hot rods & customs

_____

In my first post here, I mentioned some ideas for rods & customs that have been rattling around in my head...

The Deuce 2.5

Have you ever seen an original 1932 Ford pickup?

I have.

Have you ever driven a US Army 2 1/2 ton 6X6?

I have.

The '32 Ford has long been known as the 'Deuce', and that Army workhorse has long been known as the 'Deuce-and-a-Half'. At some point I began to imagine what a '32 Ford would look like if it were modified to 50% 'more'...

Here's my take on it: You know right away, this is going to be a wild custom rod. Instead of two axles at the rear, this beast has two at the front -- and yes, all four front wheels steer. A custom frame is needed for this, but there are a few highly qualified frame builders out there who can handle the task. The sweeping front fenders ('wings') of the original are scrapped in favour of a quartet of angular cycle fenders, reminiscent of the Army truck. Rear fenders are similar.

1932 saw the debut of Ford's flathead V8 engine. Only extreme car geeks like me know that Ford's Lincoln division had a flathead V12 based on the V8. This 'Deuce-and-a-Half' should ultimately have one of those Lincoln V12s, but sourcing it and then having it rebuilt with custom components for greater performance and reliability could prove extremely problematic. A vintage Jaguar V12 will do, even if parts and maintenance are as much or more of an issue. Perhaps a Lamborghini 7.5L V12 under that stretched hood...

Many pickups back then were roadster pickups, with removable folding tops. Army 2 1/2 tons also featured removable tops, either of steel or canvas, to meet a minimum break-down height requirement for aircraft transport. Thus the Deuce 2.5 is not a 'hardcab', but a roadster pickup -- also featuring wooden bows supporting a canvas canopy over the bed, which has fold-down center-facing wooden benches on the sides, just like the Army truck (finished not in green paint, but high-gloss polyurethane).

Paint is olive -- but candy, not drab. Chrome? Yes, please. Even the blackout lights (a full set) will be chromed, or powder-coated to resemble chrome. Reproduction headlights should be fitted with steel covers with slits, just like those used during WWII (except, chromed). Wheels should be painted steelies with Baby Moon hubcaps...

I've pictured this thing cruising without the cab roof, and without the front and rear canopy flaps, but WITH the canopy. Also missing are hood sides, the better to show off the 6-pipe headers on each side. Internal combustion is okay if fuelled by Joe Cell technology...

The Rumbler

Ford changed their styling for 1933, but the only major change for 1934 was the grille. I like the '34 better, so I'll use that as the basis for the Rumbler. What is the Rumbler, you ask? This is something I've been thinking of since junior high. Imagine a '34 roadster with so much space dedicated to its transplanted engine -- an Allison aircraft V12 -- that the body has been cut back so much that there is nowhere for the driver to sit but in the rumble seat...

A rumble seat, in case you are unfamiliar, is a seat set into what would otherwise be the trunk space. Once upon a time, some buyers would opt for this extra seating in the expense of cargo capacity. The seatback folds backward with the lid, where the lid would ordinarily open forward...

For the Rumbler, this is the only seating -- and the windshield disappears into the cowling when the rumble seat is closed, so that the car appears to have no driver compartment at all. Modifications are made so that occupants are not sitting bolt upright, but nestled in with plenty of legroom...

This is a custom rod inspired by drag racers of yesteryear. What would be ironic would be if I executed the concept with a massive electric motor and a ton of lithium-ion batteries instead of an enormous V12 from a WWII fighter plane (with a full hood and sides to conceal those components, instead of no hood at all). Then, it wouldn't rumble...


Customs (as opposed to hot rods)? Let's just say I like doorhandles, and that I've seen too many customs (and rods, for that matter) get way too smooth. I like what was done in the '50s and early '60s, and despise the smooth trend that began in the '80s. I'd like to do a '49-'51 Mercury to show everyone how I think it should be done, but what I really want to customize are those forward-control vans and pickups of the 1960s...

ChevyVan, its GMC equivalent, first-generation Ford Econoline, and Dodge A100. Just let me loose...



Phil Smith
October 9th, 2007


Just when you thought I'd gone on long enough, here's more:


Yes, I said I like doorhandles, yet they are conspicuously absent from my concepts. For me, it's a matter of preserving a certain amount of the flavour of yesteryear. If I ever do get the chance to build a few hot rods and customs, it will be my intent to present them as if they were modified long ago, during a 'simpler' time. They'll be low-tech, and the lowest-tech way to open a door is with a handle.

My original concepts are for the future, in which I am allowed to use technology with abandon.

About forward control: Volkswagen pioneered it with their Type 2 (Transporter, Kombi, Samba Van, Microbus). There was COE (cab over engine) before that, but VW put the engine in the back... A forward-control vehicle is basically anything with the front seats over the front wheels. Within that genre are quite a few vehicles I admire and would like to own. Plus I happen to think that the FC driving position inspires people to drive more carefully, as it puts you right up there where the impact would happen...

Just imagine, if everyone had to pilot their vehicles from such a position. Wouldn't they be more careful? Wouldn't there be fewer accidents?

Let's just say the modifications I would make on the vehicles I mentioned above (plus a Jeep FC150, and a Haflinger and a Pinzgauer from Steyr-Daimler-Puch) would be mild -- yet each example would be right in my eyes...


I'd rather build an EXOVAN, after all. Seriously, with the effort and money people put into restorations and modifications of old stock, it would be easier to create something new. The difference with me is, I have new things to create -- not just old things to breathe on and/or covet.


When it comes down to it, I'd much rather perform and be recognized for original designs, over well-executed customs and hot rods. This is not to say that I wouldn't, if I had my druthers, proudly display those steel dreams in my garage and out in the world. It's just that my creativity goes beyond that, and nothing would bring more satisfaction than driving something (completely) of my own design.

I hope you understand.


Phil Smith
October 13, 2007

_____