A topic that is sometimes discussed among owners of 1913 T's, and was also touched on briefly in Bruce McCalley's book, is the point at which the Cast Iron intake manifold was introduced. Reports exist of original cars from late 1913 that have Iron intakes and we also know of early 1914 model years that have Aluminum units.
My car is SN 299,xxx (June 26 according to ford records) and is an original car that has only had a cosmetic paint job on the body. The entire running gear has never been restored other than mechanical maintenance. When I purchased the car, I though the intake had lost it's aluminum intake along the way and been replaced with an iron unit - Until I noticed certain characteristics on this iron intake that were different from other iron intakes I had observed.
I started researching but found very little other than reports from folks who had seen them on cars made in late 1913. I looked in Gal Rodda's column; "All The Same, Huh!!" published in "The Model T Times" and found his report on manifolds in the July/August, 1990 issue. While showing variants of the aluminum and iron intakes, the version on my 1913 Touring car is not represented.
While I realize that we are speculating based on evidence, the convincing feature which links this iron example to 1913 are the placement of what Gail Rodda called the "Core Support Pins". These are the three tooling marks embossed into the manifolds during the casting process. If you compare the photo's here of the iron intake on my 13 to that of the photo of the aluminum intake, you will see that there are three core support pins and they are positioned in the same approximate locations on each example. (ignore the vacuum nipple on the aluminum intake.. that is an owner installed item). Also note on the iron intake of 1913, that there is no "FORD" name embossed in the intake.
The intake on my original 1915 Touring, SN 679,xxx (Jan 29 production) only has two core support pins on each side of center and the area where the bottom, or center pin location would be has the letter "G" embossed instead. Also, by this time, "FORD" is embossed in the intake centered between the two upper Core Support Pins.
While no one knows for sure how all this actually played out at the factory, I think it is reasonable to believe, based on some of what we have learned, that it is possible that iron intakes were indeed on the scene as early as June of 1913.
Here is the early 1915 Intake on my Jan, 15 car. It would be good to see pictures from those who have aluminum intakes on 14 model year cars.
I did have a cast iron intake a few years ago. Larger inside diameter than the "later" standard. Worked just as good as the aluminum intake it replaced.
A friend now has that intake on his T, will see if pictures can be accomplished this week.,, of both the aluminum intake I presently have with raised factory part number and his iron intake.
Bob - That would be great. I don't know how the flow characteristics of the early iron intakes compare to that of the aluminum examples. I only have the visible outside features to observe. I look forward to your findings!
The only non-scientific measurement I did at the time was to insert a finger in the ports and determined at that time had more room than later intakes. Roughly the same as the aluminum unit on my car now.
Also I believe Bruce McCalley has a discussion and pictures in his "From Here to Obscurity" book.
Thank you for this thread! As I am nearing completion on my "mostly" '13 and putting together the pieces for an early '15, this really helps.
Again, thank you.
Drive carefully, and enjoy, W2
James, the top picture to me looks like the later small manifold, not the puffier 1914 style. My gut reaction is that it has been replaced. It doesn't seem likely to me that Ford would go: Big aluminum - small cast-iron - big cast-iron - then small cast-iron again.
No proof, but a logical conclusion in my opinion.
Here is the other side of the one shown above;
Tom - I won't deny it is very possible...I'm just trying to piece this together just like you are... so in the spirit of that, explain the exact same placement of the core support pins on my cast iron unit as seen on the aluminum version? I've seen this on no other manifolds.
It'd be good to see another 13 whose owner believes to have an original cast iron intake.
Hey Mark.. Thanks for the extra pics.
Working on re-sizing my pictures, here's a picture from Greg Sarky on this Forum of a '12 showing the non-doglegged aluminum intake manifold.
Someone drilled to add the primer valve (?) in the center of the casting
Not a great angle shot, shows he three casting bumps, also no script
Thanks Bob... I had often wondered what the actual purpose was for the vacuum valves that people added to the T. I've seen something similar on farm tractors and they used them to run milkers.
That or had a priming cup for starting, vacuum tank fuel pump, windshield wiper, wolf whistle, top oilier etc.
I have one made of cast iron. Picked it up 30 years ago. Looks just like an early 09-10, figured it was after market.
Jerome... Is it possible for you to post a photo?
Is your find a cast iron dog leg style ?
I've been told Metz manifolds are casr-ron dog-leg style and will fit a T.
Looking thru other recent Forum posts, located a past e-Bay auction.
Looking at the pictures, you will see engine with a rusted intake manifold that looks very much like the aluminum intake that it replaced..
Metz intake manifolds are dog legged. There is a Metz Runabout in Freehold, N.J. at the Metz Bicycle Museum...... operated none other by a gentleman by the name of Metz !
Google Metz Bicycle Museum
I had a friend with a July car. It had the big cast iron manifold.
Bob - Although I realize that anything can be replaced, I need to see some proof that identifies the cast iron intake I posted in the very first picture in this thread. It'd be nice to see a picture of it on a "known" original car of different vintage, before I discount it. I realize it isn't the same puffy shape as the aluminum ones, but the casting marks are identical to those of the 13 aluminum manifold and I have not seen this on any other iron intake. The rusty intake on that 14 roadster is hard to identify, but it looks to me like it does not have the lower casting mark on the plenum.
The primary reason I am not so quick to say "yep, its a replacement"... is because nothing else significant on my car has been replaced. It even still has the 2-screw carb. The previous owners of this car never even got around to putting an auxilary oil line or trans screen in it, much less swap parts - so much as I can tell anyway.
I don't think everything or anything can always be "proven" but James your iron intake sure looks exactly like the typical 1913 aluminum intake to me.
Yes you will see casting marks on iron and aluminum intakes...
You will not see the Ford logo.
Iron will rust, not aluminum.
Check out : http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/TURTLE-BACK-/281121542023?_trksid=p3984.m1438.l26 49&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&forcev4exp=true
look at the engine picture... rusty large diameter iron intake.
Sorry for the link, 'puter ignant on picture resizing.
Have you checked out Bruce McCalley's book , your will find documented proof of the intake "history" and useage. Find a true bonified untouched '13 ?? ... only as true as the current owner ??
Royce - Thank you... That is the point I was trying to make.
James, it looks sort of like a typical 1913 manifold, except that it looks too little to me. The 1913 manifolds I've seen and the early cast iron manifolds are puffier. They measure about 1.34" on the od of the port runners. Yours looks like the one on top, which is about 1.2" od on the port runner, which I think is later (again, no proof, but it makes sense to me.)
I have set all three side by side and painted them black so they are easier to compare. The top one is the small cast iron, the center is the big cast iron and the bottom is the aluminum.
Tom - can you measure the height of your manifolds and post the dimensions? If you look at the work I did on your photo, I drew a line from top to bottom of the aluminum manifold and copy and pasted the same exact line to the others. It appears there is a big difference in heights. The aluminum unit seems much taller. However, I realize that this can be the declining angle from the aperture of the camera making an illusion, but I wouldn't expect that much of a difference.
I'm sure it is a camera illusion. I will try to remember to measure them tomorrow.
Just to add my two cents worth (perhaps overvalued) and to further muddy the waters, I will include a couple of photos of yet another style of early cast iron intake manifold. I have thought that this was the first generation of iron intake, but I do not know that. I also do not know when it was first introduced nor when discontinued. I surmised that it was the first cast iron intake as it has the same markings as the aluminum manifold, suggesting (to me anyway) that it was make using the same mold as the aluminum manifold.
I don't know; make of it what you will. It will be mounted on my Feb. engined and March bodied 1914.
Have fun and keep the shiny side up. Bill
I tried to highlight the markings for easier reading.
I think it was last year that someone did a flow test on various T manifolds and wrote an article about it in MTFCI's The Model T Ford Times. I posted some of the results for some manifolds on a post here on the forum. Maybe someone good at searching can find it. I'll post a picture of my 'big' iron manifold when I can.
Hello all ,
may I sneak in with a side question . I have recently got a 1913 touring and am novice to all this .
The intake manifold of my car has a screw in the middle , just like in the one on top of Tom's picture .
Does anyone know what that was for ?
William - Thanks for posting a photo of your manifold. It sure does appear to be the same as the larger unit in Toms photo and has similar part number markings, although I can't read the numbers on Toms. I will say that it does not appear to be made of the same mold as the aluminum intake of 1913 because it is missing the core support pin castings.
The one thing that all of us may be missing here is that the early manifolds that do not have "Ford" markings were probably made by different manufacturers and that would explain the differences, more so then establishing an evolution...
Ludo - They had a number o uses... vacuum port, priming, etc.
My top manifold doesn't have a screw. What looks like a screw is actually a casting core support, just as in James's first picture. Your screw it is likely there to plug a hole.
William, I believe my center manifold is exactly like yours (except the primer cup). I will look closer in the morning.
Morning???, where the heck are you, Tom??
Curious...... RE: longer neck on manifold ?
Would you be making reference to the earlier Torpedo body style that was equipped with the longer neck intake ?
Bob .. not necessarily . I was just making an observation of Toms picture.
Bob, still morning in the Pacific time zone.
My big cast iron manifold (we call them puffa-puffa manifolds) is the same as William's.
The manifolds are all the same basic length.
Tom, Metz fits to a T.
Metz iron intake with stock ford
Metz in place on car....
A Metz dog leg cast iron inlet manifold on my 13 Touring.
David, I like the look of that Metz intake.
It appears to be exactly the same as the earlier alumin T dog leg manifolds.
It pushes the carbi about 1/2" further away from the heat of the engine.
Original '13 Runabout engine, with "large" aluminum style manifold, newer NH carb & water pump.
All: Mislabeled picture : Iron intake: same inside diameters as prior aluminum unit.
My '26 with the '11-'13 factory numbered aluminum intake, straight-thru NH carb.
Bob - Thanks for posting the pictures. May I ask what the assembly date of your engine is? Mine is June 26.
Ok, so lets focus on progression / evolution if you will. Your (Bob) "aluminum style" iron intake has the same core support pin castings as the aluminum 11-13 intake.... which is also the same core support pin castings as my "slimmer" iron intake on my mostly original 13 touring. So this begs the questions:
1 Is the slimmer iron design (meaning same casting marks, just thinner) the next evolution from the fatter, "aluminum style" iron design?
2 Is the slimmer design just as early or maybe a month or two later than the puffier iron design?
Folks - Here is a thread that took place two years ago. The conversation was very similar, however, it leads me to believe that some of the variation in size could be more an artifact of manufacturing at that moment, rather than a "Progression" of sorts. Then again, I could be wrong!
My engine number actually is October 1926, which in Ford records is a '27 model. ...... still has the '26 style runabout body features.
Bob - I was talking about the original 13 runabout engine you posted the picture of.
I believe from what I have seen that the aluminum dog legged manifold of '09 evolved into the "straight" aluminum manifold of '11-13... with the same internal dimensions. The ones with the factory part number were the first cast then the number was dropped for the rest of the production.
The cast iron style, with the factory part number were replaced with the plain unmarked manifolds using the same dimensions of the earlier aluminum units..... and the factory part number was dropped for the rest of the production ..... to be replaced by the now standard intake with the smaller diameter dimensions , at first with the cast nubs, and later with the Ford Script till the Vaporizer became standard in late '26 till the end of Model T production.
That's my understanding.
I believe is a July '13 casting number.
One has to understand that the changeover of the improved parts dis not happen on a certain date.
Factory letters may document the change , but the factories were using up the stock they had before implementing the new part..... thus the inconsistency of changes of parts on surviving cars according to their engine casting dates.
Sure, I realize that... and the 13 model year is a superb example of that policy!
Sort of depends on how pure the gang wants to be...but always fun to watch the Fords go by...
I don't think that anyone could ever prove the change-over date. There are some that say it can only be from the date shown on the Record of Changes card and no earlier, add a little bit to get them actually made...there are those that believe new changes were cut in sometimes as pencil mark-ups and the real pen-ink drawing stuff came later with the associated dates,
Although not relavant to the '13, I came across something this week that says when Ernest Kanzler moved over to Ford from tractor unit in 1920, his first management task determined there was $88 million worth of inventoried parts in EXCESS of actual production need and parts flow. OK, 1920 turned out to be a bad year for all automotive and no real detail on how Kanzler arrived at this but still $88 million! Sort of makes you wonder where the practice of 'never run out' all got started!
Going back to the Record of Change Cards...send for the change record for 512B/3062. I have found that sometimes Record of Change cards can be quite good in detail...other times you waste your money but you never know until you try.
It may just tell you when engineering acknowledged the changeover, and as mentioned still a jump ball for other reasons....but the 'can't be before the drawing change' boys won't argue with you and that's half the battle in the court of public opinion when you are trying to be 'correct'!
I also think we are seeing too many different manifolds, 'think' is my problem...get the change card for the B and the previous (Ford never used A) and then with luck you'll actually see the evolution. I'd also have to do some checking...but something in my mind tells me that using patterns and molds built for aluminum for something this size, and then cast with iron the size difference because of different material skrinkage rates would never be seen, meaning, close enough for grenades,no one would really care where the lower flange wound up?!
Would a 1912 use what would be called the 1913 version of the aluminum intake? (like the one shown at the very top) If so about when would it have been introduced?
Mark: Either version of the non-dogleg aluminum intake would be correct... see my photo above for the first run of raised factory numbered intake.