1930 Frame - Front Cross Member - Screw/Bolted-In - Old Repair or What?

[28-31]

Hello All:

I have a 1930 Ford Model A frame (Serial # A3346XXX) in which the front cross-member appears to be screw/bolted-in place (see attached photos).

The previous owner speculated that maybe it had been in an accident and that was how they repaired it. That seems plausible to me, but I don't see any other signs of accident repair damage.

I'm curious if this was the standard repair method of the day -- or, if there is any other reason for this, because I've seen this same exact "bolted-in" front cross member on another frame that was also straight as an arrow, with no apparent accident damage.

Thanks!

-Jeff

[Mike V. Florida]

All frames from the factory were riveted in.

I'm interested in seeing a picture of the actual bolt. Were do the threads start, at the bolt head or just before it leaves the cross member. Also what size is the bolt hole, same as rivit or larger?

[BrianBurkert]

This is a pretty common repair.

[Joe K]

Check the height of the landing pad for the radiator. Are frame details consistent with your build date/frame number?

Two radiator landing pad heights are seen normally on a Model A. 28-29 (until October 29) are level with the rails. 30-31 (after October 29 actually) are recessed about 1/4" below the rails. For a short period between October 29 and December 29 when the new body form came into production, there were "shims" used to make up the difference and allow Ford to put the older body form on the "pre changed" newer design frame.

Yours may be a factory frame modified to use up one form or another of the front cross-members?

I have a "transitional" frame sold to me as a 1929 but the date code puts it late November and has the low pads - so I made the shims.

Or maybe I speculate and your frame rotted out under the radiator and was repaired?

Joe K

[Jason in TX]

Originally Posted by BrianBurkert

This is a pretty common repair.

I have purchased a few sets of fenders in the past that have had three holes drilled where the crossmember rivits should be. Would this be due to repairs like this? People didn't want to remove the fenders so they just drilled through the fenders? Or is that a factory thing?

I think the fenders I've seen this on were 1930 fenders... Possibly from trucks.

[PeteVS]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Model 'A' front crossmembers (as well as later models) have been known to crack in the area above the front spring. In your case, the simpler way to repair was to bolt in a replacement crossmember. Riveting, which is the preferred method, was probably much more difficult than bolting in the case of a small town garage repair.

[28-31]

Originally Posted by Mike V. Florida

... I'm interested in seeing a picture of the actual bolt. Were do the threads start, at the bolt head or just before it leaves the cross member. Also what size is the bolt hole, same as rivit or larger?

I'll see what I can do about additional photos -- although, as of now, I don't intend to remove any of the bolts, so I most likely will not be able to comment on the size of the rivet/bolt hole.

[28-31]

Originally Posted by Joe K

Check the height of the landing pad for the radiator. Are frame details consistent with your build date/frame number? ... Joe K

Thanks -- I'll check. I believe my frame dates from May of '30, so I'm thinking it's not a transitional frame -- but, still worth checking, to see what replacement cross-member was used (assuming it was replaced).

Originally Posted by Joe K

Or maybe I speculate and your frame rotted out under the radiator and was repaired? Joe K

Quite possible. Thanks

[Joe K]

Originally Posted by Jason in TX

I have purchased a few sets of fenders in the past that have had three holes drilled where the crossmember rivits should be. Would this be due to repairs like this? People didn't want to remove the fenders so they just drilled through the fenders? Or is that a factory thing?

I think the fenders I've seen this on were 1930 fenders... Possibly from trucks.

Both cars and trucks WERE subject to frame issues caused by Henry's construction method. Some say the rivets afford "flexibility." Others point to construction efficiency for the use of rivets. I think to the latter as rivet use in construction is NEVER done in structures to create flexibility. A riveted joint in structures is analyzed as "rigid" or pin-ended component.

Not to say that Henry might not have observed some tolerable flex in the Model T frames - and put the thought on steroids for the Model A.

It was also an age where welding was a relatively new practice (welding on gas tanks was HIGHLY unique - including Ford's method of welding procedure for the tank.)

But trucks were trucks. Bought and paid for what they could earn as tools to create money. And when a truck with frame issue showed up, the repair was done as expediciously as possible. Possibly to include drilling the fender top and going right through.

Just one thought.

Joe K

[PeteVS]

The thing to keep in mind in comparing a bolted joint to a riveted joint is that with a bolted joint, the holes are always larger than the bolt diameter. If they weren't, it would be impossible to install the bolt, especially if there are more than one. (For multi-bolt situations, the holes must be large enough to accept the bolt even when there is variance in the hole locations.) The holes are also larger than the rivet diameter, BUT, when the rivet is installed, the diameter increases to be a very tight fit in the holes. This means that the only thing keeping the two parts from moving in a bolted joint is the friction between the two parts. If the bolt isn't tight enough, the two pieces will slide. The holes will become elongated, the shank of the bolt will see impact in shear, the joint will fail. With a riveted joint, there is no way that the two pieces can move in relation to each other. The joint will not fail. IMHO

[Mike V. Florida]

Originally Posted by 28-31

I'll see what I can do about additional photos -- although, as of now, I don't intend to remove any of the bolts, so I most likely will not be able to comment on the size of the rivet/bolt hole.

Maybe just one

[Mike V. Florida]

Originally Posted by PeteVS

The thing to keep in mind in comparing a bolted joint to a riveted joint is that with a bolted joint, the holes are always larger than the bolt diameter. If they weren't, it would be impossible to install the bolt, especially if there are more than one. (For multi-bolt situations, the holes must be large enough to accept the bolt even when there is variance in the hole locations.) The holes are also larger than the rivet diameter, BUT, when the rivet is installed, the diameter increases to be a very tight fit in the holes. This means that the only thing keeping the two parts from moving in a bolted joint is the friction between the two parts. If the bolt isn't tight enough, the two pieces will slide. The holes will become elongated, the shank of the bolt will see impact in shear, the joint will fail. With a riveted joint, there is no way that the two pieces can move in relation to each other. The joint will not fail. IMHO

What if someone were to drill out the original holes so that a bolt with a shank that has no threads for the thickness of the frame and cross member, thus there would be no play between the bolt and the hole and no shear? See why I asked about removing one of the bolts?

[Joe K]

What if someone were to drill out the original holes so that a bolt with a shank that has no threads for the thickness of the frame and cross member, thus there would be no play between the bolt and the hole and no shear?

Your thought is a logical extension, but I think ANY bolt capable of passing through the hole will involve some free play. Normally called "assembly clearance" in the industry.

That is unless the bolt were made an interference fit, which approaches the condition of a rivet where compressive stress exists in the rivet and tensive stress in the material surrounding the rivet.

I think that's why they invented rivets. To get the advantage of an interference fit without having to use a press. You simply beat it while hot and hope while in cooling that not much diameter is lost or at least made up for by contraction in length.

Joe K.

[Mike V. Florida]

Originally Posted by Joe K

Your thought is a logical extension, but I think ANY bolt capable of passing through the hole will involve some free play. Normally called "assembly clearance" in the industry.

That is unless the bolt were made an interference fit, which approaches the condition of a rivet where compressive stress exists in the rivet and tensive stress in the material surrounding the rivet.

I think that's why they invented rivets. To get the advantage of an interference fit without having to use a press. You simply beat it while hot and hope while in cooling that not much diameter is lost or at least made up for by contraction in length.

Joe K.

No doubt that a rivet in this case would be the ideal solution just wondering how they did it in the day. I'm sure today there are people that just drop in a fully threaded bolt from home depot and the like tighten it up and call it fixed.

[Joe K]

I'm sure today there are people that just drop in a fully threaded bolt from home depot and the like tighten it up and call it fixed.

Believe me, I have been tempted. Grade 8 bolts are cheap compared to even making the dolly(s) to do a re-rivet job.

Dunno. I'm still thinking of making a fully boxed/welded frame in the Model A pattern. This to bring absolute confidence for a Model A Huckster/truck (which is where it will be used) to carry any load I might decide to put to it.

The difficulties of boxing around the steering column and motor mounts still eludes me. And there is no real good way to get past the center crossmember without butchering everything up. It's almost as if I want to start from scratch on a fully boxed repop frame rather than modify an original?

And even though they make "kits" of pre-punched panels to box the frame (with instructions) maybe it's all better left alone? I do have a spare frame. Actually two!

And they can be straightened...

Maybe I work too hard at it.

Joe K

[28-31]

Here's a couple more photos (see attached). I'm starting to get curious about what the bolts look like too (not enough to remove one yet), because they sit flush in the top of the frame rail. I'm curious how thick (or thin) the head of the "bolt" is(?)

It was too dark and cold in my garage last night to crawl underneith to see if the bottom of the bolt is visible up inside the cross-member. I'll try to take a look this weekend.

The photos do appear to show other bolts holding it in place. I haven't compared it to a factory rivieted frame yet, to see where the bolts on mine are taking the place of original rivets (beyond the obvious -- top 3 holes).

Assuming that the frame is square and not sagging anywhere and everything is tight (I will be checking when I tear the rest of the chassis down as part of the rebuild), I imagine the best thing is to leave it alone? I'm not building a fine point car, but I do want it structurally sound. I'm staying with the 4-cylinder/etc. -- and all numbers match on this (engine #, frame #, and # on title), which is why I don't just go with a different frame.

The radiator from this car (which is a proper '30-'31 style) appears to be dated 1940, which is when the previous owner speculated the "repair" to the front cross-member was done -- whether due to an accident or leaky radiator or anything else, we will never know. ...but if that's true, then it's been this way for the last 72 years. I go back and forth on whether to do anything with it. Clearly, the first step is to see if the frame is still square/straight.

Thanks for all of the replies / opinions / information.

-Jeff

[Mike V. Florida]

What size is the bolt? Maybe we can get an idea of whether the holes were drilled larger or not by the size of the bolt.

[OHV DeLuxe]

Mine is done the same way, i left it the way it was. I feel it's part of the history of the car.

[Kevin in NJ]

You would be wise to fix the bolts with rivets.

The rivets contribute to the structure of the frame. The bolts will allow the parts to slide and eventually cause issues. The rivets allow flexing, but compensate for slight hole mis-alignments. Since the rivet is designed to fill the voids yet allow movement. The bolts will allow for more movement in a frame with a lot of movement.

So how much do you want the part that holds the front axle and engine to the car to move? Mix in the likely hood that the wishbone ball is loose and some more looseness elsewhere in the steering. How much is too much?

Ya, I know how much do you drive the car and will it really matter? That is your choice.
Please do not think this is so trivial. It is all the little things that add up to give a car that is not so pleasant to drive. Is the history worth it?

A properly restored A (not necessarily JS correct) is a fun, reliable confident car to drive at 60 MPH. At 45 it is just as much a dream to drive.

[1931 flamingo]

28-31: Are we doing a restoration, or building a driver?? If a driver, and depending on how far apart it is I would take some measurements and see if frame is close to square. If OK I would weld the c/member in. JMO Probably been done thousands of times before..

Paul in CT