As posted on the MTFCI, here is a write-up regarding the investigation into the fatal roll-over accident.
http://www.tinlizziefl.com/April_2012_Newsletter.pdf
Thanks for posting that, Ed. It's sobering, and at the same time confusing. Did both the tire and rim separate from the wheel? Which perch failed? Is that pic of the accident vehicle?
From what I see, two accessories might have prevented this accident:
Reinforced wishbone. This was an early one.
Hydraulic steering stabilizer.
----------
OTOH, the accessory shock absorbers contributed.
rdr
The tire and tube separated from the wheel. The perch that broke was the passenger side. The wishbone did not cause the accident and was still attached to the spring since the perch snapped off exactly even with the top surface of the axle leaving the spring and wishbone still fastened together by the upper portion of the perch. While we searched high and low to find a matching accessory perch, none surface until Chicasha. A front axle donated to me by its owner at that time has the exact same accessory perches on them. Another fellow also found a single one loose that had been welded back together having separated in the EXACT same place long ago but rewelded. Mark Cameron wrote an article about early repro parts and their risks and it published recently in the MTFCI magazine Model T Times. Most of my chapter were in the cars immediately behind Ken and witnessed the accident although only the car immediately behind got a good look.
I don't think a steering stabilizer would have stopped the accident since clearly these were a dangerous after-market perch prone to breaking. We only have seen 2-1/2 sets (5 perches) with solid evidence now that 2 of them had broken. I will not sell the axle but am considering destroying the perches to prevent someone from ever putting them on a T.
John
Can you show picture of this perch that you discribed and any ID markings that might Identify them for others to look out for.
Thanks for the report.
Bob
Thanks, John. The wishbone did not cause the accident, but did not prevent it, either. According to the report, the single wishbone allowed the caster change, which caused the steering to do a hardover, which overstressed the perch.
I have a late, under-the-axle wishbone welded to an early, above-the-axle wishbone at the Y, and it will not allow any caster change at all. Otherwise, my front brakes would cause a calamity the first time they were applied.
Without strain from caster change and the resulting hardover, those aftermarket perches might last forever. It might even be possible a reinforced wishbone was specified for those perches originally.
Without a hydraulic stabilizer, the only thing limiting a steering hardover is the driver's thumbs. The driver's thumbs are even mentioned in writing from the era. Is a hardover possible without a defective perch? It happens far too often, and is even possible (but less likely) with a late, under-the-axle, unreinforced wishbone.
Note, this happened at 30 mph, a "safe" speed.
rdr
Here is a photo of the type of shock absorber, this type is for the above axle wishbone T's, so it probably dates in the 'teens. No mfg marks anywhere, and I couldn't find any advertising of this type in printed materials in my research.
This picture I took at Chickasha 2012, and is the type that Ken placed on his '15.
Here are the shocks that were on Ken's T.
If you note the design, while looking like typical can-covered coil over accessory shocks, these have a two-piece design.
The 'yoke' shape shaft goes into the axle, above that is the long perch arm portion to fasten the wishbone early style over the axle, and to fasten the spring shackle. This upper part is riveted to the yoke. There is wiggle between the yoke and upper arm on worn parts. The two-piece design of a high-moment arm perch seems too weak to me.
Other designs of similar shocks are one-piece forged and seem more stout. Since these are one-piece arms, no wear or wiggle could develop.
Aftermarket accessories, while some good, some never made the big time sales, and for a reason, best advise when using old accessories is to really study the part, design and function prior to placing it on your T.
I was on that tour and drove 30 MPH. At that speed, we left early every AM and got to see every car on tour by lunch, as they passed us. The driver following Ken and was the lone eyewitness is a member of my club and prior to witnessing the accident was not known to drive as slow as 30 MPH.
FWIW.
Looks like Ken didn't have a chance. It would be interesting to know if the perches were forged steel or malleable iron castings and how their strength compared to the Ford perch. Our 80-100 year old machines are inherently not as safe as modern cars, and we do need to recognize that the risk does increase with speed. I am not too bashful about moving on down the road, maybe I had better give it some more thought.
Ed, thank you for posting the executive summary, and John for your excellent explanation. Ken was a fairly new friend to me, and my stomach did knots on seeing the thread title and reading the summary. As you know, I did not see the accident but was intimately involved shortly afterward. It took me several seconds to recognize my friend. I have long wondered what caused the accident. Hopefully this can bring some closure to the accident. I look at my accessories and my driving habits differently now.
Noel
Wouldn't a steering stabilizer possibly have prevented the initial steering hard over/loss of directional control due to the tire/rim failure? If I am reading this correctly, the tire failure resulted in the steering hard over first, and that in turned added the stress that caused the perch to fail which resulted in an unrecoverable situation?
Hi David.
I personally don't think that the type of aftermarket steering stabilizers found on some Model T's would have prevented this particular accident. The stabilizers that are VW bug size would have slowed down the full over a little bit, but the wheel would be at full lock in less than 1/2 a second, maybe a lot less. If the "shocks" allowed the geometry to change (reduce caster), then the weight and speed of the car would completely over power the stabilizer. The stabilizer is actually a modern shock absorber, that converts motion to heat. Most stabilizers that are valved to allow for normal steering will absorb a momentary impact (like a pothole) but they will comply with sustained pressure (like moving the steering wheel, surfaces that are not level, or a missing tire)
We recently heard reports of front tires leaving the rim on T's with no stabilizers, with no sudden loss of control, so it wasn't just about the tire. Like most tragedies, it is an accumulation of problems, each survivable on its own. In this case, the "shocks" added to the missing tire, throwing the front suspension completely out of spec. The bad geometry overloaded a questionable part to failure, then everything else became inevitable.
So a stabilizer probably would not have helped (my opinion) but I doubt that it would have made things worse. I'm sure that there are specific situations where a steering stabilizer could make a difference, but one can go a lifetime without experiencing one. It really comes down to a personal choice. Your car, do what you want. But in this case, I think that the "shocks" increased the risk, a steering stabilizer would probably not offset all of that increased risk. I think that an entirely stock front suspension, in good repair, might have prevented this accident, based on the fact that many stock T's without "improvements" have survived the initial event (loss of a front tire).
Just quick note, I have participated in the design and fabrication of a front suspension in my V8 powered 914 that has been operated at 140+ mph without a stabilizer. They're not a magic answer. They come with trade offs, especially with manual steering. Talk to someone that can really engineer/design front suspensions and they can objectively evaluate if a stabilizer will actually do what laymen think that it can do.
Sad accident. I think the root cause was likely a valve stem failure. Something deflated the tire and caused it to exit. I also wonder about the speed of the car, it seems unlikely to me that you can flip a T going 30 MPH. Ken was not known for driving 30 MPH unless he was waiting for traffic to thin so he could pass me.
He immediately slowed down when he lost the tire according to all the reports I've heard, the car is now in Fulton Mo. The fellow who purchased it hasn't decided to part it out or rebuild it, the body is amazingly in good shape, the top bows are fixable, just sheetmetal and rear end, front end need replacing as I see it.
Eric,
Thank you for the detailed information. Very helpful. I agree that it follows the classic scenario of a lot of accidents, auto or aviation. No one thing in itself would have caused the accident, but the specific combination of factors and timing leads to an unrecoverable situation.
Dave
Guess I should have worded my first post differently:
"From what I see, two accessories might have prevented this accident:
Reinforced wishbone. This was an early one.
Hydraulic steering stabilizer."
--------------
The stabilizer would have certainly made little difference without the reinforced wishbone. With a reinforced wishbone, you won't have a caster change, but only the uneven drag of the wheel with the flat tire pulling to one side. In that case, a hydraulic stabilizer would slow the possible sudden strong pull.
Also, there's no reason to believe a T won't turn turtle at 30 mph. Brent Terry's son rolled a '15 Touring at maybe 15 mph, according to Brent at the time.
The speed was 35 MPH at time of accident based upon some science and witnesses. The tire leaving the rim did not immediately cause anything since the marks on the pavement indicate the car was still straight ahead and in fact then began a gradual move to the right to exit the roadway. The hard over came after that. It is not certain when the perch broke but basically it appeared that the car essentially did a "pole vault" when the right front spring and radius rod combo hit the pavement and launched the car into a spin and roll for 2 revolutions and landing on its wheels with engine still running. Ken and his wife were ejected on the first roll. This data given to me by eye witnesses and my own investigation with some others. The perch may have been broken with the right front wheel encountered the road edge or it may have been weakened by the left rim running on the roadway for a time and/or it is possible the perch was broken and just sat on top of the axle for a time but no doubt there was a sudden shift and the right front corner struck pavement which seems to be the time when the radius rod got bent since it and the front spring together comprised the vaulting point. I have not personally viewed the car nor the pavement but have viewed pictures and interviewed witnesses in attempt to get the truth.
What I learned most is that many many aftermarket products sold during the T era have questionable metallurgy since those sources may have been simple garage operations with no real engineering background or foundry experience. I personally now would never use any aftermarket accessory that would be a part of the suspension or steering. Without knowing that something is Vanadium steel and made correctly, it could be a threat.
Please make up your own mind on all of this but do think about it.
I agree on the metallurgy, John. How was the caster sloppiness determined after the accident?
Ralph
Executive Summary, paragraph Probable Cause, the yoke holding the perch above allows the perch to wiggle fore and aft. There was a spread of that yoke, and rivet was loose. Both of the shocks, left and right exhibited the looseness.
Note the gap in the yoke portion, allows the perch to move back and forth, so that this design, when compromised, would affect the caster. This is the intact shock, the other one sheared off at the axle.
Unknown if the gap was existing or if the gap occurred as the T was in a skid with the steering wheel at full lock, causing a large thrust by the right front wheel against the spindle, perch, and the axle.
I have a pair of rear shocks and judging by the main bracket casting, they are an exact match to Ken's front shocks. I was going to sell them, but their value has probably been reduced to Zero because of this unfortunate accident. I may try to Ebay them, but they'll probably end up going to the scrap man.
Thanks, Dan. I couldn't understand what they meant by the yoke shape. This pic clears it up.
That's pretty ugly, and it looks like that device is depending on the wishbone to keep the caster from changing. At least with the original setup, the spring helps a little bit to keep caster somewhat under control.
rdr
Terry, maybe you could donate them to the MTFCA museum, and at least get a tax deduct.
Before all these aftermarket parts get scrapped I think they should be saved to study them and put in the hands of someone that will not sell them to anyone to use on a car. We all need to know what to watch out for so maybe they should be sent to the museum and displayed as a watch out for this part type display. It could save a life down the road.
Bob
Hi Ricks,
I agree, a split wishbone (doubled, siamesed, insert your favorite term here) that attaches both over and under the axle might have prevented this accident, even with the aftermarket "shocks", or perhaps not. My '16 touring has an added under "wishbone" that was put on around 1960 or earlier. It looks like it was made from one "U" shaped piece of some type of angle iron and is welded to the upper wishbone at the back and the front tabs are between the perch nuts and the axle.
Personally, I think that auxiliary brakes and the split wishbone are the two most important safety modifications for a T. These two items specifically address problem areas that have killed a number of T owners, at least some that were personal friends of the family.
Thanks to whoever posted this initially:
"I made up a radius rod, which was holding the axle top and bottom, ..."
I was going to install my Hasslers this year, I think I will pass on this now and leave everything stock. I blew a front tire last month at speed with my stock front end and had no problems getting over to the shoulder. I guess it goes with that saying,,,,If it's not broke dont fix it.
I think the easy way out for some is to paint all accessories with the same brush, and label them as dangerous. That is just not the case, I frequently run across chassis accessories, especially shocks, that have obviously led harsh lives, with incredible wear and tear present. Others, would fail early in their life when put to the test. All aftermarket shocks are not dangerous. The ones used on Kens car were of poor design to begin with. Hasslers, KW's, and quite a few other brands are the good ones. Odd, no-name brands will need more scrutiny before using to be safe.
I know this may be sacrelige to many, but, I feel that whenever it is found that a vintage, aftermarket Model T accessory is dangerous and has caused a fatal accident, we have a moral obligation to render said part, unsellable with a hammer and not sell the dangerous part to anyone, especially to the unwary, for if they install it on their car and, God forbid, it results in a serious or fatal accident and it can be traced back to whoever sold it to them, the seller might share some liability for the accident and any damages that resulted to the victim(s).
I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. Meeks' family made an effort to find who sold Ken the shocks that caused his death and his wife's serious injuries. If they can find a receipt for the shocks that caused the accident, the family could have a case against the seller that sold the shocks to Ken. Jim Patrick
Good point, Jim.
In this case, and judging by the wear, I would guess those shocks had been on the car more years than Ken had it. They showed bad neglect, and should have been repaired or replaced years ago.
rdr
Well, here is how I see it. Why does it ALWAYS have to be someone elses fault. Mr Meeks is the one that decided to either put or leave those shocks on HIS car. Mr Meeks must have liked them or thought they were safe or helpful. Mr Meeks paid the ultimate price for HIS decision! It was a horrible accident and we all do need to learn from others mistakes, but the ultimate decision was Mr Meeks. It ruffles my feathers when people look to blame someone else like "the person who sold them". The seller would be just as guilty as the person who bought them in this type of case unless there was a gun to the person's head. If more people spent more time looking in the mirror for the person to blame for alot of things instead of searching for who is at fault, there wouldn't need to be a warning on the Mc Donalds cup that "your coffee is HOT!
McDonalds no doubt profited off that lawsuit, at least productwise. Their coffee was too hot for good brewing, and it was crap. After that laswsuit they began serving always fresh coffee, and it's not too hot to make it a good brew.
I respectfully and wholeheartedly disagree with you Mr. Patrick. Your litigious attitude is a root problem with the newer generation that shirks their own responsibility as Mr. Nicholson eluded to previously.
Although I sympathise with the Meeks family over their loss, I agree with Paul. I have many aftermarket and modified parts on my fordor, including an accessory wishbone and spindles modified with Nash Metropolitan brakes. I chose to install and use them. If they fail, I don't know who made them and I was the one who chose to install them. Its the chance that I'm taking. No one forced me to use them. We have enough lawsuit abuse in this country.
Steve. You don't know me and have no right to accuse me of having a litigious attitude. While I appreciate you thinking I am young enough to be a member of the "newer generation", I am not. I was born in 1953 and am 58 years old and of the mind that one should take responsibility for his own actions and not blame others for their misfortunes. I've never sued anyone in my life and do not have a litigeous bone in my body, but you are correct in pointing out that we have become a litigeous society and there are those that seek to blame others for their troubles and carelessness and those are the ones we need to be wary of, which is why I felt the need to remind our membership of this FACT. To ignore or try to wish away this FACT does not make it less likely to happen. Anyone who knowingly sells a dangerous part is taking a big and potentially expensive chance, especially in light of Mr. Meek's unfortunate accident and anyone who knowingly does so and causes someone's death or a severe injury (especially if it is to me, one of my MTFCA friends, or one of my loved ones), should suffer the consequences of their actions. Jim Patrick
Two quick thoughts. First, while I don't know for sure, I strongly suspect that the shocks were on the car when Ken bought it, so I doubt that there is a supplier in the picture. Second, Ken's surname is Meek, not Meeks.
All I know about lawyers is they will sue everybody, regardless of involvement, and let the court decide who should pay.
--------
Tom LeRoux, super Model T guy, opens his "Hoist Service" garage two Saturdays every January for the Long Beach and Orange County T clubs to have a voluntary annual inspection "tour." Members bring their cars in and get expert pairs of eyes looking over their cars. A lot of minor, and some serious problems are found every year. Ken Meek's frontend would have been flagged, based just on the wear in the shackle hole.
Do other clubs have annual inspections?
rdr
Dick, no disrespect towards Mr Meek, I Should have put an apostrophe which would represent ownership of his decisions, etc. Then again that maybe wouldn't be right either. Sorry for the mistake, it was MY fault.
If it were up to the do gooders here we would all be part of the BORG! Man's free will is God's way of protecting the gene pool, get over it!
Ricks,
You wrote "judging by the wear, I would guess those shocks had been on the car more years than Ken had it. They showed bad neglect, and should have been repaired or replaced years ago"
Note that the executive summary states that it isn't known if the wear and gaps in the yoke existed pre-accident or not. The stresses involved in the accident could easily have done that to an otherwise tight-looking accessory part.
I think people are getting out in front of their skis thinking Mr. Meeks was negligent in either the use or care of these accessories. Until a pre-accident photo emerges showing the looseness of these parts, I think we should give the benefit of the doubt and assume that he wouldn't allow something that loosey-goosey to stay in service on his T.
I think the cautionary tale here, as others have stated, is that we should be wary of lesser-known accessories, particularly those with a bearing on the safety of our cars. Mr. Meeks didn't have this cautionary tale with which to re-evaluate his T. We do.
Accessory or not, one thing that is pointed out to me is that those cotter pins and safety wire are really important and should be in place and checked. If the wishbone would come off the front axle and fall for what ever reason, looks like a bad situation. Cotter Pins; Don't leave home with out them.
Jay, Wow! I don't think pointing out that sellers have a certain moral obligation to buyers if they know that the part they are selling just caused a fatal accident, is detrimental to the hobby, nor do I think being called a do-gooder should necessarily be considered an insult. If you look back, my original post, it was in response to Terry's intention to sell the same shocks that caused Mr' Meek's accident, knowing they were dangerous.
Do you really feel that the gene pool has benefitted by Mr. Meeks' demise? I'm pretty sure you were simply trying to be funny and didn't mean it to sound that way, but...
Sure, Ken made a bad decision for which he paid the ultimate price for and, from which we can all learn from, but the litany here seems to indicate that some of you feel that his death was his fault and not the fault of a dangerous part. That we all have a right to purchase dangerous parts from irresponsible, morally bankrupt, sellers and if we die because of it, it is our own fault caused by our own stupidity. That it is our right to be stupid if we want to. I guess if you want to believe that way, that is your right... Only problem is, passengers in your Model T, or on the highway in the path of your cartwheeling Model T, might not share your belief. When your rights interfere with the rights of others that is when they cease being your rights alone. Jim Patrick
I'm still not prepared to say that Mr. Meeks made a "bad decision". Assuming the part was in good condition (i.e. the looseness in the picture earlier in the thread was not present before the accident), I can't say I would have decided not to drive that T. In fact I can say I probably would have hopped right in. He'd probably put a lot of miles on the car with no issue. The owner before probably put a lot of miles on the car without issue, etc. Why *wouldn't* he assume that today would be like any other day?
How is he or any other hobbyist supposed to know how a part will react under what has been described as "abnormal" conditions?
That's why I think we can only take away that we have to be wary of any accessory. That doesn't mean saying no to all of them, just understand that there are risks in their use.
But we all know (or ought to) that climbing into a 100 year old vehicle is inherently risky, whether it's all stock or modified.
The wear in the yoke portion of the shocks has nothing to do with the caster angle changing. The caster angle is controlled solely by the wishbone and angle of the wishbone bore in the spring perch. The fact that there was wear in the areas above the wishbone only meant that the attachment with the spring was sloppy. Same as many Model Ts with very worn spring shackles.
The "big picture" description of the accident is that the shock mount fractured, either due to some exceptional forces generated by some other issues or by simple brittle fracture under normal loads, thereby causing a lack of steering control and subsequent vehicle rollover. Given that, the exact mechanics of the rollover are somewhat irrelevant. Even the precise trigger event is not that important, since it appears that whatever incident began the sequence of events was, in itself, unremarkable except for the fact that it overcame the underlying weakness in the accessory shock absorber.
Jim, Wow! I guess you consider yourself a Do Gooder since you feel I pointed my statement at you.
I have TONS of accessories in my collection some I would use on my cars and some are wall hangers IT'S MY CHOICE NOT YOURS OR ANYONE ELSE'S WHICH IS WHICH, RIGHT OR WRONG, THAT'S LIFE, THAT'S FREE WILL!!
Jay, your "BORG" statement was aimed at anyone who would question the rights of individuals who feel they have the right to do whatever they want, even if their rights endanger others, does, I guess, put me in that category.
I am one who has enjoyed the many postings of your accessory collection on the forum over the years and even once encouraged you to publish a book with photos of your collection, but you are missing my point. I am not referring to all accessories. Only to those that have been shown to be dangerous, as in the shocks that were implicated in the death of Ken Meek. Once it has been shown that an accessory is definitely dangerous and was responsible for the death of one of our members (or anyone), I think we have a moral obligation to future hobbyists to eliminate that accessory so that it can never cause another death, even after Ken Meek tragedy has receded into a faded memory. I know of no other accessories that have been implicated in a death so I would not suggest that any other accessory be treated in this way. Jim Patrick
Interesting reading. I believe many have been waiting to read and discuss the finding to this terrible accident. I appreciate the discussion.
It seems in this case, when the aftermarket part failed, the front end of the car fell, or collapsed, hit the asphalt street, dug in to the asphalt and caused it to “pole vault”.
What if the car hadn't ‘pole vaulted? Would the car have come to a sliding stop?
How can we prevent a front end from digging in to an asphalt street, or a hard compacted road that could cause a car to dig in and “pole vault”?
Orlando
Look again at the "good" perch:
Both the shackle hole and the wishbone hole are egg shaped. That means not only did the shackle not get enough lube, but the wishbone was loose in the perch. That's a sure way to get a caster change. For the wishbone to have a chance to keep the caster stable, the wishbone has to be tight in the perch.
Once the caster went to zero and the steering hardover occurred, the car was sure to roll over, even without a broken perch. Two examples in mid-2009 were Brent Terry's son, and David Cockey.
rdr
WOW! Interesting thread to read for sure!
Some of what I just read supports my belief that we have too much government, too many laws, many of which are designed with built-in controversy which provides an opportunity for ridiculous litigation that takes place mainly for the money involved than for the good of the people that it should benefit.
I guess if today's society was to revert back to the transportation means of 150 years ago, it would be possible (and profitable) to sue the livery stable where you were kicked by a horse that you were hitching to your buggy!
Sorry; just sort of "thinking out loud" about some of the things that this thread brings to mind.
Because I DO NOT know you Mr. Patrick, your statement regarding bringing an action against the party that sold the shocks to Ken was the reason I accused you of having a litigious attitude - my apologies if you took offense to my observation.
I considered Ken a friend as well as a fellow business man. I too am in the business of providing service and a supplier of both new & used for the Model T. It is attitudes such as yours that could be the cause of us "Ma & Pa" Model T enthusiasts from abandoning the hobby, thus leaving a void for those that do not or cannot repair or service their own vehicles. That would very unfortunate in my opinion.
I have sold thousands of new & used Model T parts and have repaired hundreds more Model T's for customers. I DO have a substantial business insurance policy to safe-guard my wife & I from folks with your attitude.
Weren't you the fellow a while back that was "boo-hooing" and was going to sell your T which was followed up by a rather lengthy "Pity Party" thread ? Perhaps this isn't the hobby for you ?
Ricks, but how do you know that egg-shape didn't occur during the accident, "good" perch or no? Or has it been demonstrated that there were no on stresses on the "bad" perch during the accident? I would think that all of the front end parts experienced amazing stresses during the "pole-vault".
Look closely, Mr. Solak. The holes in the perch shown just above were not stretched in a single event, the steel is worn away. I have Ford perches like that, too.
Jim,
I don't think anyone can disagree with your scenario of someone selling a known dangerous part and how wrong that would be. I just don't think we have that situation here. By all accounts, Ken was as good a mechanic as most and HE obviously did not feel the part was dangerous. Remember, this part didn't have a bad reputation, at least in modern times, until now. The fellow who sold it to him, whether already on the car or not, could not have known of its danger. It wasn't broken when sold and the seller didn't have the X-ray vision needed to spot flaws, nor the ability to forecast the future and most likely zero background in metallurgy. Pretty much true of any of us I suppose.
I'm not trying to inflame further this side of the discussion, but instead trying to lend some reasonable perspective.
It does little good to argue over what was worn and how it got worn, who sold it, etc. This whole event would most likely not have occurred if the shock hadn't broken away or, if there had been a brace on the wishbone. Period.
Rather than argue over small points, let's learn a hard lesson from this and move on smarter and safer for the knowledge.
A lot has been said about the quality, or lack of quality of the part, but it is interesting to note that in the picture included with the report of the left side of the car, the wishbone appears to be badly bent and the axle is rolled back, and the left side perch did not break under what would appear to be great stress.
None of these parts were designed or made to last nearly 100 years, and metallurgy, and alloys, and engineering design, and our own understanding and knowledge have all greatly improved since these parts were designed.
We break axles and crankshafts all the time! The Titanic was state of the art, it was "unsinkable."
As far as, "I know of no other accessories that have been implicated in a death," how about auxiliary transmissions getting caught in neutral, or Ruckstells caught between high and low? I have read several accounts of Rocky Mountain Brakes not holding a car on a hill or not being able to stop in reverse, some resulting in damage to cars and possible injuries, yet many people including myself,feel that accessory brakes such as Rockies are an improvement over factory brakes.
We need to be aware of the possible consequences of using very old parts on very old cars made with very old technology, and in many cases, we need to ask "why was this part removed from the car it was originally installed on?" We need to inspect our cars regularly and carefully.
There may be more to be learned from this event.
Extracted from Executive Summary:
Note 1. : It says the "left front tire/rim assembly separated.."
It was the left front tire, tube and maybe flap that separated. The rim stayed on the wheel.
Note 2. : "Skid marks indicated that the right (and left) front wheels instantaneously snapped to full left lock position."
From that point on, the driver was only a hapless passenger. Snapping the wheels hardover on dry pavement will cause a rollover at speeds much lower than 30.
Note 3. : "Probable Cause"
The report attributes design of the shocks, and not worn holes in the perches that caused the hardover from the caster variation, but it's obvious from the pix.
The perch snapped after about 40 feet of skidding. That sounds far? That's less than a second at 30 mph.
The left rear wheel did not leave a skid mark. Did the car have wheel brakes?
Will, Trentun, New Jersey:
Hasslers shocks are a terribly dangerous add on. You are sure to have an accident if you use them. Since you are not going to use yours would you sell them to me.
Hasslers at work:
They're the red things. I bought them from Steve Tomaso in 1997, and still using them.
"The left rear wheel did not leave a skid mark. Did the car have wheel brakes?"
Ralph, the car had disc brakes. Ken had already put them on several of his cars and was a fan.
Sure looks like the perch was worn out, not damaged from the wreck. In any case drive slower and you will live longer. Lawsuits don't help if you or your loved ones are dead.
I would think that when the front wheels "instantaneously snapped to full left lock position",....the left rear wheel would be up off of the pavement and as such, would not leave a skid mark.
The Model T ford is a 104 year old design. We love them but must put these facts into the equation. Kens demise was a tragedy, for sure, but the fault of no one.
Corky Coker sells us tires from Viet Nam that crack in six months... Should we sue him? Should we park our cars and treat them as the museum pieces they are?
I drive my car regularly and respect its inherent weaknesses.
Ralph Ricks has shown us that with major modifications, front brakes, steering gear, Hydraulic stabilizer etc. The Ford design can be made safe to a point. But we criticize him.
We all risk our safety in a Model T. If we insist on originality then we must accept the risk.
Just MHO.
John, Well said!!
To those who might have had "feathers ruffled" by my first post on this thread, I would like to point out that I stated although I had considered Ebaying the rear spring perches/shocks, I said they would probably end up going to the scrap man and after the later posts that were made relative to my post, I have decided that the scrap man is the best place for them, along with a pickup load of other stuff. Note these shocks that I have are REAR spring perches that incorporate a small coil spring; not front spring perches as failed on Ken's car. As I see it, the potential for disaster is much greater if a front perch fails than a rear perch. If a rear perch fails, one is sure to have damage to a wheel, fender, and possibly, a rear quarter panel, but if a front breaks, loss of steering and all kind of bad things can happen.
As for Hassler shocks being unsafe, I haven't ever heard or read in 50 years of fooling with T's where a set of Hassler shocks caused or contributed to a disastrous accident. I have used them before on a 16 touring and I am using them now on a 26 fordor, and I don't plan to remove them. I chose to install them and if the day comes that they cause a serious problem, that is the chance that i am willing to take.
I'm still thinking if the tire had not have lost air the following events would not have happened.
It was noted that the tire which left the rim still had the tube with air in it when found which leaves one to think the lousy valve stems which are incapable of holding 60 psi safely are at fault. Does anyone know if the tube was still fitted with the rubber stem as supplied with new tubes these days.
Besides one blowout from a nail and one from a paper thin tube ( both on the back wheels) I had 3 of the valve stems blow out requiring a clamps around them to stop them leaking last year.
Terry Woods:
Don't tell Will, Trentun, New Jersey that his Hasslers are safe. I am trying to buy his terrable dangerous, Hazardous Hasslers. I need a pair of arms for the rear to complete a set for both axles for my 16. I just installed them on the front axle, but would really like to complete a set for the rear axle also.
Dave, If I had a set of beehive rears, you could just have them. All I have now is an extra pair of those particularly dangerous beehive fronts.
Unfortunately the events surrounding Kens accident are not new to me.Nineteen years gao I sold my 1911 Roadster to a guy that was relatively new to T's. Shortly after him purchasing the car on one of his early drives he had a blowout on the front right tire. His immediate reponse was to steer left.(This is right hand drive in Australia travelling on the left side of the road)After steering left the right hand wheel rim bit into the road resulting in a full right hand lock and both wheels and front end folding under the car. The end result was the car did an end for end rollover and threw the driver clear. He was lucky to get away with moinor injuries. Similar to Kens accident, as stated in one of Ricks postings after the the tire left the rim and the steering made its way to full lock a natural instinct is to try and return it to the other way. Remembering all this happens in seconds you may well be able to get the steering to reverse back the other way but it will be sure to continue to full lock the other way subjecting the vehicle to all sorts of un natural stresses. Sorry for the long winded description but I see the route cause of the accident as being the tyre/tube failure rather than accessory steering or suspension devices. Check your rims properly before fitting tyres, and check your tyres pressures each time before you tour. At least this might help to stop tyres and tubes from failing in the first instance.
To add to Warwicks comments if the tire lost air quickly and was then running flat on the rim it would need some pretty strong forces to pull it off the rim. Being flat and having excellent grip with the road its no doubt going to tug on the wheel and possibly pull the steering onto full lock to get it to depart from the rim.
As a lot of members have posted here before getting new tires on can be a test of strength to mount them so they are not going to just pop off easily.
Unfortunately, I have been "detained" and away from the forum for much of the past week. I first found this thread on MTFCI and posted the following.
Yes, thank you for posting the link. It looked to be a well investigated and thoroughly thought out report.
One thing that has concerned me for many years, is the use of accessory suspension on T Fords. Ford used some of the best materials available at that time. Accessory manufacturers often did not. Spring type shock eliminators such as Hassler or H&D type have a history of use that makes us trust them. They also do not significantly weaken the front end or its stability. Even they can lead to squirrelly steering when they start wearing loose.
I am not technically an engineer, although I have a lot of engineering background and training. As such, I have these little engineer's flags inside my head that start waving around when I see something that looks like it may not be a good thing. That type of shock absorber (with the small springs held high and the car's spring hanging below them) have always bothered me.
The problem with them is that nothing, not even steel, is truly ridged. It has a small amount of flex in even a short piece. The original Ford suspension had a fairly short, stocky, perch with the end of the spring hanging about an inch below it. Not much room for any steel flexing.
These type shocks hang the spring up high. The replacement perch is about four times the height, but the flex grows incrementally. Depending on a dozen other variables, the flex could increase by eight to a dozen times. The slop that will develop in the hangers and all other parts that move even a little is also much higher. That all adds up to a lot of potential instability. Even if wear had not reached the point of being noticed, even by the best of T owners, the total flex would be potentially worse than even a loose early front end.
I have restored eight model Ts over the years. I didn't put shock absorbers on any of them. If I were to use a set. I would stick with Hasslers or H&D type. Never something like these were. I shudder every time I see a set.
End of other post.
Dave H,
Sorry to derail your efforts. But as I alluded to, Hasslers have a very good reputation based on thousands still in use and few if any potentially serious problems in millions of miles.
I have just read this thread from the beginning, for the first time since my quiet return. A couple points that need clarification.
1, The biggest problem with this type of shock eliminator, is that it is seriously unstable in both caster AND sideways directions! Think about a Ts steering. It operates sideways. Stock perches, early OR late, limit sideways motion to about an inch.
I have driven model T speedsters at racing speeds on dirt tracks with stock steering. You CAN FEEL the effect of the front axle shifting back and forth sideways. But limited to one inch, I always felt very comfortable with it.
Those shocks could allow nearly two inches of sideways shift. That is the axle, NOT the tie rod or drag link. Under these conditions, a steering damper could actually cause the tie rod to follow the axle more slowly. This could likely result in the damper making a lock-over MORE likely to occur. I do not recall Ken's car having one, just food for thought.
Even without a damper, those shocks increase the likelihood of an extreme or any unusual stress resulting in a lock-over.
2, One of Ralph's favorite issues. A properly (or even reasonably) added secondary brace (wishbone) probably would have prevented the rollover. Even with those (I would have never used shocks like those for more than a very few miles before removing them) shocks on the front end, it probably would not have gone to negative caster and almost definitely would not have broken off the axle to drop "the pole" to vault the car over.
Long enough for now.
Drive carefully, and enjoy
Wayne Sheldon:
I am not sure what you mean by derailing my efforts. I have Hasslers on all my cars except my 16 and I am putting them on the 16 also. I just finished putting them on the front axle today.
Peter, I saw a guy in front of me on a tour have the tire pop off of the rim from going flat. It happened after he was pulling to the shoulder. It never fought at all.
Doug, Yep I've seen that happen myself, was on a tour once when a T had his front tire leave the rim 3 times without any problem his problem was the bead had been ground away to get to thick metal because it was so badly rusted so there was virtually nothing left of the bead for the tire to grip.???
. A well used tire can be easily put on with your bare hands without any tools ( see Royce's demo he has often put forward) trouble with all these things there is so many different possibilities road condition, speed, wear in all parts.
On some of the flats I've had over 40 years most often nothing happens except there is a bang and when you pull up the tire is there on the rim. Other times it has come partly off or either gets caught around the diff housing or front axle or has left the rim to roll to the side of the road.
The amazing thing about this thread is some of the crazy comments like suing the seller of the part you bought at a swap meet because it failed.
I wonder if the accident had been caused by the back axle breaking ( fairly common) or the front wood wheel spokes collapsed would we be saying all our cars should be not driven ever again.
Don't forget you could just as easily do a "pole vault" by putting your stub axles on the wrong side.
Doing a restoration or buying a vehicle one assumes it is done correctly with parts that are serviceable even buying a new car one expects its OK. My modern car (5 years old) has had a recall due to lower front suspension ball joint failure and how often have you seen a modern car have a front end failure and we want to condemn accessories on the T's.
We hobbyist do take grave chances enjoying our chosen hobby. Our choices are an educated risk given the near 100 year old cars we choose to operate. There is so much risk given with metal fatigue and the inherent low safety in the cars we drive not to mention the risk we take when we pull our cars onto these modern roads with the high speed traffic.
My considerations to not install an after market part has a few incorporatations, The safety of my famley and any riders I may have, I have on a few to many occasions driven my T faster than what it was built for so this also comes into play. Then there's the I dont know factor. Will that part cause my car to be unsafe?
I spent a bunch of money buying unusable mounts and springs before getting a complete set of usable Hasslers. If someone wants to buy them then they will send me notarized statement saying that I am released from any and all responsibly from the sale and the understanding that anything I send you is fully unsafe and unusable and to be only to be used as garage art. Just a thought keep in mind that I will not sell them cheap, I know what I have invested and will need recoup at least some of my investment. They have sat in a box for a couple of years now and if needed they can sit in that same box for years to come.
In the case of Mr Meek the whole thing started with a blow out of a front tire. Just last month I had a blow out where the tire came off the rim and I'm almost sure the air was right as I check it a couple of times a week, Was it at 60 PSI the day I had my flat I don't know as I did not check it that day but the day before it was at 60. What I do know is how it felt when it happened. Now I have to imagine what would have happened if I had the after market shocks installed and one of my grandchildren were in the car. To me the risk is just to great. You can bet that before that car leaves the garage from now on the air will be checked every time.
I wont stop enjoying driving my car but if there is a slightest chance that safety can be improved by not installing a part then so be it. If anyone is interested, When I get back up to my summer place next week I will take pic's and send them to any interested party.
Unsafe at any speed. Sorry, it's true. What whacks some one at 35mph in a T will whack somebody else at 20mph. The stuff is going to break. It's past it's life expectancy by decades. The biggest problem here is that we, today, have something ingrained in our life experiences that drivers back then didn't have mainly the experience of driving modern vehicles. Walking away from 20, 30mph or much faster accidents was made us "indestructable". Like teenagers that do crazy things because they can't get hurt or killed. those that drive their T's like modern cars end up, unfortunately, like the subjects of this post. It's been posted here repeatedly: "I lost a tire, (or a rim), good thing I was going slow". Speed was the determining factor in this tragedy. Everything that happened relates to this. A standard perch may have broken the same way the shock perch did. Wheels locking right or left? That happens a lot too. Maybe more so today because of wear and not-up-to-specs replacement parts. These cars cannot be driven at the speeds their being driven at. That's the bottom line to me. "They were made for it"? Yeah. 80 years ago. I don't mean to sound like a wise guy but I faced up to this about 6 months ago after a few incidents while street driving. Most people I took for rides just plain weren't comfortable. Out of 3 T's my wife took a ride. Once. She never asked again and she told me I'd looked nervous over the whole ride. Guys, it's a wagon with a motor in it you need to keep the speed down and that won't work on today's roads.
A different scenario; The wishbone on this particular setup is attached above the axle. The perch broke at the axle. I would think that the axle would naturally be forced back under the car by the forward motion, and the wishbone (and the car) would be riding on top of the axle. Now the car is pulling to the right because the axle is angled to the right. The natural reaction would be to steer left to keep the car straight on the road. Steering left would put even more force against the unsecured right side of the axle pushing it as far back under the car as it could go. At this point, the car essentially has a wagon type steering where the whole axle pivots to steer and it is trying to steer right while the driver has tried to steer left. The wheels are quickly forced to full left lock by the extreme side forces as they are basically plowing forward while turned sideways full left lock and the right side of the axle is as far back as it will go. The car will now easily go end over end if traveling at any speed.
When the car came to rest, the axle was forward and out from under the car and the wishbone was probably resting on the ground, but this was after going end over end with centrifugal forces pulling everything in outward directions.
The report suggests that the wishbone hit the ground and polevaulted the car. I can see this maybe happening on a car with the wishbone under the axle, but I think that with the wishbone above the axle the axle would slide back under it and it would not hit the ground, Also with the other side of the wishbone still attached I think it would be difficult for the free end of the wishbone to even touch the ground.
If the car did indeed "polevault" on the wishbone, there should be evidence of it being lifted from the center such as a bent or damaged pan. If you can pull a wishbone out of it's socket merely by tying your car to a trailer, the polevaulting action should have completely separated the wishbone from the car and severely damaged the pan socket!
Good analysis, Jeff. However, I doubt driver efforts played a part in it. From flat to broken perch appears to have been less than one second: probably less time than it took the steering to go hardover.
----------
I had a front blowout at 65 on the 605. Was I thankful I wasn't going faster? Nah. I was thankful I had the foresight to install a double wishbone, steering damper and 10:1 '37 Ford steering gear, however.
It was pretty much a non-event, except I never found the tire and tube. The pinched flap was there on the axle to tell me what I had done wrong a couple of years earlier to cause this flat.
If everything isn't perfect, you better have a backup. A flat tire should not cause an accident.
Mark Rand, David Cockey and Brent Terry all had rollover accidents in brass Tourings, without even a flat tire to blame.
Way back in '97 I bolted a video camera under the runningboard and went driving. Turned out to be not very interesting with a double wishbone. I challenge anyone with an early wishbone to do the same, paying particular attention to wishbone flex.
Ralph, no doubt it happened very quickly, however the diagram shows that the car drifted right 25 to 30 feet before the wheels apparently went full left lock. He may have actually tried to steer left compounding the problem.
What Charlie said is true too. When these cars were made, many towns had a 15mph speed limit and on the unpaved roads outside town you probably couldn't comfortably go over 20 or 25mph. Remember too that compared to a horse, 20mph was a thrilling, even death defying speed. Kind of like driving 100mph today.
You have to be really insane to drive 65 in that thing Ralph.
It's certainly no more insane than a motorcycle, Royce, and from experiences related on this Forum, not as insane as driving 20 mph in a brass Touring with only stock early wishbone: Rand, Cockey and Terry.
Jeff, you've been involved in a lot of local T club inspections. How many cars out of the total have you seen with perches worn as badly as Meek's?
rdr
R.D., The only time that I used a "stock early wishbone" without extra bracing was on my 16 and I was too green to t's at the time and never gave it any thought. Things would be different, now.
Every Model T I have ever bought came with perches worn out clear through the bushings or nearly so. I don't go touring in a T with worn out suspension, it is just not a good idea. That shock is damaged beyond its useful life, it needs to be scrapped.
Back in 2006 I loaned my dad my 1913 touring, the one Constantine is now driving halfway across the earth. We went on the All Ohio Tour that year. I had just rebuilt the entire front end, rear end, and replaced the front crossmember, and replaced every rivet in the frame.
Dad blew out the left front tire with Mom in the passenger seat going 30 MPH down a steep hill side near Harrison, Ohio. Sounded like a 10 guage shotgun. I was ahead about 25 yards in my '15. The tire passed me because it blew right off the rim. The car was not out of control, didn't flip and no one was even excited. We installed a spare tire and continued the rest of the tour, a total over 500 miles in 5 days.
And there you have the main problem facing every T driver/owner today. Garbage tires made to mininum standards outside the USA with no regulations to meet or pass. Every time I see Coker give that good 'ol boy smile in his commercial and he says "You can bet on it" I want to puke.
Did anyone answer Jeffs question? On this vehicle with the wishbone end mounted above the axle, how did the end of the wishbone cause the car "pole vault"?
If the end of the wishbone was above the axle how could it dig into the ground?
Arnie,
The answer is no, the wishbone did not fail nor did it have any defect that contributed in any way to Ken's untimely death.
Arnie
When the perch of the accessory shock failed by shearing off the axle top, the shock, leaf spring, and wishbone assembly dropped to the pavement and struck hard enough at sharp angle to propel the T airborne into that tragic cartwheel.
Did the car have metal valve stems or rubber ones? (From the picture above it looks like it had brass dust covers, but it could have had rubber stems underneath).
Also, the report says that the "tire/rim assembly separated from the wooden wheel presumably due to a loss of air." Above it is mentioned that the tube with air still in it was still in the tire that came off. Obviously the rim didn't separate from the wheel which makes the report more questionable, but what is known about the tube - Was the valve stem intact? How much air was really in the tube? Is the theory that there was enough loss of air to make the tire come off the rim just driving down the road but with no blowout or complete loss of air?
Ken was a nice man and I'm really sorry that this happened. It is good that the information is getting out so that others may be helped, but I do wish this report was disseminated much sooner.
I'm not saying its not good to investigate these things. On the contrary. However, in my opinion, it is folly to expect modern safety from an antique car. Some things In life are dangerous. Some more than others. Driving 100 year old cars is no exception. Accept the risk or don't do it. If you get hurt....stuff happens. No lawyers needed.
Ok guys - Mine are 24 and 25 models. What do I need to do before each drive to give a good serious once over to the front end that can help keep a tragedy from this happening? worn parts yes, but what do I need to really give a good critical eye to? Maybe for us new guys - you older drivers and mechanics can give us a good step by step once over inspection list to use - maybe the whole car - like the pre inspection you use on an airplane before each flight? - Im being very serious now, so please dont pick on me.
I thin the MTFCA has a check list that's pretty extensive. Others will chime in.
I agree with Hal - we dont need someone on here spending time talking about lawsuits and attorneys when we are in a hobby that accepts risk and we use parts that are 100 years old. Why would something like that even come up?
Thanks Ed for the checklist - now thats constructive!
Dan:
The last picture posted appears to have the front axle in front of the vehicle on the right side. However, when the accident first happened, with the vehicle still upright, was the wishbone able to get under the front axle? In other words Dan, perhaps the wishbone end did not go under the axle at first. If this was the case, are you thinking the angle was steep enough for the end of the wishbone to dig into the pavement while still on the top side of the axle? I am not trying to be difficult here, but would like to learn from the tragic accident Ken had.
Or another thought, was the front wheel angle enough to cause the vehicle to cartwheel. The reason I bring all this up is I am under the impression that the report attributes the "pole vault" to the wishbone end digging into the pavement. If that is the case one needs to think of possible ways to prevent the wishbone end from digging into the pavement, in order to prevent another tragic accident. If it was something else we need to concentrate on that something else to reduce our chance of a similar incident.
Perhaps, if the vehicle did not overturn, the accident results would have been different. Of course no one knows for sure. That is why my concern to the cause of the vehicle "pole vault".
Too many accidents happen by the caster going negative, causing a steering hardover.
Here is my preliminary plan for a dynamic check of caster, once I have the engine back in the ol' brass picup. Basically, I plan to hang a long pipe wrench over the axle for an indicator, and then push the car against chocks to measure change in caster.
I can check it all on just my car, by separately loosening the attachments of the early wishbone, then the late wishbone.
This will be for your benefit, not mine, as my double wishbone prevents any caster change.
I believe this is from Jem Bowkett's study of early wishbone accidents.
Fahnestock
Suggestions?
That spring perch can be easily bent by hitting a large pothole, a rock, or a curb when parking. If over the years, it has been bent many times and then straightened to correct caster, it will eventually break off from metal fatigue. It could happen with any type spring perch. I think the under axle reinforcements, even though not correct as original, are a very important improvement and for a car which is regularly used in tours a good safety feature.
Norm
Ricks:
The caster (distance between where wheel touches the ground from where imaginary steering axis hits the ground)also changes when one turns the wheel. Please consider a bicycle which normally has some positive caster. If one turns the front wheel at right angles to the rear wheel (on some bicycles this is not possible) one would have 0 caster.
Yes, your experiment would show the change in caster when things were loose, but hopefully everyone checks for loose/worn suspension components on their car from time to time.
I think you mean wishbone, or radius rod, Norm. The Ford perch is forged steel.
OK after lots of thinking, planning and spending a boatload of money, I think I have transformed my coupe into a safer model T! Here she is---------
OK OK I know what your thinking, but hear me out> How can it not be safer, it has NO wishbone, modern steering, disc brakes and no clincher tires. The only thing that "bakes my beans" is the fact the small block has to run a water pump-----geessshhhh! She will do 130 down the freeway all day long!!!!
Just being a smarta$$ but, to me, if you want to modify your T to cruise along with traffic, then do it. But if you drive your T like I do, then please make sure they are up to snuff. Just be careful when doing modifications to any suspension components, a little knowledge can be dangerous!
The wishbone doubler on my '16 touring looks just like the 59 cent one listed in the advert that Ricks posted. It was on the car when my father purchased it around 1962.
When I replaced the mag on my 26 and adjusted the gap, I found the flywheel was contacting the magneto when I put the pan on. The forward part of the pan where the radius rod attaches had been pushed back, presumably by a blow to the front axle or wheels. I carefully coaxed it back with a 2 lb hammer (and checked that the 4th main still was in alignment), but wonder what that would do to caster. Come to think of it, the car tended to oversteer going around corners, sometimes feeling like it was going to go up on 2 wheels. I believe that is another weak spot with a 4 dip pan.
Noel
A friend swapped the front axles and wishbones from his '15 touring and his '23 fordor to sell the fordor.
With the '15 front end under the fordor it would go over center on every turn. The car was not really driveable.
THEY HAD REMOVED THE RADIUS rod while doing the changeover and we could never get the nuts on the front of the radius rods tight enough so they wouldn't twist in the axle.
I was able to see exactly what happens when the wheels are turned and the front axle goes into negative caster.
If the radius rods (wishbone) was keyed into the perches that would/could not happen.
The new owner of the fordor had me help him change the front end back to the later type with the wishbone under the axle.
.
We had a guy in our local club with a '14 touring who lost it on a hard right turn while going up a winding mountain road. He and his wife almost went over a cliff.
He had to back up to get back into the road again and he said the car was just fine ever since.
I tried to explain what had happened but he could not agree that could cause the problem. It was a regular track car with a wide track front end.
Well he died soon after and his wife sold the car.
I went to the new owner's house just by chance a year or so later on another matter and in talking found out he has a model T. When I looked at it and saw the wide track he said he bought it from a widow.....and so on. Same car.
I warned him about the front end. I told him to get a big bar and tighten those nuts. He didn't listen.
A couple of weeks later while on a tour, in a town, driving slow, he made a right turn and the car suddenly pulled so hard to the right that he hit a car and smashed the h$%^ out of both cars, especially the T.
Remember a couple of years ago when the guy was killed going around or entering a traffic circle in a brass car? I'll bet it was the same problem. He rolled while going very slow.
Now there are those who will tell us that they have been driving brass Fords for umteen years and have never had that happen.
Well I have have been crossing the street for over 70 years without looking either right or left too and I have never been hit by a car!
Has anyone ever heard of that problem happening on a car with the wishbone under the axle?
It is a real problem that can easily be fixed but can get you killed if you don't change or modify it.
Thanks, Aaron. "..we could never get the nuts on the front of the radius rods tight enough so they wouldn't twist in the axle."
I've heard of that before. Now take another look at Ken Meek's perch and you see how badly worn the hole for mounting the radius rod is. There is no way it could have ever been tight.
I don't recall anyone being killed entering a traffic circle, but David Cockey and his wife were hospitalized after the steering on his brass T did a hardover. It doesn't have to go over center into reversal to cause an accident, either.
Oh, it was reported here there was a '14 last year in La Jolla that had a steering hardover and crashed. Are you keeping count, Hap?
I used to say front brakes are the best improvement you can make on a T. For a pre-1920 T, it's a reinforced wishbone. Of course, you have to reinforce the wishbone to install front brakes.
rdr