The Cal-look Lounge

A lot of clamoring about 'what looks right' in this hobby... and as the hobby is so based around living up to a "look", that is understandable. But what happens when a solution is come upon that improves the function of the car but doesn't "fit the rules"?

there is some truth to function and form going hand in hand..... in some situations. The Weber 48IDA is a good example. It looks like what it is... simple, big and unforgiving. They are tops when it comes to horsepower, throttle response and gettings dropped jaws when you pop the lid. But overall, if you were to really use your car... they are unforgiving... no air filtration, big and in the way, etc, etc.
Though not really applicable to the VW, cosworth ports have always been beautiful and undoubtedly WORK.
A Vertex mag... same thing. You see it, it looks right and it does what it needs to.

But let's move on when it comes to following the CAL LOOK rule book....  ::)

When it comes to making the fast VW a better car to drive (fast)... what cosmetic "rules" are actually not improving the cars performance?

My guess would be a few things that are 'set in stone' as far as this hobby goes. Of course, if the Cal Look is only about 1/4 mile and looking the part.... then never mind.

#1. 135-145 front radials.
#2. Raked stance
#3. (more recently, and not 100% accepted by the hobby [thank God]) excessively narrowed front beam
#4. flabby sidewall, tall rear tires

My thoughts on each...

#1. It's pretty obvious... despite 55%+ of VW's weight on rear wheels, I think the front tire width is a consequence of getting tires to fit under fender after achieving # 2. If you've ever had top panic stop a 135 or 145 car (make it worse...in the wet)... you'll know you could've used more contact patch
#2. Raked stance.... it sure does look "right" and for drag racing... is it? Does it help weight transfer to rear wheels upon launch? Does it help stability up at top end of track? One thing it doesn't help is cornering, especially on a swingaxle. That ass up in the air stance is actually probably the opposite of what gets the VW around a corner in a hurry.
#3. Narrowing to keep tires under fenders (due to dropped spindle, disc brakes, wheel width...) is one thing. Burying the wheel a good 2" in from fender is just dumb. And looks it too. Narrowing track is a nightmare for handling.
#4. The big tires as of late... they mimic the look of a 26" tall drag slick. The tires I have seen in the "big tire size" on the typical Cal Look wheels seem to have floppy sidewalls, which yes, is a benefit to drag racing (and somewhat of an improvement over older bias tires, which had far less give in sidewalls, resulting it tire tread being "picked up" in cornering), but do nothing for stability as far as a street car goes. Stiffen up torsions, shocks, roll, and you still have the mushy sidewalls... unless you crank the psi way up... then you shake your dentures out...

My point is, there seems to be an emphasis in the hobby on appearance, regardless of the performance result. Especially now a days, they is such of wave of favor for "old school"..... everybody romanticizing using ancient tech "because it looks right", but then again... how much of this archaic tech is actually holding your car back?

Something to think about.

Agree with everything here !

I have constant debate with my friend Zvonimir (Cal-Look is his nick on this forum) about same details...
I prefer more realistic approach to these details - for example front tyres - I would put 195-60-R15 in frontof my car any day over some skinny 135's and 145's !
Ten years ago I changed original radial Michellin ZX 155's for modern lower profile Goodyear Aquatread 185-65-R15 and never looked back, so to me this seems a normal thing to do - improve some characteristic of my car and modify it in a acceptable way.

Can you do this with your cal-look ? ->

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7sNlvvC850  8)

To be total honest, I'm in VW's since I'm aware of myself and just want to do my car best that I can !

@ Jim: When I will have a little more time, I will post some details in your older topic how it all started (how we all get into VW's)... ;)

I ran 195/60 on front about 10 yr ago. Actually when I went 12.66 @ Carlsbad, the front tires were 195/60. I changed to 145 when I wanted to go "faster", along with the entire motor spec (which never ran half as good as my old 2276 or the latest 2165).
I also ditched 205/65 rear a few weeks ago after years of not liking the squishy lateral stability, replacing them with Goodyear Eagle 195/65 which fit much more squarely on FF BRM wheel, and give much higher level of stability under all conditions my car sees. We have pretty gusty winds here, and just tire change made a world of difference in resisting cross winds. The canyon roads around my house are more fun now too. The old tires would chatter and hop under hard cornering, my opinion was sidewalls were giving and "snapping" back, not giving much confidence. The new tires just plain dig in. You come into corner, and get rear planted and then get the power on... no more skittering.
I think more and more, when the weather is right, being able to do the tour around California I've always wanted to do in my '67, but running the open stacks... low ride height...etc. What I need is a fast VW that works like a Lancia Stratos  ;D.

Well, you're just sick, I cannot help you !  ;D :D

bought my bug in 1991(1974 standard)- don't know anything about "cal-look" :o :o :o. at that time in germany it seems that everybody build there modern bugs back to a 61-66 modell- like i did. bought 6 and 7 /15 fuchs wheels lowered the car and put some 195/50x15 at the front and 195/60x15 at the back, i loved the way it drives. today the back is raised a bit and i put 195/65x15 rear wheels with 155/65x15 at the front. the handling is not half as good but it looks better!!! i don't like the look of a narrowed front beam!!!

i really like cornering, so i build a lowered bug with 195/50x15 rear and front wheels, the engine is a stock 1600cc. but with that small diameter tires it is so much fun in the hills( very small hills called "eifel").

so not only cal-look is fun but it looks great and means more fun in a straight line.

dirk

Hey Leo,I know you want a drift car,but this is a cal-look forum ;D

I tottaly agree with what Jim stated.

The only reason why I have stepped up to a 2" narrowed front beam were the front tires rubbing constantly on the fenders.I had 185/65/16 at some point up front,and with a stock beam that was OK,with a stock lowered beam that was not OK :PThere was constant rubbing of the tires to the inner fender lip,and paint started falling off.Offcourse,the wheels were guilty,as thay had not so good ET of 20mm or so,the chrome Mangels wheels :)

When I put the narrowed beam,there was a whole a lot of difference:)With those big tires up front it started looking good,cause they were tottaly hidden under the stock fender.

As far as handling is concerned,I do not plan to take a fast cornering round or Spa,or similar track,just relaxed street driving,occasional meeting trips(driving on the highway) and 1/4 weekend action.This is the reason why I can remain the current beam.

Many of us have read the cal-look rules many times,and if we stick with the "what is obliged" then we are cool in the mass.But...........

Offcourse,todays roads and sometimes  the conditiones under which we drive,tell us that we need something that can be safer for everyday need.

Nice topic Mr. Jim ;)

Maybe it's time for evolution of a cal-look style ?  8)

what about adjustable spring plates in the back and 2 set of whells with different tire sizes?
the next problem will be the turbo muffler ground clearance...

dirk

adjustable spring plates a re a cool item to own  :)

donnow about the wheel sets

but I think If lowered in the back,someone would always rub somwhere the exaust

When my car was lowered one spline,I was schratching the asphalt when I was going on the pavement :Dsparks  ;D

Do you have adjustable springplates Dirk?

I would definetly stay with stock ride height at the rear which can be improved with camber compensator,good bilstein shocks and so on

no sorry, no adjustable spring plates, but i like to own them sometimes!

another funny thing is to put the 195/50x15 on my "looker" it fells like i found 20 horses ;D ;D ;D

dirk

I guess one way to look at things is...

Jim "Sarge" Edmiston wasn't looking for goofy and spindly little 30HP Okrasa stuff to make his white Bug cool, back in 1965-70...right? Those guys were looking to today or tomorrow... how to make car faster, lighter, meaner (maybe not more user friendly).
Don't get me wrong. You'll never see EFI or 17" wheels on my car.

And I appreicate "period correct" maybe just as much as the next guy... it IS cool to see the style of years gone by still alive,

but to make excuses why a car cannot be used as a car, only to keep its "looks" period correct... I don't get that (or want to live by those rules). Or even to make excuses why performance must be compromised and take second seat to "looks"

If it works right, it will look right. Function is timeless.

There has to be a happy medium! But I'm usually willing to sacrifice a small amount of function for form if it comes down to it.

Jim, I love this thread.  I have always believed that form follows function.  I also appreciate the look, but believe that modern day parts actually make things better.  I built my car as a driver.  I believe I have proven that.  I had one set of 48s and let them go years ago realizing that I would probably never get them on my car.  I have run DCNFs for years not and have no reason to go back.  Not saying you cannot make 48s work on a driver, but I do prefer carbs with air cleaners.  I bought my car in 1984 and never looked back.  The first thing I bought for the car was a set of 135s.  I thought they looked cool and they did.  The first time I tried to slow down in the rain to make a turn and slid all over the place I had second thoughts.  I got plenty of miles out of those little tires, but I would never run them again.  I have 145s, but would prefer 155s like I had when I finished the car.  I couldn't find any just like I couldn't find any 185/70s either.  I like Berg linkage of today because it has been refined and improved  over the years.  The function is much better than the early models.  I don't believe in sacrificing performane for looks.  I respect how the look was back then, but I would rather have things that just work better for me. JMO.

The Berg linkage goes a long way in making an engine compartment right. Not that the other linkages don't work, but the Berg works well, and looks like it does. Another good example.
I guess where I am going with this, is look at a purpose built, factory competition car. What you see is what you get. Everything has a purpose.
I agree. I would rather have things work correctly and live than worry about whether my stuff fits into the page from Feb 1975 Hot VWs.

I agree 100% Jim.  I won't put something on my car for the look only, over function.  I do run 145's, but I can't fit anything wider right now.   :-\ 

I agree ... good thread.
This past weekend I finally made a step in the right direction when I was buying new front tires.
A friend installed some of the 175/55-15s on his FF BRMs >>> the look is good and the traction is available, but I just can't stand driving around recalculating the speed for accuracy ... 55 while the speedo reads 70, I hate that stuff.
Well, I found out while searching TireRack's website the new Mini Coopers run 175/65-15s; 23.96" tall, just like a 145, and they fit the rims better.
I put these on my FF BRMs and they fit perfect! The speedo error is tolerable too. I highly recommend check them out next time you're looking.
Now I can enjoy using my Wilwood 4-piston calipers on the front brakes! ;D

I can't believe the 175/65s get overlooked so often for our cars.  There's a good chance I'll try a pair on the front of my car when the time for new tires comes.

The period correct-ness thing does have some limitations, but if you are reasonable about it, there's not a whole lot of what I would call "realistic" cal-look elements that reduces the enjoyment of our cars.  I think one thing to consider, however, is that by nature the original cal-look cars were used in a somewhat limited environment.  Yes, they were often the owner's only transportation and needed to be used as such.  But did they really go much further than cruising the surface streets of so-cal?  Some did, I'm sure...  Freeway use?  Relatively rare would be my guess.  And the cars that did see that sort of use were likely more mild than we would like to remember.

Great topic! I ran 135's on the front of my bug for many years and had a few scares. the last time some genious in a Geo Metro cut me off and I locked the tires up so hard that I made flat spots on them and ended up in a ditch on the side of I-25! after that I got a pair of 175/55's and I love them.

One of my V-8 buddies can't wrap his mind around the fact that my little four cylinder's  IDA's flow more CFM than the dominator carb on his all motor 9 second Camaro.

Say TexasTom, can you post a pic of that tire here??

I tried, but the pics were too big.
I'll get some new, smaller versions and post asap. :P

Yeah, I had a few scary moments with the 145s locking up and sliding on my '67. They would also slide in a sharp turn. I don't think I will run them on the new car when it is done.

--louis

That's an interesting look at this.... that the cars were used in limited manner.... but
I've seen pictures of DRF cars crawling through muddy creeks out by Palm Springs, etc.... which is a good 2hr drive from OC, (somewhere there is a pic of a brown sedan (Thurber or Hunsaker?) going through a muddy culvert and another of a makeshift tent strung over car out there...
Trips to San Diego zoo.... pictures of that in the first KS book... of course, looks like the cars were much more stock than the "1970-on 'Aronson' era", but then again, read the chapter on Mike Mahaffey's '51 2180cc green 13 sec car.... it was his only car! If he needed to get somewhere, it was the '51 he used.
We oughta here from the horse's mouths here...  Sarge? Mike? John L?

Hi,

Changing tyres and wheels around on a car is great fun.
I run 195/60 all round or 195/50 all round or 195/60 front and 195/65 rear.
All of which are not cal look but the nearest you get is different size front and rear.
I don not care if it is cal look, the stance counts and even cal look sometimes lookes wrong due to the wrong stance.
So in effect I like my car best on 4 lug sprint stars with 195/60 front and 195/65 rear nice stance and good handling.
But with 195/50 on ATS Alloys all round that car looks like a racer and is so much fun to drive, turns in very direct
with a very snappy back end.
Just right for speed cruising.

So whatever, whoever does, it is down to taste followed by function, both is at times difficult with a classic car.

Cheers Stephan  ;D

I understand that 145's aren't the best thing out there, but my car stops on a dime and leaves a nickels change with them. I wasn't about to narrow the beam on my car to fit wider tires, and I like my car to look like a time warp anyway ;) For AssHull's car I chose 185/60's, because like the 175/65's they are about the same height as a 145, but offer much more grip.

I've seen that...think it was the Hunsaker car.  And BRMs, no less!

Another example is in the magazine write-up on Wallace's red sunroof car it is mentioned that he takes the car north on ski trips.

Lets face it it's all wrong anyway

engine way out back, 70 year old design, upto 5, 6 or 7 times the factory hp, engine with no water etc etc ::) ;D

still it the most fun you can have with a car, puts a smile on my face every time  8)

 

Well said Ron, we're all crazy guys, and we like it !  ;D

Look at old rally/sport cars, R8 Gordini, Simca 1000 Rallye etc... they all have skinny tires, high suspensions, and a lot of fun to drive !
For a beetle 165/65 could be a nice choice, they have a heigt between 135 or145, and handle nicely I think.

8)

I know Larry Mckenzie... ol' Lar.. he gets what I'm saying. Last time we rapped a bit on the phone he was doing stuff to make his gorgeous black '67 a real "driver".... I think we're both trying to outdo one another... "who has the better driver?" ;D
Anyway, last time I saw Larry's black '67 it was driving away from my home in Southern Calif, on his way back to Northern Calif.... yep 360 miles away...
He brought the car down for the weekend to visit and bring it along to Nicks for DKP cruise night, and then a few hours @ Disneyland with me and Sheep and our better halves. I was real proud of Larry that weekend, he showed he had the balls to drive a 48IDA 2276 on a good trip, the car looking absolutely bitching the entire time. Larry you're the man. Ray is wrong about you.
If you've seen Larry's car, you know it's as nice as any other serious hot rod VW...

and in the truest Kerouac form... just took an all "back roads" trip, in an old Single Cab, to Death Valley, then Cambria, then Big Sur... using all back highways and stopping in at funky truck stops and cafes. Nice....

To me the look is very important. If doesn't look right then it is just wrong. I like to drive my cars and when I was younger I put up with a lot things that just didn't work right because of stupidity, lack of money and/or knowledge. Now that I am older, but still not to smart, I like things to work right. So I have been working hard to get my car working smoothly and still looking right. With Jim's help I have the 48's working nice and he is sending me a fix for that darn noisy fuel pump. Now I want to drive it more. Last weekend I took it out to a Kelly Park pre-show at Mark M's shop (100 mile trip) and showing off threw the fan belt. Boy that car is fun! I have 165s on the front, yeah they don't look perfect but they stop good. I have a feeling that car will get quite a few miles on it this year. 

Is there a thread somewhere on major miles in a hi-po VW?  There should be.  Its the main requirement of my car, including with the upcoming adrenaline shot.

hey Larry, good you reminded me to send buffers. Sorry I forgot

Great topic Jim...

My project Oval will probably be a failure in some ways... it'll be too low, too loud, geared much too short for daily street driving, etc.

It's more or less a vision I've had for thirty years or so... an Oval that looks like it's pissed off and has the HP to back it up.
I'll sacrifice in some ways to get the look I envision... I even know better as I could not begin to count the number of cars I've built over the years for family, friends & customers that were built to balance out form / function.

I look at this project as 100% toy... something to make this 'ol guy feel good. 

~DR.

Here's a photo from last weekend with the new 175/65/15 Pirellis on front ...

That looks great,Tom. Where did you find the pirellis? I was seaching for that size tire a while back and the only brand I could find was Continental.

http://www.longstonetires.fr/productPage.php?productID=2073&categoryFilename=Pirelli-Cinturato.php (http://www.longstonetires.fr/productPage.php?productID=2073&categoryFilename=Pirelli-Cinturato.php)

cinturato cn 36 175/70/15

I found them through Discount Tire. Though Pirelli is discontinuing the P3000, they still had a few at a local store.
I think I may get one more pair ... just in case!

Those look just fine, far as I can tell.

Here's another ...

I would run those over 145s in a heartbeat!

Lawrence,
They really fit the rims very well.
I love my old Mich 145s, but these are just far superior.
Tom

good looking blue car 8) Tx Tom

Larry...good for you on taking that 67 on a road trip.  For me, that is what it is all about. You can have the look and drive them. Don Bulitta and I, along with a few others, set out to prove that in 97 on our 5200 mile round trip in our big motor cars. 

I will do none the less with my 66 chop when back together. I have always wanted the car to be more fun per mile and that means being able to drive it anywhere, anytime.  The key to my 2276 motor project is driveability...with 48s.  Mine are smooth as glass and I can drive it like a stocker off idle.

Good to hear you are taking that thing on the road. Hopefully in the future we can all meet up somewhere.

Rick Mortensen

Rick, Larry's post was made three years ago – and the car is now in Scotland. Does that constitute a long road trip? :D

I'm always interested in History and how styles evolve.

I really love the simplicity and ingenuity that the very first Cal Look VW's show us.

Because of the lack of 'off the shelf' parts way back then, very often a Home-Grown solution was found and I just love that whole ideal.

Make do and mend...  :D

I'm not a Big Motor/IDA kind of person and that's mostly because I've never had the money available to go that route. Also I'm no lover of the Extreme Narrowed Beam Brigade simply because I don't like the look very much.

My tastes are simple, but I genuinly applaud those that are beavering away coming up with ever new styles & ideas. You don't have to like everything, but some respect and often admiration is deserved.

What I think looks right isn't always going to be what others think and that's 100% fine. I love the VW scene because for most part almost everybody can get along, no matter what your taste is?

Looks Wrong? Works Rght? Looks Right, Works Wrong?  Which One.. All of them of course......

Keith...I guess my response to Larry's post means I have been on a very long trip.   :-)  Funny!

Rick M

Tom, your car is looking good! That color looks very familar, looks good!

Ted

IMO and what my dad used to preach, the only opinion that matters is the one that pays the bills.  I am sure we all criticize other cars.  But that is the beauty of the hobby, IMO to follow a strict guidelines for a certain looks get boring after a while.  After a while it looks like all the cars are just cookie cutter stamps of each other with just different sprinkles or toppings.  I say build it the way you envisioned it to be, if they want it to look a certain way tell them to pony up the cash and/or parts.  Consider it as a sponsor.

Thanks guys ...

Interestingly appropriate for this thread, I changed wheels once again a while back .... always wanted to try alloys.
6s and 7s with 185/60s front and 215/60 rear: I thought both would actually be be too large, but the wheels fit the wells so well I thought it worked pretty well!
The handling is superb. Nice to actually be able to USE four piston calipers up front AND go around corners with speed without the fear of understeer. Also, the nice light weight of the alloys versus the Flat4s increased the Zippidity!

I'll try and get a couple pics up later ...
TxT

  Rick that is really funny to me. It really got me tickled!!

looking forward to seeing some shots of that dude...  8)

I agree with all that you said Jim, even as I realize that my car is guilty of all you mentioned.   ;D

OK, here are the 6 & 7" alloys, 185/60s in front and 215/60s at the rear.
A different look for the car, but like I said, it handles very nicely with this combination!
Wish we still had autocrosses around here ... probably STILL wouldn't fair very well, but would be better on the course than my old '67 with the 145/185 combo! ... Did thrill the crowd (and me) boiling the tires out of the corners though! LOL
TxT

Looks great like that, been considering the same sizes myself.

very nice Tom ;great looking car

Love it, especially rear tires/wheels. 8)

what about 155 tires?  Vredestein has a pretty cheap classic 155/80/15 model.  Does anybody run 155's?  pictures maybe?  I'm interested in those for a loooong time.

these tires are 0.80 cm / 0.3 inch   higher then 145's, so not THAT much of a difference...  or are we just crossing the borderline with these?  ???

I run 155 R15 tyres on my car.

Sorry for the poor quality picture, this was the only one I could find.

(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/vw71/oval/p32.jpg)

Hi Stretch,

nice!  What brand are the tires?  your rims are 5.5" I suppose?

I can't remember the brand, i'll look this evening.

Yes, the rims are 5.5"

155 are the best tyre on the street, but I' m getting old and soft. They run soft with a good amount of grip and still have enough feed back through the steering 

135 and 145 are best left for the strip IMO

IMO, 155's are too tall and don't let the front come down enough for proper rake. 135's are too short so the nose needs to come too far down in order for the tire to fill the fender well. The height of a 145 is perfect for a Cal Looker, IMO. If you want more grip, get a 175/65 or a 185/60, but you'll probably have to narrow the beam. Looks, and works right, too.

I put Smart Car tires on my son's 66 a few years ago on repop alloys.  Worked and looked fantastic.  Can't remember the exact size.  Nice height and width.  Snug

either 155/60-15s or 175/55-15s, or both

pretty short, both sizes

TxT

I run 165-65 R15 and i'm very happy with them...
(http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/der60er_Wooddy/1960%20ragtop/th_DSC06425.jpg) (http://s261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/der60er_Wooddy/1960%20ragtop/DSC06425.jpg)

Is that beam narrowed?

Leave it to a newbie to see truth. Ah yes, an unpolluted mind. We'll take care of that in no time!  ;D

There are two things to consider. One, in the strictest sense Cal Look represents a cultural expression from a specific period. For me Cal Look represents simple, stripped-down, drag-inspired cars built from the early '70s to the early '80s. Elements of the era were fairly narrow front tires, nose-down stance, vertical rear tires, and a few body modifications made to simplify the car or make it better match its owner's wants. Sure you can CALL a car slammed over 17-inch alloys but you can also call it a Zephyr Wombat. It just won't BE either one of those things. That's not to say that car wouldn't be cool. It might be the coolest thing on earth. It just wouldn't be a Cal-Look bug.

Two, a lot of us have fixated on a certain style or group of parts. I have every Hot VWs in binders. I can almost quote chapter and verse. I can tell you this much: there was no set rules in real-world Cal-Look land of the '70s. Rivieras, chromies, and flames even. Mustang seats. To#¤ta Corolla seats. Steering wheels most of us have never seen before. Stock shifters with goofy knobs. Kadrons. Single Webers. SUPER BEETLES! And those are the cars in the Cal Look issues. Hell, Gary Berg's car ran 155R15 tires up front and NOBODY would question that car's credibility.

Can you use more modern parts on old-style cars? Sure you can. Some really fit the image. Take the 175/65-15s on the front of Tom's bug. They look the part--in fact they look awesome. In fact most people would have to read the sidewall to tell they weren't tall, high-profile tires. Even the 185/205 combo works. If anyone says they don't belong on a Cal Look car I'll show them a set of the F7015s and 205/70s that have gotten so trendy lately on 'true' lookers. I have yet to see that tire size on a Cal Look car in an old magazine. Understand I'm not bagging on those tires. They look great and fit the part. I'd run either (though with rag tires on the front with the F70s--it's not a good idea to run radials up front and rags out back but that's another topic). Also new parts like the wide-five discs can improve our cars without detracting from 'the look.'

Can you evolve the Cal Look aesthetic? Probably not without creating a new category. At the same time the movement doesn't need evolution. It just needs a few brave souls to venture out and use some of the other era-correct parts that haven't been done to death. With all the parts available to us there's a million ways to shuffle the deck.

[/rant]

p.s. you people who have extreme traction problems with your 135s and 145s. You're probably doing something wrong.

A 135 has a 4" tread and a 145 a 4.1" tread. Bear in mind that a 5.60-15 tire has a 3.8-inch tread. I've run 'em on everything from VWs to pre-war hot rods (really fast ones, too--I've done 11s with 5.60s in the front) and I've NEVER had a traction problem with them. No, they're not a 235 but they work well.

Here's the way to get them to grip on a VW: use the tire pressure VW specified. The pressure designated on the sidewall is just the maximum pressure required for the tire to bear the maximum load...which in some cases is almost as much as the whole car weighs. Instead, use the pressure that Volkswagen specified. It works just the same with altered tire sizes and radials too. Over-inflated tires merely ride poorly, wear quickly, and slide in the rain or under braking.

NICE rant! 8)

Thanks! I try (and I get good practice).

about 3 inch , because big brake and dropped spindles

that is the truest statement I have read in a long while,why would you want to build a modified beetle whith a modern twist then call it Cal look,its not!!!!  be original and call it something else,anything else but not Cal look as we know it ::)

Again very well put,if you evolve it into something else,it is something else,dont kid yourself its cal look if it has a super narrow front end,still has chrome moldings,has a stock engine,modern tyres,fake wheels etc etc,that is not what cal look was about,and never will be,dont be fooled by what is written in magazines,they just want your money ;)

Richie, I agree totally. For me, your cab (the floorpanned one!) totally nailed Cal look when it was in the Volksworld show in the first year of Outlaw Flat Four. I've still got a picture of it on my computer and it's one of my revolving desktop wallpapers - the dechromed body and the Fuchs alloys make it for me.
The new cab shows Cal look influences but I don't think you'd ever claim that it was a Cal Looker - it's obviously a street legal Pro Mod.

I like the cantilever slicks, maybe 15x6 inch rims with 8 inch GY or Hoosiers bias ply slicks.
remove the camera platform and it might kick ass at the autocross.
Photo may have been in front of the hot pits at Fontucky.

In the looks right works wrong department...

Just a normal turn with zero degrees Celsius and wet road.. Makes me really think what to do with my car. How streetable is it really? Close ratio gearbox, 190hp etc.

[attachment=1][attachment=2]

SHIT!

I hope that at least you didn´t get hurt?!?

Tobi

Thanks Tobi, I'm ok, just a little headache and a sore body.

 :'(

Hope you get it sorted Jesse.

Glad your OK though.

That'll buff out! ;)
It sucks, but believe me it could have been a LOT worse!

Well, if it helps I did something similar with an almost stock 1600 in the rear. Limped home and found that the drum was cracked between all the bolt holes.. With the miles You have on that bug I'd call it streetable just avoid 0 degrees and wet roads...

Sorry to see this, good luck with the repairs!

OMG, that just hurts.  I hope it's "just" the two fenders? 

I've been thinking the same since a long time now.  I really had it with those stupid 135 / 145 tires up front for even a longer time.  You just can't do sh*t with these sizes.  I've upgraded in front to 175/65/15 pirelli cinturato tires (new looking profile tough)
These tires are exactly the same height as 145's and with my narrowed beam they tuck nicely under the fenders.  They fill my arches real nice and I even must commit that I like the look better!  I struggled with the look in my mind for a year but I'm so glad I did it!!    You don't have that extreme contrast anymore of a silly bicycle tire up front and that steam roller 205/70 in the back.  It's way more in proportion now!  I still need to drive my car but I'm positive about it.  When my car is ready I'll start a new topic with all the changes I"ve made to make it more streetable and how I experience them.
And with streetable I mean really use it on the street like a proper modern car, not go fast for 200 meters and then chicken out in the corner...  Drivebility, cornering, breaking, all the aspects of a fast enjoyable car.  A classic racer, not a classic "looker"

Texas Tom really opened my eyes with his tire combo, just look at it, it's mean and usefull!  And that's I like, but like I said, I will post a new topic soon when I'm on the road again.

Dem

Sorry to see that Jesse, hope you get it fixed quickly. That's bad luck!
That being said, I think you could have that experience with most powerfull rearwheel drive cars... (without anti spin).

OUCH! That sucks mate. Hope you're OK though, cars can get massaged back pretty easy, heads don't, keep a close eye on the usual irritations like headaches and sudden blurry patches.

Skinny tyres with soft rubber (like 165s or 175s with new silica compounds), and the good old-fashioned bag-of-cement right on the nose, it should cut through the ice sheet and grip a bit, more pounds-per-square-inch should help.

I hope you're back cruising soon mate.

A lot of great info here -- -- but I always thought that the "front down - back up" was for the gas mileage --- 'cause you're always going downhill.

Omg! Jesse good luck.....
Hopelijk frame niet krom! :-\

 :)

Dam... now you tell me....

Common, you don t mean that Jesse. Just a little sit back.
Just drive it the same as you do your bike and you ll be fine ;).

Hope you restore it and have fun with that nice car.

Just a guess.  ???
When I read you had a spin in the rain with a close ratio box.
Was the spin related to perhaps a slight lift of the throttle when you entered the wet corner?
If so thats called trailing thottle oversteer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift-off_oversteer
Its an important technique for rotating the car, pitch it by lifting and then catch it by adding throttle (pitch and catch).
Close ratio gears=increased engine braking=sudden/increased weight transfer to the front=severe trailing thottle oversteer.
To help balance/calm the car on wet roads try cruising at lower RPMs, or upshifting to the next gear.

If the roads are always wet then agree I would change the set up to best suit the wet roads.
Wet set up stock gears, big front sway bar no rear sway bar, soft torsion bars and shocks.

that is a shame Jesse.
hope you get it back on the road before the summer so you could enjoy it again.
don't know if it would made a difference if you had bigger tyres up front,if the rear end starts to slide i don't know if bigger tyres up front would be better.

henk!!!