1923 Non-Starter Equipped Car - Question

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 2018: 1923 Non-Starter Equipped Car - Question
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dan B on Thursday, June 28, 2018 - 06:28 pm:

I am looking for someone with an original 1923 non-starter equipped car to tell me if the drivers side front running board support is riveted or bolted to the top channel of the frame.

The starter switch bracket would normally share this hole and be bolted along with the running board bracket to the frame on starter equipped cars. But I would like to know if they instead riveted the running board bracket on non-starter equipped cars.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dan B on Saturday, June 30, 2018 - 09:22 am:

Bump


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hap Tucker in Sumter SC on Sunday, July 01, 2018 - 08:16 pm:

Dan,

I wanted to let you know that I looked at the article on the very original non-starter 1925 touring in Mar-Apr 1998 "Vintage Ford." I also looked at Sep-Oct 2009 "The Model T Times" article on the Stynoski winning 1926 non-starter roadster that was Gordon & Marcia Koll restored from a body. But neither article mentioned the front running board bracket and if the 3rd hole was riveted or had a bolt.

I would suggest you consider broadening your search a few years. As the pressed running board braces were introduced during 1921 (with overlap when both styles were used -- ref date: http://www.mtfca.com/encyclo/C-D.htm#Chassis1 ).

It would be nice to know how Ford handled the possible cost savings of one rivet verses the cost of a nut and bolt verses the cost of keeping track that some frames that could be used for starter cars while others were for non-starter. They did do that for the Coupes, Centerdoors, etc. at lease once the frame & chassis were assemble due to the Gas tank in a different location.

Hopefully some additional folks will chime in. And perhaps there are additional photos from that 1925 loss leader touring that may turn up and show the running board bracket.

You might also check with Gordon Koll to see how he did his frame. And if he was able to find any documentation for using a bolt or a rivet in that 3rd hole.

Respectfully submitted,

Hap l9l5 cut off


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hap Tucker in Sumter SC on Sunday, July 01, 2018 - 09:31 pm:

Dan,

Ok, I remembered reading in Gordon Koll's Sep-Oct 2009 article that he mentioned the following about his very early "Improved Model":

"The frame has no battery box or carrier but the floor of the trunk has the typical access cover (picture 9)."

So Ford USA was already keeping track that the frame was for a non-starter car -- i.e. no battery carrier -- which was riveted in on the cars equipped with a starter. So it would not have been any extra cost to keep track of the non-starter frame - as it was already unique.

He also stated that while the frame had no provision for a battery box, the trunk area of his roadster had a regular batter access panel.

Respectfully submitted,

Hap l9l5 cut off


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dan B on Tuesday, July 03, 2018 - 08:05 am:

Hap,

Thank you for looking into this. You are thinking about it the same as me. I imagine the frames coming down the line with some getting a starter switch bracket installed with bolts and others receiving a rivet in that location to fasten the running board bracket. I would think that there would be cost and time savings associated with making the non-starter frames unique to those cars as you pointed out in your second post.


Hereís the interesting thing. My car is a Ď23 Touring with electric start. It had sat since the 1950ís untouched, and significantly deteriorated before I purchased and restored it. It had the oil side and rear lamps when I bought it. I always assumed that they were installed by someone who maybe preferred oil lights since the car had a motor with an electric starter, a batter carrier, and electric tail light. The foot switch was missing and it had a crude solenoid mounted to the front seat pan. However, it wasnít until recently when I was fooling with the foot starter switch that I installed, that I learned that it should have been mounted from the factory using the same hole as the front running board bracket. On my car, the front running board bracket is RIVETED, with no sign of a switch ever being mounted there. This discovery leads me to believe that my car was actually a non-starter car (hence the oil lamps) and that the electric system was added later. Otherwise I assume that I would have a bolt in this location OR a piece of the switch bracket still under the head of the rivet. To me, this discovery seems to indicate that starter frames had bolts in the running board/switch hole and non-starter frames had a rivet in this hole.

Iím sure this conversion was done quite frequently (my car also has demountable rims), but the fact that the engine is a matching Ď23 build date left me not realizing the possibility that itís not the original engine after all these years.

Thanks again for the info Hap. I figured you would be the one to respond.

Dan


Add a Message


This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Username:  
Password:

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration