Early Ford V-8 Club Forum

EFV-8 Club Forum / 1940 Ford Discussion / wood bow

Reply to Discussion | New Discussion << previous || next >>

Posted By Discussion Topic: wood bow -- page: 1 2     shogun1940 11-16-2010 @ 4:57 PM reply profile send p.m. Member Posts: 464 Joined: Feb 2010 mike my wood bows have many hole and some dry rot that i am repairing with Quick Poly, but I was thinking of replacing them . Any one do you recomend or not recomend. Also did sedan delivery& converts have .010 thicker steel in the frames? kubes40 11-16-2010 @ 7:12 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3370 Joined: Oct 2009 The convertible frame was most certainly .010" thicker than the closed car frames. I honestly don't know enough about the sedan delivery to offer a positive answer. Every reproduction wooden bow that I have had has required some finessing to gain a proper fit. I'd suggest, if possible using the originals. As the bows are covered, any repairs done well, will not be visible. In summary, if the bows you have are structurally sound, repair as necessary and use them. ford38v8 11-16-2010 @ 10:12 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 2735 Joined: Oct 2009 Mike, not having done research on frame thickness, I cannot refute your statement, but I wonder if you can produce evidence to back you up. I have heard that 60hp cars may have a front crossmember of a thinner steel, and I do know that a convertible has an extra brace under the front seat area, but I always thought the thicker frame for a convertible was a myth. A well placed thin brace, you know, can add considerable strength where 50 lbs of extra thickness can offer little. Alan kubes40 11-17-2010 @ 6:45 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3370 Joined: Oct 2009 Hi Alan, The only 'evidence' I can offer is the fact that convertible frames bore a completely different part number and my personal experience. I've had a number of 40 convertibles that retained their original frames. They were in fact thicker than the closed cars I've had. Cross member being different for a 60HP? I've only restored one 60HP car, a 39. The front member was most certainly the same as its big brother - the 85. The only modification I note is the addition of the two riveted plates to accept the smaller engine (mounts). This message was edited by kubes40 on 11-17-10 @ 6:49 AM supereal 11-17-2010 @ 9:14 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 6819 Joined: Oct 2009 For what it is worth, the green book does show different frame part numbers for closed and open cars, and sedan deliveries with different suffixes. ford38v8 11-17-2010 @ 10:44 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 2735 Joined: Oct 2009 Mike & Bob, in a quick review of parts numbers going into frame assemblies, there does indeed appear to be differences between open and closed body frame assemblies. The odd thing is, although there were many different crossmembers, gussets, pads and braces, I could not find a frame side member part number anywhere, even on the line drawings of frames. My search was done in the 1949 Orange Bible, so there may still a chance someone could nail it down with another catalogue. To my thinking though, the different frame assembly numbers are due solely to add-on members, which may be different thicknesses as reported. Those part descriptions and applications did not, however, indicate thicknesses nor open/closed/85/60 breakdown on pass cars, although some truck frames were identified as "reinforced". It would be good if someone took a micrometer aka: a "mike" to some siderails and crossmembers! Sorry, Mike, I couldn't resist the pun! Alan kubes40 11-18-2010 @ 5:49 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3370 Joined: Oct 2009 Hey Alan, I have to admit I never checked the thickness of the cross members, only the side rails. The side rails are definitely thicker on convertible frames. 50# of added weight I would think would be a gross exaggeration. I'd find it difficult to believe it added even 5#. Consider a thick layer of foil (.010") the width of the side rails, etc. I'd bet my 5# guess is too much. The extra thickness of course would have been thought necessary to prevent torsional twisting of the frame rails. A 10% increase in the thickness would in fact add a lot of rigidity to those sections. I do know for fact the 60HP frame is the same as the 85 in 1939. I am thinking the 1940 frame would also be the same between the two engine applications. Mike "Kube" Kubarth supereal 11-18-2010 @ 3:27 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 6819 Joined: Oct 2009 Even though convertibles are supposed to be reinforced, most, such as mine, will pop the doors when put on a lift, anyway. For wood bows with lots of nail holes, we use a trick I learned years ago from an antique dealer. Just fill the holes with plain old Bondo. It doesn't shrink or fall out, and will accept new tacks without cracking. shogun1940 11-22-2010 @ 6:37 PM reply profile send p.m. Member Posts: 464 Joined: Feb 2010 I did not know what i was starting with frame rail thickness, my convert & sedan delivery measure .110 if I remember right. Now I am going to have to go measure again. Thanks for the tip on the bondo. Like i said I am trying this stukk called Quick poly, it can be mixed with various fillers even sawdust. thanks again kubes40 11-23-2010 @ 8:39 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3370 Joined: Oct 2009 You started nothing but some interesting banter I'd suggest a poly fill similar to what you've been using. Bondo will dry out, shrink and crack when used in a wood environment. The frame thickness you've seen on your vehicles is correct. Regards, Mike

<< previous || next >>

PAGE: 1 2

NOTE: YOU MUST BE A REGISTERED USER AND BE LOGGED IN TO POST (and reply to) messages in this forum. If you are a first time user, please click the CREATE A NEW ACCOUNT in the masthead above to register and Log In. After that, all you do is LOG IN to enjoy using this site.

DISCLAIMER: The V-8 Club does no independent testing of any of the opinions, thoughts or suggestions presented in the website on the Forum, in the Tech Tips section, or any section. A reader should consider the website to be a forum wherein differing solutions to a particular set of circumstances may be discussed. Ultimately, the selection of an item for an individual's vehicle must be based upon the independent study of the vehicle owner in consultation with people in the hobby and restoration experts.

EFV-8 Club Forum Home | Back to Home Page | Contact the Webmaster

Copyright © 2009 - EFV-8.org
Powered by < CF FORUM > v.2.1