| 35gal | -- 01-25-2011 @ 11:59 AM |
|
Has anybody seen 1935 running boards that do not have the 1/8 diameter holes in the top for the rubber to show thru. My 35 is an excellent car with no rust or patch panels anywhere and never any damaged. The car was undercoated in 1982 so I know the boards were on there then. And yes, I’ve removed the undercoating and the holes are not there. These may be reproduction boards but if they are, except for the holes, look original. All the braces, bends and welds look original. And they fit like a glove. They do have replacement covers. I’ve seen a lot of 34 boards but these are the first 35 boards. I just cannot believe someone back then could make a board as excellent as these. Could these be boards that were reproduced in the late 30’s or 40’ and sold through Ford dealership for replacement?
|
|
| Stroker | -- 01-25-2011 @ 4:51 PM |
|
35 Gal: In the mid 70's, I replaced the running boards on my 38, which were badly worn (yes I saved the originals), with a pair sourced via Hemmings that were made in Argentina. Other than the metal being a little thinner, I was very pleased with the fit and finish. They did not have the holes, and I still have them installed on the car. I've heard a lot of negative comments on the Argentinian running boards, and today there are a couple of additional options available; New Drake boards, and recovering services for your old Ford boards. For now, I'm happy with the Argentinian boards, as I'm simply re-doing a driver, but someday, I may have my old boards recovered. I don't know how the judges deal with this, but I would assume if they crawled under and didn't see the holes, they might dun you. Dan
|
|
| ford38v8 | -- 01-25-2011 @ 7:51 PM |
|
Dan, your assumption is correct. The key word is "might". Any repop, including Ford Service Replacements, is subject to possible point deduction, and would depend on availability of original, quality of the repop, whether the judging team caught it, and whether the Deputy decides to deduct for it, or only note the discrepancy on the judging sheet. I'll tell you of a recent experience I had as a Deputy, and how I handled it: As is the case with most Deputies, I have judged the same cars at more than one meet, and may recognize not only the car, but the owner. Some, I have helped with advice during the restoration. A Judge in this position must be careful to treat such cars as fairly as those he's never seen, and with only limited time available to judge, his team is liable to miss discrepancies if not made aware of them. I do try to educate my Judges as best as I can before judging begins, and do not point out items I was previously aware of in the interest of fairness. So that the owner knows he got lucky this time, and the Judges know they missed something, I will then write it as a no point item and point it out to the Judges. This is tricky, this fairness thing. We are not in the position of being able to recluse (is that the right word?) ourselves as a Supreme Court Judge is. Every car must be judged, and fairness demands they be judged by the same team that judged others in the class. There is no way I can think of to do this fairly if a Deputy imparts his prior intimate knowledge of the car to the team. He must hope that his team is sharp enough to catch discrepancies and mark them for deduction. The worst case scenario happened, and I judged a car in which I was involved (long distance) in the restoration of, and was friends with the owner. Although I had never seen his car prior to the meet, I knew it was his and knew of many deductions it should get. Luckily, my team found most of them without input from me, but I was sweating bullets on how to make it right if they hadn't. His car was judged again at the Eastern Meet, and that team had come up with basically the same results as my team had, the car was judged to be a Second Place. A situation like this can go very badly if a Deputy is not careful. Either extreme of possible results can be damaging to everyone concerned, and I don't claim the wisdom of Solomon, so I would like to hear of others comments and opinions on the subject. Alan
|
|
| trjford8 | -- 01-25-2011 @ 8:56 PM |
|
35gal, I agree with Stroker that you may have some Argentine boards on your car.The metal is thinner and there are no holes on the bottom side.You might check the crossbraces to see if you find "Industria Argentina" stamped on one of them. Those boards did fit good, but over time the rubber deteriorated if they had a lot of exposure to the sun. As with all things Ford it might be possible they could be original as Ford used many different ouside suppliers, but it is doubtful.
|
|
| EFV-8 Club Forum : | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum |
| Topic: | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=18&Topic=2491 |