Do cars look better with side mounts?

[Pfeil]

My belief is they take away the look or lines of the car. The black walls show off the wheels.

[EmTee]

I don't know that there's a single answer (as with the whitewall discussion).  I guess it depends on the car.  All I do know is that whenever I'm messing around under the hood of my '38 Century I'm happy not to have them on my car! 

[zepher]

I agree with @EmTee, it really depends on the overall lines of the car.

Very large, stately cars tend to look better with sidemounts while smaller sporty cars do not.

Not many cars from the later 30's look good with them since the body lines are not complimented by the sidemounts.

[EmTee]

Open spare vs. hard cover probably also is a factor...

[TG57Roadmaster]

I used to think sidemounts were the bees’ knees. They can be a visual distraction but are so popular that it’s fun to see cars without them, especially near the end of their runs. 

 

Like this 1940 Buick Limited Model 81 Touring Sedan.

And this 1941 Packard Super Eight 160 Club Coupe.

Or this 1937 Lincoln K Model 362 LeBaron Coupe, one of 6 known survivors of 24 built.

Edited November 23, 2022 by TG57Roadmaster (see edit history)

[Gunsmoke]

Aaaawww... another one of these questions that have perplexed automotive experts, amateurs, stylists, onlookers, the informed and uninformed for 100 years. Of course that is because there is no answer, only 1 million opinions. As an architect schooled in the art and engineering of design, I look at the matter simply. When the designer of the specific car completed the initial styling concept, it is almost always (and perhaps 100% of the time) done with no consideration of where or how the spare tire(s) are dealt with. In the 20's/30's the prevailing final pre-production design approach was an over-bumper rear mounted spare, seldom included in design sketches. I think most afficionados would agree most cars look best with no spare showing of any kind, as they always look like an after-thought no matter how well fitted or dressed up ( WW's, covers, hubcaps, side clamps, mirrors etc). But until large enclosed trunks became the norm, dealing with the ubiquitous spare tire was a wart that needed to be dealt with. 

 

Personally, I'm  not a fan of seeing spares period. Rear mounted always seems best of many poor options, as they are hidden from most angles, and especially don't clutter up the front end, where most of the design effort has been focused including efforts at streamlining. On some very large cars where there is lots of room and money for "curb appeal and glamour", twin side-mounts can provide a sense of prestige and may have been considered in early design concepts. One place where side-mounts seem practical and appropriate (and not for prestige) are early pickups. 

 

Like the debate on white-walls, our point of view is too often skewed by all the restored cars we have seen (we subconsciously accept the new norm) rather than by the initial designers concept. Nothing wrong with any of the million opinions, hopefully including mine LOL.

[TexRiv_63]

I love sidemounts on larger 20s and early 30s cars with upright formal styling and I also love the trunk racks connected to them. I do not like them on later 30s and early 40s "streamlined cars where they stick out and spoil the lines. IMHO they do not work on most smaller two door cars, the rear spare looks better.

[zepher]

Side mounts and whitewalls.

 

 

[Walt G]

The spare is a sphere, and the wheel color, type ( disc, wood, wire), does it have a cover - canvas or metal, color of he cover, fully enclosed cover or ? and the whole color of the car. these are considerations that have to be taken into account. No "right" or "wrong " decision .  Also the era of the car - teens? of late 1930s - fender line and styling all play into what works or what doesn't so far as eye appeal. I have owned cars with both rear and side mounted spares. Love them all.

[Matt Harwood]

Sidemounts demand a fairly large car to wear them successfully. There are plenty of bad sidemounts where someone tried to put them on a car that just isn't big enough to carry them.

 

Eeeew:

 

 

 

 

(That Ford roadster up there looks especially dumb with one sidemount and one rear mount spare.)

 

 

Edited November 23, 2022 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[kfle]

I know many are saying they look better on bigger cars but I love the model a roadster with side mounts.  When I see one without sidemounts it just doesn’t look right to me.   I think it depends on the car.   

[TAKerry]

I agree with KFL, they kinda seem out of place on a lot of the 'smaller' cars, but to me they fit right in and look perfect on an A.

[1937hd45]

Side mounts remind me of other sports. 

[1937hd45]

They look better on the back of a car. 

[Walt G]

It depends upon the size of a car , body style . open and especially two seat open body styes that are smaller look better with the rear mount spare.

[Uptowndodge]

I your car doesn’t have them and another car like yours pulls up and parks next to you and his has dual side mounts that’s when you’ll think I wish I had them. It’s one extra that definitely looks classy and definitely adds some good value to the car. People who say they rather not have them in my opinion are saying that because they don’t. Don’t get me wrong there’s so many beautiful cars that don’t have side mounts but if you ask the 10 owner’s if they had a choice with or without I bet 8 or 9 would say with

[joe_padavano]

I'm gonna go with "not always..."

 

[edinmass]

 

The answer is simple. Always, a yes.

[Gunsmoke]

Due to the proliferation of 1931 "higher end" cars of all models on the internet with dual side-mounts, it is hard to find models without. Some may have come with S/M's from factory, but I suspect many such cars were retro-fitted during restorations. Regardless, here is a nice selection of such cars without side-mounts, and I love them all. I cannot imagine any owner taking one of these and thinking side-mounts will improve the look. However, they might think it will improve selling prospects or help keep up with the Joneses! So will Salesman Red! I note most likely have after-market WW's! I threw in a couple of European cars for our overseas colleagues. How many would say "This car would look much better with a big lump on each fender!"

 

In order, Auburn, Buick, Cadillac, Chrysler, Cord L29, Franklin, LaSalle, Oldsmobile, Packard, Packard, Pierce Arrow, Studebaker, Bugatti, Rolls-Royce.

Edited November 24, 2022 by Gunsmoke (see edit history)

[alsancle]

I grew up around prewar Mercedes.   The difference between a rear spare car and a sidemount car was almost 2x in price.   I didn't realize until the last few years from this forum that wanting a sidemount car was actually a thing.

 

Rear spare and especially double rear spare means a much longer silhouette.    Hidden spare is less clutter than sidemounts.   I prefer double sidemounts to single rear spare or single sidemount.

 

That said,  last time I checked all my cars but one were sidemount cars.

[SC38dls]

AJ, the one car that doesn’t have them is probably because Ed took them off when he worked on the car and conveniently forgot to put them back on. Check his cars maybe you can get them back. 
dave s 

[Shootey]

This Caddy won’t work with side mounts. 
 

[pont35cpe]

Some people like them, some don`t, i`m with the don`t. Side mounts, and continental kits, do not appeal to me at all.  Just being honest.

[Pfeil]

3 hours ago, Gunsmoke said:

Aaaawww... another one of these questions that have perplexed automotive experts, amateurs, stylists, onlookers, the informed and uninformed for 100 years. Of course that is because there is no answer, only 1 million opinions. As an architect schooled in the art and engineering of design, I look at the matter simply. When the designer of the specific car completed the initial styling concept, it is almost always (and perhaps 100% of the time) done with no consideration of where or how the spare tire(s) are dealt with. In the 20's/30's the prevailing final pre-production design approach was an over-bumper rear mounted spare, seldom included in design sketches. I think most afficionados would agree most cars look best with no spare showing of any kind, as they always look like an after-thought no matter how well fitted or dressed up ( WW's, covers, hubcaps, side clamps, mirrors etc). But until large enclosed trunks became the norm, dealing with the ubiquitous spare tire was a wart that needed to be dealt with. 

 

Personally, I'm  not a fan of seeing spares period. Rear mounted always seems best of many poor options, as they are hidden from most angles, and especially don't clutter up the front end, where most of the design effort has been focused including efforts at streamlining. On some very large cars where there is lots of room and money for "curb appeal and glamour", twin side-mounts can provide a sense of prestige and may have been considered in early design concepts. One place where side-mounts seem practical and appropriate (and not for prestige) are early pickups. 

 

Like the debate on white-walls, our point of view is too often skewed by all the restored cars we have seen (we subconsciously accept the new norm) rather than by the initial designers concept. Nothing wrong with any of the million opinions, hopefully including mine LOL.

I agree, and I think it really does have something to do with " gee now that the car is done, where are we going to put the spare"????

Then there are the marketing people that get involved. An example of that is in the car below.

 

Just to show how marketing people can make mistakes when they get involved-think what the poor stylist sees after they ruin their creation of flowing lines with "pop art" below,

 

 

This-  to this- now that enhances the sculptured body

 

[Pfeil]

2 minutes ago, Pfeil said:

I agree, and I think it really does have something to do with " gee now that the car is done, where are we going to put the spare"????

Then there are the marketing people that get involved. An example of that is in the car below.

 

Just to show how marketing people can make mistakes when they get involved-think what the poor stylist sees after they ruin their creation of flowing lines with "pop art" below,

 

 

This-  to this- now that enhances the sculptured body-not

 

 

[John_Mereness]

Cars look more formal with sidemounts - they look more "modern: without sidemounts.

 

[58L-Y8]

Designers, particularly for the custom coachbuilders, preferred no side mounts when the objective was to emphasize the hood length and a clean, elegant look.

[edinmass]

Designers, particularly for the custom coachbuilders, preferred no side mounts when the objective was to emphasize the hood length and a clean, elegant look.

 

 

I disagree......... but hell, that's what makes the hobby fun.

[Steve Braverman]

Side mounts are one of those things. I like them on some cars, but not others. My black, 1932 Franklin does not have them, and I absolutely love the way it looks. However, big, black sedans can also look great with side mounts. My green, 1930 Franklin has only one side mount, as that was standard equipment on the seven-passenger sedan. So I get to enjoy both looks, with and without side mount, depending on which side I stand on. My yellow, 1933 Franklin has a rear mount, where as most of the convertibles had side mounts (I guess a trunk would come in handy). I absolutely prefer the rear mount on the convertible as I feel it makes the car look long, lower, and sportier. 

 

 

[TAKerry]

I like the looks of the green car. The sidemount is very utilitarian. 

[1937hd45]

Rarely seen on the front. 

Edited November 25, 2022 by 1937hd45 (see edit history)

[SC38dls]

I think the rear mount on a long hooded car looks fabulous. I know this is a rolls and I think it’s a 33 or 34 but not sure. This pic was on the net so I don’t know any history or where the pic came from. 
dave s 

 

Edited November 25, 2022 by SC38dls (see edit history)

[Skvitt]

Will this be considered as side mount  ?

[JACK M]

I wonder where the passenger would put his feet.

[coachJC]

I like the sidemounts on the big cars, I also like the hard covers but that is also what I am used to seeing my entire life. I can cover all the basis with these 2 pics and show whitewall tires and blackwall tires also.

 

Edited November 25, 2022 by coachJC (see edit history)

[pmhowe]

I think this 1929 Buick looks good with blackwalls and no side mounts. I also like the rear bumper treatment. To bad there is no spare.

[Walt G]

On 11/23/2022 at 5:24 PM, alsancle said:

  I prefer double sidemounts to single rear spare or single sidemount.

I have had pre war (WWII) cars fitted both ways. One thing - with side mounted spare(s) you get a lot more room to store things in a trunk and the trunk if part of the cars body or mounted on a platform at the rear ( like a victoria body style) is a lot easier to get to. It is why I am happy to have two of my cars a decade apart age wise - the Packard (1930) with side mounted spares and the Buick (1940) with the spare in the trunk .Still have room to carry stuff .  Both straight 8 engines of approximately same capacity and effortlessly cruise along at 55 mph no problem up or down hills. Hood length is in proportion to the body style as well.

[alsancle]

5 hours ago, SC38dls said:

I think the rear mount on a long hooded car looks fabulous. I know this is a rolls and I think it’s a 33 or 34 but not sure. This pic was on the net so I don’t know any history or where the pic came from. 
dave s 

 

 

You picked out a special car.   It is a 1933 Rolls-Royce Phantom II Continental with Gurney Nutting one off body.  Chassis # 170MY.

 

I think the last time it was for sale Richard Gorman was looking for north of 7 figures.

[Dave39MD]

One of those to each his own kind of topics. I like the open Ford model A's and open Chevrolet's of the same time period with side mounts. My 31 Chevrolet looks sporty to me!

 

Dave

[SC38dls]

20 minutes ago, alsancle said:

 

You picked out a special car.   It is a 1933 Rolls-Royce Phantom II Continental with Gurney Nutting one off body.  Chassis # 170MY.

 

I think the last time it was for sale Richard Gorman was looking for north of 7 figures.

AJ I just loved the look of that Rolls. The long hood, the two rear mounts and the closed cabin make this car have that unique look to it. The car deserves a seven figure price. If I win the lottery I’ll think about talking to you about how to get in touch with him. I better go get a ticket. 
dave s