Just for everyone information. I have no connection or knowledge of this car
FYI: Looking in Hemmings I see the same T is listed for sale at $29,800.00
Yep, saw that too, this was actually covered in a previous post!
This always happens when I don't happen to have an extra 30 grand on hand.
lets see nope no 30 grand in my pocket, hummm lotto #'s 1,3,7,13,20,30
1 for 1 of a kind. 3 for supposed mileage. 7 for the number of days listed. 13 for the year. 20 for the number of years stored. and 30 for the number of thousand dollar bills you need. that does it I will play these numbers werkz fer me.
I was all prepared to offer a high shut out bid, but then I saw the water pump.
Yeah, thats a deal killer. I once passed on an original 1909 Touring for the same reason. It is a lot of work removing a water pump.
It's even tougher when it is cast into the engine block!
I like the sellers feedback rating, 0.0% Bid with confidence.
I just saw the ser# listed as 183149 which by my logic would make that a 1912? am I missing something?
December 1912 = 1913 Model Year
According to Bruce the model year started in September 1912.
I don't think I could deal with a car that needs rags on top of jack stands
Please identify where Bruce identifies a serial 144XXX T as as a 1913 model year?
Definitely the 1913 model year. Here in Adelaide #178296 survives and was found complete in 1958. When found it had all brass headlights and half the windscreen was brass painted black.
In the encyclopedia Bruce says October 1, 1912 as the start of model year 1913:
That's serial #157,425.
Sure woulda been nice if they would've just had the model years start and end in a regular calendar year! Would end the confusion.
In his book "Model T Ford the car that changed the world" on page 141 he says Sept 12 to Aug 13 Approx.
The production dates are located here.
Now since he says approximately?
I've tried making sense of the dating confusion with this page:
Is the accessory water pump correct for the period?
Would it have been available in 1913?
I am hoping that Royce will give us a rundown on
what is and is not correct on the car.
There was another thread on this car and Steve
mentioned the front axle appears to have the "droop". I am not sure what he meant?
Some "Improved" T models seem to have a front axle that has a definite 'droop" in the center - perhaps to re-define the camber.
This car may or may not be as it looks but any buyer/bidder should be aware that the seller has several negative feedback comments. Any potential buyer should review them and be an informed bidder.
A couple comments that seem to repeat are, "Do not trust picture that they had taken, bad car dealer." and "they sold the vehicle before I had a chance to send any money"
I would love to have that car and would take it off the rags and drive it. However, since Royce will chime in I will try a few comments. Correct me Royce if I miss.
1. TranshueWilliams front axle. 1913 ? Years used I do not know but may explain the "droop" y'all are talking about. Mine is a DB on my July 1913 car.
2. Car has a one piece drive shaft. Should be a two piece that early I believe.
3. Not the deep "tea cup" oil drain you would expect on the 1913 engine pan. Seems to be later pan.
4. Splash aprons should be punched in line with rear carbide generator holes. Replacement aprons as no gas line hole shows on apron.
5. Later coil box.
6. This engine should be a pipe plug style and the plug would be easily seen from the angle the photo is taken.
7. Serial number boss on driver side of engine above the water inlet is missing and the area is "smooth". Numbered 183149 up at top lip of block instead of adjacent to water inlet. Casting date should show from angle of photo and area appears smooth.
8. No hole in the passenger side spindle for Stewart speedometer setup. No speedometer and this car would have had the B&B 26 or thin Model 100 Stewart.
9. Front hubs appear to be later style wide flange.
All in all, it may need a good close up review by someone who knows his stuff for that kind of money. I don't believe we are looking at a 1913 engine block, pan, drive train etc. Rear end is 1913. Just my observation, Royce?
Ken in Texas
I agree Ken - still a nice looking car but the 1913 items you mention are expensive and hard to find. It looks to be a real nice driver if the price were say $15 - $18 thousand.
For another $5 - $8 thousand you would expect to see a lot more of the expensive hard to find 1913 parts on the car. At thirty thousand I would expect to have a 1913 runabout nearly capable of winning a Stynoski award.
Lotto numbers didn't win Royce is correct about negative comments this seller didn't sell anything on ebay for a year that's why he has a 0.0 feedback rating!
I maybe wrong but are not those windshield supports off a 14, windshield folds back, 13 fold s forward!
If you want to look at a sellers feedback this program works well.
Ebay sometimes shuts them off but you can usually look at all off a sellers feedback.
All his feedback comes up on the listing at this end of the world, 191, all for cars and several -'s
The listing ended and he re-listed it with a video of the engine running. Its scary watching him crank it! It seems to be stuck at $14590 which is about what Royce said it is worth.
I was reading his 191 feedbacks. He is a used car salesman he has quite a few negatives for sounds like a shady person to deal with!!!!!!!!!!!
I hate to pick a car but before putting out big bucks I would want to see it. One glaring wrong part is the top frame. Note the rear top iron and where it attaches to the center. It would be a fun car to own and drive but it like many others is a nice looking driver but not a show car.