| thunder road | -- 08-28-2018 @ 7:52 AM |
|
You have to wonder why Ford took out this beautiful shape on the earlier 1939 Ford Deluxe front fender. The one that I wish that Ford had built would be a 1940 Deluxe Coupe with mohair not stripped broad cloth interior, and deluxe 40 wood grain. It would have the early style 1939 deluxe front fenders and the 39 deluxe grill, and the 1939 deluxe headlight design, the 40 standard hood and it doesn’t matter whether it’s a 5 window, or a business coupe but it has to be black. Domenic
|
|
| ford38v8 | -- 08-28-2018 @ 10:34 AM |
|
It was a cost savings change. Fat fenders were some of the most difficult designs to produce. Metal stamping dies don't last forever, and are extremely costly to make. Additionally, some stamped panels require extra metal finishing work even with newer dies, this perhaps being an example of both reasons to rework the old dies rather than to make new ones. With a trained eye, you can observe the auto industry's hard learned panel stamping education over the years, producing simpler and simpler stamped panels. Alan
|
|
| kubes40 | -- 08-28-2018 @ 6:02 PM |
|
For the most part I tend to agree with my friend Alan. We don't truly KNOW why Ford changed the design but the theory that it was cheaper to alter the form dies vs. building new ones is as good a theory as nearly any other. Stamping dies with proper maintenance last a VERY long time - easily long enough to run a years worth of fender stampings. Forming dies on the other hand tend to wear more rapidly. So, lending to the theory of "cost savings" - IF they wore to the point of "no reasonable return" they may have been modified vs. new dies built. My gut tells me the "truth" lies somewhere in the middle. I'd surmise that forming that deeper draw (early 39) was much more troublesome than simply removing that deep curve. Most folks would never have noticed the difference between the two designs. In fact, I've noted former Dearborn status cars with one of each design fender. heck, if a judge or judges didn't catch it, would one expect John Q. Public to notice? Mike "Kube" Kubarth
|
|
| ford38v8 | -- 08-28-2018 @ 6:22 PM |
|
Mike, I hear your difference in terminology, and agree. Big difference between stamping and forming. And, I apologize for leaving the impression that what I said was established fact. Alan
|
|
| thunder road | -- 08-29-2018 @ 4:27 AM |
|
Both of your input makes sense. Get more use out of the dies. I don't know how they were able to make this fender out of one piece of metal? The steel reproduction ones that are made today, are made out of two pieces of metal, and the metal that they use for these sheet metal reproduction parts, and whole bodies, is softer than the original steel. But these repro parts due keep a lot of these cars on the road. The rear quarter panels on a 1959 Chevrolet passenger car, has the deepest draw out of any other panel that was made. The gauge of the steel used on a 1959 Chevrolet was thinner than the gauge steel used on a 1940 ford. Domenic This message was edited by thunder road on 8-29-18 @ 9:32 AM
|
|
| kubes40 | -- 08-29-2018 @ 8:29 AM |
|
Alan, my gosh man, NO apology necessary! For as many years I had spent as tool maker, some of these old parts (the way they were made) continues to puzzle me. Today, the technology makes many processes of tool making so much easier than decades ago. I won't bore any folks that aren't aware of drawing dies and the many things that are encounter in their designing and building. Leave it at "A LOT" of minute details to make things work correctly. Deep draws / forms are especially difficult to produce on a huge scale. Just think, it took Ford until what, 1937? to figure out how to draw a roof section in one piece. To add to my previous post: The more thought I've given this front fender design change the more I believe the dies were most likely replaced vs. modified. I also believe it most likely happened (design change) as the earlier style simply had 'too much" going on in the area questioned. I can only imagine how often a tool maker was summoned to the fender die(s) to repair, polish, etc. that specific area. Although labor was quite reasonable in those days, that tool maker, when repairing a die, was not doing something else. Not least to mention, that press was "down" and as such costing time in production opportunity. Alan is spot on in noting how automotive design has followed "simplicity" rather than style for a long time. It becomes even more obvious when one notes how much a Ford looks like a Chevy that looks like a BMW, etc. It's cheaper that way...more profit. Mike "Kube" Kubarth
|
|
| thunder road | -- 08-29-2018 @ 9:30 AM |
|
Mike if the reason is because they thought that their was too much going on, than this point in time marks exactly when form over function became less important. They then must have felt that people didn't care that much about making a car a work of art, and more about costs. By the looks of everything that came after the 1940 ford , it seems that style and fancy looking cars didn.t return until 1955 for ford. Domenic
|
|
| kubes40 | -- 08-29-2018 @ 10:08 AM |
|
Domenic, Form over function is a very subjective matter. Unless of course this was discussed and determined by a board of directors. The fender design? Who is to say which design is more appealing? Fords were lower end cars built for the masses. As such, cost savings were critical. Your example of the fenders is in my humble opinion not a good one of "form over function". Not many folks even realize(d) that the fenders were changed. Mike "Kube" Kubarth
|
|
| ford38v8 | -- 08-29-2018 @ 10:34 AM |
|
Dominic, with all due respect, I think you may have confused the issues involved in the drawing of metal panels when you reference the 1959 Chevrolet and 1955 ford designs as deep draw examples. If I'm not mistaken, a deep draw means that the metal is stretched in multiple directions to achieve the desired effect. This causes problems in panel finish, as wrinkles develop, thinning, as rejects appear with tears, and of course wear and tear on the tooling. In addition, some designs may also include multiple die operations, meaning more machinery and labor involved per piece. The '59 Chevrolet that you reference had a deep fold in the rear panel (but it was not a draw, as I understand the term), and presented minimum difficulty to achieve. Designs of not only body panels, but of all parts to be manufactured all undergo a feasibility analysis by the Engineering Department, which in turn signs off on designs. An early example of an Engineering influence of a design is the front fender of a 1941 Ford, which is made in two pieces, not the first such, but just one example. Modern cars have close to zero draws, as those complex curves are made of plastic, modern high strength steel being incapable of draw forming in the traditional sense. Alan
|
|
| thunder road | -- 08-29-2018 @ 6:03 PM |
|
Hey Alan , and Mike thanks for the input. Somewhere I read or heard that the 1959 Chevrolet passenger cars rear quarters had the biggest draw of any other panel made. I am not even sure of the differences between stamping or drawing when forming the panels. When you look under the rear fin of an original 1959 Chevrolet they did not even bother to finish off the leaded seam on the bottom of the fin. As you see the changes on the cars over the years it gives you some insight as to how competition helped to bring out the best. When someone came around the corner only to see a brand new 1955 Chevrolet two door hardtop for the first time, in two tone black and white , they must have thought they were on a other plant compared to what Chevrolet was making for many of the previous years. Domenic This message was edited by thunder road on 8-29-18 @ 6:09 PM
|
|
| EFV-8 Club Forum : | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum |
| Topic: | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=14&Topic=12286 |