***1909-1911 Fan Assembly***

[VowellArt]

The parts list called out the nut for bolt 3968 (as nut) and it is drilled for a cotter pin too, yet there is probably no reason for this nut in the first place, since there is no stress or rotation other than a slight pivot of the fan arm and it goes through the timing cover and threads into the block boss on top, so I don't think there is any real reason for the nut and or the cotter pin, but I included the nut's thread size (since I couldn't find a part number for it) if you wanted to either install or replace one.

As always, if any of you see something not right, please let me know and I'll correct it as quickly as I can.

[DanTreace]

Only the cotter is used at the end of the bracket bolt, no nut.

Spread the cotter to ride against the block, prevents the bolt from getting loose and the fan from walking into the radiator!

[TonyB]

I’m not sure the method of holding the spring on the drawing it correct. I think my 09 has a pin to locate the spring where it attaches to the front plate. Of course I could be wrong or I may have forgotten. I can’t quite tell if the drawing of the front plate is for the one piece timer which seems to be used until the 1911 models.

[RajoRacer]

I recently had a quite original 1910 in the shop and it did have a castle nut & cotter on the rear of the fan arm bolt !

[Walter Higgins]

There are two basic designs of the early two-piece timer cover with the spring and then a third where the lug used a tension bolt. They were discussed here awhile back:

http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/82 ... 1519055307

[DanTreace]

Steve:

I recently had a quite original 1910 in the shop and it did have a castle nut & cotter on the rear of the fan arm bolt !

Could be, but factory data, 1909 Aug Price List shows factory drawing, that Fan Bracket Bolt, Factory # 605 (p/n 3968) uses a cotter pin. 3/32” x 5/8” cotter, Factory # 608 in illustration below:

[Scott_Conger]

Two things:

1. the one early front plate that I have recently worked on (and can remember) has both a slight recess and a proud center "pip" that holds the spring (at least on 1911 SN 47xxx). I most certainly wish I had access to the link provided above at the time a month ago to see if this was someone's repro...this car has been in a museum for 35-40 years and was last serviced by Lee Pierce. The timer looked like a mint NOS or old repro (the roller was later FORD)
2. I am convinced by the fan support bolt's cotter pin hole distance back from the front plate, that there should be a lock nut. I just went through an '11 that without a locknut, the bolt drooped a bit and was free to loosen a good 1/4" and I don't think for a minute it wouldn't have during the bouncing and vibration during use (and the radiator had a nice 1/2 moon section carved out of the fins, where the fan had drooped and worked it's way forward sometime in the past...). By necessity, the nut I made was thinner than a standard castle nut and had no reduced diameter in the area of the slots. When I was done with it I turned my attention to replacing the fuel line which called for the removal and modification of a non-stock wooden engine/frame support. Taking out the long side bolt through the wood support, guess what? The nut that belonged on the fan bracket was there! And it looked exactly like the nut I fabricated. I had nearly every nut/bolt off and on again on this car and this ONE unique nut was misplaced into the engine mount. I put the correct nut on the engine mount and gave the original engine nut to the owner for posterity.

And FWIW on my '13, that same bolt (which is fixed tightly) has the same cotter pin hole which is so very close to the casting that a nut could not possibly go there and I simply install a cotter pin. The difference is that this bolt is socked down SOLID with no expectation that any vibration of the engine will likely work to the threads. On an '11, the bouncing and rumble of the belt would most certainly work a bolt loose(r) since it is not tight to begin with (unless there is a locknut on the back)

I think this thread is going to be an interesting read...

[DanTreace]

Scott

While certainly none of us were around on the assembly line, and could be some had castle nut on the fan bracket bolt, but lack of Ford part# for such a nut just seems rather rare. The bracket bolt isn't totally tightened up firm, as the bolt needs a slight amount of movement.

That special bolt (3968) has a machined shank to fit to the bracket, allowing the bracket arm to swing when you adjust the fan belt tension. The early ones, with the spring were done that way likely to have the tension automatic.

Later front plates did away with the spring, and tension was done by a separate threaded bolt on the later front plates, that pushed the bracket lug to tighten. All these later brackets used the same bolt, and all used the cotter pin. The pin was spread against the block, and would allow the bolt to just lightly move, only a 1/8 or so turn.

All the early engines seen by me have the cotter, never a castle nut tight against the bolt that is also pinned. And the repro bolts aren't necessarily like Ford part either.

583310.jpg (88.33 KiB) Viewed 10125 times

IMG_1411 (550x413) (500x375).jpg (110.38 KiB) Viewed 10125 times

[Scott_Conger]

Dan

I can't disagree with anything you say. The '11 I just worked on had enough wear on the fan bracket that it could float back and forth along the shoulder bolt about 1/16" and if pushed "back" then the fan belt would rub on the timing rod. I made a .050" shim to place at the back of the bracket which allowed the bracket to still pivot easily and just clear the belt. The bolt threads and cotter hole still stuck past the casting with enough clearance that I was frankly fearful of how far the bolt could come "out" (and the fan had already hit the radiator once). Correct or not, I felt it was prudent to fit the nut and ensure the bolt remained in place (at the time, I did not know it was wrong). Fortunately for me, this car will probably never be shown at a show that will know enough to deduct points for a careful repair.

[VowellArt]

I was under the impression that the lower end of the spring was held in place by a deep cup bored into that boss, so is there also a pin that fits into the ID of the spring as well inside that cup? Having never seen one of these before makes it a bit hard to fathom...and of course the next one is the 1911-1912, that one I don't think has the spring, but a bolt that does the adjusting...my problem is the same still, I've never seen one, so I don't know what it looks like...if any of you guys have pictures of that fan bracket as on the car, I'd appreciate it seeing them (wish I could see that earlier thread the link was posted for, it doesn't open for me though).

[Scott_Conger]

Martynn

the thread that won't open for you is a gold mine of info...it states that the front cover I just saw (with the pip) is a reproduction. I was surprised to see that insofaras this car was pretty correct and has been on display for 40 years or so, so the repro has some age on it.

[VowellArt]

Scott, which year is it and the topic's title and I'll go look it up myself.

[Scott_Conger]

Martynn

it won't open for me now, either. I think it's a MTFCA server issue. Wait a day or two and try...sorry I couldn't help

[Walter Higgins]

The server problem still exists. I'd like to scrounge the other photos in addition to mine and make a more concise post once the thread comes back to life. I think in my haste I misstated the cover thing and that instead it should be that (not counting the earliest water pump stuff) that there was a cover with a spring pocket, a very similar cover with a lug that uses a tension bolt, and then they went to the more common cover for the one-piece timer that came after. The reproduction cover that has attributes of both with the lug modified with a pin for a spring is fictitious animal that Ford did not produce. I think it was decided that reproduction cover was an attempt to satisfy both the spring and tension bolt two-piece timer cover markets with a single casting.

[TonyB]

At last I remembered to take the phone to the barn and take a picture of the fan mounting on my October 1909 Model T Ford.
My memory was correct (for once), the plate has a pin to hold the lower end of the fan tension spring. You can see the pin through the coils of the spring.

Fan spring mounting

So I don’t know where the idea of the hole shown in the drawing originates, of course mine could be wrong.....

[DanTreace]

Tony

I recall the earlier thread, now seemingly lost perhaps to the old server files gone? Used to easily google search MTFCA and FORUM and find lots of hits, maybe this is only a server issue and Adm. can fix.

But the 1909 parts book shows sketch of the p/n3009 front plate with the hollow boss and no pin part listed, but maybe that pin/post should be there?

Early plates have the spring just nestled in the hollow boss recess.

[Scott_Conger]

Tony

the '11 I just worked on had the same front plate as yours...

[KimDobbins]

This is the 1909-10 403-B front cover used after car #2500. The 1911 cover has a stud and nut that is used to tension the fan.

[VowellArt]

Hmmm, ok it is 1909-1910...how about this?

Would like to see a better picture of that timer. Because of the Mid 1911 to Late 1911, oil filler/timer, I might just have to do all the timers, at least on these early cars.

[VowellArt]

Is this correct for the 1911-1913?

because for a brief period in 1911 (6 weeks actually), they went with an oil filler on the timer itself, which proved to be a really bad idea and went right back to the previous idea with the stud/bolt and nut adjustment. In fact I think Ford had to recall all those with the Oil Filler Timer because the leaked oil everywhere whenever the timer moved (like advanced).

[VowellArt]

And this one which is the 1911-1911 Oil Filler Timer (which will be a separate assembly).

[Walter Higgins]

This is my photo from the previous thread. On top is a correct reproduction of the 1909 - 1910 cover that uses the spring and below that is an original 1911 cover that uses a tension bolt. Both of these use two-piece timers.

I don't think either of your two drawings above are correct. After the failed oil fill timer they went to the standard cover with the tension bolt pushing from the side, not the vertical bolt as in 1911. Also, I think the 1912 oil fill timer cover also used a tension bolt from the side.

Just for the record, I think it was decided that the problem with the reproduction cover that uses a pin protruding from the lug with the spring perched on top is that it affects the length and proper positioning of the spring vs. the one that sits down inside the well.

[VowellArt]

Wish I had seen that second photo before I posted those last two...I kept trying to figure out which way that bolt went from and was told that the bolt had a shoulder on the end that pushed against the fan arm...the one your showing here is directly opposite of what I've been told...I don't think you can get a wrench in the crook of the fan arm to turn the head of that bolt, but I don't know, these are waaay out of my understanding. Have you ever heard that the bolt or stud has a shoulder on it that fits into the crook of the fan arm or that the fan arm has a thick pad on which the shoulder of that bolt or stud pushes against?

Good to know about the 1912 though, I was wondering about that.

[Walter Higgins]

Things are difficult with the old forum down. Look at the first row of photos here:

https://www.google.com/search?q=1912+oi ... 20&bih=969

My 1911 cover is just the way it came to me and I never questioned the orientation of the bolt. I held it up to a block and I'd say you could get a wrench on it either way. So far as I know, there weren't fan arms specific to each style of cover. That early style arm with the bump for the spring continued to be used long after the spring was gone. The catalog shot in that Google link showing the 1911 cover looks to have the bolt head on top but it's a little fuzzy. I can say from looking at mine that the alignment of the bump and the centerline of the bolt isn't perfect, so the head being on top provides a little more grace for the fan arm bump to make contact.

[VowellArt]

Ok, how about this one...I had to change the aspect of the arm, because it sat too low (I think I'll change all of them also, they all seem to be sitting too low and the bottom pin doesn't line up with the gap on the plate). Also made slight changes to the plate itself.

I'm still not sure of the date span though. Let me know so I can get on with the other fun ones...the 2 piece timer and the oil fill timer.

[Walter Higgins]

The date span is just 1911. As you know, most things were not an exact model year change and I'm not sure if it went into 1912 a little or if the "1912 oil fill" caught on at the tail end of 1911 a little, but it wasn't used for the 1912 oil fill timer or again after the 1912 oil fill timer so far as I know.

[Kohnke Rebabbitting]

I found a fan bracket arm, with fan hub and blades, where the hub and bracket arm, were made of brass. I didn't see that they were brass until all the old grease got taken off.

Herm.

[Walter Higgins]

Brass hubs were a thing early on but the brass arm is a reproduction.

[VowellArt]

So, even though the fan arm is used clear to 1916, it was not used with the bolt adjustment under the arm past 1911? In 1912, I think is when the steep side bolt was being used, that pushes against the tab on the bottom of the arm (sort of like the later styles) to adjust the tension on the belt. Because as far as I've been able to figure out the oil fill started sometime about late 1911, and lasted only 6 weeks (start in mid October 1911, which is 1912 Model year). They rather quickly found this to be a really bad idea and I think recalled all cars with it and switched to the side adjustment. Because the early 1912 plate I've got pictures of (courtesy of Royce Peterson) shows that side adjustment bolt.

[Walter Higgins]

I'm not as well read on 1912 stuff but McCalley's book states for 1911 that the model year runs Nov. 1910 through Dec. 1911 approx and for 1912 the model year runs Jan. 1912 to Sept 1912 approx.

That is correct, the arm continued to be used as it was even though they retained the bump for awhile after moving the tension bolt from vertical to the side. The part worked, so I supposed there was no reason to rework the mold or deplete the inventory. The next style of plate shown below used the same arm. I believe some years later while that same basic style of arm was in use they did eventually delete the bump. That same plate may even be (generally) correct for the oil fill timer as it is also a one-piece timer. Never had one to play with so I can't say for sure.

The two-piece timer was discontinued in 1911 and the plate has to be machined differently to accept a one-piece timer. You cannot install a one-piece timer on a two-piece timer engine without changing to the later style front plate.