Originality

[vping]

I'm curious if there is a website, book, or list of some sort that lists points if originality.

My intention is not starting a thread on if originality is the way to go or not, just what was original or not. Some may not care, some may and I respect either side.

The curiousity is if anyone over the years documented and put together a list of: "was that bolt painted", "was it not, was it black, was green, was it purple"....

I got to thinking about this after I learned split rims were galvanized and not painted silver. (Mine are crap IMHO and I'd love new ones)

There's a great website in regards to the MGTD, which list details like this and I enjoy the reading and discovery.

It's cold here and when I can't handle the lack of heat in the garage, I like to read about our classics, inside, in front of a nice warm fire and a cocktail.

Cheers,
Vince

[Chris Haynes]

There's a great website in regards to the MGTD, which list details like this and I enjoy the reading and discovery.
Cheers,
Vince

Morgan Garage Torn Down.

[jiminbartow]

If you want a book that details the original features of each Model T feature by feature, by year, by body type, you need to get the below book, “Model T Ford, The Car That Changed the World”, written by Bruce McCalley. It will not disappoint and will give you all the information on the Model T you desire. Plenty of pictures and illustrations too. Jim Patrick

PS. I discovered a great paint for painting the split rims of the Model T. A very durable roof paint called “Silver Brite”, by Sherwin Williams that stands up to all types of conditions and weather, looks beautiful and lasts forever. It can be used on bumpers as well.

IMG_8388.jpeg (99.85 KiB) Viewed 4308 times

[Allan]

Vincent, your split rims are unlikely to have been galvanised. Galvanising is dipping components into a bath of molten zinc. This would certainly jam up the latching mechanism at the split. The rims were electro plated Zinc. This is not galvanising. It is a process which results in a silver coating like galvanising, but the coating is much thinner, doesn't clag up components and doesn't give as long lasting a finish as galvanising.

Allan from down under.

[A Whiteman]

Hi Vincent - good question and respectfully asked

Try this site - the MTFCA has a wealth of detailed information as well - follow this link: https://www.mtfca.com/encyclopedia/

Bruce MCalley's book is available in 'soft copy' (on a pen drive I think). I have been told it has more information than in the book.
I don't have the details to order one but am sure someone here can chime in with that.

[vping]

Vincent, your split rims are unlikely to have been galvanised. Galvanising is dipping components into a bath of molten zinc. This would certainly jam up the latching mechanism at the split. The rims were electro plated Zinc. This is not galvanising. It is a process which results in a silver coating like galvanising, but the coating is much thinner, doesn't clag up components and doesn't give as long lasting a finish as galvanising.

Allan from down under.

Thanks for the correction. I'm sure I read zinc somewhere and my brain switched it to galvanized upon creating this post. Zinc makes more sense. I'd buy new rims if they were not so expensive. My are badly pitted and then painted over. Would be a lot of work to weld and body fill to get smooth.

[Jerry VanOoteghem]

I'm curious if there is a website, book, or list of some sort that lists points if originality.

My intention is not starting a thread on if originality is the way to go or not, just what was original or not. Some may not care, some may and I respect either side.

The curiousity is if anyone over the years documented and put together a list of: "was that bolt painted", "was it not, was it black, was green, was it purple"....

I got to thinking about this after I learned split rims were galvanized and not painted silver. (Mine are crap IMHO and I'd love new ones)

There's a great website in regards to the MGTD, which list details like this and I enjoy the reading and discovery.

It's cold here and when I can't handle the lack of heat in the garage, I like to read about our classics, inside, in front of a nice warm fire and a cocktail.

Cheers,
Vince

The Model T Ford Club International has a Judging Guidelines book. Many people overlook it because they never intend to have their car judged, However, it's enormously helpful for those, like you, who just want to "get it right".

https://model-t-ford-club-international ... th-edition

[Been Here Before]

Interesting. Following the ways of those who practice Historic Preservation and ascribe to the text found here to answer " (a) book, or list of some sort that lists points if originality.": https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/tps-publications.htm.

The national register states that an automobile is an eligible moving structure for the National Register, provided it follows the Secretaries Standards for preservation. But I still think they (the NPS) don't have a handle on Automobiles, yet, but do for airplanes and boats and trains, and tanks, and the ubiquitous log cabin.

But for what is is, and some have seen this before, I tried to get a Model T listed as a locally important vehicle and I got as far a as a review at state and federal levels.

Your best bet for originality is research and review of period manufacturing methods.

[vping]

I happen to have that book and have been reading it all morning. Already found I either have the wrong fenders or splash aprons or it's totally normal LOL.

[Been Here Before]

" Already found I either have the wrong fenders or splash aprons or it's totally normal LOL."


Yep. The Model T is hard to date and put together, especially when the factory parts catalogue states that it is for all Ts from 1908 to 1925. As a friend once told me -- "They all look alike." Pick a part and it will fit.

s-l500cataford1924.jpg (26.52 KiB) Viewed 4016 times

[Rich P. Bingham]

I had a parts list, update of the one George posted, dated March, 1928. It was my bible when I was a kid, and I found it very useful for identifying T stuff in the junk piles we raided. Yes, most parts were identified as being for 1909-27, although most of the problematic early parts were not mentioned, and not a few were tagged 1912-25, or so, for example. The dating notes were strictly for utility, of course, and had nothing to do with identification of any model years.

[John kuehn]

I believe the Gail Ronda parts identifying manuals were pretty good. The Gail Rodda parts ID guides are available from Lang’s.

Learning which parts for different years, where they go and etc comes clearer over time. I’ve been around Model T’s for many years and have learned by the Ford parts list books, Bruce McCalleys books, parts suppliers books, the forum and this website for the most part but I’m no expert and always learning.

The 17-25 ModelT’s are what I have and pretty much can identify those parts. BUT T parts would fit for a lot of different years and that’s where it’s gets tricky if it’s the correct parts!
Have fun!

[vping]

I'm that with Little British Cars. MGs, Healys, Jag's....I know them inside and out because I've been wrenching on them for over 40 years. I've had the T a week and really enjoying all the new discoveries. Seems like there's still great support out there.

[Wayne Sheldon]

Already found I either have the wrong fenders or splash aprons or it's totally normal LOL.

A lot of things with model T Fords become a moving target. Your side/splash aprons may be one of them.
Like a lot of long-timers in this hobby, I was fortunate to meet and have several discussions with Bruce McCalley. His research and the book were a work in progress. Bruce, more than any other one person, was responsible for pushing serious research, and publication, of the model T's details and history. But he knew when the book was published that many details would later be found to be incorrect. Side/splash aprons for 1925 sedans were one such detail.
Sadly, our hobby has a long history of following fads, and making changes that should not have been done.
Before Bruce came along with his passion for research and getting things right, too much of what was "known" about model Ts was mostly based upon faulty memories. Those and incomplete records from the earlier era had people believing in and expecting the model Ts to have fit into a modern era ideal. But the reality of the model T was much more chaotic than that. Many changes were made when they were ready or convenient, not in keeping with "normal" model year changes.
Back in the 1960s and '70s, a lot of 1925 sedans, mostly fordor but also some tudor, had the squared side aprons believed to belong on 1926 and later cars. "Prevailing wisdom" of the day touted that all those cars were not correct and that someone at some time had had to have changed the side aprons to the later style. Too many owners of 1925 sedans changed their cars to the earlier style side aprons. So, a simple yet significant anomaly has been largely lost to history.
Your model T owned is a 1925 tudor sedan? What combination of fenders and aprons/shields does it have? Do you think they may have been changed?
While the 1925 and 1926 tudor sedan bodies look very similar, they are significantly different. Fender style generally should follow chassis year, however, side apron/shields on late 1925s could be either earlier of later style.

I have not worked on many of the later "improved" model Ts. Although I have seen a couple of 1925s with the squared later apron/shields, I haven't ever looked at them closely. I have sometimes wondered how well they fit together?

[vping]

First of all, I appreciate all of the response to this thread and truly enjoy the knowledge being thrown at it.

Below is a picture of the fender/apron combo I discovered today. I'm still waiting on info from the PO on what was actually done to the car. If it's anything like he had for the TD I restored for him, then he's got great history.

[John kuehn]

A notable change in Model T’s came in 1919 with the introduction of an electric starter. That was a big improvement for a T. You can see and and buy older T’s with added starters and especially in the brass era cars. It’s not original to the earlier cars but people like to have the best of both eras. A brass T with a starter!

Others will have opinions about that for sure. It’s not fun when a T breaks your arm or shoulder trying to crank a T at an old car meet!
That comes along with the hobby and especially among older T owners. If I had a brass T I might add a starter and the changes that are made to do it. To each his own I guess.

[Been Here Before]

"A notable change in Model T’s came in 1919 with the introduction of an electric starter. That was a big improvement for a T. You can see and and buy older T’s with added starters and especially in the brass era cars. It’s not original to the earlier cars but people like to have the best of both eras. A brass T with a starter!"

Well yes and no.

Prior to the FMC introducing an electric, owners up to 1917 could purchase after market starters. Those with disposable cash?

Interesting too, the post that appear on the forum discuss problems with the FMC starters and Bendix.But not the after market. Too many been removed because they were not original?

No cars here with an aftermarket starter? Wow what if Ford adopted a starter generator...Oh wait one of his competitors did!

[Wayne Sheldon]

So many aspects to model T history! How Ford built them. How many Ford built differently. The standard view of model year changes. And the oh-so many model Ts that were done differently due to running changes during production!
After-market accessories add a whole another dimension to all automobiles of the era. Personally, I consider a few such accessories to add a fine touch and personalization to most cars of the era. However, I feel that too many accessories tend to spoil a car.
As for the side aprons/shields (semantics aside?) on your tudor? Is there anything to narrow down the actual time of manufacture for the car? Engine number, and any reasons for believing the engine is or is not original to the car?
I don't know the two-door sedans very well myself. However, a few years back when I had my 1924 coupe, I corresponded with one of the club's experts of 1924/'25 coupes. The research on coupes was such that details in the body construction itself could nearly pinpoint its manufacture to about three months (spring) of 1924. Its engine number was early April 1924, and likely the original engine.
I don't know if anyone has documented the tudor sedans as well as were the coupes. But details like the type and position of window regulators, amount of wood in the doors, and even type of belt moldings can sometimes pin down construction timelines. None of all that stuff is really important to the car or its historic value. However it does add interest, and make one style or the other side aprons more appropriate.
I seriously doubt that there was ever an official changeover to the newer style side aprons. Supply was running low on the old style and the new style were coming in preparing for the changeover to the "improved" 1926 models. So the factory personnel just began substituting the new type aprons on some cars. How many is anybody's guess. Could have been a couple hundred sedans? Or it may have been a few thousand of them. Regardless, apparently dozens of the survivor late 1925 model sedans had their original side aprons replaced by earlier style aprons. Fiftyish years ago, I personally spoke with at least three people that had made such a change on their late 1925 sedan. Three may not be a lot of cars, but I didn't really know a whole bunch of owners of late 1925 sedans, so I consider it a significant statistical cluster.
That whole side apron issue was one of the first issues that made me always tend to doubt the "prevailing wisdom's" usual rush to judgement.

If that car were mine? And if there is some reason to believe it was in fact a late 1925 model (and maybe had those style aprons originally???)? I would keep the later style side aprons on it as a testament to the fact that history is not always tied up in a nice neat ribbon and bow.

[vping]

Yeah I wasn't overly concerned about them. I figure anythung could have changed over the years and most of the tribal knowledge is lost as well. I'm just a caretaker of what it is now, until I pass on to the next caretaker.

[jiminbartow]

Let’s just hope the next caretaker does not have the mindset of Boyd Coddington…

Here are just a four examples out of the thousands of vintage cars that he destroyed and what that mindset can do. Coddington is dead now so he can do no more damage, but unfortunately, he has a lot of followers that are continuing his “work”. Jim Patrick

IMG_8394.jpeg (57.88 KiB) Viewed 3530 times

IMG_8395.jpeg (117.9 KiB) Viewed 3530 times

[John kuehn]

You’ve got that right Jim.

[TRDxB2]

I'm curious if there is a website, book, or list of some sort that lists points if originality.

My intention is not starting a thread on if originality is the way to go or not, just what was original or not. Some may not care, some may and I respect either side.

The curiousity is if anyone over the years documented and put together a list of: "was that bolt painted", "was it not, was it black, was green, was it purple"....

I got to thinking about this after I learned split rims were galvanized and not painted silver. (Mine are crap IMHO and I'd love new ones)

There's a great website in regards to the MGTD, which list details like this and I enjoy the reading and discovery.

It's cold here and when I can't handle the lack of heat in the garage, I like to read about our classics, inside, in front of a nice warm fire and a cocktail.

Cheers,
Vince

If you want members to help identify this & that for the Model T in question they will need photos (front & rear suspension; side , front & rear views) for a starter. Also the year the Model T is claimed to be & the engine number. T parts were basically upward/downward compatible with slight variations so............

This website has just about every FORD book (owners manual, parts list) by year for download or viewing on your PC https://www.cimorelli.com/mtdl/default.htm

--
--
other useful sites
The MTFCA has to encyclopedias versions old & new. The old is easier to get an answer about a part area across years while the new version is about a specific year.
Old version https://www.mtfca.com/encyclo/index.htm
New version https://www.mtfca.com/encyclopedia/
Drawings https://www.mtfca.com/phpBB3/app.php/gallery/album/5
--
--
The site as useful rebuild instructions https://modeltfordfix.com/
--
and lots on YouTube
examples of slight differences - and there are lots

hot air pipe.jpg (55.21 KiB) Viewed 3544 times

[Russ_Furstnow]

As was mentioned earlier, the MTFCI has a book entitled "The MTFCI Restoration Guide and Judging Guidelines". This book details nearly every part of the Model T by year in an effort to guide a Model T enthusiast when restoring the car. The book also includes Gail Rodda's "All the Same, Huh?" photos and comments. The photos have been digitized and are quite clear. The book also covers details on Model TT trucks and Canadian Fords. This book was reviewed by the late Bruce McCalley, and he gave it a "thumbs up" for its content. The book can be purchased by calling (586)864-5110. I hope this helps,
Russ Furstnow
MTFCI Chief Judge

[Jerry VanOoteghem]

As was mentioned earlier, the MTFCI has a book...

Russ Furstnow
MTFCI Chief Judge

Thanks Russ. I thought I was shouting into the wind...

[George Mills]

Wayne is absolutely correct in my view. Over the years I have managed to convince myself that starting in about April of 25, on closed cars only…’26 items started to integrate themselves into builds.

As Wayne pointed out…decades ago there was a hard line view….‘square’ shields only went with improved cars…no large brakes unless with a ‘26 chassis….bead under front fenders were only on commercial chassis only. This ‘wisdom’ actually led to people destroying their late ‘25 closed cars actual builds hawking Hershey for parts to make it right. While there is no apparent paperwork showing a phase in using the closed cars…the only other explanation for this significant amnomilty is that closed cars built from April 25 onward were POS’s and somehow service centers WANTED to use ‘26 items on the newer work…but not on open cars.

Ironically, the year I was at Hershey looking for bead out fenders and ‘round’ splash aprons for a late 25 Fordor my car took a best at the then brand new Historic Preservation category…lol. The late Bruce and I had a chat over what should I do we decided to leave it HP “as was”, still is, and somewhere long forgotten there were the items I picked up at Hershey…lol. Good luck.

[John kuehn]

This all goes back to what I’ve come to believe over the years. There was no exact cut off date in reality when Fords changes were coming to the T. And yes there was bulletin's put out saying so. But it did happen exactly as was stated on paper?
No in my opinion.
The only time the car was original was when the car came off the assembly line. And it was for that particular car only.
And if the car was built near the end of the production year that’s the point where dating what year the car was when Ford was using the earlier years parts and beginning to use the next production years parts things got confusing. And especially for a purist restorer.

If you restore a car to 95% of what it should be that’s pretty good. And yes there will be differing views among the purists.

[Wayne Sheldon]

Thank you for the kind words George M! I tend to be opinionated and outspoken, often opposing "prevailing opinions". History, and our beloved model Ts are one of my refuges where I enjoy going and doing research.
You mentioned the "truck" front fenders without one of beads running under the side apron. Fiftyish (again) years ago, one of the fine members of our local model T club was restoring a late 1925 touring car. The car was a fairly nice unmolested car with some known history. There was absolutely no indication of the car ever being damaged in any sort of a collision. Yet, both front fenders were the so-called "truck" fenders. As he considered his options restoring the car, the club at its monthly meetings discussed the subject often. Numerous club members admitted that they had previously replaced similar "truck" front fenders on their 1925 cars. It became very apparent that there were way too many 1925s with the "truck" front fenders to simply believe they were ALL victims of a previous inappropriate replacement. Too many of them had been very nice unrestored cars with little or no deviation since the factory. Quite a few club members began admitting that had they been given the information of so many such 1925 cars, they would not have replaced their fenders themselves.
It was noticed that very few earlier year models had had the "truck" fenders. It made too much sense that IF they were strictly later replacements, we should have seen similar numbers of earlier year models with the late replacements. While there were a few earlier cars with later fenders, most of those had the typical 1923 through 1925 front fenders (statistically most likely!), not the late 1925/"truck" fenders. Such smaller numbers made sense that the later fenders were later replacements of damaged fenders. There were just too many late 1925s with the "truck" fenders to accept that they all had to be later replacements.

Gary restored those "truck" fenders for his 1925 touring car, and what a beautiful car it was when he finished it! He eventually moved out of the area, but I ran into him at a national club meet about fifteen or twenty years later. He said he still had the car, and it still looked beautiful. "Truck" fenders and all!

[TRDxB2]

Apparently the term "commercial fender" (aka "Truck Fender") is only in reference to a style of fender applied to different model & years. Several discussions indicate the TT truck continued to use the 1925 fender through 1927 hence the name"Turck Fender" was apopted
continued to use the the 1925 fender in 1926-27
From the encyclopedia

--
--

[John kuehn]

The post about the so called truck fenders has the line in the beginning ; ( beginning in late 24 the commercial fenders were introduced. ) My late production year 24 Coupe had the commercial fenders on it when I inherited it. It was in the family since 1942 and I have no idea what was on it in 1942.
I noticed it in the late 1980’s when I started to notice the details were a little different than some of the other 24 Coupes I had seen. My car has a September engine no it.