Jump to content

butchered cars


GARY F

Recommended Posts

I was wondering when someone would put up some sort of comparison.To me, none of those look butchered. The rat rod looks thrown together and the other two are very tastefully done. It does not look like any of the three were cut up and abandoned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not even an antique! Its just a used car to many people.

Oh I see. So no one else is allowed to make comments about anything except you. Your opinion is so much better and more important. Guess what. 2010 models are now out. 1985 IS an antique whether you like it or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd gut it and make a parts hauler/camper out of it. How long a ladder will fit in side, a painting contractor could put it use, is it low milage? What does he want for it?

Oh I see. So no one else is allowed to make comments about anything except you. Your opinion is so much better and more important. Guess what. 2010 models are now out. 1985 IS an antique whether you like it or not.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd gut it and make a parts hauler/camper out of it. How long a ladder will fit in side, a painting contractor could put it use, is it low milage? What does he want for it?

I guess that is supposed to be humorous? ALL cars including Duesenbergs, Packards, and Stanleys were used cars at one point. There wouldn't be any around now if no one collected them years ago. Interesting how some people can pontificate about how people can do whatever they want with their cars, yet still badmouth people for what they own.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No one has the right to tell me what I am supposed to like or not like either. If I see a car, I am free to express my opinion of it. I wouldn't insult the owner to his face, but that doesn't mean I have to like or pretend to like his car. If I see a car that I would have liked to have bought, but a butchered custom job makes it not possible to return it to stock, it doesn't mean I can't be upset about that.

Every car show on TV focuses on rodding and customizing. My friend has a car that is quite unique and one of only two built. Any time it is at a car show people have to come up to him and tell him how they would chop, tub, paint, put 22" wheels on it. It is a shame that people cannot appreciate a rare car for what it is, and feel that they have to customize it exactly the same as all the other customs to make it "different". So he has to hear these comments all the time, but cannot state that he likes cars to be stock?

Maybe if there were some programs that showed how to properly restore a car back to stock condition correctly, and educate people on the value of rare stock originals, there would be more appreciation for them.

I think the TV show has constantly been being worked on since 2004, but so far it hasn't come to fruition. I simply do not watch any of the TV shows, just like I seldom attend "Cruise-in's", especially here in Florida. I'm simply not interested in seeing street rods. Occasionally I do go, just to get out of the house and drive my cars and perhaps talk to the one or two other people who appreciate cars restored to stock. I saw a little of this while living in Virginia, but never while living in Maryland. Here in Florida it's all I see. Perhaps Maryland comes out on top because I lived there prior to 1992 and I think things were different then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guess what. 2010 models are now out. 1985 IS an antique whether you like it or not.

No, 25 years is measured from calendar year to calendar year. Your friend still has 3 months to go. Then it will be a new antique.

My car is 46 years old. There are a lot of people on this forum that don't consider it an antique, just another used car.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was wondering when someone would put up some sort of comparison.To me, none of those look butchered. The rat rod looks thrown together and the other two are very tastefully done. It does not look like any of the three were cut up and abandoned.

That's not what some people are claiming. They are claiming that just hot rodding a car is butchering.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I would take any of the three to a show, but give me the '32 highboy for my every day ride.

Aw, man. You're being too logical. That's not fair. Besides. you didn't answer the first question. :)

I want to hear from the people who don't like cars being modified from stock. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say it definitely makes a difference what the car is before. Two true stories.

First is a 1957 Chevy I saw at a local show. The guy told me it was from an old woman's estate. 2 door, light pink with white top, white, black, and silver interior in excellent condition, 26,000 original miles. He ripped out the 6 cylinder and put in a 350 with blower and sawed a hole through the hood for it. He was going to saw open the wheel wells and put on 22" wheels. Then he was going to gut the interior and put in velour bucket seats with flames, chop the top, and paint it flat black with flames. The quality of his work was not good either. I'd say that car was butchered. Too bad it couldn't have found a home with someone that would have treasured it as it was.

2nd car is a 1937 Packard 4 door. It was a rotting hulk in a junkyard, ready for the crusher. A guy bought it and removed the body from the rotten frame. He mounted it on the frame of a 1980's Cadillac stretch limo. He then custom built the stretch between the front and rear doors copying the window trim and matching the roofline. It used the original Cadillac engine and drivetrain. Interior was custom done to look kind of period but offer all the modern comforts. It is rented out for weddings. I'd say that was a nice job, and not butchered.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that they're all butchered, I wouldn't waste even one digital image on any of 'em. And digital is cheap.

Perhaps, maybe, on #3, only to lament the trashing of a fine, large '34-'35 Buick.

Not that it amounts to a hill of beans, but the BCA lost me when they allowed modifieds at shows.

The same will happen if the AACA ever follows the path of that slippery slope.

TG

Link to post
Share on other sites

My car is 46 years old. There are a lot of people on this forum that don't consider it an antique, just another used car.

Bluesky: Tell those people that the year I was President in 2004 I declared the term "used car" as applied to old cars as an obscene word/s.

People my father's age used that against me way back in 1963-64 on my 1939 Buick. Now it's hard to find a Class 20E car on the field at virtually all of the National Meets. Time keeps moving on. Enjoy your car and to heck with those who denegrate it by calling it a "used car." They're being small.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But, I don't mean to enjoy a car by chopping it up and/or modifying it with unnecessary modern updates. That said, even I have had to give in to making changes to keep my '39ers running on alcohol gas. Yesterday I installed a fuel pressure regulator and hooked the electric fuel pump up full time. It grieves me, but the car simply would not run on alcohol gas on hot days with the mechanical fuel pump. It's a case of more government intervention without regard to who it hurts as well as who it helps. In other words when Florida Gov. Charley Crist edicted alcohol gas ONLY be sold in the state, it relegated we old car guys to a no other choice situation. When I left Virginia we had gas both ways....of course I don't know if that has changed. Wayne, has that changed in Virginia?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, any substantial, irreversible changes to the chassis, body, drive train, interior, etc. especially chopping, sub-raming, repowering, etc qualify as "butchering" in my book.

Especially if it was a hack-job, or even worse, the dismembered remains that wound-up in a local boneyard.

A rustoleum brush-paint job that Uncle Al did back in 1960, may be "unfortunate", and a P-I-T-A to strip off today, but that's not like trying to put 6 inches of stock steel back into the body pillars...

I also frown on the practice of taking closed cars from the pre WW-II era and "rebodying" them as open cars, "because open cars are more desireable".... apparently this happens with the almighty "Full-Classics"....

Once again - if we're talking about a stripped / rusted / wrecked hulk that really had no other hope, that's one thing.

But hacking / modifying nice, straight antiques is a shame. In my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But, I don't mean to enjoy a car by chopping it up and/or modifying it with unnecessary modern updates. That said, even I have had to give in to making changes to keep my '39ers running on alcohol gas. Yesterday I installed a fuel pressure regulator and hooked the electric fuel pump up full time. It grieves me, but the car simply would not run on alcohol gas on hot days with the mechanical fuel pump. It's a case of more government intervention without regard to who it hurts as well as who it helps. In other words when Florida Gov. Charley Crist edicted alcohol gas ONLY be sold in the state, it relegated we old car guys to a no other choice situation. When I left Virginia we had gas both ways....of course I don't know if that has changed. Wayne, has that changed in Virginia?

Installing an electric fuel pump so that the car runs better is not butchering. It is minor and can be removed if someone wants to do that. The same with changing wheels. The 1957 Chevy in my post is butchered. A nice original was ruined, and it cannot be returned to stock. It had to be customized to make it "different", the same as all the other customized 1957 Chevys and black primer jobs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In my opinion, any substantial, irreversible changes to the chassis, body, drive train, interior, etc. especially chopping, sub-raming, repowering, etc qualify as "butchering" in my book.

But hacking / modifying nice, straight antiques is a shame. In my opinion.

Ok. What is your opinion on the three photos I posted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill,

You put us at a bit of a disadvantage - looking at one photo of a given vehicle, versus looking at it live, walking around it, talking with / listening to the owner give a more complete picture.

That said, Photos 1 & 2 qualify as "butchered", in my book, # 2 being a "no-brainer".

#3 is difficult to judge based on the photo you supplied. It would appear to be a nice stock '33 -'34 Buick, at a quick glance, to my non-Buick eyes.

Car #1 is a bit of a quandary for me... if it was "built" back in the 1950's or '60s, it may have some historical significance as an early custom... if it was created within the last 10-20 years, out of a nice original car, then I have a problem with that. Go buy a repro body and play off of that.

I'm really concerned / frightened by this new interest in "rat-rods", where folks take a solid, but shabby old car (usually 1920's - '30s), and chop / repower / re-seat , but don't repaint and just cruise around in that... there's a '31 Olds sedan fitting that description that's recently turned-up in the Scranton / Wilkes-Barre area... from what I can see of the old tin, it was a solid car, a good resto candidate.

I'm as concerned with "what did you start with" as I am with "what did you do to it"...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill,

You put us at a bit of a disadvantage - looking at one photo of a given vehicle, versus looking at it live, walking around it, talking with / listening to the owner give a more complete picture.

That said, Photos 1 & 2 qualify as "butchered", in my book, # 2 being a "no-brainer".

#3 is difficult to judge based on the photo you supplied. It would appear to be a nice stock '33 -'34 Buick, at a quick glance, to my non-Buick eyes.

Car #1 is a bit of a quandary for me... if it was "built" back in the 1950's or '60s, it may have some historical significance as an early custom... if it was created within the last 10-20 years, out of a nice original car, then I have a problem with that. Go buy a repro body and play off of that.

I'm really concerned / frightened by this new interest in "rat-rods", where folks take a solid, but shabby old car (usually 1920's - '30s), and chop / repower / re-seat , but don't repaint and just cruise around in that... there's a '31 Olds sedan fitting that description that's recently turned-up in the Scranton / Wilkes-Barre area... from what I can see of the old tin, it was a solid car, a good resto candidate.

I'm as concerned with "what did you start with" as I am with "what did you do to it"...

I agree, what they start with makes just as big a difference as what the end result is.

If they pull a rusty hulk out of a junkyard and build #3, well it was probably headed for the crusher anyway.

If they take a repro body and build #1, I have no problem with that.

If they take a beautiful condition original car and make #2 out of it (pun intended), I have a problem with that.

Plus there is a current movement to use nice original or restored cars to build your rat rod or custom. According to many sites I have seen, it is so much easier to start with a restored car. You don't have to do any body repair and can just start chopping and cutting. Any parts taken off can either be sold to "some old fool that likes them stock" or scrapped. The cash you get can then be used for more chopping and customizing.

An original car can always be appreciated. What happens when whatever current custom fad is over in 5 or 10 years? Can it be rebuilt or is it just sold for parts and scrapped?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill,

You put us at a bit of a disadvantage - looking at one photo of a given vehicle, versus looking at it live, walking around it, talking with / listening to the owner give a more complete picture.

That said, Photos 1 & 2 qualify as "butchered", in my book, # 2 being a "no-brainer".

#3 is difficult to judge based on the photo you supplied. It would appear to be a nice stock '33 -'34 Buick, at a quick glance, to my non-Buick eyes.

Car #1 is a bit of a quandary for me... if it was "built" back in the 1950's or '60s, it may have some historical significance as an early custom... if it was created within the last 10-20 years, out of a nice original car, then I have a problem with that. Go buy a repro body and play off of that.

I'm really concerned / frightened by this new interest in "rat-rods", where folks take a solid, but shabby old car (usually 1920's - '30s), and chop / repower / re-seat , but don't repaint and just cruise around in that... there's a '31 Olds sedan fitting that description that's recently turned-up in the Scranton / Wilkes-Barre area... from what I can see of the old tin, it was a solid car, a good resto candidate.

I'm as concerned with "what did you start with" as I am with "what did you do to it"...

Good, well thought out answer. Unfortunately, I don't know anything about the history of any of the cars. I do know a little bit about #3, which I will post later.

#'s 1 and 2 were taken at the 2008 Grand National Roadster Show in Pomona, California. #3 was taken at a local (Virginia) car show last year.

I posted these because I would like to find out why people react the way they do to certain cars. I'm not a psychologist, just a car hobbiest.

Oh. I agree with you on #2. Although I find Rat Rods to be "interesting," some of the ones I saw at the GNRS (including this one), struck me as being totaly unsafe for road use. Especially considering that this is in California! :D

Any other responses?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, if a car was needed too much bodywork to be restored, how much body-work goes into a chop-job ?

Seems a lot more complicated to take three to six inches out of a closed-car roof, and get all the curves right than it would be to fix some cancer... (Let alone doors ! )

I've seen some fantastic handiwork on some rods and customs; would love to have that quality of work done to fix the rust on my De Soto !

Link to post
Share on other sites
If they pull a rusty hulk out of a junkyard and build #3, well it was probably headed for the crusher anyway.

If they take a repro body and build #1, I have no problem with that.

If they take a beautiful condition original car and make #2 out of it (pun intended), I have a problem with that.

I think #2 WAS a rusty hulk from a junkyard. Probably should go back there too, but I am showign my predjudice. :D

I THINK #1 was a reproduction still body, but I am not sure about it.

What are your thoughts on #3, as presented with no other information?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The same with changing wheels. .

Oh Man, I hate wheels changed to "rallye wheels". Ask Wayne, I was well known up there in Virginia for hating rallye wheels on cars that didn't come with them. Heck, Wayne even went out and bought wheels and hubcaps for his '56 Chevy panel delivery.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, if a car was needed too much bodywork to be restored, how much body-work goes into a chop-job ?

Seems a lot more complicated to take three to six inches out of a closed-car roof, and get all the curves right than it would be to fix some cancer... (Let alone doors ! )

I've seen some fantastic handiwork on some rods and customs; would love to have that quality of work done to fix the rust on my De Soto !

True enough DeSoto Frank. Too bad I can't post pictures of a 1971 Buick Riviera that we took 8 years to bring back in a fully restored manner. Talk about rust!! Yeah, I know I could have gotten a better one, but it was a challenge to restore an $800 car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is true that there is some fantastic body work on some street rods/hot rods, but that's not really the point of the discussion. The point of the discussion is that this car is/was a historical artifact, one that can and will never be produced again and it is a diminishing resource. For every one that that is lost to rodding, there is one less to be saved for history. Pre-World War II cars, particularly the "fat fendered" cars that rodders love to modify are getting very difficult and expensive to find today. It just seems wrong to me and I hatge to see each one of these survivor cars lost forever. Here in Florida if you go to a "Cruise-in" the local population doesn't even know what an original car looks like, and have no idea they didn't "come that way", lowered in the front with chomre wheels and a 350 V8 and bucket seats. I'm serious, they don't even know the difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think #2 WAS a rusty hulk from a junkyard. Probably should go back there too, but I am showign my predjudice. :D

I THINK #1 was a reproduction still body, but I am not sure about it.

What are your thoughts on #3, as presented with no other information?

#3 as shown with no other info appears to be a tasteful, well-done (quality wise) street rod. I would not say it was butchered. That being said, I'd rather see it returned to stock if possible and would probably just walk right past it at a car show.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh Man, I hate wheels changed to "rallye wheels". Ask Wayne, I was well known up there in Virginia for hating rallye wheels on cars that didn't come with them. Heck, Wayne even went out and bought wheels and hubcaps for his '56 Chevy panel delivery.

Yes, but wheels can be unbolted and removed. It would be a lot harder to unchop a roof.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is true that there is some fantastic body work on some street rods/hot rods, but that's not really the point of the discussion. The point of the discussion is that this car is/was a historical artifact, one that can and will never be produced again and it is a diminishing resource. For every one that that is lost to rodding, there is one less to be saved for history. Pre-World War II cars, particularly the "fat fendered" cars that rodders love to modify are getting very difficult and expensive to find today. It just seems wrong to me and I hatge to see each one of these survivor cars lost forever. Here in Florida if you go to a "Cruise-in" the local population doesn't even know what an original car looks like, and have no idea they didn't "come that way", lowered in the front with chomre wheels and a 350 V8 and bucket seats. I'm serious, they don't even know the difference.

True. These cars are a non-renewable supply. There are some cars out there that are the only known examples to exist. How sad if one of these were chopped and customized beyond repair so that the only way to see what they are supposed to look like is in some old b&w photos.

On the other hand, most newer cars have zero character and personality, and are built by the hundreds of thousands. Yet nobody chops and customizes those. All they do is put on 22" wheels, some bolt on bling, 12 DVD players in the trunk (which I really don't get, I don't sit in my trunk to watch TV), and a huge stereo.

I have seen 3 customs which impressed me. Unfortunately they are kits, not one-off special creations. First two are a 1953 and 1962 Corvette look-alike based on 1990-2000's Corvettes. The third is a 2000's era Town Car limo done up to look like a new Bentley. Why can't people do interesting things like that or take a new Town Car and put suicide doors on it and make it into a retro-'60's convertible. Or take a 1990's-2000's 2 door and chop the top and make a hardtop out of it. Now that would be impressive. #1, 2, and 3 have been done many times before.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Please explain why. Not arguing, just curious as to why you say that?

Sure, The three photos show cars that someone thinks are "Butchered", to answer that question one would have to see a photo of the lump the builder started with. The pickup would be my #3 pick, was it a cab half buried to start with or an AACA National THIRD winner? :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote for car #3. The big series 1934-35 Buick 4 door sedans (usually black) fell in the AACA production Class forever overshadowed by the flashy open cars in the same class. They cost as much to restore as an open car causing them to be relagated to last place on the antique car desirability charts in the 70's and 80's. Can't blame folks for not wanting to spend $30,000 to "restore" a car that will be worth $15,000 when done.

I think what was done with the #3 cars is wonderful! How else would we even know what a 34 Buick Series 80 car looks like. (they never really looked as good as this one) We as "Antiquer's" don't save them (Except Earl B), so

I choose to admire #3 and think it's a handsome addition to any automotive gathering except on the AACA Judging Field.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...