Unwritten rules of mouldings?

[Russell Timmins]

Are there any unwritten rules about square body mouldings?

I want to put a moulding on my truck.
Problem is the correct moulding to suit my 78 is the full wrap around moulding. (first picture) No big deal except i am in Canada and LMC want $250 plus another $250 for shipping oversize.
$500 usd is approx $500,000 canadian these days

Is it a square body no no to put a single moulding on? (second picture)

Thanks

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[bucket]

That used to be a common thing to do around here. Guys would update their trucks to the newer look and often had a two-tone color along the bottom.

I personally really like the '73-'80 trim much better.

 

[Russell Timmins]

I totally agree. The 73-80 trim is awesome but I cant bring myself to pay the shipping.

 

[Old77]

I totally agree. The 73-80 trim is awesome but I cant bring myself to pay the shipping.

Yeah I’m sure it’s pricey considering you’re in Canada

 

[Big Chip]

Yeah I’m sure it’s pricey considering you’re in Canada

Maybe all the money he’s “saving” on health care could offset the shipping cost?

It’s too bad someone in Canada hasn’t thought to open a business selling this stuff, it would sure help those guys out up there. One of the Canadian cats ought to look into it.

 

[Old77]

No kidding. If a company like LMC can get Chinese and Taiwan repop products and sell them surely a Canadian company could do the same Maybe LMC should open another store up there to with the intent on getting more Canadian customers because I'm sure @Russell Timmins isn't the only one in this boat.

 

[Blue Ox]

If you're striving for authenticity,.. ignore everything I'm about to say.

From an aesthetic viewpoint I always felt GM only got it right on the '81-'86 trucks. Otherwise they had awkward geometry that the moldings only highlighted.

On the 1st gen trucks the bulge and light on the front fender called for the lower body molding to be low on the fenders, bed and doors. But when it got to the tail end of the rear quarters it had to kick up to meet up with the bottom of the taillights and tailgate. It created an odd kick-up in the 11th hour that just didn't fit with the rest of the so-called "squarebody" style. While one could argue that the tape stripe used to separate the two tone paints was a "cheap" alternative to a molding, they did manage to get it right on the later trucks with the horizontal front marker lamp lining up with the body molding that wrapped under the taillights.

On the post '86 trucks, because they were trying to match the family look of the newer trucks with their bumper moldings they were forced by the same taillight and quarter panel configuration to angle the moldings that created a wedge shape which, once again, did not fit the "squarebody" aesthetic.

No matter how you cut it there is no factory way to work that straight line or two tone on the early trucks. If it was my truck, (and I certainly understand that it's not and you do what you like with your own truck) I would follow Old77's example and use pinstripes to follow the body contours and front fender bulge for the upper body line or two-tone and use the later moldings from under the taillight to the back of the front wheelwells, keeping the whole thing straight and not trying to match the lower front fender bulge or wrap under the front markers.

Any angles in the moldings tend to create a squatty or oddly raked look to the truck because these accents are what the eye is drawn to and focuses on. Not the actual rockers or body lines that define the stance of the truck.

So there you have it. My artistic take and opinion on squarebody moldings. Worth everything you paid for it.

 

[Goldie Driver]

If you're striving for authenticity,.. ignore everything I'm about to say.

From an aesthetic viewpoint I always felt GM only got it right on the '81-'86 trucks. Otherwise they had awkward geometry that the moldings only highlighted.

On the 1st gen trucks the bulge and light on the front fender called for the lower body molding to be low on the fenders, bed and doors. But when it got to the tail end of the rear quarters it had to kick up to meet up with the bottom of the taillights and tailgate. It created an odd kick-up in the 11th hour that just didn't fit with the rest of the so-called "squarebody" style. While one could argue that the tape stripe used to separate the two tone paints was a "cheap" alternative to a molding, they did manage to get it right on the later trucks with the horizontal front marker lamp lining up with the body molding that wrapped under the taillights.

On the post '86 trucks, because they were trying to match the family look of the newer trucks with their bumper moldings they were forced by the same taillight and quarter panel configuration to angle the moldings that created a wedge shape which, once again, did not fit the "squarebody" aesthetic.

No matter how you cut it there is no factory way to work that straight line or two tone on the early trucks. If it was my truck, (and I certainly understand that it's not and you do what you like with your own truck) I would follow Old77's example and use pinstripes to follow the body contours and front fender bulge for the upper body line or two-tone and use the later moldings from under the taillight to the back of the front wheelwells, keeping the whole thing straight and not trying to match the lower front fender bulge or wrap under the front markers.

Any angles in the moldings tend to create a squatty or oddly raked look to the truck because these accents are what the eye is drawn to and focuses on. Not the actual rockers or body lines that define the stance of the truck.

So there you have it. My artistic take and opinion on squarebody moldings. Worth everything you paid for it.

Wow - well written !


So much so I wanted to go look at pics, so I used a handy source.

Now I see what you are saying.

You must be registered for see images attach

But, look at the dually.

I guess since it has a separate piece due to the rear fender it sits higher , which allows it to sit straight.

You must be registered for see images attach

To each, their own - I always liked the "shark nose" reverse slope and wondered why GM did not make the "slope nose" 2 tones follow the upper body line.


To the OP - it's your rig - be creative !!

Make it look the way you like.

Britt

 

[Blue Ox]

Wow - well written !


So much so I wanted to go look at pics, so I used a handy source.

Now I see what you are saying.

You must be registered for see images attach

But, look at the dually.

I guess since it has a separate piece due to the rear fender it sits higher , which allows it to sit straight.

You must be registered for see images attach

To each, their own - I always liked the "shark nose" reverse slope and wondered why GM did not make the "slope nose" 2 tones follow the upper body line.


To the OP - it's your rig - be creative !!

Make it look the way you like.

Britt

Thank you. It's something that has always caught my eye, and kind of bothered my artistic sensibilities. However, it's all personal preference, so it is what it is and you do your truck to suit your tastes.

Yeah, the dually breaks it up and takes some of the emphasis off it. There's also an issue with the rear wheel wells on the regular trucks being shorter than the fronts which also creates a squatty look. Again, it's about the cues they eye is drawn to as opposed to the actual stance of the truck.

 

[Russell Timmins]

Thanks everyone,

Great response and some great feedback.
I think I will take the wise words of Blue Ox and run with the single moulding.
Run straight of course haha.

And as for someone opening a shop to sell parts up here, there may be a shop doing so but in my experience people tend to over charge for parts.
I understand that they likely buy from the US and put there own mark up on things.
But engine parts are more cost effective to buy from summit etc and pay shipping.
No big deal really, just those particular mouldings are quite long and the shipping was huge.

I wanted to make sure I wasnt going to get laughed at going to shows with the incorrect mouldings on my truck.

I guess everyone is cool with whatever if it looks good.

Thanks

 

[Blue Ox]

We will expect pictures, of course.

 

[Russell Timmins]

Of course!

 

[Rusty Nail]

If you're striving for authenticity,.. ignore everything I'm about to say.

From an aesthetic viewpoint I always felt GM only got it right on the '81-'86 trucks. Otherwise they had awkward geometry that the moldings only highlighted.

On the 1st gen trucks the bulge and light on the front fender called for the lower body molding to be low on the fenders, bed and doors. But when it got to the tail end of the rear quarters it had to kick up to meet up with the bottom of the taillights and tailgate. It created an odd kick-up in the 11th hour that just didn't fit with the rest of the so-called "squarebody" style. While one could argue that the tape stripe used to separate the two tone paints was a "cheap" alternative to a molding, they did manage to get it right on the later trucks with the horizontal front marker lamp lining up with the body molding that wrapped under the taillights.

On the post '86 trucks, because they were trying to match the family look of the newer trucks with their bumper moldings they were forced by the same taillight and quarter panel configuration to angle the moldings that created a wedge shape which, once again, did not fit the "squarebody" aesthetic.

No matter how you cut it there is no factory way to work that straight line or two tone on the early trucks. If it was my truck, (and I certainly understand that it's not and you do what you like with your own truck) I would follow Old77's example and use pinstripes to follow the body contours and front fender bulge for the upper body line or two-tone and use the later moldings from under the taillight to the back of the front wheelwells, keeping the whole thing straight and not trying to match the lower front fender bulge or wrap under the front markers.

Any angles in the moldings tend to create a squatty or oddly raked look to the truck because these accents are what the eye is drawn to and focuses on. Not the actual rockers or body lines that define the stance of the truck.

So there you have it. My artistic take and opinion on squarebody moldings. Worth everything you paid for it.

Great post! I concur it's all about the turn signals.

I thought $500 sounded reasonable and if that's too much then you don't want it very bad..

Never in a million years would I dishonor an early truck with later model moulding.
Omg the horror.
Eww, no.

I like to keep things relatively stock OE looking and the later stick-on **** looks cheap to me.

 

[bucket]

Gotta stick my two cents in here, lol.

I always liked the kickup at the rear that the trim does. I've seen people put it on so that it sits level instead and it really bugs me. And the shorter rear wheel opening doesn't bother me at all either. That was the styling trend of the time and so many cars and trucks shared that feature.

I also never noticed that the dually trim didn't do it.

 

[Craig 85]

Here's my friend and his '77 Cheyenne circa 1988. His truck did not have the lower trim. Just another option.

You must be registered for see images attach