lot of time is wasted trying to define things instead of just enjoying them for what they are. People seem obsessed with categorising things to the detriment of those on the fringes of lots of different groups. |
|
|
|
Post by krassandbernie on Nov 8, 2010 2:02:51 GMT -5
Not to throw a wrench into the monkey works here; but one thing you should all keep in mind is this..........a car is dated by it's newest part(s). We've seen how a simple wheel change can DATE a car.........and dating a car is the main factor in determining whether it is TRADITIONAL or not..........I've gone through this deal with the 1:1 car guys already........some people (the 1:1 crowd) just can't get that concept through their little pee brains! LOL!
|
|
|
|
Post by RodBurNeR on Nov 8, 2010 2:08:25 GMT -5
Excellent point Ed!
|
|
|
|
Post by zenrat on Nov 8, 2010 6:30:04 GMT -5
For the Forums sake (ie pre 69) My way of thinking about Traditional, If the parts were available back then its fair game. At least thats what I thought when I joined here. But it's not just the availability of the parts. It's how they were/are put together. After all it could be argued that given enough sheet metal, the tools, the skill, the time and the right drugs it would have been possible in 1965 to produce something that looked exactly like a 2010 Camaro. It would be a stupid argument but it could be made... |
|
|
|
Post by Koolkat on Nov 8, 2010 14:17:38 GMT -5
For the Forums sake (ie pre 69) My way of thinking about Traditional, If the parts were available back then its fair game. At least thats what I thought when I joined here. But it's not just the availability of the parts. It's how they were/are put together. After all it could be argued that given enough sheet metal, the tools, the skill, the time and the right drugs it would have been possible in 1965 to produce something that looked exactly like a 2010 Camaro. It would be a stupid argument but it could be made... And of course Rev. Mr. Black would remove such a model in a heartbeat! |
|
|
|
Post by krassandbernie on Nov 9, 2010 0:47:28 GMT -5
That was totally pointless! LOL! Only a moron would waste their time arguing with the person stupid enough to make such a claim! So, I don't think we need to worry about that here........I doubt anyone on this Forum is that clueless....or hardpressed to have their late model builds excepted on here! LOL!
What we need to keep in check here (again....as we do with the 1:1 crowd) is the HISTORY REVISIONIST or rewriting mentality! The logic of 'If it could have been done back then, then it's traditional' is a very fine line. What makes something traditional is the indelible mark it left on the hobby and vintage pages of Car Craft, Hot Rod, Rod & Custom, etc.
I think that about sums it up! LOL!
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by Bryce on Nov 9, 2010 20:39:38 GMT -5
What we need to keep in check here (again....as we do with the 1:1 crowd) is the HISTORY REVISIONIST or rewriting mentality! The logic of 'If it could have been done back then, then it's traditional' is a very fine line. What makes something traditional is the indelible mark it left on the hobby and vintage pages of Car Craft, Hot Rod, Rod & Custom, etc. I think the risk that you run with this kind of militant attitude is a loss of creativity as the forum becomes totally nostalgic and focused on replicas. I would certainly lose interest in posting here if I have to start supplying documentary evidence to support every new build. The vibe here has always been akin to that of an NNL, whereas lately it is reminding more of IPMS. |
|
|
|
Post by krassandbernie on Nov 9, 2010 21:23:12 GMT -5
I wasn't being militant.......just explaining how to tell what is traditional and what is not....by dating the parts....which is the only way to accomplish that honestly. I didn't mean what I wrote to be taken out of context here either...........as I too believe this place would die if we were pigeon holed into building replicas only; and/or having to back up our builds with historic documentation! LOL! Basically what I was saying was that all anyone has to do is pick up an old Hot Rod or Rod & Custom magazine from the '50s and '60's to see what was traditional. That doesn't mean that you can't build something out of your head now does it? LOL!
|
|
|
|
Post by RodBurNeR on Nov 10, 2010 0:01:13 GMT -5
replicas are fine...but that's not what it's about...period.  let's stop worrying about this corvette thread...it's getting too anal. arguing or pointing out facts that we all know is fun and refreshing, even educational to those who don't know....but I think the answer was given to the question. IPMS? oh hell no.....that's not the vibe I want to come from this place!  |
|
|
|
Post by zenrat on Nov 10, 2010 0:08:45 GMT -5
Shades of grey.
As soon as you define it and lock it down you restrict it's creativity and it withers and dies.
|
|
|
|
Post by RodBurNeR on Nov 10, 2010 0:14:47 GMT -5
Shades of grey. As soon as you define it and lock it down you restrict it's creativity and it withers and dies. Nobody is restricting any creativity here...it's good to learn and ask questions. This thread is not going to change the face of TRaK. |
|
Nov 17, 2024 17:50:56 GMT -5
Nov 17, 2024 17:50:56 GMT -5