KOOKIE frame rake

[mikesplumbing]

Hey guys, i'm sure you can tell business is rather slow this week so I'm spending some quality time with my laptop researching my build. I think i'm really warming up to the 50's type look and one of my favorite cars from that era is Norms "KOOKIE". Can someone explaine how he is able to get the kicked up look of the body? Do you guys call it "rake"? I really don't want to copy another rodders rod but the way is sits is a cool look for me and I would like to get somewhat close. Any ideas on what I might need to do to the frame to get a look like that or is that just how the body is mounted?

Mike

 

[RPM]

Hey guys, i'm sure you can tell business is rather slow this week so I'm spending some quality time with my laptop researching my build. I think i'm really warming up to the 50's type look and one of my favorite cars from that era is Norms "KOOKIE". Can someone explaine how he is able to get the kicked up look of the body? Do you guys call it "rake"? I really don't want to copy another rodders rod but the way is sits is a cool look for me and I would like to get somewhat close. Any ideas on what I might need to do to the frame to get a look like that or is that just how the body is mounted?

Mike

Mike it is how the frame is built little or no kick up, or it might have a buggy spring across the back instead of the newer coil overs.

 

[mikesplumbing]

I'm doing some reading and it seems like I could handle it a couple ways, first is the front end right. in order to get a steeper angle I could start by having more drop in the front axle right?

Second is in the rear frame, if I were to have a smaller distance in the amount of "kick-up" it would increase the fram angle by raising the rear, all things considered of course. Am I on the right track in my understanding.

The third thing I could do is when mounting the body on the frame I could adjust the body angle a little bit then glass the floor in when it's about right.

I would imagine I would have to be real carfull in order to not have so much angle that i would slide off the seat!

Does all this sound about right?

I just don't know how to pre-plan the frame kick up in order to get close, any suggestions?

Mike

 

[Keeper]

Instead of trying to adjust the angle of the body (which would throw off the look of the car)

You could always just adjust the seat bottom so you are not leaning forward.

 

[T-Odd]

There's a buckethead up in der Tundra with a nice green and gold bucket with steelies and wide whites on it... he jsut changed the rims and tires and the car looks totally different now.

His doesn't have the same rake but it is a beautiful car.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2619/3945735810_270863d123_o.jpg

 

[GAB]

If this is the look that you are seeking, I can tell you how this was accomplished.

The frame for this car was built using a pair of Model A side rails and a Model A rear crossmember. The rails were unboxed, narrowed and shortened to achieve a wheelbase of 88" The rear crossmember was positioned just inside the back of the body and a high arch A spring was mounted to the early Ford axle housings that were swapped side for side to enable mounting the spring in front of the housing and getting the clean look. There were the standard tube front crossmember with a suicide spring mount and a 4" dropped axle. The transmission mount was also a straight tube across with a couple of u shaped straps that picked up the ears on an early Ford torque tube driveline. Hardly the way that they are built today but this was in the late 50's.

 

[mikesplumbing]

T-Odd, that's really close to what i'm looking for!! Thanks for the pick. Any idea as to what grill he used for the front? I've got a notebook going with notes from what you guys are teaching me about the T-buckets and some notes as to what all the parts are I need to build my own in the style of the 50's-60's.

I see that the frame in the photo is pretty level to the ground and i'm wondering what I would need to do to the frame to make more of an angle, all the while keeping the same look as in the photo you posted and of course Kookie.

Thanks

Mike

 

[mikesplumbing]

Hey GAB

Thanks for the photos and explaination. Do you have any advice on how I could have a steep rail rake using a more modern rear end like an 8 or 9". Any guess as to the rail offset in the rear??

Mike

 

[mikesplumbing]

I just took a piece of paper, held it up to the laptop, drew the frame angle, drew the level mark, and brought it to my drafting table. According to what I measure in the photo (Kookie) the frame sits at about 9 1/4 deg. from the ground (as i sits). Does that seem a little steep for a frame to sit at? Would that be safe?

Mike

 

[TheAntiBoyd]

Mike; 2 things...NO T bucket is 'SAFE'. Sure there are things we can do to minimize things...but 4 good tires and some solid brakes and perhaps a lapbelt is about all thats going to be in the way of safety gear. Personally tube axles scare me...thats me though; anyway, Streetrodder did an article in their Milestone series about Norm Grabowski (the guy who built Kookie's T) that explains his measurements in detail along with some really cool photos. For some reason when I made the photos in the article fullsized, there was actually a few more photos that werent in the article page.

Sadly the actual car does exist, its current owner has changed the car completely some 30yrs ago and wont let anyone see it. He also owns the Barris Golden Sahara. Additionally, if the car is restored, it will be as its together now, with dual slicks on each side in the back, quad headlights, high back button tufted seats, and zoomies as tall as a tall T windshield...oh and a twin-blown chev motor
.Heres a link. 0112Sr 080Miles01 Z Photo

 

[Hotrod46]

Mike

I had to wait until I got home from work to answer your post. I thought I had a pic of the Kookie car from the rear.

This is the Kookie car with a different paint job. I appears that Norm used a "high acrh" T spring in the rear. Like this one

High Arch Rear Springs

The original version of the Kookie car didn't sit that high in the rear. It was called the "Lightnin' Bug".

He wanted to make the car a lot more radical in the rebuild. Kind of "over the top" so it would stand out more. It's hard to believe that it's the same car! I think I remember reading somewhere that Norm changed from a lower arch spring to the T spring to raise the rear in the Kookie version.

Hope this helps.

Mike

 

[donsrods]

I grew up drooling on Grabowskis second incarnation of the T, the same one you pictured. It was a Model A frame with no kickup in the rear, and in addition he had some serious spacers under the rear single leaf spring to get that rake.

If you are interested in this car I can't recommend this video enough:

[ame=[media=youtube]g4bMyrKxRdQ[/media] - THE CAR THAT ATE MY BRAIN![/ame]

We have the full version and watch it pretty often. There are scenes in it I have never seen before and it covers the build Von Franco did on the two clones he did.......one of the Lightnin' Bug and one of the later "Kookie T" version. It is a fantastic video.

Don

 

[butch27]

Don's right- Norm told me NO kick-up.

 

[mikesplumbing]

First of all......thanks to all of you who are helping me figure it out. It's going to take me a while to get the gist of what goes on in a bucket build and I appreciate your patience.

On the safety front.......I see what your saying, ya do what you can and thats about it.

Concerning the high arch springs...... I love it! Don't know much about it but I really dig it. Thanks for the photos and the link.

Now on to Kookie and the video. Thank you so much for posting that video, I always liked all types of T Buckets but my favorite has always been the skinny tires, 50's type retro type bucket. I'm not sure why but maybe it's because of how I was brought up going to all the car shows etc., something about it just gets in my skin and I just love that look. Anyhow, I would like to order that video, it seems like a cool vid just to have for the heck of it.


Kookie and cars like it is what i'm determined to try and build. Given the scenario of what I want what is my best resource to try and replicate not the exact color etc. but the rake, length, and basic geometry? Is the video the best resource, or does anybody have any other recomendations for me?

Again, thanks for the time you guys have spent helping me, It's been fun for my son and I just doing the research, and we can't wait to start building it.

Mike

 

[mikesplumbing]

Thanks Butch, so your saying it's just a set of straight rails???

Mike

 

[GAB]

Here is an sketch of how the frame was made for the car in the earlier post . Just straight side rail as far as the horizontal profile goes. No kickup.

 

[mikesplumbing]

Awesome drawing GAB, thanks a bunch. After looking at that drawing and looking at the photo below if I wanted to use a high arch spring and a bajo rear-end I think I could build a frame with a kick-up and still have a good rake. My reasoning is even on Norms frame the bach has an arch, and to hide the frame it might be better off. HMMMMM, that's a real thinker.

Mike

 

[blownt]

this is mine back when I first built it in 92 or so. One of the main ways to get rake is to have a 6" drop front axle. It would be a GOOD idea to raise the motor/trans up higher (I have about 3" clearence at the oil pan and have a Slamgard pan).

 

[mikesplumbing]

Thanks BlownT, I wrote that in my notebook so when I get to mounting the engine/tranny I'll be carfull not to make it too low.

You have a nice chassis and with the early model spring on back it looks sharp! I noticed you have a block on the top side of the spring to act as a spacer. Looking at that and the kick-up in the rails, i'm thinking I could just use less of a kick-up and eliminate the block all together. Do you know off hand what the distance is from the bottom of the main rails to the bottom of the riser block. If I had that number it would help me know about where I need to be when I build my frame.

Mike

 

[donsrods]

When Norm built the first version of the T it sat lower in the back as shown in the picture Mike posted (the black car version). Then he redid it later on into the one we are all familiar with from 77 Sunset Strip. He put an upside down C channel piece into the center of the rear crossmember so the spring now sits totally outside the original pocket where the spring normally lays. He gave it that kicked up in the rear look that distinquished it from most of the modifieds running around at the time, and started what we now call the T bucket craze. If you look at the picture of the rear of the later version you can see the spring is totally outside the crossmember.

But, you also have to remember his T had doors. In a T bucket that sat that high and had no doors it would be a bear to get in and out. If you are planning a door, no problem, but even at the height my Son's bucket sits at it is tough for an old guy like me to climb in and out. That is why I build my cars right on the ground.

Everyone should do themselves a favor and get that video. We got it for Xmas last year and have watched it a bunch of times and never get bored. It gives a lot of insight into how the cars came about and has videos most of us have never seen.

Don