**1919 - 1925 Flywheel/Magnet Assembly**

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration
Model T Ford Forum: Forum 2015: **1919 - 1925 Flywheel/Magnet Assembly**
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Martin Vowell, Sylmar, CA on Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 02:29 am:

Ok, I know what the title says, but I'm not really sure of that starting date...I personally feel it's more likely 1921 but everything I've looked at suggests that all the later starter cars were pretty much this assembly, flywheel and all. If any of you could help pin the starting date, I'd appreciate it. I need to do some whittling down of the teeth on that ring gear too...sometimes I get lost in all those bloody lines too. :-)

The part numbers 3269DU, 3255U, 3254U and 3278 "S" and "RES" are Langs, but the numbers themselves are Fords Part numbers for those parts. The "U" stands for Used.



This drawing is really part 1 of a two part assembly and I'm really trying not to make a foldout, but should really be a foldout (I hate foldouts). Part 2 which I'm working on currently is the engine side of the magneto, mounting the coil ring and then fitting up the magnets/flywheel assembly to the end of the crankshaft. I'm thinking of showing on this drawing the correct tolerance of the magnets and coil ring would be helpful. I usually try to shy away from technical information, but in this case, that's really part of the magneto assembly and so as such should be specified...I think.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Martin Vowell, Sylmar, CA on Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 04:46 am:

I just thought of this, instead of showing all those screws, plates, bolts and washers, like this...how about I show only one exploded from the assembly and the rest where they're supposed to go when assembled. Not exactly correct drawing technique I suppose, but then for the sake of clarity, that's really the only answer, I can think of.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Frank van Ekeren (Australia) on Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 05:41 am:

The part # for the fly wheel it's self 3269D is a early non starter one, the part # for 1919/27 would be 3269G.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mark Strange - Hillsboro, MO on Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 09:33 am:

Martin, I love your drawings, they are top notch! :-)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Larry Smith on Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 11:17 am:

Your flywheel doesn't have the notch for the ring gear!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jerry VanOoteghem - SE Michigan on Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 11:34 am:

Larry,

It's on the backside, where you wouldn't see it in the present view.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Martin Vowell, Sylmar, CA on Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 06:19 pm:

Frank, I'll make that note on the drawing, after I do some orthodonture work on that ring gear. I know that 3269D is probably not correct, but the picture I saw looked like mine so I thought they were the same.

Does anybody know when or which car the long plate with the two tabs on it was used? I see it in Bruce's Parts List book as available on all years from 1912-1918. Also what shape is the magnets for the early cars...I can't get a clear enough picture of them.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Michael Garrison - Rice Minnesota on Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 07:03 pm:

Please forgive me for this unqualified critique. I really like what your doing and feel uncomfortable saying anything about it. But, why can't you create section drawings and explode one area as you're suggesting. Specify where the section drawing is located on your isometric drawing. Then within the section drawing define each part as 16X. Most people that work with assembly drawings are capable of referencing isometric views. I enjoy your drawings but feel the level of detail is messy and unnecessary.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mark Strange - Hillsboro, MO on Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 07:21 pm:

This thread has a picture of an early flywheel and magnet setup in it:

http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/506218/522037.html?1425938745


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Martin Vowell, Sylmar, CA on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 03:26 am:

Mark, those magnets look to be machined, with a separate hole for the bolt, not just bent iron like later magnets with a machined bolt/washer surface in the bend. How strange that the early magnet/flywheel assemblies had no plates at all, just a pan head screw with a washer. The flywheel though doesn't look all that much different than mine (I'm sure the weight is different though), which is out of a 24 engine. Sooo, when did those long plates get used? Or were they used concurrently with the smaller plates, depending upon where the car was assembled?

Ya know the more I delve into these cars the more I find interesting little nuances making each and everyone of them totally unique...which of course makes my job a total pain...but fun. :-)

Michael, I love critiques, but what you're suggesting would be totally unnecessary for such a small assembly like this one. I suppose if I went from the aspect of drawing the total magneto assembly, then breaking certain details off to show it's assembly, would be acceptable. Since I didn't start drawing that way to begin with, the best I could do is show only one of the 16 different sets of parts exploded from the assembly, while showing the other 15 different sets in place, with the ring gear left where it is. This would facilitate clarity of the assembly I believe without straying too far from my original format. I mean why should I show all that repetition especially when it makes things really hard to see? Tell you what, I'll repost the drawing in the format I just suggested and see what you guys think.

I've noticed that some of the flywheel assemblies have lock wire on the bolts that hold the "V" section of the magnets to the flywheel...is that only on the early cars or did that carry through to the later ones as well?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Frank van Ekeren (Australia) on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 03:40 am:

Martin, I've only come across the 1926/27 Canadian ones with out the provision for lock wire. US may be different.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Stroud on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 04:34 am:

Martin, I have said for a long time, "The more we learn about these T's, the less we know!" Keep up the good work! Dave


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Martin Vowell, Sylmar, CA on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 06:35 am:

David, about the only thing I've found so far that each and every car has in common with the others. Is that they all have Ford on them...otherwise they're all totally different from month to month, week to week, day to day and sometimes hour to hour of any given years production run.

When dealing with Ford's Model T that common myth "they're all the same"...Oh no, they're not! :-)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Anthonie Boer---- Klaaswaal NL on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 12:20 pm:

Martin V. Your Flywheel Assembly is from 1919-1925 . What is the difference with the 1926-27 ??
Thanks
Toon


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Martin Vowell, Sylmar, CA on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 06:25 pm:

Anthonie as far as the assembly goes, nothing, they go together exactly the same way as any of the other flywheel/magnet assemblies. The flywheel on the 26-27 is a wee bit different in that the boss that posts for the triple gears in the transmission side is a little more extended and appears on both sides of the flywheel, instead of one (the transmission side) like on this one.

Ok guys, how about this...



Looks a bit cleaner to me, does it work for you?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mark Strange - Hillsboro, MO on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 06:50 pm:

I'm saving them both... :-)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Bill Harper - Keene, NH on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 06:57 pm:

Yes, not as "busy".


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By bob middleton on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 09:59 pm:

Yes the last version much cleaner


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By John Grabowski on Friday, November 13, 2015 - 10:58 pm:

Thank you Martin, very nice


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Martin Vowell, Sylmar, CA on Sunday, November 15, 2015 - 07:32 am:

LOL, This was just brought to my attention by Anthonie Boer...the dashed lines were reverse between 3278 and 3276B, which just shows to go ya,



They should've gone in front of the first arm and behind on the second arm of the magnet...they're correct now. See, this is exactly why I post here, so you guys can catch my mistakes. ;)

Thanks again Toon.


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.
Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration