I don't believe that there is a right or wrong answer to this question, but I was curious as to when a part or the whole car ceased to be "stock" in your opinion.
As I drive my T around I am often asked "is this car stock?" I say "yes" even though I have some modifications - aluminum pistons, polyester condensers in the coils and so on.
When does a part become non-stock? For instance, if you sand blast the rust off of an engine block, is it still stock? If you blast out the valve ports, enlarging them slightly, is the block still stock? If you grind and smooth the ports, is it still stock?
I googled "stock" and none of the definitions match what I think "stock" means. What is your definition?
Isn't this the age old question ???
Technically, I believe the term means "stock, as in off-the-shelf" when new. OEM.
However, with the way T's were built/sold almost like kit cars, and certainly treated as such by
most people upon ownership, that definition got contorted early and continues to be the neverending
I would define stock as how Henry built them. "Stock appearing" would define 99.9% of T's in the
hands of guys like you and me. To me, "modified" comes next, with "rodded" being something very
altered in mechanics and appearance.
To me the meaning is muddy I take it to mean with an original type of running gear and maintained in a safe and roadworthy fashion. Following my definition would allow for some modifications for safety and ease of maintenance (i.e. if I were putting together a "T" to travel the country in my retirement It would have some type of brakes on all 4 wheels and turn signals) So mark me down as confused!
I agree with Burger. "Stock" means, at least to me, as originally built. Replacement parts are still stock if they are made to factory specs.
Of course there are lots of period accessories that make a car or truck be no longer stock. My TT for example has a Muncie and Bennett brakes that I'm sure we're installed when it was new. At that point it was no longer a stock TT.
Just my $.02 worth.
Didn't we just go through this?
No Mark, in my opinion that thread was about "original". I am talking about the word "stock", which I and I presume many others don't think means the same thing as "original". I think Burger is giving the definition of "original", not "stock".
"Stock" is an abused word. Look how stock car racing started and look what it became. I'm still waiting for Ford to make me a two door Ford Fusion. I pretty much agree with Burger's definition unless 100% original comes before stock. OTOH, totally stock and stock can mean the same thing.
I see the term as applying to two things in different ways. One of those things is parts. If a part is shown in the Ford parts book, it's stock. If it's aftermarket, whether period or modern, it's not stock. The other thing is the vehicle as a whole. Here I see the term as applying in degrees (mostly stock, 90% stock, etc.). I suppose a third category might be systems, as in ignition system, cooling system, etc. In those cases I think the parts book standard applies.
Thanks, Tom, I thought the two were the same, can't wait to be educated on the differences!
Not only does "Stock" mean different things to different people but it is constantly changing as the bright young lads get involved in the hobby. I usually hear it used for "original" by folks not in the main stream of restoration.
Hmmm, I'm dimly beginning to see the light - if a car is restored with Ford parts that fit and function properly, but are not consistent with its time of manufacture, it may still be "stock", but not "original".
What about reproduction parts? Can a car with faithful, modern reproduction parts still be "stock"?
So an "original" car is automatically "stock", but a "stock" car may not necessarily be "original".
I guess then, that Ford owners and dealers back in the day started turning their "original" cars into "stock" cars as soon as they started replacing the worn out "original" parts on their cars with "stock" replacement parts that fit and worked, but might have a slightly different (updated) design or date of manufacture.
A little OT, but in the Mopar muscle car world, brand new cars from the assembly line came with some unique parts that the dealers did not stock (and could not order) as replacement parts.
For example, some of the belts, hoses, and fittings used at the factories were not an exact match to what the dealers carried as spare parts.
The elite restorers search madly for these so-called factory "lunch pail" parts that factory workers walked out with during the day, so that they can put the "correct" factory original parts onto their elite restorations.
Does this make any sense?
Mark, I'm not saying that "stock" and "original" aren't the same, I'm waiting to be educated too. I happen to think they are not the same, but am willing to concede that they may be.
I like Steve's finesse on the situation. If I understand him correctly, A 1909 T with a 1927 motor in it would have a stock motor, but not an original motor.
There are obviously degrees of "stock", as you hear the term "completely stock", or "bone stock". If there are degrees, then does any car over 1/2 stock round up to stock?
I'm cool with it, and anxious to hear other folks' opinion on the subject.
Using my earlier OT analogy, the cost to bring a collectible Mopar to its "original" state, with correctly date coded parts of the identical type that the car left the factory with (not dealer replacement parts or reproduction parts) has gone stratospheric because of the extremely limited supply of the unique "lunch pail" parts. Only a few rich individuals that had the foresight to buy up those parts can play in that league.
Those players also pay whatever it takes to apply the correct finishes to all the parts, including all the correct prep steps, runs, drips, overspray, orange peel, inspection stamps, and just the correct amount of rust that a car leaving the line would have had on its bare metal parts.
I will tell you what I have, and let the forum decide whether it is "stock" or modified. The car is a 26 touring.
Radiator, Brassworks flat tube. Bright work, chrome instead of nickel. Paint Phoenix Brown (a "27 color) All paint is acrilic enamel. Has some bondo in body. Repro side panels on hood. Top and upholstery kit purchased from Lang's but mailed to me from Snyder's. New wood in bows, floorboards (plywood floorboards), tack strips and seat supports. Tires, Bedford on 26-27 wire rims. Has bumpers and motometer. Headlights have accessory "Non-Tilt'lenses and chrome plated reflectors. Taillight has Ford drum original type but has socket and two filament bulb for stop light. Stop light switch.
Engine, sleeved to standard with aluminum pistons, Stipe 280 cam, Scat stock size counterbalanced crankshaft. Poured babbit bearings with dippers on rods. Head original Ford head milled just enough to make flat. Adjustable lifters, 4 insert exhaust valve seats, chevy valves, Mag oiler, 3 helicoils in stud holes, new exhaust manifold and high volume intake manifold. Holly NH carburetor. Copper rings for manifold gaskets, copper head gasket. Rewound magneto coils with boat resin sealer. Transmission, Kevlar bands, new shaft, cam,and notch in low pedal, new link between pedal and clutch, Ford disks in clutch. Rear axle, original U joint, original pinion bearing and gear. Ruckstell 2 speed, original Ford ring and pinion gearing. Neoprene seals and bronze thrust bushing. Rocky Mountain brakes made for 26 brake drums, New Rocky Mountain brake pedal. Front axle,helicoils in spindle bolt threads. New spindle bolts and bushings, new bushings in tie rod. New spring shackles. Flip top oilers on spindles, shackles, and tie rod.
Is this "original", "stock" or "modified"?
I missed one thing. Aluminum aftermarket front crankcase pulley and ball bearing fan pulley.
I missed a few things. Aluminum aftermarket front crankcase pulley and ball bearing fan pulley. Fun Projects plastic coil box replacement for wood.
Anderson new timer.
Anyway, it looks like a Model T and runs like one and to most people who see it, it is a Model T.
Depends on the context.
In the strictest sense, original means unrestored and unchanged except for life-limited parts like brakes, belts, hoses, etc., all of which would be replaced with stock parts.
Stock means the car has factory or factory-identical replacement parts.
To an insurance company like Hagerty, stock means your Model T is not a T-bucket hot-rod.
To a spectator, stock means your Model T has a Model T engine that starts with a crank.
To me, there are the stock trailer-queens that are only driven across the lawn to the judging area and have original-type bushings, bearings, pistons, seals—everything. _And then there are "drivers" which are prepared for practical touring and utility. _They're stock if everything a judge can see is either original or identical to original. _Judges can't see aluminum pistons and bronze thrust-washers so stuff like that doesn't count.
It sounds like you and I come from the same background of silly people building silly cars to
silly standards. It is largely for this reason that I am drifting backwards into older cars.
My "unit of measure" in the old car world is whether or not the driver places all emphasis on
his love for the car, OR ...
... all emphasis is using the car as a tool to draw attention to the owner.
I find this perspective is WAY more important than if the car is "stock" or not. I have seen some
crazy creations that I could really get with because the owner was so into what he was doing and
didn't give a damn what anyone else thought. Conversely, I have met stoic historian types with
flawless original-type restorations that were equally impressive, ... because it was about THE CAR
and not about the personality behind the car.
My personal niche in the hobby is period correct appearance. I don't like "cutesy", I don't like
contrived, and I have a real problem with chest-pounding "Look-at-ME !" types. I just like ordinary,
as found, as used, as seen in 1942 kind of T's and such. I'd rather see a patinaed old dog going
down the road than a flawless restoration on a golf green any day. Does it have to be "stock" ?
Well, too far off the path and it looks cutesy, contrived, or just wrong for period appearance. If it
is too damned shiny and perfect, .... same thing. Go take that thing off road like it was meant to
be driven and get a proper "T look" !!!
I suppose it would depend on the context. If you are getting gas and the guy next to you asks if it's stock, I don't think he means "Does it have any repro parts?". I think all he probably means is "Does it still have the underpowered flat head four or have you dropped in a crate motor?" On the other hand, if you are at show amongst a bunch of other T folks, the question would probably mean something more along the lines of "Have you upgraded to a Stipe 280 and high compression head?"
Hal is right on... definitions such as "stock" or "original" depend on who you're explaining it to, and whether they'll understand it.
Hal The questions I usually get at the gas pump are
1) Is it a real model "T"?
2) is it legal to drive it on the road?
"Is that a kit car?"
Stock is as it came out of the factory. So's original. Comparing apples to apples. As stated Ford replacement parts are stock/original too. Exact replacement Ford licensed parts also fit this category. The car's too old not to have the latter mentioned parts just to keep it running so there probably isn't a 100% stock T out there except possibly the Rip Van Winkle T. By the way Mike, since years ago I built a kit car on a VW chassis, my nephew once asked me if the '23 Touring was a kit.
The Rip van Winkle would be original. Anything with replaced parts that are OEM specs is stock.
To me, "stock" doesn't have to mean 'as new, off the showroom floor' condition. If it did, would your new late model car or truck be 'non-stock' the minute it was driven away from a dealership? Depreciated, but not non-stock'. I associate stock vs. modified. As long as the vehicle has not been changed in major ways from its original factory condition, I consider it stock. It is ridiculous to think or say that a model T is not stock because the tires have been changed from the original brand or the engine has been rebuilt with replacement Ford parts, I.e. EE crank, light rods, etc. As long as the original engine is in the car and looks stock, runs close to stock, and doesn't have a DOHC head and headers on it, I would say it is stock.
I agree with the tires, belts ect. not being stock IF original manufacturers parts aren't used. You have to replace maintenance parts to keep going. However replacement parts, though highly desirable and of Ford manufacture, that didn't come with the car when new can't be stock. Yes, I'd want the better crank ect. but it's not stock/original.
I tend to agree with Hal Davis -- the meaning of "stock" varies with the situation. Just as the meaning of "restored" may vary according to who is asking the question.
When I'm filling up with gas and someone asks me whether I restored my car, I answer yes. I answer yes, even though my car is not an authentic restoration since it has disc brakes and other non-stock components. It's not important to get into a discussion of the actual meaning of the word "restored" with them. I'm answering the question they intended to ask.
Charley, original, or later model Ford improved parts; who in their right mind is going to do an engine tear down to prove that they have the original, crank, rods, pistons, etc. on the rarest of the rare early Model T's. If an owner is so pompous (and that is in no way intended towards any individual) that he cannot accept all Ford parts, early or later production used in the restoration of a Model T, then he should go ahead and make his car as original as possible. I'm sure there have been many 100 point Senior cars that have not had 100% of the original parts that they left the factory, with.
That was my point. At some juncture, this becomes more about the personality behind
the vehicle than the vehicle itself.
I like to muse myself when I see these poobahs of self-import, imagining them talking
their big talk with the likes of some afghan tribal elders and picturing them being led out
back to be shown "what is stock" at the end of an AK-47. Because honestly, all this holier-
than-thou attitude is an artificial reality, and if those types were stuck in a very real, life
and death reality, they'd discover just how artificial everything they expound as important
is really not important at all.
Burger, I'll add to what you and I said; there IS a difference between the parts that a car left the factory with and O.E.M. or N.O.S. parts. It is a rare find these days to find any vehicle with ever single part that it left the factory with, and when a part was needed to be replaced under warranty or due to collision, etc, how are we to know whether a T has all its original parts, even if it is a supposedly an original, barn fresh T that was stored since 1928. Why do collectors get so excited and pay so dearly for N.O.S. Ford parts (excluding aftermarket parts, obviously.) Original factory fresh is one thing; "stock" is another.
As long as the car parts haven't been changed from their original factory function or design, I would consider it "stock". New reproduction parts can be stock parts. Adding parts that weren't included in the model's design from the factory or dealer would not be stock. These are modified cars.
But you might get an argument from NASCAR.
There's not a single part on those that are a factory model design.
Here in Winnipeg Canada our Motor vehicle branch defines stock as AS THE FACTORY BUILT IT.
The word stock in the car hobby has a different meaning to different age groups, it's like classic, a true classic is defined by the classic car club. or Classic mustang, two different meanings.
Ken, Although the interiors may have been gutted, the last years that NASCAR stock cars even resembled cars you could buy off the showroom floor, was in the early to mid sixties; the days of the Ford 427 high risers and the 426 Chrysler Hemi's. Then, Ford came out with the 427 SOHC engine which did make it into some street driven cars (although maybe dealer installed), but was outlawed by NASCAR because it was too radical. In my eyes, not any more radical than the Hemi.
Stock Model T engine with stock 1928 Chevrolet head on it!
How can a car with later parts manufactured by the Ford company, even though an improvement, possibly be considered stock? Would I tell a contest judge about them? Hell no. You know why? Because it ain't stock and he'd tell me so and I'd have to agree with him because it's true.
As I said, just try to find an "original Model T or A with all its factory original parts", even if routine maintenance parts (belts, hoses, wiring, etc.) are excluded. I don't know of one. If one exists, will the owner post a picture and history of the vehicle on the Forum?
I don't like the word "stock". When I was a kid, interested in antique cars, I decided I did not like "stock" cars because everything I saw for a few years that was called "stock" was anything but what I later found out the word really meant. I never have forgiven NASCAR. Linguistics may be a fascinating subject. But people are weird.
Drive carefully, and do enjoy the New Year! W2
It's all a matter of opinion.
My car is strictly stock. Yours is a highly modified collection of parts.
If we traded cars, my opinion would still be the same. My new car would be stock and yours would be highly modified.
Here's a guide to clear this up pic 1 1912 ford pic 2 same car restored to stock condition pic 3 1915 ford parts car pic 4 modified both cars done in 1961.
I screwed up here's the parts car
125.bmp (108.0 k)
I cant make that picture work but you get the drift
When My dad and I restored my Grandfather's 1927 coupe in the late sixties, a lot of the reproduction parts that are available, now, weren't available, then. There was only one swap meet in Texas that was worth going to for antique parts, and being a teenager new in the hobby, I didn't know all the collectors that I know, now. I hadn't joined a club and I had little idea of what was correct for a 27 coupe. Grandfather had ruined the original block and at some time, went to a salvage yard in the 40's and replaced the original with a 22 block. The deck lid was missing along with the taillight and bracket. The rats had destroyed all the original interior, so I didn't have a clue what the interior was supposed to look like. We did the best we could and called it an amateur restoration. I considered it 'stock'. It didn't have a Ruxtell, a Warford, or an OHV head so it was as close to stock as we knew how to restore it. The years since have educated me, along with making friends with collectors and vendors and the internet put me in a whole new world. It currently has a new paint job, a new correct interior, all the incorrect parts have been replaced, and a correct 26-27 block rebuilt to mate with the car's original transmission. My Dad and Grandfather would be proud to see it now.
Here is Colin's parts car pic:
This has been an interesting thread, thanks Tom for starting it, and thanks to all for contributing to it!
NASCAR. What a joke.
There used to be a saying: Race 'em on Sunday, sell 'em on Monday.
In other words, the same cars they were racing on Sunday, a person could go buy off the
showroom floor on Monday.
Not sure what those cars are today ... jellybeans hollowed out and a bunch of decals slapped on ?
But then again, I am the guy who believes Detroit closed the doors and sent everyone home in 1970.
Got no use for Tupperware cars or the electronic BS that runs them. Ugly AND pointless AND expensive.
Burger, I'm on your side on this one (NASCAR). Also, what about the Indy 500? I remember the days when everyone used an Offy engine. Now everyone uses a Honda engine, but I stand to be corrected.