Assembly Line Build Sheet for Chassis?

[Tom Wesenberg]

Just wondering if the Model A chassis had a build sheet that followed it down the line?
Otherwise how did the workers know which rear spring it should have?

The Twin Cities plant had a code stamped into the right rear of the rear crossmember, but I don't know of any other plants that did this.

[Steve Plucker]

Tom,

Happy Birthday!

That is a GREAT question! They must have had one because the rear spring was added to the chassis in one operation (#10) and the next operation (#11) was that of the assembling the rear axle assembly to the spring while the frame was "bottom-side up" on the conveyor. This was step 10 and 11 in the assembly process.

By step number 53, the car body was added to the assembled chassis coming down the asembly line.

So yes, there must have been some sort of "build sheet" for the workers to follow if three or four body styles were coming off the assembly line which required a different rear spring for each.

On the other hand if the assembly plant was making just body styles that took a particular rear spring, then maybe there was no need for a "build sheet".

If you do not have a copy of Fay Leone Faurote's articles about the assembly of the Model A Ford, he did 12 of them for the American Machinist in 1928, you should get them as they are quite interesting.

Pluck

[tbirdtbird]

those early American Machinist magazines were awesome, tho i have only seen a bound volume for one yrs worth (i think it was 1912)

where would we access the 1928 issues??

[Steve Plucker]

I interlibrary loaned them from the University of Washington...got them...copied the articles...then sent them back.

Might be other universities closer to you that have the set.

The articles were in the following: Vol. 68: #'s 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 26, Vol. 69: #'s 1, 2, 4, 7,

The one on the gastank was interesting but unfortunatly it was done BEFORE the dates started to show up on them so we still do not know for sure just why the dates were put on the tanks but we have some ideas.

Might be more but I could not find any.

Pluck

[Kevin in NJ]

So how many cars got the wrong body for the springs?

You know some errors had to have happened.

[tbirdtbird]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

curious how you were able to determine the Am Machinist had these articles in the first place....

[Tom Wesenberg]

Originally Posted by Kevin in NJ

So how many cars got the wrong body for the springs?

You know some errors had to have happened.

I'm still puzzled by the Twin Cities frame Rusty owns that has "R8", since Roadsters are supposed to have a 7 leaf rear spring?

[QGolden]

American Machinist was a very cool periodical for its day. I have a copy of the American Machinist Shop Note Book, published in 1919. It is a bound collection of Articles from the periodical that has some great problem solving articles in it, that I make use of today.

[Steve Plucker]

Originally Posted by tbirdtbird

curious how you were able to determine the Am Machinist had these articles in the first place....

A very good friend of mine who has since passed on, Mr. Fred Gooding, had a few copies that were not very ledgeable...So I did the research and found the issues and copied them for myself.

Pluck

[Richard in WV]

Originally Posted by Tom Wesenberg

I'm still puzzled by the Twin Cities frame Rusty owns that has "R8", since Roadsters are supposed to have a 7 leaf rear spring?

Please note this frame that says (CS0). I believe that 9 leaves was the norm for a Convertible Sedan.