| wrosenkrans | -- 12-27-2010 @ 11:57 AM |
|
We have a tool display for all of our cars, and I have been working to create one for our '42 V-8. I know it isn't quite correct, but most of its there. Its a simple wooden frame with a handle at the top attached to some pegboard covered with blue felt. The tools are attached with cable-ties poked through the felt. When I find them, I'll display the tire iron/jack handle, hank-crank rod, and burlap bag separately. Satisfying way to spend some snowed-in time. Wayne & Barb '42 Super De Luxe Tudor
|
|
| 40guy | -- 12-27-2010 @ 12:29 PM |
|
That looks very neat. I've been intending to do that with my 1940 tools for some time. Maybe seeing your work will provide sufficient motivation for me to get started.
|
|
| alanwoodieman | -- 12-27-2010 @ 2:58 PM |
|
Neat way to display, when you purchased your last new car-did you get anything like that in the trunk?
|
|
| 40guy | -- 12-27-2010 @ 4:49 PM |
|
Are you kiddin', you don't even get a real spare tire anymore!
|
|
| ford38v8 | -- 12-27-2010 @ 5:54 PM |
|
Wayne, A very neat display, to be sure, but... Henry Ford never showcased the tools supplied with Fords, in or out of a wooden box. The jack had a simple burlap sack, and the small hand tools were stuffed into a pouch of leftover top fabric. For Concourse showing, the Reference Book should be displayed within its correct envelope, inside the glove box. Your tools would not be accessible should a Judge wish to check part numbers, and lastly, there is enough paint on your tools to cover five more sets. Please don't misunderstand me, I don't wish to put anyone down, but to give you a reality check on what is correct on the Concourse. It would be a real shame if you lost a point on something as basic as your tool display. I have not myself, but I have seen Judges zone in on those displays in the past, and have heard Chief Judges rail against display boxes also. Alan
|
|
| trjford8 | -- 12-27-2010 @ 7:37 PM |
|
Great tool display. It's also a good way to show the tools without the possibility of someone trying to take one of yours to fill an empty spot in their collection. Theft is pretty rare, but it does happen. Losing a point or two on the concourse(if you decise to show your car) is a lot better than losing a hard to find tool. This message was edited by trjford8 on 12-27-10 @ 7:38 PM
|
|
| wrosenkrans | -- 12-27-2010 @ 8:14 PM |
|
I don't know if I'll ever enter a concours or not, but I like to nicely display the tools - I have similar ones for our Model T's and A's - I think they add to the experience of the car to the viewer. The tool display shows people that times were different then - even in 1942 most people still worked on their cars themselves. I love the looks from kids when I explain what a shade-tree mechanic was,that cars came with the tools to do most of the work, and engine diagnosis was listening rather than checking a diagnostic code - or better yet when their grandfather is telling them that. I guess I'm more into showing the cars for the stories and the history rather than the hardware. Our car has ARC Motor Corps medallions front and rear, a 1942 PA Registration sticker, C-ration sticker, and Tax stamp on the windshield. Concours correct? No, but its part of the image we're trying to project and puts the car in context. Wayne & Barb '42 Super De Luxe Tudor
|
|
| alanwoodieman | -- 12-28-2010 @ 6:07 AM |
|
Congradualations, your outlook is what this hobby is susposed to all about, too much emphasis on "concourse" showing-I have owned several original Fords over the years and NON of them looked like a concourse show car when they were built.
|
|
| trjford8 | -- 12-28-2010 @ 8:26 AM |
|
Amen to wrosekrans and alanwoodieman. In the last few years we are seeing a lot more cars in the touring class and being driven to Ford V-8 meets/events. People are into enjoying the fun of driving their cars. It's the comraderie of touring with others and attending a meet with other V-8 owners. The concourse is a great event for those that want to have a show car and I applaud their efforts. For me the drive to an event and the drive home with other V-8ers is juat as important as the event itself.
|
|
| wrosenkrans | -- 12-28-2010 @ 11:05 AM |
|
I enjoy looking at concours cars as well, admiring and respecting the effort it takes to get them to and maintain that condition. Since we're talking about shows, I will share a pet peeve of mine about customs. I was looking at a very well done custom this summer - not my cup of tea, but I can admire the workmanship and design, then I looked at the title card - 1938 Ford. The owner was nearby so I asked how much of the 1938 Ford was still there? Probably less than 10%; new frame, engine, transmission, rear end, brakes, etc., all that was left were portions of the front fenders and cowl/windscreen. "So how can you call it a 1938 Ford, much less register it as that?" I asked. He shrugged and said he had to call it something. I can see his point, but it just doesn't seem right. Today I was looking through the National Woodie Club magazine and one of the feature articles was on a 1939 Ford woodie. Again, beautiful workmanship, but almost nothing left of the 1939 Ford Sedan he based it on. As I said, just doesn't seem right, but I also don't know what the answer is Wayne & Barb '42 Super De Luxe Tudor
|
|
| ford38v8 | -- 12-28-2010 @ 6:20 PM |
|
Wayne, I agree. There is a faction of car enthusiasts that will go to any length to preserve an original title to qualify for a smog exempt registration. This practice is counter productive to the hobby, as there is a constant and ongoing threat to legislate us out of existence and off the road. The legitimate old car enthusiasts, you and me and most all of us on this Forum, do deserve the exemption, while those we speak of do not. With the auto manufacturers traditionally rowing against the tide of green legislation, I would think it a mark of pride for the hobby if those same guys decided to change course and show just how green a car can really be with the technology available today. As for us, the guys with original cars, I see propane conversions in the near future, with or without legislation. As I understand, propane is not only clean burning, it is much easier on the engine that burns it. Alan
|
|
| supereal | -- 12-28-2010 @ 7:07 PM |
|
Undesirable attention has been focused on the old car hobby because many street rod owners, and those with "resto-mods" have been evading use taxes and license fees by claiming that their vehicle is actually a stock example of the year of manufacture. These actions can involve huge amounts of money at a time that all jurisdictions are in need of it as much as they can get. This has prompted more examinations and demands for documentation that the vehicle is, indeed, an antique, rather than just an old style body with a different chassis and driveline.
|
|
| TomO | -- 12-29-2010 @ 7:24 AM |
|
This discussion reminds me of the American Hot Rod show with Boyd Coddington. He searched all over the country for an unrestored Model T roadster for his wife. Then he started to modify it. I think that he ended up with about 2" of model T metal in the cowl and the windshield hinges. He totally destroyed a piece of American history for something that could have been made from scratch or from a reproduction body. Customs and hot rods do have their place in the hobby and I do appreciate a well done custom. Years ago, most were made from cars that would be too expensive to restore, but the latest trend seems to be for the customizer to find the best unrestored car he can find and then add his touches to it. Most of them end up in the recycle bin as unfinished projects. Tom
|
|
| johnpoly | -- 12-29-2010 @ 12:26 PM |
|
I also have the same pet peeve about someone describing a car as a "1936" Ford, Chevy, Buick, etc. when in fact there is almost nothing left of the original. Perhaps the solution is to use the EV8 Club 1000 point starting mark and then deduct points for mods and changes. In my view there should be huge deductions for incorrect engines, transmissions, interiors, dashes, steering wheels, exhausts, and so on. A "deuce coupe" with nothing left on it except a tail light could then be described as a ".05% 1932 Ford". Perhaps the Federal Trade Commission could get involved and enforce the rules about misleading and fraudulent advertising. Fat chance!
|
|
| ford38v8 | -- 12-29-2010 @ 2:04 PM |
|
You guys have shown a side of the issue I hadn't considered. When a "Kit" car is registered, in California it is registered as year of manufacture of its engine, with current smog requirements. It also carries a use tax and license fee of a new car. If the DMV had the resources to inspect all new license application vehicles claiming to be older, the inspections would likely pay for themselves with first year fees. It is hard to imagine that SEMA could justify lobbying against inspections, but they would probably not support the idea either. Alan
|
|
| supereal | -- 12-29-2010 @ 3:02 PM |
|
Building a kit car isn't a sin, and some of them are spectacular. That said, in comparison to an authentically restored car, it is in the same category as "kissing your sister".
|
|
| Stroker | -- 12-29-2010 @ 3:52 PM |
|
This thread is getting to be a little like inspecting your navel. I too have sinned; in 1955 I had a 32 "B" pickup with a 33 cab, that had brake-formed bed sides, cause the originals apparently had been used to haul large, pointed, heavy objects. This frankenord had..(horror of horrors), a 32 Passenger grille, and a bored and stroked 59A motor and juice brakes. To make matters worse, I had 35 vintage 16 inch "bent-spoke Kelsey's", and I gave up on the 32 steering, and installed a 56 Ford pickup box and a spare 38 banjo wheel I had. I know that according to "The Rules", that I should burn in Hell for this. Fortunately for me, it would be another 8 years before the EV8 Club came into existence to write "The Rules". I greatly admire the quest to get it as close to "As Henry Built It" as possible, as we are now in the business of preserving history. I deplore the idea of taking a Rouge gem and turning it into some phony American-Graffiti period custom. Me-thinks though, that we sometimes take stuff just a little to seriously. There's room for Bonneville modified roadsters, Hot Rods, Rat Rods, and Custom's on this planet. I doubt whether most radical customs or competition coupes were created by taking pristine concourse rs candidates away from the marketplace. Boyd was simply trying to screw the tax man, and I sure there are EV8 members who are creative enough to appreciate his "tax avoidance" concept. At some point though, when you sell the thing, it's true intrinsic value becomes apparent in a free market system. So, it's simply a matter of deferring the impact on your cash flow. Boyd's wife is a member of a club that I belong to; the Rod Riders Racing Team. We run cars at El Mirage dry lake in California's high desert, and are regular competitors at Bonneville. Many of these competition roadsters, coupes etc. have seriously modified early Ford bodies that conceivably, might have been the basis for an EV8 concourse car, given a veritable plethora of collected bits and pieces. But I think not.
|
|
| trjford8 | -- 12-29-2010 @ 7:58 PM |
|
One of the things the V-8 board did a few years ago was modify the general policy of the judging rules. It came to the Board's attention that many cars were being restored with a lot of reproduction parts. During this time some very nice reproduton bodies were also being built. We were seeing woodies with new wood(in other words 50% or more of the car was new) and we were seeing brand new 32 Ford roadster bodies(with parts that would interchange with original cars). A discussion arose about a new roadster body sitting on an original chassis and being restored to original specs. The discussion centered on where do you draw the line. Is a new body on an old chassis a restored car? Is an old body with new quarter panels and doors a restored body? If the judges don't know it's a new body and give it a Dearborn award does the award stand if you find out after the fact it's a repo? Is the club liable if a Dearborn award is given and the car is sold and the new purchaser finds out it is a repo and sues? All these questions led to the wording being changed in the General Policy. "The vehicle is judged strictly on it's appearance of authenticity". The V-8 Club has made some strides in making sure that the rules are flexible enough to accomodate and encourage new restorations.We need to remember that this is a hobby and hobbies should be fun.We are a small group and one of our missions is to encourage new members to join. No matter if they drive a Dearborn restoration or a "barn find" we need to make them feel welcome in the V-8 Club.
|
|
| 40guy | -- 12-30-2010 @ 7:32 AM |
|
while I agree with everthing that has been said; I think we've got just a little off topic. The guy was kind enough to share a picture of his tool display with us, that he should be proud of. I think he deserves a few more kind comments than he recieved. If someone wants to start a thread about Steetrods, Kitcars, and tax evasion, let 'er rip and we'll dive on it.
|
|
| wrosenkrans | -- 12-30-2010 @ 7:51 AM |
|
I hadn't really thought about the legal aspects of this debate - but it does put a finer point on it. To me, if the intent is to restore as accurately as possible then the use of patch panels and even whole bodies (wood or otherwise) may be indicated. That fact should be documented fully however. At the Paul Garber facility, the restoration shops for the National Air and Space museum, they often have to fabricate missing parts for the historic aircraft but all non-original parts are fully documented so a future restorer or historian knows what's original. Most restorers I know are pretty good at documentation. That's a separate issue though from where the intent is not an authentic restoration, but rather creation of something new then calling it something it isn't, i.e., '38 Ford. My daughter and I are building a Model T Fendered Speedster. It uses a 1917 frame and running gear, 1926 engine/transmission and steel spoke wheels, and a fabricated body. The speedsters really were the hot-rods of the post-WWI era and in a way, the equivalent of the post-WWII Deuce Coupes. Fortunately, our local DMV is an understanding lot and will register the car using the engine serial number which will identify it as a 1926 Model T. In this case the term "Speedster" identifies it as something other than a factory-built car (when does a Speedster become a Racer?). Maybe that '38 Ford really should be named and registered by its engine, i.e., 1963 Chevy Small Block Custom. Wayne & Barb '42 Super De Luxe Tudor
|
|
| alanwoodieman | -- 12-31-2010 @ 6:22 AM |
|
you know what is the best part of your last comment was? MY DAUGHTER AND I, great staement, it means somewhere out there is a younger generation forging a love of old cars and things and of Father's and sons and daughters bonding-you have my sincere congradulations!! ps-both my sons have a love of old cars-just my luck, not Fords but bowties
|
|
| wrosenkrans | -- 12-31-2010 @ 7:31 AM |
|
My daughter, 21, is very into history, including the cars and era fashion - particularly the '30s and '40s. We attended the Model T Centennial a couple years ago and she met several young folks like her, that's where the Speedster idea was born. The plan is to have it finished by the time she graduates college next year and take it on the Speedster Run in Monterey. She's names all of our cars (the '42 is Ellie, short for Eleanor), and creates all of our descriptive posters. She's also become pretty proficient at doing '40s era hairstyles which has come in handy with the theatre productions at school. My son, 26, likes the cars, but just isn't into them to the extent she is. However, he can name most WWII aircraft on sight and still looks up whenever he hears a radial engine going over. The picture is her sitting on the runningboard of grandpa's Model T last year. I have a similar one of her at age 2 sitting on the same running board. Wayne & Barb '42 Super De Luxe Tudor
|
|
| alanwoodieman | -- 12-31-2010 @ 10:12 AM |
|
this fall I took my 11 year old grandson to see"the aluminum overcast" a B17 that was on display, one of these days I am going into hock just so I can ride in one, love to hear a radial engine plane and imagine what it was like to be under a group of them flying overhead-would be awsome to quote my grandson
|
|
| deuce_roadster | -- 12-31-2010 @ 11:07 AM |
|
Allenwoodieman, Since we are this far off topic ( I DO like the tool display) I wanted to let you know that last year I took some of my swap meet earnings and paid the 300 some dollars for a ride in the Aluminum Overcast when it was here in Seattle (where many 17s were built). Well worth the money, got to go up in the nose where the bombidier sat and took pictures as we flew over flattops at the Bremerton Navy yard. The 4 radials were really cool--like a big Harley with wings! So next opportunity you get--DO IT! Besides the ride, your money gets you a year membership in the EAA and their magazine has many good articles about building homebuilt airplanes which I think would be interesting to anyone in this group.
|
|
| wrosenkrans | -- 12-31-2010 @ 12:23 PM |
|
I worked for about 6mo. at the airfield in Geneseo, NY, back in '84 on their B-17, Fuddy Duddy, and PBY. Actually got some right-seat time in the 17 going to airshows in Albany and upstate Jersey - life doesn't get much better than that. When the planes were home somebody had to crank the engines up twice a week and move them around to avoid flat spots on the tires. An old A&P mechanic and I got that distinct pleasure. Also got rides in the rear jumpseats of a P-51 and a P-40. At the "Wings of Freedom" airshow in '86 we had four B-17's, a B-24, and the Canadian's Lancaster do a flyby with 6 Mustang's, a P-47, and the P-40 on top - what an amazing sight and sound. The photo is a banked shot of Fuddy overhead. Wayne & Barb '42 Super De Luxe Tudor
|
|
| alanwoodieman | -- 01-01-2011 @ 9:23 AM |
|
Deuce did you realize that you riding in a B17 with three Wright engines and one STUDE, yea made under liscence by Wright,
|
|
| deuce_roadster | -- 01-01-2011 @ 10:37 AM |
|
Alan, no I wasn't aware of that. I do recall that there was something different or special about the superchargers on it or maybe all the late planes. I have seen static display radials that had Ford script on the main case.
|
|
| carguy | -- 01-02-2011 @ 6:51 AM |
|
Interesting thread. My '34, to the best of my limited knowledge, is almost perfectly original and the more I learn about originality the more I appreciate the efforts of the unknown person who restored it. Years ago, at a EFV8 meet in Branson I met a man who was badmouthing a '34 that he knew of that had evidence of an original LF fender that had been damaged and repaired. Unknown to him that is my car. I could replace the fender with a new reproduction but I kinda like the idea that it still has the original, repaired, fender. Bill Brown '34 Cabriolet
|
|
| alanwoodieman | -- 01-02-2011 @ 9:47 AM |
|
also one of the engines was NOS when installed. I took pictures of the Stude engine and sent them to a friend who is into Studebakers
|
|
| deuce_roadster | -- 01-02-2011 @ 9:54 AM |
|
Bill, Every club has someone who is like the person you described. In our club it is someone who has never finished anything in his life but runs down everyone else's work. Ignore those type of people, they are just insecure fools. If you had 4 NOS fenders he would have wanted proof the air in the tires was original. Alan, The amount of new post war stuff sitting around boggles the mind.
|
|
| EFV-8 Club Forum : | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum |
| Topic: | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=18&Topic=2351 |