Old Ford pics

[SkylinerRon]

Rich,
Several longtime Ford employees including John V. have verified this info. I suggest you call
Kevin Marti to confirm this as he would be selling this information if it existed.

Ron.

p/s I never read wiki.

[djfordmanjack]

Tom, interesting coincidence. when I built my first Model A Hot Rod, I also had a 46 donor car for engine, drivetrain, suspension aso. It was the first time I stumbled upon the stay/steady rods. and first had no idea what they were about, but pretty soon it became obvious that they were part of the torque tube drivetrain and clutch linkage system. I used them ever since. I can see many reasons why someone would not put them back in the car. when you swap a flathead engine in a fully assembled 30/40s Ford, it is nearly impossible to get the steady rods back in, once the engine is in the car. you have to add them before or while setting the engine back in the car. then they really can get bent or stuck in the bellhousing of engine and when replacing an engine, some might not come out or you would have to use a heavy hammer or drive. then there are the countersunk allen head type bolts on the frame( but with a square socket), that typically rust solid and have to be removed by chisel, once the square socket has stripped the head. ( all pre 49 V8s, but on the 32 which has 4 bolts holding them to the K member).
It is also easy to see, that as you mentioned, if the transmission mount bolts were loose, this will add badly to clutch chatter, and fastening them would be a quick remedy, much to the surprise of the unknowing onlookers. How can you repair a clutch by fastening 2 bolts?

Concerning a frame, obviously it was cheaper to use folded or stamped open U or C type profiles for the frame rails and X members, so I am sure Ford was on a budget as usually, building afFORDable means of transport by the millions. But back then they did a lot of reasearch and in my mind I can see building them like that on purpose. also rivets allow for more flexibility without welds cracking from flexing. this is just my personal opinion of those frames. of course also the body has a lot of influence on chassis rigidity ( as on an all- metal sedan) but what about the wood framed Roadsters and Pheatons ( which both of them I am currently restoring), they have NOTHING to add to the strength of the frame and their door latches are designed for a certain amount of body flex from factory.

But most probably, both ways of thinking are somewhat right. Probably they couldn't build them much better on the money at the time, and so they decided to design it as a somewhat flexible unit from the start.

I mentioned that the clutch chatter thing happened to a friend's car & two of my own. This was the mid 1960s when we were still in high school.  First was with my '47 Tudor, the one with the whitewall on the front only. The PO had done some minor hot rod mods to that car & it didn't have those stay rods/steady rods.  He had probably removed them.
Second time was with a friends '48 4 door.  It was pretty much stock but it's quite possible someone had removed the steady rods on that one too. Maybe they didn't know what they were for.  A bunch of us kids with cars were out on a big drinkin' party at a lake about 70 miles from home when the '48 acted up. I fixed his '48's problem right there 'cause the guy with the '48 didn't have a clue about it.
I don't think I even learned about those steady rods until about 15 years later & forgot about 'em since.

[lalessi1]

I personally doubt that flexibility was intentionally "designed" into those old frames. I would think that the parameters of design didn't include torsional rigidity and that the flex was simply a result of the parameters used. Back then designs were almost always the result of "empirical" data, simple experience, and simple calculations. I say this because I was taught airframe design from a 1948 textbook that was laced with tables and charts of what worked and what hadn't. All in all it was very scary to think that when part of an airplane failed engineers went back and changed the charts. As late as the early 60's airplanes were crashing because of structural failures that were poorly understood. Look at the Lockheed Constellation for example. In the absence of computers, methods of structural analysis were crude and required large factors of safety, it is a miracle that we ever got to the moon....

Fun fact, the Saturn V will not stand up on its own unless it is pressurized.

[Jeff Norwell]

The King doing notes...

[rmk57]

The lineup of drivers Ford had for the 1969 season was amazing. No wonder they won the championship that year, helped having a Boss 429 under the hood to.

[hemidave]

 '57 Convertible in background

[CobraJoe]

[gasman826]

David Pearson -- RIP

[rmk57]

Sad to hear that. He was my favorite all time driver.

[djfordmanjack]

Is this called  'old Ford pics', yeah ?

Pushing the limits of this forum (until somebody kicks us out) but we need to get this baby in here. and she's ALL FORD ! 





several of them still around and airworthy!

[CobraJoe]

During World War I, Jack E. Gallivan was a Federal employee working at Chanute Air Base in Rantoul, Illinois. He worked with the Wright-Martin Co. in developing production capabilities to build the French Hispano Suiza aircraft engine in the United States. After the war, he continued helping in the development of an improved Hispano Suiza aircraft engine.

Jack used his knowledge of the Hispano Suiza engine to design, develop, and manufacture the Gallivan cylinder head for the Model T Ford engine in 1926. The head was an eight valve double overhead cam design with hemispherical combustion chambers. Both intake and exhaust valves were 2 inches in diameter. It featured four intake and four exhaust ports 1 7/8 inches in diameter. The cams were driven by spur gears from the front of the crankshaft. The gears were mounted in ball bearings and enclosed by aluminum castings.

The Gallivan head was well built. It had the most speed potential of any of the heads built for the Model T, including the DO Fronty. When it was introduced in 1926, the Fronty heads had been on the market for several years, and had an established reputation with the racing fraternity. Jack Gallivan did not have the resources to effectively compete against the Fronty reputation. A number of racers were very successful using Gallivan heads, but the number sold was nowhere near the numbers sold by Frontenac, RAJO or Roof.

The Gallivan head is very rare today, but is much sought after because of its performance potential and reliability.

[djfordmanjack]

that overhead conversion on what I suppose is a T engine is just breathtaking, Joe. WOW !
twin straight cut cam gears in an aluminium cover. I can barely imagine the noise of that valve train.

what is the cui on the formula engine. were they 2.5 Liters ?

[hemidave]

999

[CobraJoe]

Not really sure Gunther, thinking more like 3.5 ltr. " 1989
Capacity was limited to 3500 cc not compressed (no more turbo engines), no refueling.
675 hp at 13000 rpm - (McLaren-Honda RA109E 72? V10)
660 hp at 13000 rpm - (Ferrari with its 035/5 65? V12)"

...but it's more from your neck of the woods: "1989:  General view of a Ford engine before the West German Grand Prix at the Hockenheim circuit in West Germany"

[Tom S]

Pushing the limits of this forum (until somebody kicks us out) but we need to get this baby in here. and she's ALL FORD ! 

Ford Trimotor, aka 'The Tin Goose'.
Pretty neat emblem.
A better pic of the corrugated aluminum fuselage that gives that plane it's unusual look.  Check out the external control wires.  No hydraulic assist here.