| lightflyer1 | -- 12-13-2009 @ 6:03 PM |
|
A question I keep getting asked is why was there a hole in the roof of the early Fords? I have heard several reasons. What is the real story here?
|
|
| George | -- 12-13-2009 @ 7:34 PM |
|
Hi! Hey! My 1934 Ford pickup truck does not have any holes in the roof, it is solid steel. Is this only for cars? George George
|
|
| 42wagon | -- 12-14-2009 @ 3:12 AM |
|
There are two reasons. The first is that old habits die hard. There was a perception out there that having a rubberized canvas top made the car cooler in the days before cars were air conditioned. The second, and more important reason, was the limitations of the metal presses in use at the time. The first Fords to receive all steel tops were the 31 Model A pickup trucks. This was a relatively small piece of metal to press.
|
|
| nelsb01 | -- 12-14-2009 @ 6:14 AM |
|
It wasnt until 1937 that Ford cars had an all steel roof, due to Ford finally determining what it took to stamp large curved steel stampings.
|
|
| Chevguy49Ford | -- 12-14-2009 @ 8:34 AM |
|
Thanks, I have often wondered about that myself. Cheers, Scott. 1949 Custom Tudor. http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e42/35thLE/49016.jpg
|
|
| wmsteed | -- 12-14-2009 @ 9:30 AM |
|
Actually there are two reasons why Ford utilized the fabric insert in the top longer than the other manufactures. Up through the mid 1930's, the technology to form a solid one piece steel top for automobiles did not exist. The ability to stamp "body belting" in lieu of flat sides on car bodies, did no exist prior to 1927 and the use of "all steel bodies" did not become common until 1928 Starting in 1935, the use of fabric inserts ended for most manufactures, Chryco and Ford were the exceptions. The vast majority of both Company's bodies were at the time built by Budd, Briggs and Murray. Chryco/Fords decision was most likely an economic one, because of the Great Depression. Ford found them selves pushed into a very small corner in 1936. Chevrolet was kicking their butt, as was Plymouth.. The Chevy had an all steel top and hydraulic brakes. Plymouth still had a fabric insert in the top but they had better handling and hydraulic brakes. Ford responded to this threat by claiming that the all steel top was unhealthy... A large PR program was launched, claiming that if the windows were rolled up on an all steel top, upon the closing of the doors, serious ear damage would occur to the occupants, where-as the fabric top would allow for air expansion within the body sh*ll.... no ear damage. Everyone should remember that H. Ford was a Dictator of the first order. so things were done his way or else. Bill 36 5 win delx cpe
|
|
| old green | -- 12-14-2009 @ 3:33 PM |
|
GM advertised their new technology as "turret top,all steel for strength and safety"
|
|
| Chevguy49Ford | -- 12-14-2009 @ 5:57 PM |
quote: Man, leave it to Henry. Cheers, Scott. 1949 Custom Tudor. http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e42/35thLE/49016.jpg
|
|
| wmsteed | -- 12-15-2009 @ 9:12 AM |
|
I have always found it to be very interesting that GM spent the money to tool up for the "all steel turret top" bodies in 1936, where-as in fact, all GM bodies through 1936 were built over the old fashion "Coach Built" wood framed structures. I would surmise that the high survival rate of the '28/37 Ford built cars, when compared to the GM built cars, and a few others, is in direct relationship to the quality of the body construction. I know that there are people that would pose the theory that the mechanical portion of the Fords were superior to the other cars of the period. In some respects this is true. Fords buggy type suspension held up very well on the poor roads of the 1930's when compared to the coil spring, knee action/hydraulic assisted suspensions the other manufactures used. Ford's mechanical brakes were also of great benefit on the average unimproved roads of the 1930's. It did not take much of a rock to damage a hydraulic line, where-as a bent brake rod had little effect on the system. The engines of the period were all about equal in longevity. The Chevrolet "blue wonder stove bolt six" would out pull the Ford V8, starting from dead stop in high gear, which would kill the Ford. My grandfather always called the Ford's "race horses", not much good for pulling a load. So what does all this boil down to, simple.. there was not much sense in re-powering a vehicle if the body structure was falling apart. I have a large picture taken in a wrecking yard sometime in the early 1940's. With the exception of a '39 Ford station wagon and a '37 Ford coupe,(truth be known, the '37 Ford was probably a V-8 60) the other cars shown on the heap of cars are all non Ford. Damn..... There I go again.. More useless bits of info leaking out of the dark corner of my brain cells. Bill 36 5 win delx cpe
|
|
| EFV-8 Club Forum : | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum |
| Topic: | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=18&Topic=440 |