Thanks!
Chris
Mike "Kube" Kubarth
One design of filter assembly was offered for the 85 and 95 horsepower engines. Fit with part #01A-18658-A and supplied to Ford by the Fram Corporation of Rhode Island, these units were normally installed at the dealership.
The filter housing was vertically mounted to the left cylinder head above and between the #5 and #6 cylinders with three special #350710-S7 nuts.
This assembly utilized a replaceable filter element.
Both the housing body and cover were painted gloss black. The steel cover retaining bolt, 01A-18691 was plain finish. Beneath that bolt was a copper flat washer.
A red, yellow, black and gold decal was placed on the cover. It indicted the filter was manufactured exclusively for Ford by the Fram Corporation and utilized a replacement cartridge filter, #01A-18662.
Some unique features of a proper 1940 filter housing are depicted in the photo.
The inlet is on the right side, near the bottom of the housing and is fitted with a 90* brass fitting. Directly below that fitting is a decal that simply indicates “INLET”. On the very bottom and center of the filter housing is a threaded hole that was fitted with an identical 90* brass fitting as the inlet. This port is used to return the oil to the engine. Just to the front (left) of this fitting is yet another threaded hole. This drain hole was fitted with a brass hex head plug.
Made from an oil resisting compound and covered with a black lacquered braided cloth, both pressure and return hoses were supplied to Ford by the AC Spark Plug CO. All fittings were brass – swivel type. The only exception being the late return hose which had a “banjo” fitting on one end. The exterior of the hoses was rough - obvious evidence of the cloth covering.
While there were two different routings of the oil return hoses, there was but one routing for the pressure line.
The pressure hose threaded into a special angled brass reducing elbow fitting, 01A-18669 (photo #A) that was fitted to the horizontal threaded hole near the oil pressure sending unit. The hose was then routed near the bottom row of cylinder head studs and attached to the inlet fitting on the right side of the filter housing. A cadmium plated clamp (photo # B) which was placed beneath the cylinder head stud between and just below cylinders #7 and #8 held this hose in place. A 27081-S screw and 34141-S nut were utilized with this clamp. There were two designs of this particular clamp. One design had a slot, while the second had a hole.
The first routing of the oil return line ran between the fitting at the very bottom and center of the filter housing and a special bolt / fitting that replaced the bolt at the left fuel pump flange. This was the most common routing having been utilized from the beginning of 1940 production until the very end of
April, 1940.
This return hose was routed through a hole on the rear of the filter housing bracket. A rubber grommet was placed in this hole to insulate the hose against abrasion. Traveling backward along the top of the spark plug conduit, the hose was scr*w*d into a special fitting, 01A-18661 (photo #C) that had replaced the left fuel pump mounting bolt. A cadmium plated clamp (photo D) held this line to the left spark plug wire conduit. This clamp utilized a 26515-S2 screw and 34129-S2 nut.
At the very beginning of May, 1940, the return line routing was revised. The hose came from the bottom and center fitting of the filter housing and ran through the rubber grommet in the base but now was routed forward.
A special hollow bolt with two copper gaskets replaced the bottom – right distributor mounting bolt. The newly revised return hose (photo #F) had a “banjo” fitting on this end to accept this hollow bolt. To hold this line in place, a cadmium plated clamp was placed beneath the washers of the generator mounting stud.
A 27081-S screw and 34141-S nut were utilized with this clamp.
Chris
I wrote that, so - thanks for the kind words
I can email pictures to you directly. Your email address again?
Mike
Thanks!!!
How the heck do you post pictures on this site? Tell me, tell me, tell me. Pretty please ?
Mike "Kube" Kubarth
This message was edited by kubes40 on 11-28-10 @ 6:04 PM
Kube, to upload photos, click on the "Choose File" box just below your reply on the 'Reply to Topic' page. Then open the folder on your computer that has the photo and click on the photo and open the file. The photo will then be uploaded. You will not see the photo until after you submit the reply.
Tom
Can you send me the pictures you refer to in this article. Also, where would be a good source for replacement hoses? I have the canister but the hoses have dry roted. My e-mail address is ggodfrey@bellsouth.net
Gil
The hoses (correct type) can be found on ebay on occasion. The correct hose has long been obsolete so finding it at your local hydraulic hose manufacturer will be fruitless.
Here's the second one with the fittings...
Gil
I notice that you refer to the return hose going to the fuel pump stand. There was a letter sent out in 1940 to change the routing to the distributer location on all cars, due to oil leaks at the fuel pump stand location, so most 1940 cars had the distributer location even if they were built before the change over date. I don't have the date of the letter as I donated all of my 1940 letters to the Foundation.
Gil, the hoses are not being reproduced and most of the original and replacements are dry rotted or so old that they would be unreliable for any car except a trailer queen. I have the complete set up for a 1940 car sitting in a box, because I drive my car.
The oil filter was an option in 1940 and IMHO is not necessary if you change your oil frequently. I drive my car about 1500 -2000 miles a year and change the oil at 1,000 miles and every fall.
If you want to install a filter, you will have to find a way to un-crimp the fittings from your hoses and then re-crimp them onto modern hoses.
I checked into having hoses made in the late 1980's and was told by several hydraulic hose supply companies that their equipment could not handle that type of hose.
Imperial Brass (the company that made the original fittings) was still in business at the time and I asked an engineer at the company if they still had any of the equipment or if there were replacement fittings available and the answer was no.
Tom
This message was edited by TomO on 11-30-10 @ 7:21 AM
The letter you speak of was produced in May, 1940.
There will of course be some latitude as to exactly when each car got the early or late routing applied. We will never know when the car was built (exactly) nor when it was finally delivered to the consumer.
I had to make a tough decision when I started researching and writing the '40 book. That decision (reached)was to provide the reader with the best and most detailed information available. That will include what Ford INTENDED / DESIGNED to build and subsequently supply to the consumer.
There has to be a standard applied (in my opinion) when it comes to having our cars judged. Otherwise, it is easy to apply a near 'anything goes' on the concourse.
Remember please that our cars are judged as to how they were delivered. If a part was not available at the time of delivery, it simply should not be allowed as correct. Even though it may have been retrofitted, it remains not AS DELIVERED.
We all realize that should a certain cadmium plated bolt run short one day, a raven finish bolt would have been installed. That's reality. However, the cadmium bolt was INTENDED so (again, my opinion) the cadmium bolt should be the only acceptable one on the concourse.
Things like the oil line routing are a bit dicier in that we can't pin down exactly when the change took place in the 'real world'. We know when the letters were sent out. We do not know when the various
plants / dealers received that letter. Nor do we know when the letter was read and / or when compliance became a reality.
In this example we can (once again, my opinion) offer a little 'room' upon the concourse. However, to think that an early car (let's say, February) got the late routing... NO WAY.
There are other glaring ambiguities that no doubt will need to be dealt with by the JSC at some point in the future.
One ambiguity that comes to mind is the fact that single side whitewalls were not available until VERY LATE in production. This is a non-refutable fact. Yet, I have never observed a '40 with double whites.
Another (lesser) FACT is the outside 'swan neck' mirrors were not available as a pair until nearly May, 1940. In other words, NO right hand mirror could have been installed on a car delivered prior to May, 1940. Yet, one sees more 'dual mirror' cars than not.
The list goes on and on...hopefully, many will appreciate why I chose to write what was designed / intended vs. what 'may have happened..."
respectfully,
Mike "Kube" Kubarth
With regard to factory letters and when a running change was actually made, there is, in addition to an expected lag in compliance to a letter, the likelihood that certain changes became fact before any company-wide paperwork was generated. There were, as you know, limited trial runs for delivery to Detroit area dealerships, to expedite engineering review should failures result. It is logical also to assume that similar events may have occurred at outlying assembly locations, as of course, there are more than one way to skin a cat, and some plants did in fact have difficulty with methods as done at the Rouge.
While a Purist will lament the fact that most Concourse cars have whitewall tires, and many Standards have been upgraded to DeLuxe, if the options were available at the time, they will be on the Concourse today because that's what people like today.
Also, speaking as a Master Judge, I have never seen a serial number compared to so called "early" or "late" options on the Concourse. There is, you know, the usual directive to not "kill the car" being judged, so, I for one would respectively hope that your book contain the words "May have" more often than the word "Never".
Alan
I will hazard to express my opinion that I am probably more keenly aware of what happened in the day to day builds of our cars and what surrounded those happenings than most.
And, while I agree in theory with 'don't kill the car', when something is known to be fact, and that 'something' is wrong on a particular vehicle, a deduction should be taken. Period. Your example given about single whitewalls being an option at the time...the problem is they were NOT an option at the time for perhaps 90% of the 40's built. Do you still believe just because guys like them, no deduction should be taken?
Yes, allow some leeway for build and delivery time frames - absolutely. However, a car with early ash trays, January glass, etc. most likely did not sit in a showroom until May and THEN have the tires swapped for single whitewalls.
Bumpers without ribs on the back? Radiator hoses with markings? Five rib spark plugs? Wrong. Period. these are things we KNOW. There is no leeway.
If those cars are allowed the same points as a car with the correct parts, then what's the point of attempting to restore a car properly?
Personally, I spend a lot of time and a lot of money making certain my restorations stand out in terms of both accuracy and quality. The theory that it takes twice as much time and money to do a 999 point car as it does to do a 950 point car is quite true from my experience. I'm willing to bet that anyone that has personally done such a restoration (999) will agree with that formula.
Many guys choose not to spend the 'twice' to achieve the 999 and that's perfectly fine. It is a choice we are all faced with.
If the vehicle with numerous KNOWN inaccuracies shall receive the (nearly) same score as the one that has gone through that extra effort required to be as accurate as (known)possible, then why would anyone continue to make that extra effort?
Respectfully,
Mike Kubarth
Does anyone know length of supply hose used in 01A-18683?
2.The 01A-18658-A filter assembly continued for both production & service, until stock was depleted, and was to be replaced by 11A-18658-A assembly per a 5/23/41 Service-Tips Letter. 11A-18658-A had steel oil lines.
3.Mike: Did you get any installation instructions with your NOS in-the-box 01A-18658 oil filter assembly? For everyone's info:Service Letter releases indicates the filter housing itself had 7 narrow reinforcing at bottom of housing. This appears to match your housing.
The inlet boss connection on the 01A housing was changed about March 1946 to a more near-the-top location per a FRAM 1/7/46 FILTER instruction sheet for the flexible-hose equipped (except 60 HP)V-8 engines.
The 01A designated filter housing "apparently" was used until about June 1946 when, among other changes, the housing was changed to 4 reinforcing ribs at the bottom to reduce oil leakage due to the higher 80# oil pressures in later engines.
4.Also for what it is worth,a 10/29/40 Cleveland Service Letter mentioned that production engines were being furnished with the 3 studs, used for the oil filter assembly, as being set 1/16" higher in the cylinder block to allow for proper nut assembly when filter housing was installed. (this "may or may not" have caught some 1940 engines in production)
5.On the attachment showing oil fittings,would presume the early 40 was shown to the left,while the late 40 was to the right. If so, what is the stud-like fitting for, shown near the top? Could it be the drain stud 51-18670 as used with the early 40 filters? It just looks "different".
While there are excellent repop bumpers available today, they are not correct without the rib, and in my book should have a deduction. Even if original bumpers were not available at any price (which is not the case), a repop could be modified to show a rib to gain the nod of a Judge.
Our Concourse today is not guilty of the charge of political awards as some Concourses have always been. We all know that people are fallible and Judges are people, but a car must stand or fall on its own merit, not on who built it. I have and will continue to call it like I see it, as I believe to do otherwise would be to do harm to those who deserve the high point judging sheet. I do not think this is at issue with the statement "don't kill the car", even though the term implies a degree of leniency.
Alan
I see I need to clarify my post in regard to whitewall tires on '40 Fords. Sorry... I was dead tired when I wrote my last response.
SINGLE whitewall tires were NOT available on 1940 Fords until the very end of May, 1940. Double whitewalls were. i realize as you certainly do that the actual date of availability didn't start exactly on May 30th. However, that leaves a LOT of 1940 Fords on the concourse with incorrect (single whites) on them.
Respectfully,
Mike
Your work with the service letters had to be a long, tedious task! I have currently the letters from 1939 through 1941 that you had inspected and made notes upon. Thus, I am beginning to understand the work involved!
I am not certain which 'stud like fitting' you refer to in the photo. The one on the left is the early style as you suggest and that 'stud' is the fitting that replaces the fuel pump bolt.
The one on the right is the later type and used to hold the banjo fitting to the distributor / timing cover.
ALL of the pieces will be labeled and noted within the text of the book.
What I had posted was a very rough draft.
I did not have any instructions within the NOS filter (box).
Best regards,
Mike Kubarth
Tom
Yes, researching any of the Branch Letters (Service, Sales, etc.) requires time and patience as there is no INDEX to guide you. In order to make sure that you do not miss something, you have to go through them page by page, which takes time. Thanks for sharing your info.
2.Tom: Thanks for the supply hose length.I missed this length when reviewing the Chassis Parts List. On the return oil line, there seems to be a conflict on its length as the 9/4/40 Service Tips Letter, mentioned previously, gives a length of 25", while the 2/20/40 Chassis Parts & Price List specifies the oil return line 01A-18667-A to be 19" long. Can not explain the difference unless the return line lengths were changed during that time period.
The one that came in the Fram kit was 25". The 2/20/40 parts catalog was published before the change over around the May 1940 and probably refers to the hose that connected to the fuel pump stand.
Tom
This message was edited by TomO on 12-13-10 @ 7:04 AM
Thanks!
Chris
-------------------------------------------------------
about your post can you post or puta a link of the pictures how did you put it so i can help you with your problem so hard to tell opinions if i haven't seen it you know thanks!
These hoses and hardware are not reproduced, so if you are going to have your car judged, you will have to look for Ford hoses or not install the filter.
Tom
Check my reply dated Nov. 26th within this subject for details. Also, check the post dated Nov. 28th for a great photo of all the pieces.
Mike Kubarth
This message was edited by kubes40 on 1-26-11 @ 5:45 PM