X-Frame

Members
  • Content Count

    803
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by X-Frame

  1. Thanks, Roger. Possibly the repair shop used an aftermarket fender or hood and not one from the factory or from an original parts car? Aftermarket panels are notorious for not fitting properly unless there is some alignment issues with the cowl from the accident? I am noticing the rear being up higher than normal... air suspension?
  2. Roger, congratulations. This is one of my favorite year and model as well as color combinations. Low mileage, still have the correct original whitewalls. But you have a sharp eye obviously with your 1/12 scale cars like me having managed auto detailing for major dealerships many years ago. My concern is where I circled on your photo... where the hood meets the door. There is a fit and finish issue and since the paint shade does seem to be off on the fender and hood, possible a fender bender in the past occurred and the new fender is not a good fit (alignment)? There should not be a big gap there but tight. Examples attached as well.
  3. 1940 Cabriolet Chassis Question... I am new here but have been gathering information for an academic book on the design and development of vehicle chassis for the past 9 years. The '40 Convertible fame has been a puzzle for me and hope historians or those who own them can help solve this one? We know that there was no 1939 Convertible offered in the states but there was one exported to Australia. The frame had a conventional X brace added to it by Holden prior to assembling the kits. The '40 models were also delayed. The chassis design is a one year, one model only design not shared by any other GM line and is a bit awkward and overbuilt. Even though GM had been using some form of X bracing since 1933 and even Chevrolet used it on their 1935 Standard models (another one year only frame). It is known that Marvin Coyle "Mr. Facts and Figures" was a penny pincher and as soon as he took over the Chevrolet helm, ordered the new KY design frame to be redesigned since it was costly in many ways to produce. So, why was this massive one year only tooling allowed? The frame is not mentioned in any sales materials. Not even shown in shop manuals. I have only run across one body shims chart from a service bulletin and the layout is not 100% of what the production version ended up. I did find a mention in the 1941 Chevrolet Engineering book about how this design was a failure and the new 1941 frame, which is basically a traditional X braced style, was much stronger. Something they could have utilized in 1940 but didn't... why? Who designed this frame? Who authorized it? And why was this particular oddly laid out design chosen over tried and true X bracing other GM cars were already using? Thanks for any information! Eric Photo from Bob Johnson's online collection
  4. Want to bring this topic back up and hope new members may have something to contribute. I can add that the new London Taxi TX5 is a unibody car and so, the TX4 was their last to use an X frame configuration. Now, are there "any" cars (or trucks) being made, worldwide, that still uses a cruciform or X braced chassis frame? Thanks!
  5. 1907 Imperial double-drop still being used on vehicles today
  6. A tech question hoping someone here may be able to add to this? The double-drop chassis frame design has been a standard part of vehicle technology since the 1930s but dates back much earlier. Supposedly, the world's first car to use it was the 1907 Imperial (not Chrysler) from Williamsport, PA. But prior to that, there was the single-drop design which the 1905 Peerless is credited again in the USA. I found an earlier version with the UK 1904 Wilson-Pilcher. Does anyone know of even an earlier version of the single (or even double) drop frame?
  7. CY is the manufacturer UD is the tire size F317 is the tire type / model 19 is the week of the year 5 is the year Since tires have shelf life, no one would be expecting to figure 20+ years later what year it was made
  8. Where did you come up with 1971? The last digit in these DOT codes is the year and it is a '5'. I wasn't sure about when the lettering code changes before 2005? Thanks.
  9. It's a McCreary tire P315/45 16 possibly made the 19th week in any year with a 5 in it such as 2005, 1995, 1985, 1975 Hard to tell.
  10. Does anyone have a high resolution scan of this Zephyr X-ray illustration that you can share? Thanks.
  11. Actually, Chevrolet used this chassis layout from 1934-1936 (only on the Master in 1936) and Pontiac also used it the same years. Not an "X" but is called a K-Y frame yet functions the same way. Chevrolet went to the boxed girder ladder frame in 1937 (1936 on the Standard model) and Pontiac went with a more traditional X braced frame in 1937. Chevy played with a X brace ladder frame on the 1935 Standard model, one year only. And the 1935 Pontiac Deluxe had a different frame which was a cross between the K-Y and X. Would like to find the original photos of this to get a scan.
  12. Thanks!... where is the original available at?
  13. Found it... actually the same year your car is... 1947 Champion...
  14. Not a 1950 Ford nor Chevy. The 1949 Ford looks like this but the lens is a different shape. The 1950 Hudson also looks similar but the lens again is different. My be custom built (machined)?
  15. You are very luck to catch the '38 Plymouth in time. No, not a Buick nor Cadillac but the Plymouth coupes are also desirable cars and looking forward to your posts of the restoration process.
  16. I agree. When you swap the matching numbers chassis and engine then chop, channel, and torch the rest while gutting the interior, what is left? Nothing you can work with to restore the car back to original. Like you said, some people only see it as a car and could care less about collectability. One further with your baseball analogy is that some will only see it as a piece of cardboard so what is all of the hoopla with the value? It sickens me to see rare or low number cars being altered beyond any future restoration. Might as well send it to the crusher. Eric
  17. The point of all of this is why have rules and not use them? That is only one step away from anarchy. Also, rules are in place to keep everyone safe, if they are followed. Maybe there is a longing for the "good ol' days" but what is so "great" about today's dysfunctional antisocial society? And no, social media does not count as being "social". Education.
  18. "the Land of Entitlement" goes hand-in-hand with one of my earlier statements about Generation X and Millennials who have no social skills. When I grew up we were disciplined. Today you end up in jail if you do which leads to kids that feel "entitled" and flows over to the "all about me" society. I am not here to talk about parenting but just saying.... On a side note, there was two local news stories about companies who have 80% Millennial employees because they can get their skills cheap out the starting gate. One concern was would they stay focus to work? In their defense they said they would but also have things like ping pong tables, bean bag chairs, etc... no "formal" skills to be in the "real" world but gives them an environment they are familiar with which is detached from it. It is these cheap upstarts hurting senior workers, like me.
  19. Bill, just made a comment that "speed" is not the only factor and yes, with people who are totally obsessed with their phones only grows, so does that aspect of the equation. There are so many other things daily drivers around town do that causes accidents and deaths because of their being dumbasses. Will taking tests help? It can't hurt because either you remember the rules and pass the test or loose your license because you don't. People who get ticketed will often have to take classes. The only difference is that one person got caught breaking the rules, the other didn't... yet. But why put other people's lives at risk because of your ignorance? That is the point I am trying to make.
  20. I'll agree there but "speed" is only one aspect of poor driving habits. Take my examples above and more. More than speed causes accidents, even deaths.
  21. To me that is lawlessness (the speeding)
  22. John, again, someone says they don't agree but did not say why? Are you afraid of not passing? Don't like tests? Most people I talk to don't grasp the rules of the road like they should. OK... If I put my arm out of the window up in a 90-degree angle does that mean I am making a right turn or waving Hi to someone? When you are at an intersection and a car is also stopped in the oncoming direction but making a left turn and you straight through, do I have the right of way or whoever gets through the intersection first wins? When approaching a stop sign, if the person in front of you stopped, do you also stop or just roll on through with the car in front like you are an attached trailer? At a crosswalk, the wide white line painted across your lane... do you stop with your front bumper over it or the middle of the car so your front end is out in traffic? Just some stupid stuff I see and have encountered daily and there is a LOT more because people do not follow rules of the road. Yeah, that is an old excuse people use that never works and don't know why they think the cops haven't heard it before either?
  23. I'll go one further to contemplate. What if you are on a two lane road and the people in the right lane are going too slow and the people in the left too fast?
  24. Problem in Virginia, police are ticket happy but the other problem is finding a cop on the job because there is a need for more of them. As for the 10-year test, that will help and supposedly for those who get caught in-between, are to go to the court appointed Traffic School.