Early Ford V-8 Club Forum

EFV-8 Club Forum / General Ford Discussion / 1948 ford car oilbath

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

Posted By Discussion Topic: 1948 ford car oilbath -- page: 1 2 3     noelr542 05-11-2015 @ 2:32 PM reply profile send p.m. Member Posts: 1 Joined: May 2015 what color is the oilbath air filter supposed to be black or gold. jdpears 05-11-2015 @ 2:42 PM reply profile send p.m. Member Posts: 11 Joined: Dec 2009 i'm pretty sure '46 '47 and 48 were all black len47merc 05-11-2015 @ 3:07 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 1165 Joined: Oct 2013 While black is correct, the EFV8 technical adviser for these years directs 'satin' or 'matte' black at most to obtain the finish that most closely resembles the original black. While gloss may have been spelled out originally, the end finish of the paint in the late '40s produced a dull shine, not a bright reflective surface. Steve Stroker 05-11-2015 @ 6:47 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 1460 Joined: Oct 2009 Being literally older than dirt; I have seen these filters when new. I'd describe it as about half-way between semi-gloss and gloss, unless you are like Kube who likes to lean on the super-gloss end of the spectrum. The point is that Ford, just like cheb-o-lay, plow-mouth, etc. didn't waste a lot of time or money making the stuff under the hood pretty, only brand specific. The theory was that only the mechanic's or "retentive" owners (like my Dad) ever ventured in this vast, but necessary wasteland of vital complexity. Now we are venerating subtle differences in reflectivity. I'm obviously not a big fan of over-restoration. As a fan of early Fords, I tend to favor stuff that has the degree of "shoddiness" that was extant when the product rolled off the line out into the "real-world". TomO 05-12-2015 @ 7:42 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 7258 Joined: Oct 2009 I agree with Stroker. Matte is way too dull and base coat-clear coat way too shiny. Bill Hirsch supplies a chassis black that is close to the original. Tom len47merc 05-12-2015 @ 11:50 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 1165 Joined: Oct 2013 For what it's worth I use POR-15 semi-gloss on all chassis & suspension components calling for black originally. All engine components defined as being black originally were cleaned, primed and then painted with a high-temp black semi-gloss as well, and the finish is as close as I could come to pics provided by other forum members of award-winning cars. I'll try to remember to post the feed back received from the Charlotte Meet next month. Steve This message was edited by len47merc on 5-12-15 @ 11:51 AM kubes40 05-12-2015 @ 3:38 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3411 Joined: Oct 2009 The subject of "gloss", "semi-gloss", "satin", chassis black" has come up many times. I personally find it almost laughable when someone states a frame (example) was "chassis black". I dare anyone to PROVE just how "glossy" "chassis black" was. I also would like to see ONE bit of proof in the from of a color chip / sample as to what Ford applied. Ford did NOT name their chassis colors. Instead they applied code numbers that corresponded with a formula made to Fords specifications. As NONE of these formulas can be translated to modern paint technologies, it remains impossible to duplicate any of them with 100% proven accuracy. As many of you know, I have done a LOT of research in regard to 1940 Ford construction. Frames (example) were actually quite "glossy" - far more so than what Eastwood sells as "chassis black". As glossy as the frames I restore? Of course not. Ford would not afford the monies it would require to do so. Air filters? Gloss black. Period. How "glossy"? Not having a spectrometer in my eye, I could not offer an opinion with 100% authority. I think one must remember that things appear more "glossy" when the surface the paint is applied to is extremely straight / smooth. Yes, my air filters (1939 - 1940) are blocked out prior to painting. From the factory? Hardly. Please, understand I only speak to 1939 - 1940. I have not done much research of other years so can't say what may have changed or perhaps remained the same. Respectfully, Mike "Kube" Kubarth len47merc 05-13-2015 @ 5:32 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 1165 Joined: Oct 2013 Thanks Mike. Clearly no definitive standard exists, as you infer/state, regarding 'glossiness' that we can refer to when restoring our cars. For those of us new to the process it is difficult to understand what will be acceptable to judges. Whether period correct or not (and I know am preaching to the choir here) if one is after points and awards the answer has to be what is acceptable from a judging perspective, hence why the best resource found for my application was input from the EFV8 technical adviser, Rusty Davis, input from senior resources on this forum, plus pictures of award winning cars as well as viewing the same at shows. Trying several different levels of glossiness and brands of paints led me to what came closest to my eye as well as what functionally was determined to be best for each part (e.g., POR-15 for the applicable parts of the frame and undercarriage). It has been communicated to me through experienced EFV8 resources that there is a degree of subjectivity and variance on this among judges making it even more challenging to get it right the first time. This said, all of us new or relatively new to the process have to take input from EFV8 technical advisers as well as the most experienced and knowledgeable resources on this forum and, drawing from all this input, make the best decisions we can and hope we are as close as possible to what is likely to be most acceptable from a judging perspective. This is the one area that gave me fits trying to find a 'shininess' standard and it started with something as simple as the oil pan which was removed for cleaning and gasket replacement prior to starting the car after being idled for almost 4 decades. Couldn't find a standard in my then quite limited but developing EFV8 resource & documentation library so I posted the question on this forum. Among the multitude of answers and opinions came direction to contact technical adviser Rusty Davis (I think TomO advised this) and his input became the ultimate driver of the glossiness decisions made for at least black components going forward. From that point on if no clear direction or recipe exists for any topic I have tried to advise forum members to the applicable technical adviser and former judge resources to obtain the 'final' answer. Steve kubes40 05-13-2015 @ 7:10 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3411 Joined: Oct 2009 Steve, I want to thank you for your thoroughly thought out response and your great articulation of those thoughts. I'd like to offer a bit of personal background and build a bit upon your thoughts. I have been a member of this club since 1973, a full 42 years. During that time I have owned too many 1940 Fords to most likely recall. I have twelve Dearborn awards behind me, the worst, a 997. I am in the midst of four additional '40 Ford "high point" projects. I only state some of my history to hopefully add a bit of credibility to my opinions. Regardless, they are of course only my opinions. At the very least, I hope, someone will seriously consider them and possibly we can change the current method of operation in regard to judging standards. Like you Steve, early on I had experienced the same frustrations. Those frustration remain to this day. Attempting to find a definitive answer on numerous things in regard to my restoration efforts. Proper finishes had always proven to be the most elusive. In my opinion, this could be addressed "head on" in a fairly easy and decisive manner. I know that this subject has been presented to various boards throughout the past decades. And, sadly but apparently, each time this very subject has been dismissed leaving serious restorers like yourself (and me) "hanging" in the proverbial wind. I have yet to come to an understanding why this club with its massive funds has never offered any judge training much less required such. Other clubs do so. Our club sends out anyone that volunteers to the concourse. While I feel it is wonderful that folks volunteer, I also think this sets up all too often a frustrating situation for the owner / restorer. Why? All too often, a "hands on" restorer will know much more than most judges on a particular team. That is, again in my opinion, highly unfair to the restorer. Anyone that is as serious as you (and me) deserves to be judged by his peers. I have little doubt that the volunteer judges have a desire to learn. They are most likely not looking to simply find "busy work". I have heard from volunteer judges many times how much they enjoy learning. Do we as a club not owe our members better educated judges? One (simplified) approach would be to offer "standards" from which to judge from. We all realize Ford made swift and running changes each and every day. Hey, if those cadmium bolts ran short, I have no doubt some raven finish bolts were installed instead. Still, the INTENTION was to utilize cadmium bolts in that (example) place. So, instead of the all to oft used phrase "Don't kill the car", how about standards being published and "judge the car according to the standards". As new (differing) information / documentation may be uncovered, change the standards. In this computer age, that process is not only easy, it is swift. Steve, I hope you and other serious restorers continue "pushing ahead" I do believe we are members of a great club. Room for improvement? Without a doubt. So, what do you guys think? Isn't it past time we as a club offer / demand some sort of schooling for our judges? Respectfully, Mike "Kube" Kubarth TomO 05-13-2015 @ 8:20 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 7258 Joined: Oct 2009 Mike, No matter what Club you belong to, there are always objections to the way the cars are judged. This is true whether the judges are trained or just volunteers. The process of judging is using your knowledge and experience to make a determination of what is correct. Trained judges may or may not do a good job, depending upon their knowledge, experience and abilities. I am against having a training school for judges, because this is supposed to be an enjoyable hobby, not something that puts a stress on the car owner when he attends a meet. Hobby's have amateurs running the functions and amateurs attending the functions, so nothing is going to be perfect and we should not expect perfection. Tom

<< previous || next >>

PAGE: 1 2 3

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