Posted By |
Discussion Topic:
reval on 32 Ford Frame
-- page:
1
2
|
|
sturgis 39 |
01-28-2013 @ 7:38 AM
|
|
|
Member
Posts: 74
Joined: Nov 2009
|
Did all 1932 Ford Cars and Pickups frames have the reveal above the running boards?
IF IT CAN NOT BE FIXED WITH BLASTING WIRE, DUCT TAPE OR JB WELD - IT CAN NOT BE FIXED
|
trjford8 |
01-28-2013 @ 10:06 AM
|
|
|
Senior
Posts: 4214
Joined: Oct 2009
|
Yes, they all had the reveal.
|
sturgis 39 |
01-28-2013 @ 10:20 AM
|
|
|
Member
Posts: 74
Joined: Nov 2009
|
Thanks for the reply. i guy was trying to tell me that the first produced 32 Ford frames did not have the reveal above the running boards. Thanks again
IF IT CAN NOT BE FIXED WITH BLASTING WIRE, DUCT TAPE OR JB WELD - IT CAN NOT BE FIXED
|
CharlieStephens |
01-28-2013 @ 2:10 PM
|
|
|
Senior
Posts: 888
Joined: Oct 2009
|
I have a '32 4 door sedan with serial number *AB50035XX* (where XX are numbers I don't wish to show). It is hard to date the 4 cylinders by engine number due to the build up of inventory but it looks early. It has the reveals. Charlie Stephens
|
3w2 |
01-28-2013 @ 6:44 PM
|
|
|
Senior
Posts: 835
Joined: Oct 2009
|
Charlie, Here's a photo of the first '32 produced, #18-1, being hand stamped by Mr. Ford on March 10, 1932. Note the reveal on the frame. Dave
|
ckh |
10-28-2013 @ 9:54 AM
|
|
|
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Oct 2013
|
I have personally seen a 32 frame that in fact had no reveal. It was the same in all respects except for the reveal; front frame horns, rear horns, crossmembers,etc. It was an original frame not a repro. Perhaps it was an early prototype. Just guessing but perhaps the reveal was added for strength, not appearance.
|
Stroker |
10-28-2013 @ 4:02 PM
|
|
|
Senior
Posts: 1460
Joined: Oct 2009
|
I had an early production 32-4 cylinder pickup which had the "reveal". I've never seen a 32 frame that didn't have it, but of course as previously stated it's possible that some pre-production frames may not have been so embossed. I believe it was a Edsel inspired styling touch for the 32 passenger car line rather than a structural element. The fact that it also appeared on pickups is simple economics, as they shared the passenger car frame, so it didn't make sense to build two stamping dies.
|
ford38v8 |
10-28-2013 @ 4:29 PM
|
|
|
Senior
Posts: 2758
Joined: Oct 2009
|
Stroker, With rregard to the "early production" '32 4 bangers, you must remember that none were produced until some time after the V8's hit the streets. I'm sorry, I don't have the exact dates or numbers, but I do remember reading that Ford wanted to soft pedal the 4 cylinder, in favor of the V8. He even concealed the fact that the 4 banger was the stronger engine of the two. This means nothing, of course, to the question of the reveal, only that the time frame of the 4 cylinder vehicles reportedly started a bit later than the V8 vehicles.
Alan
|
Stroker |
10-28-2013 @ 5:21 PM
|
|
|
Senior
Posts: 1460
Joined: Oct 2009
|
Alan: I wouldn't question you logic, but my gut feeling is that a 32 commercial (pickup) would have been most likely ordered with the "tried and true" 4 cylinder since most pickup buyers at that time in history were looking for cheap, basic tools, rather than today's buyers who drive pickups for many complex sociological reasons.
|
3w2 |
10-28-2013 @ 8:06 PM
|
|
|
Senior
Posts: 835
Joined: Oct 2009
|
Actually, a potential buyer of a '32 commercial vehicle did not have the option to purchase it with a V-8 engine until late in the model year. It was first released for the station wagon two months after Job# 1 for V-8 passenger cars, but even later by several more months for the pickup and panel delivery.
|