Rear Axle Assembly - How was it originally painted?

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

I have read in the Paint & Refinish Guide on Page 15 where it speaks of the Front End assembly being painted with Black Japan prior to being assembled. It later speaks of other chassis parts were coated with enamel (either dipped or sprayed) after being assembled. I also read on Page 16 where it mentions the Rear End assembly was painted with (possible the rear end assembly was dipped in??) Black Enamel. When you look at the picture on Page 15 (photo P.833.55630-1) the appearance (sheen & texture) of the Front End assembly has the same appearance as the Rear Axle assembly.

I guess my question is severalfold in that how do we know whether the Rear Axle assembly was painted with Chassis Black enamel --or whether it was in Black Japan paint? Was Black Japan paint of a consistancy in which the assembly could be coated by dipping in lieu of spraying?


One other thing, ..in reviewing several photographs taken of fine-point vehicles and comparing those to the verbiage in the P&RG on Page 16 under FRONT END ASSEMBLY; it mentions of " ...individual pieces being painted a Black Japan prior to assembly." It goes on to say "This subassembly included the axle, spring, spring perches, spring shackles, spindles, spindle bolts, steering arms, tie rod, radius rod, lubricator fittings, and all nuts, bolts, and cotter pins.". I am having difficulty in understanding the wording. Is it saying that all of these pieces were painted seperately and then assembled, --or that these components were assembled first and then those items were painted together?

.

[Bruce Lancaster]

My impression from that is that process was like the engine, with the painted parts painted after machining but before assembly...but it is fundamentally unclear, and interpretation is speculative. Need assembly line pics!

[RonC]

On page 15 the rearend housing bolts appear to be not painted?

[d.j. moordigian]

Brent,

I have the shocks and the backing plates figured out. The rear end, less the BPs
and maybe the spring, I think wear sprayed, hents the different sheen's in some of
the photos.
The front end IS a whole can of worms in it self, which I'm still looking at.
I'll watch this thread to see how it plays out.

Dudley

[Steve Ciccalone]

Brent, frankly I think the process changed over four years and varied plant to plant. I have a very good early chassis, A8228, that is intact and has a lot of original paint on it. It is virtually all the same, the black has a semi-gloss cast but is not reflective. I haven't gone over every inch of it with a magnifying glass but it does not have lots of discernable runs in it. It is hard for me to tell if it is an asphalt base as Japan is described to be. A know a few professional paint experts. The next time one stops by I'll show him the chassis for an opinion. The chassis is clearly not like the one in the manual which seems to illustrate the fact that some parts were sprayed with proxilyn will smaller parts were dipped in enamel.

As you know MARC has taken the position that "black is black" and while some folks don't like this position, I'm beginning to think it takes some subjective position out of judging. I'm going to do each of my chassises in the manner I think duplicates like the original but would not presuppose my way is the only way. As long as the chassis components are not reflective and do not hide casting/machining/forging marks, I think it is all well and good, and this would include powder coating if it was done appropriately.

If people want to make an arguement about this, we might as well expand it to plating as today's approved processes and chemicals can't duplicate what was done 80 years ago.

[Steve Ciccalone]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Further, I'm actually looking forward to somebody to spraying the chassis with proxylin as described in paragraph 2 of page 16 of the guide. This will also eliminate any arguement or discussion as to what the correct hardware finishes are. Based on the guide, assuming it is effectively incorporated by reference into the JS (as I think it should be), I as a chassis judge would have no choice but to give full boat and move on to the next car.

[RonC]

If the entire bottom and top of the frame assembly was later sprayed with proxylin (page 16) wouldn't that cover up most of the fastener finishes that were unfinished, raven or cadmium?? Page 16 does say that the proxylin was to coat all unfinished fasteners.

[Steve Ciccalone]

Exactly

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by d.j. moordigian

Brent,

I have the shocks and the backing plates figured out. The rear end, less the BPs
and maybe the spring, I think wear sprayed, hents the different sheen's in some of
the photos.
The front end IS a whole can of worms in it self, which I'm still looking at.
I'll watch this thread to see how it plays out.

Dudley

Dudley, you may be correct but "why" are you of the opinion the Rear Axle assembly was sprayed?

Ron, I read that too and found that to be somewhat contradictory but it would align with what you/I see in the picture I referenced above regarding a glossy frame (prior to spraying the Pyroxilyn) however notice it does have the engine pans already installed. I might add that it does seem like double work and why would they bother dipping other parts (running board brackets, etc.) prior to installation if they were going to re-coat it anyway??

I echo Steve's comment about "exactly" but maybe I am missing something.

[d.j. moordigian]

Brent,
Mt thought toward the rear end lye's(sp) with the unit being assembled/disassembled,
fitting the parts in the fixture with out screwing up the paint. But that would be
after the major parts were masked to paint, torque tube, center section, L & R axle
housings. They all had machined surfaces.

The other way around, built in the fixture, mask the 3 ends and paint. Hang the
backing plates, and... The wild cards would/could be the radius rods and spring.
I think the RR bolts are Cad, correct? Which would eliminate the RRs.

Time is money for Ford Motor Company. I thought the sheen was flatter on the
rears than the front(I don't have my paint book at work)?

Dudley

[Steve Ciccalone]

Time is money for Ford Motor Company. I thought the sheen was flatter on the
rears than the front(I don't have my paint book at work)?

Dudley[/QUOTE]

Dudley, there are several factory photos that show variations of paint to rear ends, both flat and with some gloss.

[d.j. moordigian]

Steve,
I familiar with some of those photos.

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Dudley, for nearly 15 years prior to the introduction of the Model A, Henry built special machines for use on his assembly lines and then dip painted all of the Rear Axle assemblies. In the final years of the Model T production, he called the car the Improved Car and it apparently utilized many operations (spray painting bodies, dipping enamel parts, sewing upholstery, machining, stamping, assembly, wire wheel manufacturing, etc.) that would have very likely transitioned into the Model A era during that short 6+/- months when he transitioned from the Improved Car into the Model A assembly. Based on the Model T rear end vs. the Model A rear end, the Model A would have likely have been easier to "cap off the ends" to prevent paint infiltration than what it would have been for the Model T rear end assy. I am of the opinion that since I have picture proof that the rear ends were dip painted on the 'T's, then it seems plausible that he would have continued that proven process into the Model A era. Maybe someone has proof that the Rear Axle assembly was painted in lieu of being dipped??

[d.j. moordigian]

OK, I'm up for the knowledge. The 2 photos in the P&FG, Pg. 15 & 16 are very
interesting, and I look at them with regularity. So what's your idea, to figure out
this mess ?
Then we can move on to the front end !

Dudley