I want your opinion

[docwatson1938]

I would go all paint or all chrome.
To be honest I base this off of the 1:1 hot rods I build.
A. There is probably nowhere left on the planet that can chrome a full chassis.
B. To paint the rails on a chromed chassis, you would have to chrome the whole chassis first, paint don’t like to stick to chrome even when its roughed up. That is unless the X member is removable, then you have structural issues.
C. Even if you could work it I don’t like chrome, so I wouldnt do it myself, the chroming process weakens the steel that the chassis is made of.
That’s my 2c worth,
Doc.

[docwatson1938]

Andy your build would be closest to a street rod, or what we call 'gold chain'. Don’t ask.

A rat rod is an absolute lump of ****. No question, build from rusted parts, no safety no style poor workmanship an usually with an outlandish style that renders it almost undrivable.
The term has been so miss used its crazy.
I build traditional 50s style hotrods, safe, powerful (For the time period) with a mile of style and build quality. Above all SAFE.
The next guy that calls my A RPU a Rat Rod will be picking himself up off the floor.
A street rod, or gold chainer ride is a Boyd type car, millions of dollars, billet and all shine, no soul, no style.
But as has been said before it takes all kinds, I just stay down my end of the spectrum.

The term 'Rat Rod' was coined by a HotRod Magazine writer (Name escapes me now) while writing an article on the Choppers of Burbank car club. They were one of the first clubs to start building traditional styled cars back in the 80's shortly after Robert 'El' Williams started running around in his flat black 32.
They kicked up a stink about the term, they built hot rods, not rat rods. The writer used the term anyway and has been with us ever since. At least is has gone over those **** box cars that deserve it, not the real hot rods.
To illustrate the degree of misuse the term gets there is a glass Minotti bodied 3 window 37 coupe getting around the US, $300 grand plus car, independent front and rear, billet everywhere but its flat green with fake patina and steel wheels. It has been called a rat rod in every mag and web site I have seen it on.
Damn people with no idea!
That’s my rant.
Doc.

[Don Garrett]

O.K. Andy.....here goes, eveything that Doc said is 100% dead on and I agree. If you think 1:1 , chrome springs, spindles etc. are a no no, they just aren't safe! It would be difficult to chome the entire frame because of the size. All that aside......if you're building a "show car" chrome it if you want to!
The real world rules don't apply to 1/8th fantasy builds. Just because nobody else has done it doesn't mean you shouldn't. If it were me I'd try to make it look like the frame was powder coated (one color)...if you do it all in metal you could probably actually powder coat it. I wouldn't object to it being all chrome either! The only thing I wouldn't "personally" care for is a chrome crossmember section and painted rails.....that's too funky for me. You asked for opinions, so that's my bit. Great job fabricating the frame....for what it's worth it looks like a winner to me.:D

[modelmaker]

Hey Andy , your doin a great job but I am curious as to why you didn't scratchbuild the chassis rails as well ? after all the work you've put into constructing the cross members in brass,first of all the strength factor ! it has to hold that metal engine I assume you will be scratching the suspension in metal as well as metal wheels there is going to be alot of weight ? as far as weather to chrome or color it, it's your model you've got to be happy with what you like ! my opinion is chrome is ok in small quantities but not on a chassis , sorry but you did ask for an opinion !!;) :D

[modelmaker]

Ok I take my words back I just read your post under Enzo's revenge ! you are going to scratch the chassis rails in brass that makes sense! :D

[Andym]

My thought was that I would have the cross members chromed individually, then install them and mask them off before painting the rails. Now that I think about it though, I kind of like the idea of painting the entire structure. The only reason I don't want to powder coat is because I don't want to introduce yet a third color/texture into the piece. The frame and engine are a deep red, the body is black and the interior is red leather to match the engine. Powder coating would create a third version of red and I don't want to do that.

In it's entirety, I want The Revenge to appear quite simple, yet immensely powerful. The beauty of the car should be in the details that one uncovers as s/he begins to inspect it close up. Too many colors/textures on the exterior will create a visual complexity that will overpower the small details that I want the viewer to focus on.

Having thought about it, and considering your opinions, paint it is. The chrome would be too overpowering visually and, in photography, would be a dead give away that it's not a real car. For me, the ultimate test is to see if I can show someone a picture of one of my cars and have them uncertain as to whether they are looking at a 1:1 car or a scale replica.

Thanks everyone - I really appreciate your input.

Andy.

P.S. For whatever it's worth, I tried making the frame rails first on a previous build and then fabricating the cross members and it just never worked out right. By using the plastic rails first to get the positioning right, fabricating the brass frame rails just seems to go a lot smoother.

P.P.S. For those of you who like powder coating, wait until you see the wheels!!!

[Andym]

Doc:

Thanks for the historical info. That is the kind of stuff that I love to learn. Just one thing though, I absolutely assure and promise you that Enzo's Revenge will have plenty of soul and style. And the shine will be kept to a minimum. My plan is that the exterior brightwork (chrome) be contained inside the engine bay only. The exterior focal point will be the stainless steel exhaust. The interior will be a combination of brushed aluminum and red leather.

There will be no traditional dash "board" however. I have some special plans for the instruments and those plans do include some chrome.

I would never build any car that didn't have soul and style.

Andy.

[hot ford coupe]

Hey Doc, you make a great point. I'd like to throw in some of my experience and observations over the years. Having been around in the early 50's (even as a little kid, I had a penchant for great cars), I saw a number of these original rods. If they looked rough, it's because the owner drove it before he got finished with it. As money became available, old parts were discarded and new parts were put on the car. Many guys didn't have the luxury of being able to use a different car while building their rod. They had to drive that unfinished car to school, work or whatever. It was safe, I repeat safe, but not finished. They used whatever parts they could find and then changed them as they went along. It may have taken two to three years or more to complete it but when it got done, it was gorgeous, not pristine but gorgeous. The yucky looking parts were now well painted, even if done by a brush and a bit weathered. The tires were relatively clean and matched as did the wheels. If the owner had any sense of responsibility, he kept the thing as clean as he could. It may not have been as finished as a trailer queen but it was nice. Remember that the car was usually what was used to catch the ladies. Check out movies like American Graffiti or Hollywood Knights. Look at a lot of the old salt flats pictures. Sure the cars looked used but not trashed. That to me was more the norm. Sure there were plenty of cars that were literally derelict and unsafe, but these things were called, like I mentioned before, "shot rods"; not because of their great speed but because they were worn out, done for, kaput or in other words just completely shot. They were highly unreliable, broke down all too frequently, were highly unsafe and downright dangerous. They were not traditional rods, they were just crap. Although rust buckets make for great model subjects because of the high degree of skill to get them to look real and in scale as on a number of models posted on this site, a rodder today who is building a car like the $300 grand subject Doc mentioned and called traditional is off the mark to me. I'd rather see something that is clean, well built and maintained with signs of use (dirt in the undercarriage, some normal weathering of the engine bay, some small stone bruises, signs of wear in the interior). That is to me the real definition of traditional rod. Now, I hope I haven't offended anyone. This is only one rodder's observations and experiences. Many of you may have had other experiences but mine are what drive my particular building style. Now this is not in contradiction to my post #11 on page 2. The old beater is part of our roots but what I'm talking about is what developed from there. The period I site here is not the mid 40's where our roots lie, but the mid 50's and beyond. Heck, in '55 I was 5 years old and before that I was lucky I could remember what was edible and what was not. That must be where I learned the edibility of the crayon.

[Andym]

Gotta remember HFC - My only real exposure to these cars was at the PPG / Goodguys Nationals last year. And the cars that I was seeing were not beaters. I'm learning as I go. There were some rather "frightful" looking transports to be sure, but the cars parking in the winners circle on Sunday were shiny as a new penny. For better or worse, they inspired me.

[Gluhead]

Andy,

I think this is a pretty healthy discussion...and I doubt anyone feels any pressure on their toes.

You mention your only exposure being the GG Nats. While there were some fanfrickintastic cars there, it's a very small part of the picture. Here's some links to get ya goin' on the path of righteousness. :D

http://www.ahrf.com/

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=8

I agree with most of Doc's comments above...with one exception. Like with any genre of car, there's always a few that are a little over the top...that just totally blow ya away. The Busby Coupe...the Rolf Coupe...from those links above fit that bill. They are simply exceptional examples of hot rod style, without straying one bit away from tradition. Riddler cars often have very little of tradtional hot rodding left in them. Not that they aren't good lookin' cars in their own right, but for those who have had no choice (because of insane desire!) to eat sleep and breath these beasts the Riddler type of car just loses a lot of appeal in it's quest to be the "ultimate". Subtle aggression brings the anticipation of screaming demons in the eyes of a true hot rodder.

Hahaha and Doc...man...spoken like a true hamber ma brudda!

Glu

[Don Garrett]

So, what ya think Andy? Rodders are a pretty wild bunch, huh?;)

[hot ford coupe]

Hey Don, I like your idea for the build off. I don't mind not competing. Being a judge might be a pretty good learning experience for me.

Also, I want to make sure to all during this thread that I do not look down on any style of model building at all. I don't want anyone to think that I'm trashing any member's choice of models or where they become inspired. My only purpose was to bring a little of rodding history to the forefront from my own actual personal experience. It explains the way I build and shouldn't be taken as the "the way things should be". Sorry Andy if you thought I was talking some trash but I highly respect what you and all the other members do and how you all go about it. Each one of us brings different experiences and tastes to the table and we try to learn from each other what is out there. Then we make our own style choices from inspiration sources and go from there. I'm what I'd like to call myself a traditional hot rodder who builds a representative sample of what I would love to drive but that doesn't mean that any particular type of car is better than any other. I particularly wouldn't like to drive a busted up car because it would be an unsafe thing for me to do. I also do not prefer to drive a sports car because I can't get in and out of them anymore.(bad back and hip joints). I don't prefer to drive the real classics because I can't afford them and I'd be afraid I'd bust them up on the road and a piece of history may be lost forever. . I don't prefer to ride motorcycles because I'd fall off one too quickly and bust my skull before a had any real fun. I think you can get the idea from all that. I promise I'll never become an automotive snob or trash anyone for building like they do. :) :) :)

[Andym]

No worries HFC. I'm still finding my way around this genre. The custom is a good transition for me as my last 25 years have been spent studying and custom coachwork cars of the 20's and 30's. Enzo's Revenge is a natural and comfortable transition for me.

My models are a manifestation of what I've learned and what I like. The more I learn, the better my models become. Without knowing the history of these cars and the Hot Rod style in general, I can't muster any passion and without passion, there'd be no model building (at least not for me).

Getting all this background and understanding helps me appreciate what I'm doing and helps me understand what I'm a part of. And being part of this "new" car group is really a great experience for me. It gets me over the one thing that has been bothering me of late and that is there are no more Duesenbergs, Delahayes, Talbot Lagos or Hispano Suizas coming out and I've pretty much seen all the ones that we have.

Getting into Rods enables me to see new cars and experience a different dimension of the automotive spectrum. (Plus it's nice not to have to put on a tie and suit jacket to go to a car show!)

[hot ford coupe]

Thanks Andy. I'm not the kind of guy who usually goes around trying to tick people off. When it happens, I no like.

One of the reasons why I stick primarily with hot rods is that there are so many modifications made to a vehicle that accuracy is more forgiving than it is when you're trying to duplicate a Delahaye or a Bugatti. In other words, you can finagle a bit more. With the classics, you've got to be so specific as to year, model, options, etc. and at my skill level, I need all the forgiveness I can get.
Another reason for making primarily one or two styles is that if I did sports cars, classics, rods, muscle cars all together, I'd have to do so much research, I wouldn't have any time to build. As it is, I spend hours and hours doing research before I even cut plastic and at least with a kit, they provide you with instructions(:confused: ) and the parts are already formed. With superdetailing and scratchbuilding, you're on your own.
The third reason is that your best work comes out of what you know best. With my experiences in New York City in the 50's and 60's as a kid, rods and customs were what I saw the most. In my neighborhood, a Duesenberg or a Talbot Lago might as well have been made and driven on the moon.:eek:

Hey Andy, do you really have to wear a jacket and tie to go to a classics show? Sheesh, at a hot rod and custom show, the only guy with a jacket and tie is the---???? I actually don't know.