Resto-Mods & Modern Hot Rods

[Bernard Kron]

Point taken, as things can go to extremes (Wheel size on DONKS…. spoiler size in Imports…… Most rust and garbage welded onto a Rat Rod…..) but listen to yourself. Step back and read what you posted about tire/wheel size.

That's what the Greasers said when everyone was bolting Cragers on their cars in the 60's with the tires sticking out way past the fenders. ....

I'm afraid you're ignoring the question. I'm perfectly aware that styles evolve and that sometimes they grow out of the technical changes that improve performance and reliability. Are you in fact saying that there's nothing that can be done about it? I'm asking you from the point of you of someone that does this professionally and must make considered recommendations to your customers every day. If you have a customer who says they just don't look right would you tell him that he can go to old style wheel/tire/wheel opening proportions but only at a penalty in comfort and handling?

[Casey]

Well built car with old parts and technology is good to drive and they are quite reliable if built well.

Out of curiosity, Niko, would you be in favor of installing hand cranks instead of air or electric starter motors? Mechanical brakes instead of hydraulic, essentially using older parts to backdate a vehicle which falls into your acceptable year range? Would you drive a car with only gas-lit headlamps, semaphore turn signals, and ask your family and friends to ride in the rumble seat when it's raining? I'm not trying to be hostile, but rather seriously wondering what the limit is to your acceptance of older parts and styles, and exactly how "far back" you'd go with a vehicle, if older parts are the only acceptable changes.

As far as "good" wheel and tire proportions, again, that's a very personal thing, so there is no right answer, though I think each vehicle must be viewed as its own case, since they vary so much. I think these updated Pontiac "snowflake" wheels are well proportioned, and while the tire are 40-series 17" tires, they aren't too short in the sidewall:

[Bernard Kron]

Out of curiosity, Niko, would you be in favor of installing hand cranks instead of air or electric starter motors? Mechanical brakes instead of hydraulic, essentially using older parts to backdate a vehicle which falls into your acceptable year range? Would you drive a car with only gas-lit headlamps, semaphore turn signals, and ask your family and friends to ride in the rumble seat when it's raining? I'm not trying to be hostile, but rather seriously wondering what the limit is to your acceptance of older parts and styles, and exactly how "far back" you'd go with a vehicle, if older parts are the only acceptable changes.

As far as "good" wheel and tire proportions, again, that's a very personal thing, so there is no right answer, though I think each vehicle must be viewed as its own case, since they vary so much. I think these updated Pontiac "snowflake" wheels are well proportioned, and while the tire are 40-series 17" tires, they aren't too short in the sidewall:

Of course he wouldn't "drive a car with only gas-lit headlamps, semaphore turn signals, and ask [his] family and friends to ride in the rumble seat when it's raining". So the question does come on more than a bit hostile. But it's a good one none the less. What is the cost in subjective experience that one is willing to pay in order to gain modern levels of performance and comfort? Or the opposite, what is the cost in safety, comfort and performance that one would pursue in order to achieve period correctness? And of course, what does any of this have to do with car modeling, where such issues don't have any practical impact? In scale I can afford to be as much of a purist or iconoclast as I want to be!

Regarding tires and wheels, etc. Of course it's a personal preference. But once you get past that do you have to accept a penalty in quality and performance to maintain the older proportions? That's what I'm asking. From a modeling point of view I have been considering doing models that would be a hybrid of new and old technologies and aesthetics in the Resto-Mod vein, but one area where I run into issues is the tire/wheel thing. Even the relatively mild tire/wheel combos John shows in his pictures still look too light and airy in the wheel wells to my eye. (That 40 section in your post just shows way too much wheel well for my tastes). Do I have to accept this if I'm modeling a contemporary high-performance vehicle? Is their an ultra-high (or even just high) performance 15" or 16" 60 or 65 section wheel tire combo out there? This is in the interests of authenticity and accuracy in my model...

Edited February 18, 2015 by Bernard Kron

[Longbox55]

When you pull up to a light with a old muscle and some kid in a Evo or a new Mustang pulls up next to you, They will just laugh at you and blow your doors off . New cars are just faster and handle better now and the brakes are great.

In my experience, the Evo and Mustang kids might have laughed, or at least until they got their doors blown off by the '67 New Yorker we were in. But then again, they didn't expect that "stock" 440 under the hood to actually be a 537 cid stroker engine. Used to do the same thing with a '49 Chevy 1 ton truck, Sucker 'em in and put 'em in their place!

[Sixx]

Oh man John...that Olds is so freakin cool....I love that bad boy!!!!!!!! :-)

[turbo nova]

I'm afraid you're ignoring the question. I'm perfectly aware that styles evolve and that sometimes they grow out of the technical changes that improve performance and reliability. Are you in fact saying that there's nothing that can be done about it? I'm asking you from the point of you of someone that does this professionally and must make considered recommendations to your customers every day. If you have a customer who says they just don't look right would you tell him that he can go to old style wheel/tire/wheel opening proportions but only at a penalty in comfort and handling?

I cant speak for fastback but in my shop it always starts with several sit downs and planning and in that stage many things are discussed and how they will effect everything else both from a looks and function standpoint. I have no issue with putting 14 or 15 wheels on a car but I will point out that brake selection is limited as well as tire selection as they are just not common sizes any more. I dont have many customers so it makes it easy for me to know what each one prefers and I cant tell you how much easier it is than when I was working at other shops that would take on any job just to get it. As far as the idea of ruing cars by changing them I feel those people may be under the impression there all nice to begin with and that simply isnt the case, most of my work involves replacing 30 to 50% of the body on every build, the years of abuse, neglect, wear and tear, and frankly poor crafstmanship by people that didnt know better or just didnt care make finding nice survivors harder by the day.

I can appreciate everyones point of view on what they prefer but many things just have to change as a result of what the car is being asked to do, N5015's and factory disc/drums with 1000rwhp is just not logical at all. It's all in what you want the car to do and bee.

[chunkypeanutbutter]

Hot Rod magazine makes me puke sometimes. LS1 engines all time.

Original = simple = cheap = more fun

I don't care if my 4cyl Triumph will barely get 100+ hp, it's easy to work on and it'll be as fun as anything else.

[turbo nova]

Hot Rod magazine makes me puke sometimes. LS1 engines all time.

Original = simple = cheap = more fun

I don't care if my 4cyl Triumph will barely get 100+ hp, it's easy to work on and it'll be as fun as anything else.

just different folks enjoying different aspects of the hobby is all, so long as its fun. same as modeling IMO

[W-409]

Out of curiosity, Niko, would you be in favor of installing hand cranks instead of air or electric starter motors? Mechanical brakes instead of hydraulic, essentially using older parts to backdate a vehicle which falls into your acceptable year range? Would you drive a car with only gas-lit headlamps, semaphore turn signals, and ask your family and friends to ride in the rumble seat when it's raining? I'm not trying to be hostile, but rather seriously wondering what the limit is to your acceptance of older parts and styles, and exactly how "far back" you'd go with a vehicle, if older parts are the only acceptable changes.

As far as "good" wheel and tire proportions, again, that's a very personal thing, so there is no right answer, though I think each vehicle must be viewed as its own case, since they vary so much. I think these updated Pontiac "snowflake" wheels are well proportioned, and while the tire are 40-series 17" tires, they aren't too short in the sidewall:

Umm, not quite !

Alright, I will say it first that this post is completely according to my personal preferences. Probably many of you don't agree with me, but I will tell you how I like these cars being modernized.

I think it depends of the era of the car how much it can be modernized. Drag Race cars don't belong to this post, as, according to my last post, I'm okay with a bit more modern parts in them (No way I'm okay with anything like LS engines or new Hemis or that kind of stuff in them either).

With Hot Rods, let's say up to 1948 as they are often classified, I think it's perfectly fine to use 1950s and 1960s parts in them. I really like seeing for example a '31 Ford with a Small Block Chevy and three carbs. It is still old school even if it is modernized. But then again, 1970s technology in them is already starting to lower my interest and when coming to the 1980s and 1990s with that horrible High Tech style... Man, those are horrible!

On 1950s cars I'm okay seeing 1960s technology in them. In some cases, 1970s tech / style is alright as well, but quite rarely. Again 1980s and newer High Tech and then these all Pro Touring etc things scare me off.

1960s and 1970s Cars are okay with 1970s technology and style sometimes, but not always. It really depends on the situation, what car it is, how the car was built and what newer parts were used. For example a '66 Rambler American built in 1970s style with raised rear end and all of that "Important Equipment" those cars used to have, can be good looking.

Then in cars of the 1980s, it is natural that the technology is from 1980s, just like with 1990s cars. But then again, I don't like seeing them built in popular styles of those decades like the High Tech I mentioned or Pro Street with everything painted the same (And usually ugly) color. My daily driver is a 1987 Chevrolet Van with a 379 Cid (6.2 liter) Diesel V8 in factory stock condition. It works very nicely here in Finland, despite the cold and snowy winter. It is really possible to drive every day with that.

Of course these years are not "spot on" and every time it depends on the situation if the modifications are something that I like or not.

I don't like the look of many new cars. Of course the styling is almost always very ugly, but other thing that catches my eyes... The wheels and tires! That's why I think new cars look the best in Drag Strips when they have 15" wheels with high profile tires on front and rear. This goes for GM F-Bodies, Fox Mustangs and all of those new cars that usually have big wheels when rolling on streets. I am always perfectly fine with some sort of modifications and modernizing. Mostly that kind of stuff that can't be seen or that just have to be done. For example batteries. I'm fine with modern batteries in old cars, because it is a no brainer to buy those replicas of old batteries - they are very expensive. Of course if the new battery is self modified to look old, it's always better. I have no problem with someone changing an alternator to replace a generator. No problem for me, though again, the generator would have looked much better. Modern lights are okay up to some point. Those Xenon lights or whatever they are called and Led lights on old cars are a no-no in my opinion. Modern brakes, yep, no problem as long as they fit inside regular size wheels etc etc.

Maybe you get the point what I'm trying to say here. Just like it's said on TRaK forum rules. What we can't see... Can't hurt. But these Resto Mods / Pro Touring cars never look good in my opinion.

What Casey said about those Pontiac Snowflake wheels... I think the wheels are too big looking for any old car, because those tires have way too low profile and if someone installed a proper high profile tire on those wheels, then the car would end up looking like a Monster Truck or something.

I hope you guys understand what I try to say here. I don't want to say that this is the only way cars should be built. NO. But this is the way I like them.

[FASTBACK340]

I've been busy, but I have more disgusting, hacked up cars to show you. But first…...

As in almost any shop that expects happy customers and repeat business, yes we have several "sit down's" to talk-out the customers vision. And yes, we make recommendations.

This is an actual C51 (I believe that was the code….) `69 Camaro Pace Car replica. My Boss spoke with the owner several times about his plan, but the customer signs the checks and we build. This car is making us ALL cringe…..

502 fuel injected big block, automatic overdrive, 4 wheel disc's, suspension, custom gauges, etc…..

We also got the engine mounted in the Lincoln and added the big brakes

And just to show we're not out to ruin every car on the road by making them safer & more reliable with better fuel economy, here's a testament to restoration insanity. This is that 440-6Bbl. `Cuda I mentioned in a previously post. The undercarriage is nicer that most cars top-side. And BTW: This was a back-halved drag car when found complete with multi-point cage and wheel tubs and my shop brought her back.

Take a deep breath gang…. there's millions of Mustangs and Camaro's out there. If one get's dragged off the scrap-pile and get's Hot Rodded, so what? The Camaro Pace car I agree on, it should have been brought back. But then again, the guy who owns the car (and pays the bills……) get's what he wants. Even if it's the culinary equivalent of dipping your Tuna sandwich in Grape Jelly.

[om617]

The 69 Camaro Pace Car replica has potential if he chose 17 or 18" Rallye and painted the engine to look original.

Edited February 20, 2015 by om617

[fitforbattle]

I'm just gonna say that I partially agree with all of you, on some or all parts. I don't like the look of "Pro Touring", but some of them I can appreciate. Some are cool. Some are well built, some has soul.

However, I'd very much see bigger vented disk brakes on all cars. I'm currently driving around in a '01 Opel Astra Sedan, with worn out drums in the back. If they were disks, I'd fix them immediately, but drum servicing is a PITA.

Of course, this is what I currently feel about drum brakes due to my situation, and pretty much has nothing to do with the thread, but come on guys, you can't hate on maintenance-easy, reliable superstoppers.

[turbo nova]

sounds like most here are not into hot rods and customs but prefer stock stuff?

[Ace-Garageguy]

sounds like most here are not into hot rods and customs but prefer stock stuff?

I pretty much like anything that's done with skill, quality craftsmanship, good engineering and style. Straight restorations, traditional rods, street-rods, pro-touring cars, Euro and Asian tuners, offroad-trucks...anything that's done WELL.

I've seen a LOT of fine old vehicles ruined by "experts", "restorers", "hot-rodders", "car builders" etc, who were nothing but idiot hackers. Even cars from "name" shops with a lot of "what were they thinking? poorly-done "modifications".

If it's done well, works right and looks good (even the box-stock '34 Ford 4-dr sedan with mechanical brakes we have in the shop at the moment can be DRIVEN if you have just a little understanding of allowing yourself enough room to stop, and don't expect it to practically stand on it's nose like a recent Porsche) gets a big OK !!! from me.

What I'm building at the moment in 1:1 was inspired mainly by this Oz Welch build. We'll have much the same look, but no chop, 4-5" of ground clearance and LS power.

[turbo nova]

I feel the same way

[FASTBACK340]

I've seen a LOT of fine old vehicles ruined by "experts", "restorers", "hot-rodders", "car builders" etc, who were nothing but idiot hackers. Even cars from "name" shops with a lot of "what were they thinking? poorly-done "modifications".

A hack is a hack is a hack……. that happens at high-end shops, dealerships and goofy-lube. These bozo's weed themselves out from the better shops. But poor choices made by the customer, well…. we're not turning away money.

Ever have the kid behind the counter talk you out of a cheeseburger because it's bad for you and would you listen if that's what you have your heart set on?

[Lownslow]

I pretty much like anything that's done with skill, quality craftsmanship, good engineering and style. Straight restorations, traditional rods, street-rods, pro-touring cars, Euro and Asian tuners, offroad-trucks...anything that's done WELL.

I've seen a LOT of fine old vehicles ruined by "experts", "restorers", "hot-rodders", "car builders" etc, who were nothing but idiot hackers. Even cars from "name" shops with a lot of "what were they thinking? poorly-done "modifications".

If it's done well, works right and looks good (even the box-stock '34 Ford 4-dr sedan with mechanical brakes we have in the shop at the moment can be DRIVEN if you have just a little understanding of allowing yourself enough room to stop, and don't expect it to practically stand on it's nose like a recent Porsche) gets a big OK !!! from me.

What I'm building at the moment in 1:1 was inspired mainly by this Oz Welch build. We'll have much the same look, but no chop, 4-5" of ground clearance and LS power.

so nothing like the OZ build

[gtx6970]

sounds like most here are not into hot rods and customs but prefer stock stuff?

Like I mentioned earlier in this thread, I like them all. IF its done in good taste and the subject idea works well as a whole ..the donks and such ,,not so much .

Also, I personally am not a huge fan of the cars slammed on the ground,,even i its on airbags . Irregardless of the body style or workmanship.

BUT,,,,, I can appreciate the work involved to get it to that point.

[Ace-Garageguy]

so nothing like the OZ build

Whatever.

Same car, same color, similar interior, same wheels, same tires...so no, nothing at all like it.

And the object wasn't to copy the damm Oz build anyway.

The client wants a car that presents as cleanly-built, straight, well-fitted and as professional as the Oz car, but something with adequate ground clearance to be used as a weekend driver. No bags. No BS. Reliability of a brick. Easy to service with readily-available parts. For under $150,000. He paid $60k sight-unseen for a "finished, all it needs is detailing" monkey-hacked mess of crapp out of SoCal with sorta shiny paint, and not much else. Got it to the big Atl and had it in 3 "professional" shops before he came to us, and all he got was bent over while he signed checks. Every damm thing on the car was done by chimps. So it's going to top $200,000 any way you look at it.

The guy could afford a new Lambo or Roller, but he wants a very special '47 Cadillac.

It will still be a beautiful old car, and it will work like a new one.

Edited February 21, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Greg Myers]

torqs lol the cop out wheel of muscle cars

YEP!

[Ace-Garageguy]

YEP!

Perfect wheels for the car.

[Tom Geiger]

I think it comes down to money and that our opinions really don't matter in the big scheme of things.

In the old days, we all had the romance of finding some old hulk in a field and completely rebuilding it, either as a restoration, or as a hot rod. We would rationalize the car as a hot rod because, "it was too far gone to restore, and that's better than rotting in a field".

Well, work, both labor and materials has gotten expensive, making starting with a hulk cost prohibitive. So today the rule is "start with the best car you can afford", and ironically ripping apart that nice clean original car is actually more cost effective than redoing a rusty hulk. And once you have two things, big business and the prices people will paid for these modern resto rods, all bets on saving those nice originals are off.

For instance, the Insurance Institute For Highway Safety bought a clean 1959 Chevy for their 50th anniversary campaign. Only they didn't tell the owner that they were going to crash it head on into a then new 1999 Malibu. I don't know what they paid for that car, but it was obviously within their budget for that stunt. And they got their money's worth of publicity for the stunt. Sacrifice one classic car.

Next example is the Gas Monkey Garage contract build for Diet Mountain Dew and Dale Jr. Obvious deep pockets, the cost of one classic car isn't even a blip on their promotions budget. Start with one very nice red and white 1956 Nomad that I really would've loved to have in that shape, tear it apart and add in all the latest junk... suddenly its this high dollar rod with a TV pedigree! You will never get that stock Nomad back, but again that served it's purpose.

There will always be enough 1959 Chevys and 1956 Nomads that we won't lose all memory of those cars because of the above two events. We lose desirable old cars every day due to mishaps. Everything from crashes while out for a cruise, nuts loose behind steering wheels, falling off trailers, and forces of nature like fires, tornados and floods. There were 100s of antique cars lost in Hurricane Sandy. In fact I was listening to a talk by one of the officers of the NJ Antique Car Museum last evening. The museum took a big hit and they were fortunate that they had moved all the cars to higher ground, but they lost a nice Model A. The insurance company paid off and took the car. Another one lost.

In the end it's no different than when we decide to cut up a nice old promo or crack open a vintage kit to create our vision of what that car should be. Just different dollar figures!

[Bernard Kron]

I think it comes down to money ... once you have two things, big business and the prices people will [have?] paid for these modern resto rods, all bets ... are off.

For instance, the Insurance Institute For Highway Safety bought a clean 1959 Chevy for their 50th anniversary campaign. ... to crash it head on into a then new 1999 Malibu. I don't know what they paid for that car, but it was obviously within their budget for that stunt. And they got their money's worth of publicity for the stunt. ...

Next example is the Gas Monkey Garage contract build for Diet Mountain Dew and Dale Jr. Obvious deep pockets, the cost of one classic car isn't even a blip on their promotions budget. Start with one very nice red and white 1956 Nomad ... tear it apart and add in all the latest junk... suddenly its this high dollar rod with a TV pedigree ... that served it's purpose.

...

In the end it's no different than when we decide to cut up a nice old promo or crack open a vintage kit to create our vision of what that car should be. Just different dollar figures!

I think this is an excellent point, but I've taken the liberty to edit the comment in order to emphasize an important aspect of how these things are working right now. Because of the technological evolution of autos, much of it driven by legislated mandates such as bumper laws, emissions standards, crash-proofing, CAFE, and, in Europe, pedestrian safety rules, and additional costs driven by the recurrent tech booms (GPS, computerization of suspension and motor/transmission systems, display technologies, etc.) modern automobiles are getting prohibitively complex and difficult to modify without radically disassembling them and replacing large portions of their systems. Even this has legal ramifications that make the result expensive to license once done. So, far better to modify a simpler, more basic automobile which flies under the regulatory radar. Unfortunately this has created a captive market that drives prices for the donor cars, and for the talented artisans who can work on them, upwards and out of reach for many would-be hot rodders. This escalation in costs has meant that increasingly only the wealthy and those benefiting from various tax preferences can consider these sorts of projects. Mass market hot-rodding, once the purview of the home garage mechanic and customizer, is increasingly a thing of the past. It has been replaced by working-man fantasies such as Hot Rod magazine cover articles on $20,000.00 carbureted pseudo-Big Blocks yielding 950 bhp, the TV fads for muscle car auctions and hot rod shop reality-show series, and other silliness, but declining interest in automobiles by emerging generations who might have formed the basis for a continuation of the tradition. This trend may yet reach its climax in the fully automated robot commodity-car. The issue is far bigger than the auto hobby, but this is certainly an area where the generalized multi-generational escalation of costs has come home to roost.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Bernard makes an excellent point about the LEGALITY of modifying later-model vehicles (as well as the complexity). In Georgia currently, the emissions-systems are fair game for removal or modification once the car has reached 25-year-old "antique" status, but as far as I know, there is as yet no legislation covering safety-related systems like air-bags, heavy crash bumpers and the like.

This means it's still possible, as I write this, to build the philosophical equivalent of a 1950's hot rod. Drag a cheap old hulk home, strip all the useless weight out of it, fit a hotter junkyard-sourced engine and gearbox, better brakes, and go hunting for high-dollar late-model expensive "fast" cars.

I don't see many any kids doing it.

CORRECTION: I've seen ONE locally. An old 240Z with a Toyota 2JZ, Weber carbs, big brakes, coil-overs and about 4" of ground clearance. The real deal, built with mostly junkyard parts.

Edited February 21, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Tom Geiger]

And for you guys whining about modern crate engines, you ain't seen nuthin' yet. I'm sure this guy is pondering how to get this Tesla chassis under his '55 Chevy!