Go Back   The Ford Barn > General Discussion > Model A (1928-31)

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-26-2012, 07:24 PM   #101
85930tudor
Senior Member
 
85930tudor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: richmond ky
Posts: 322
Send a message via Yahoo to 85930tudor
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

I hope the wife does well with her surgery...and this is the best post yet.......Dave
85930tudor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 08:35 PM   #102
Steve Plucker
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Walla Walla, Washington USA
Posts: 6,066
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RonC View Post
John can you also get the frame number and any letter prefix to the number?
And a gas tank date if possible.

Pluck
Steve Plucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
Old 01-26-2012, 10:01 PM   #103
John Stone
Senior Member
 
John Stone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wichita, Kansas
Posts: 710
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

I am planning on the engine number/frame number, the body number, the gas tank date and the firewall. I will see if I can get a shot underneath the cross member. If there are any others I should get, just tell me and I'll try. The body is in one corner of the garage, the gas tank is in the basement and the chassis is tucked along one wall. Only the gas tank is easy.
John Stone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2012, 10:02 PM   #104
Gary Karr
Senior Member
 
Gary Karr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,483
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

I have to go along with Pluck's #2 senario. How (and why) would a dealer change a right hand drive car over to a left hand drive? That would mean changing the fuel tank, cowl, windshield and wiper, steering column, bell housing, pedals, manifolds, etc. That is an incredible task.
Gary Karr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2012, 02:37 AM   #105
Tom Wesenberg
Senior Member
 
Tom Wesenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Mpls, MN
Posts: 27,582
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco Tahtaras View Post
Tom, Does your Phaeton frame have steering mount holes on the right side? I'm thinking that it would have the large hole but not the two bolt holes.

Another thing interesting is that everything I've read indicates that the new single plate clutch was in full production on LHD cars by mid November 1928. The number John provided indicates the engine was stamped either 11/30/28 or 12/3/28 and it has a multiple disk clutch.
Marco, I'll have to go out and check tomorrow on the steering box mounting holes on the right side.

For the rest of the readers thinking this was a factory job, I'm still having a hard time believing the factory torched the brake rod hole, because then you still have to explain the multiplate clutch and tranny, which as Marco said, was certainly changed to a single plate clutch by this time. So, we have two wrongs going on here that need to be explained.
Tom Wesenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2012, 06:46 AM   #106
Steve Plucker
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Walla Walla, Washington USA
Posts: 6,066
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Wesenberg View Post
Marco, I'll have to go out and check tomorrow on the steering box mounting holes on the right side.

For the rest of the readers thinking this was a factory job, I'm still having a hard time believing the factory torched the brake rod hole, because then you still have to explain the multiplate clutch and tranny, which as Marco said, was certainly changed to a single plate clutch by this time. So, we have two wrongs going on here that need to be explained.
I agree to Tom, BUT you have to remember here...the frame assembly was a SEPERATE item within itself when assembled. Just like the engine. Then they were paired up.

More than likely this RHD frame got mixed up with the rest of the LHD frames that were being shipped out to the assembly plant for where this vehicle was originally assembled.

I think, but can not prove the fact, that the reason the center cross member was "torched" was because there was no way (???) that FORD could of "punched" another nice looking hole in that cross member once the frame was totaly assembled and once that RHD frame reached the final assembly line, instead of discarding the frame, FORD did the next best thing and hacked out the hole to make the new style brake system fit their cause.

And again, this was the first item of business on the assembly of the chassis, was the fitting of the service brake parts so it was much easier to do the "hack" job right from the get go.

Question here then is this...were all the cross members and frame side rails first formed and then the holes punched into the parts OR were the holes punched first on to the flat iron then the iron formed into the part?

Also, since this frame has 2 stamped and 2 forged running board braces, according to the MARC/MAFCA Restoration Guidelines and Judging Standards, it places this frame at about December 1928 through March 1929.

Pluck

Last edited by Steve Plucker; 01-27-2012 at 11:11 AM.
Steve Plucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2012, 10:41 AM   #107
Tom Wesenberg
Senior Member
 
Tom Wesenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Mpls, MN
Posts: 27,582
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

Marco, I just checked my 9-27-28 frame side rails and my 2-23-29 frame side rails and both frames have 3 steering holes on the right rail to mount the steering box. So, my complete 2-23-29 frame is ready to use for either RHD or LHD because the center crossmember has holes on both sides for the brake rod, but my 9-27-28 complete frame can only be used for LHD because it doesn't have holes on the right side for the brake rod or brake linkage mounts.

Maybe John Stone's frame is the one mix up that made Ford think we better start making frames ready to use for either RHD or LHD.
Tom Wesenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2012, 11:00 AM   #108
d.j. moordigian
Senior Member
 
d.j. moordigian's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Fresno, Ca.
Posts: 3,636
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

Steve,
From post # 76

"Marco and I had a discussion some time back about frame rails. He said the holes
in the rails were punched prior to forming. From my experience in forming, you need
alignment pins for the part, if no flash is to be removed, after forming."

Gary and I are in agreement about changing from RHD to LHD.

Dudley
d.j. moordigian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2012, 11:18 AM   #109
Steve Plucker
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Walla Walla, Washington USA
Posts: 6,066
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

[QUOTE=Tom Wesenberg;350844]I just went and measured my 9-27-28 brake hole and it's a 1.15" diameter round hole. The hole on the top right of the crossmember is 5/8", but I'm not sure what that hole is for.

I also measured the holes in my 2-23-29 crossmember and both the brake holes (for LHD and RHD) are 2" but they are also both flat on the top, so the top to bottom measurement would be less. The center rectangular hole (on the top side) is 1" x 1 1/4" and I don't know what that hole is for either.[/QUOTE]

Tom,

It was used for lifting the frame assembly for both I think.

Pluck
Steve Plucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2012, 12:35 PM   #110
John Stone
Senior Member
 
John Stone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wichita, Kansas
Posts: 710
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

I'm back with the pictures I promised plus a couple. The swap meet kept me busy for a while. Here goes,the engine number, frame number, gas tank date, an underneath cross member shot, a shot showing the 2 different running board braces, one of the body showing it was not a RH drive body and one of the body number but it was not legible (looks like a gorilla stamped it because the area is bent down).
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSCN3915.jpg (61.4 KB, 49 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN3916.jpg (65.9 KB, 51 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN3917.jpg (78.3 KB, 50 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN3922.jpg (73.4 KB, 49 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN3923.jpg (59.2 KB, 52 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN3914.jpg (45.2 KB, 52 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN3918.jpg (65.1 KB, 52 views)
John Stone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2012, 01:17 PM   #111
329s
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Walla Walla, WA
Posts: 239
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

John,

You have convinced me if my eyesight is 100%.

Engine number A697220 stamped on 11/30/28 and gas tank date of 11/21/28 putting assembly sometime in December 28/January 29 depending on just where it was assembled.

The running board brackets are right for this time period I think (don't have the RG's in front of me).

There are the "brake stops" on the back of the center cross member plus the two square holes for the old style service brake set up, all of which was discontinued I think in late October/November 1928 HOWEVER...

Your frame runs in the same context as my February 1929 Tudor frame except I am dealing with a front cross member that was suposed to be discontinued back in November 1928.

Am I going to change it out to suit the RG's? No.

So here is another case of the fact that Ford used up all the parts if they could be used without any major revision to the assembly of the car or truck itself.

Can you tell just what the assembly plant codes are?

Pluck

Last edited by 329s; 02-20-2012 at 01:22 PM.
329s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2012, 01:55 PM   #112
John Stone
Senior Member
 
John Stone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wichita, Kansas
Posts: 710
Default Re: What would the judges say about this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 329s View Post
John,

You have convinced me if my eyesight is 100%.

Engine number A697220 stamped on 11/30/28 and gas tank date of 11/21/28 putting assembly sometime in December 28/January 29 depending on just where it was assembled.

The running board brackets are right for this time period I think (don't have the RG's in front of me).

There are the "brake stops" on the back of the center cross member plus the two square holes for the old style service brake set up, all of which was discontinued I think in late October/November 1928 HOWEVER...

Your frame runs in the same context as my February 1929 Tudor frame except I am dealing with a front cross member that was suposed to be discontinued back in November 1928.

Am I going to change it out to suit the RG's? No.

So here is another case of the fact that Ford used up all the parts if they could be used without any major revision to the assembly of the car or truck itself.

Can you tell just what the assembly plant codes are?

Pluck
Just could not make out the assembly plant code. I did see the number 4 but that area was really beat up. As I said before the person doing the stamping must have gotten carried away.
John Stone is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:06 AM.