This is the second What is it?
This is spring loaded.
Is it a crank holder for use with the early style front spring / engine pan clamp?
Looks to me like an accessory that clamps onto the front spring and holds the crank up for driving.
Would it be for a '14?
Well, it has a patent date of February 1917....
It could be used on any engine with the early style spring / engine plan clamp, although it was patented on February 5, 1917.
Might not be auto related at all.?
Ill have to look for the ad, but it is an anti-kickback device. I have one like it. I found the ad for it back when I first found mine. The hook is spring loaded and will allow the crank handle to pass by the hook when cranking, but in the event of a kick back the hook will catch the crank handle and stop it from hitting your hand. Not sure how well it would work, or if it would damage the crank handle if it did kick back. It clamps around the front cross member....
Scroll down in this thread for the "Ketch-a-Kick."
And there it is! Thanks Erik.
Someone else said it in the thread Erik's link takes you to, but it's worth saying again. The "Ketch-a-Kick" appears to provide a very sudden stop to a kick-back that may cause a crankshaft break. It looks like it'll save your arm, but not without the possibility of engine damage.
I'd agree that abruptly stopping a kick-back with such a device wouldn't be the best thing for a crankshaft (it wouldn't do the front suspension any favors either) but the dynamics of an engine just beginning to run can scarcely compare to one running full power (or over with high compression head, blown carbs, hi lift cam, etc., etc. ) and lugging down.
Like most accessories, a band-aid for a problem better solved by addressing the root cause. Any road, it's fun to see these things and identify them !
I have different thoughts that comes to my mind every time I see one of these. For a reason. When I was twelve years old, one of my uncles tried to fly his Cessna through a blizzard. Instead, he found a giant rock in the middle of it. The NTSB did their investigation, pointless though it may have been because he clearly did it to himself. He was a very interesting person to have known. The life of every party, barbecued before it became popular, played ragtime on the piano. He also had an early electronic theater type organ in his living room that I have thought about often the past few days thanks to David D's theater thread and drift helped along (maybe a bit much?) by me. He was flamboyant, and arrogant, brilliantly intelligent. And he took a few too many chances because he thought he could pull it off.
The NTSB determined several factors of his crash based upon the plane's condition and the control settings. Engine was running at less than full throttle, the tachometer indicated over 5500 rpm at the point of impact. Those two things indicated that the engine was running okay. The thing that applies to this thread, is that they (NTSB) measured the twist of the crankshaft, and did the math to determine that the engine went from 5500 rpm (if memory serves me well) to a full stop in one quarter turn.
Because of the blizzard (one of the worst in a hundred years in Califunny), it took two weeks to find his wreckage. He had been killed instantly.
Anyway. On to more fun things.
I actually can imagine what one of those anti-kickback devices could be like on a T. And you will never find one on one of my cars.
Erik -- thanks for the link!
Herny, Rich, and Wayne,
Many of the anti-kick devices did NOT stop the engine from rotating backwards. But they did disengage the starting crank ratchet part number 3906 from the engine and stopped the hand crank.
Most required the starting crank ratchet to be modified as shown below. (Thank you Jay for posting that illustration on the link at: http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/179374/182327.html )
And at the thread mentioned above by Erik -- Jay posted the following illustrations:
I personally like the design of the "Non-Kick" discussed at that same link: http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/179374/182327.html
Note it has about 8 places it would stop the crank from turning backwards while the Ketch-A-Kick has one. The position would work great if the person was pulling up on the crank. But for those folks that that push down on the crank or spin the crank, if it backfired just as it was almost to the Ketch-A-Kick -- it could be almost a full circle back before it stopped the hand crank.
The moral -- be careful, pull up on the crank, don't wrap your thumb around the crank, crank left handed if you can (some of us need to work on that one. And note that the person in Erik's thread at http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/506218/525752.html?1426639969 had cranked left handed and still got bit) have an electric starter if possible etc.
And check before you pull up on the crank. I almost got my Dad more than once when I was about 6 years old. I sometimes would get confused and pull the spark down and push the gas up when I was "in charge" of running the spark and throttle. (It's hard to get a good reliable helper from a 6 year old.) But Dad's visual check before pulling up on the crank handle caught my mistake and was followed with a "teachable moment" for me. You know he could have yelled at me but he actually would tell me I had them backwards. He would watch to make sure I put them correctly and then pull up on the hand crank.
If someone would reproduce the Non-Kick style or something similar - I for one would like to purchase one. I cannot do most of my day job with a broken arm/hand.
I've also thought about a "non-authentic" accessory answer. My Dad had a horse drawn wooden plow. The main body of the plow was wood but it had some iron straps/supports. And it had some hickory pins that you put in some strategic places. If the plow hit a rock, instead of breaking the plow or stopping the horse(s) the pin was broken. I was thinking about the 1909-1922 style hand cranks that had a handle that was bolted to the crank. How hard would it be to figure out how much of a shear section would be required to put in the bolt where it attached to the rest of the crank, so you could hand crank the engine but if it back fired and you had a good grip on it, the bolt would shear. I know that could be found out experimentally -- but is there an engineer in the house that could let us know how small the 1/2 bolt would need to be reduced and how long the reduction should be 1/4 inch, 1/2 inch? That might not work with high compression heads etc. but for stock Ts from memory -- when the T backfired back in 1966 or so it as a really hard force that pulled it out of my hand.
Hap l9l5 cut off
Hap T, Thanks for the clarification on some of the anti-kickback devices!
Your welcome. I learn or relearn about our cars from the postings on the forum, Bruce's CD's, other books, other owners and looking at cars & photos. And there us always so much more to learn. Or as Kenneth Blanchard and others have said, "None of us is as smart as all of us."
Hap l9l5 cut off
I might hang it on my 27T. I started using the starter or the crank 99% of the time