wayne sheldon

It is a tough subject, and a very difficult line to draw. No restored car is 100 percent original. Frankly most nearly all original cars are not 100 percent original. Ed M's 1917 White is about as close as they can get! The question becomes how much "not original" is too much? After a hundred years, many things are usually beyond salvage. Paint, upholstery, tires and other rubber parts, even wooden framing, running boards, and trim, are often beyond use. (I got interrupted again, AHa snuck in ahead of me) The Stanley Steamers he brought up are one of the best examples of a car that most of the cars on the road today could not be allowed as antiques if a hard and fast line were drawn at around 60 to 80 percent original by weight? In the past, many hobbyists have suggested 75 percent. A lot of cars? If in good shape to begin with, that is doable. But, some cars, like many early steam cars, Between rotted wooden bodies, boilers, and all the other usual stuff? A lot of them would be in trouble at 50 percent truly original. A lot of pre 1910 gas and electric cars could have trouble at that level as well. My 1915 model T Ford runabout is an interesting contradiction. Truly a floor sweepings car. Built up around an original early 1915 body, that was separated from its rightful chassis by some lazy restorer back around 1960. The chassis probably got a wrong year cheap body because people then didn't know any better, and that was easier than re-wooding a marginal original body. The body then bounced around for years from one bad owner to another, until a good friend of mine acquired it on an earlier chassis that he wanted for one of his projects. In turn, he made me a great offer when I was looking to put a 1915 T together. I had been collecting model T parts for many years, with special attention to the late brass era years. So I already had most of what this original body was missing. So, it is what it is. I tell people that it is a reassembly built around a real early 1915 body. I also tell people that it has more real 1914 through 1916 more than a hundred year old sheet metal and most other visible parts than most Brass model Ts on most HCCA tours. Sad, but frankly, true. I made my own patch panels, for the body itself where part of it was rusted away, as well as patch panels for the fenders and side aprons where needed. Even the aluminum hood I think is an original. Even the running boards, have the smaller bolt holes for bolting to the fenders. Ford switched to the larger bolts about 1917. Can't date them much closer than that. It would have been a lot easier to have used the nice 1920s running boards I also had, but I wanted them as close as I could get them. So as rough as the earliest ones I had were, I repaired them. The bolt sizes date them to after 1913, but not as late as 1918. In the entire car, there probably isn't two square feet of sheet metal that is less than a hundred years old. In one way, my car is so very wrong. Yet, in another way, it is more right than most. And, regardless, I like it. Hobbyists for many years built cars up from remains of something that had at one time been a car. For the most part, I always believed it was better to do so than to lose the car completely and forever. It was better to be able to see, hear, and experience what had been than to have nothing left but a few old photographs and maybe one small part hidden away here or there. Recreations of one sort or another, tribute cars? A lot of them also fall into the "better to see them and hear them" category. Or do they? I am afraid I am not Solomon. Certainly, there is a place for them. However sometimes I see cars claimed to be things that they clearly are NOT! A tough line to draw.

Make that four? I am sure Keiser 31 knows what it is also. Everybody gets those moments from time to time when the brain just doesn't connect the right file.

Wow! Twelve minutes, three responses (including me?)

Wonderful advice and suggestions! Very well written! I am going to bookmark this thread.

Oh I like that one! I don't care what they called it.

If anybody would like a better look at that short discussion George K showed above? It can be found on the Model T Ford forum. A link directly to the discussion; http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/411944/444710.html?1400006889

Those headlamp lenses were used by Ford for less than one whole year. They had a green "eyebrow" visor painted onto the back inside. They were used for part of 1921. Of course, the lenses could have been changed at some later date, or similar style lenses were sold after-market. However there is a good chance those would be there because that chassis is a 1921? Speedsters can be tough to date. So many things were changed on them, even under the best circumstances, pinning down the year is difficult. Good looking car!

I took the original question as "what do I prefer to do". Not as what is right or wrong or better or more moral or superior or etc. And my early post was answered in that sense. The way I most like it, for myself. Absolutely, the hobby has room for a wide variety of interests and approaches. The cars, the history, the hobby, need cars stuck in museums for schools and boy scouts and young families to wander through and see an early automobile they would likely never see otherwise. Local cars and coffee events attract many local people from all walks of life to also see what they otherwise might not. I rarely attend the big shows, for a variety of family reasons, but when I do attend them, I love every minute of looking at some of the best of the best! And I love meeting some of the people, and hearing their stories. I have been fortunate to personally know a fair number of private collectors. Many of them still living that I won't mention their names out of respect for their desire for some amount of privacy. I treasure every minute I have been able to spend, in their shops, or wandering through their collections, looking at fantastic cars few people get to see! The people that can afford to, save and carefully preserve a lot more historic automobiles than I ever could. And someone may see that lone four cylinder Dodge sitting in the local history museum. That lone car might spark a curiosity that makes them later stop and look at the local cars and coffee. And that might spark a little more interest leading them to go see a local charity concourse. And who knows where that may lead? I can't say I like especially rare cars ruined by being turned into a restomod. However, I can appreciate a well done hotrod built from some common shell as well as a lot of other nonoriginal things. And as long as they still represent their original intention? Rusty or restored to 100 points, road ready or needing quite a bit before starting it up again? And almost anything in between the two extremes? I like almost all of them, as long as they are old enough to interest me at least a little bit. And even if the car is too modern to interest me? I still like to see someone, basically anyone, enjoying their version of a hobby. Antique automobiles, coins, stamps, books, whatever. By the way. I started serious collecting when I was nine by collecting coins. I still have a few non-valuable things left, but sold most of my coins about forty years ago to help pay the kids' medical bills. I still look at every coin I get in change. Two days ago, I got a 1943-S wartime silver nickel in my change! I am keeping it!

So this I take it this is the W-6 McCormick Deering? It looks similar to the McCormick tractor my grandfather was still using when I was really little. I don't have any real information on that tractor, they sold the largest portions of the ranch when I was about ten, and the McCormick went away at about that time. I have tried for years to identify the McCormick, even spent hours searching the internet and tractor sites, but never found a picture any closer to their McCormick than this one. Unfortunately I don't have any real information about that tractor. Just what I remember. I did drive it a number of times. It was my favorite tractor to drive. The seat had been removed and sat in a corner of the tractor repair shop for several years. So one stood up on a small rear deck, and operated the controls. My dad was a large man, there was barely enough room for him and me on that deck, even when I was under ten years old. It had two big brake levers, one to each rear wheel. Using the brake levers improperly could flip the tractor over! Hired hands managed to do that a few times. Dad and grandpa got tired of straightening the damage, and quit letting the hired hands drive that one. So often during harvest, it was dad and I ran the McCormick while hired hands drove the safer Ford orchard tractors. Dad would ride along and let me drive it into and out of the orchards, pulling trailers loaded with peaches. In later years, I often asked what year the old McCormick was. But nobody seemed to know. It was built before the World War 2 was the best answer I could get. It had pneumatic tires front and rear, but I don't know if it was original that way or not. The only name I ever saw on it was "McCormick"? I don't know if Deering or something else belonged or not? I have always wanted to get a couple old tractors. The Fords I drove solo often, and a McCormick of the mid to late 1930s would be at the top of my want list. But at this point, that is not likely to happen. Ah, yes. Some fuzzy old photo and Sheldon is off down a rabbit hole again! Enjoy your trip DD! And the visit keiser31!

The 1915 White is looking fantastic! Congratulations! The 1917 White looks great also!

One of the best parts of these forums is all the wonderful people we get to know here! Even if we often never do get to meet them face to face. I haven't been able to get out and away much in recent years. But here I get to keep in touch with Grimy and a number of other old friends, as well as several people I have known on this and other forums. And just a couple days ago, I discovered another regular poster here that was in fact a very good friend from over fifty years ago! One of the reasons I use my real name is that I like for people that know me to know that this is me. But I also understand that a lot of people do have good reasons to use pseudonyms. And for many people, those reasons are simply it is part of the internet way? I can be opinionated (who, ME?). And sometimes I am outspoken to a fault! That is part of me. So I still like to be known for who and what I am. But that is me. I do hope my situation can yet change, and hopefully before too much longer, so that I can get back out there on tours and to shows and club meetings. And I want to get out there and meet some of the forum people I have gotten to know. There are numerous meets and even old friends that are in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Arizona, and even some farther states that I want to go to. I want to meet forum friends along the way. So glad to see this and the photos of the two of you!

I don't think it is a 1922. Not with that radiator shell, or the hydraulic brakes. The brakes may have been offered as early as 1925 on Jewett (more likely 1926), and that looks about right for the radiator as well. The "Flying J" radiator ornament is fairly rare and very desirable if it is an original. I wish I could afford this. It would make a great companion for my 1927 6-45 Paige sedan.

I have never really been into model As myself, but over the years had many friends that were. I have picked up a bit of knowledge over the years. I don't know just how many versions of "blind back" sedans were produced, but it was about a half dozen significant variations at least! A good friend completely re-wooded an original leather back some years ago. He told me some of this. There were some changes to the body between 1928 and 1929 that made the cars different. The leatherback I think was the higher end, but a different imitation material top was also offered. Along with the steel back, and if I recall correctly, at least one 1930 variation? Survival rate was fairly low, on top of not a big seller to begin with. I have known of a few of these cars over the years, usually beautiful restorations. However, in the past couple years, there seem to a bunch of these crawling out of the woodwork? I suspect that they were so unusual and desirable for so many years, that a lot of them were grabbed up cheap in poor condition and kept in hopes of restoring the special model A someday. As the years passed by, the dream faded, and now all of a sudden a bunch of half messed up blind back sedans are hitting the market. The leather back and fabric back sedans were prone to top leaks and resultant wood rot. One I found online a few months back, someone had tried to replace the failed top wood with fiberglass? What a mess. I believe the steel back might actually be more rare? And this one may be a Briggs body? (I don't know for sure?) This looks like it might be a very worthwhile project.

Amen! I hate it when I get sucked in to see something special and then notice the "little detail" that turns it into a big nothing.

Thank you for that Peter G! Hard to believe, but I earned my living for many years in cutting edge technology! We did communications systems contracting. Installed commercial satellite dishes before cable television was even running programming over the the first satellite launched for such use. We participated in the testing of that first commercial programming satellite. Later we used some of the first encryption receivers, and later still, some of the first digital receivers outside military. We designed and built information technologies that eventually became the internet. We designed and built one of the first non-government LAN systems, and had to design and custom order equipment to run that RF system nearly a mile across town, because such equipment hadn't been put on the market yet. We were in on meetings with the programmers to coordinate systems compatibility. The programmers told us about this new thing called "cookies" that they were going to use? But we already knew all about cookies before that. We were on the cutting edge. Today? In spite of me spending too much time on my computer? (Mostly here!) I don't really like computers, or the internet. Although it would be more accurate to say I don't like the way gamers and people with personal agendas run them. Technology I actually do like. Properly handled, most of mankind's problems can be solved by technology. Handled incorrectly, the same technology can bring a lot of grief. I don't like the automatic updates I am forced to accept on my computer. I don't like the changes in programs, things that used to work well, now no longer do the things they used to do. Programs I paid good money for on promises of managing my needs for many years to come suddenly age out and are no longer compatible with my updated operating system I didn't want. The cursor on my computer is constantly doing all sorts of stupid things I do NOT want it to do. No matter how many times I try to turn of "hover" and "multi finger drag"? They keep coming back on, and, eventually, how I could turn them off before itself disappears. Frankly, I am tired of playing games, trying to avoid having the cursor go anywhere near something I don't want it to magically engage without my knowing about it. And that is an ever shrinking sphere of safe areas. I don't know for sure what, or how, but somehow my computer made a switch I did not want. And I had spent an hour trying to find my way back even before I posted my above. Ben Bruce and ply33's responses reassured me that the problem was on my computer. I thank them for that. And after another hour poking around, I found my way back. I think. Sorry for the rant. But I was trained by real engineers. We had a sort of a code. Design things to WORK. Make them SAFE, and as RELIABLE as reasonably possible. And make them to be used by normal average people that are not engineers. I don't think anybody designs things that way anymore. Thank you Peter G, and all the others I shall not try to name because I won't remember nearly enough of them, for all you do making this site one of the best on the entire internet! I really do appreciate it.

Putting all your leverage on one side of a long lever causes the torque to push to one side. That in turn causes it to bind somewhat (especially if there is any roughness, like rust in the threads). Get a little longer piece of iron, weld your pins to engage the disc near the middle. Then with the help of a friend or two, carefully push evenly (as much as you can?) from both sides. That allows the torque to center, reduces the binding, and sometimes makes just enough difference to allow the pieces to slide loose.

Pun enjoyed! As I said, it "might not be". And the rail car bars I have seen were all steel, but had a slightly different curve near the bottom end. I suspect it may have been intended for some similar usage, like moving or lifting heavy machinery. Specialty bars were made for many such things. I used to have a couple nice steel digging bars. Actually those digging bars belonged to my father, and unfortunately, my brother sold them and a few other tools I really wanted to keep shortly after dad passed away. But I still have one I had gotten from someone else in the family years ago. The digging bars were straight, with sharp points on each end. One end was a broad point, the other end a narrow point. But I often used those bars to move things like four ton lathes. Often the straight ends were not advantageous for that usage, but I could make it work.

Kind of the way I feel about it. Although I really have not had that much trouble either direction. I have loaned a couple of my cars out to friends a few times, but I am always uncomfortable doing so (its a control, or lack thereof, thing?). And I have driven friend's cars a number of times (but I always fear something will go wrong, even though it rarely does). I really don't like driving other people's cars much. a lot of people would be shocked to hear some of the cars I have had offers to drive, and turned down. A Stanley steamer. A Stutz Bearcat (a real brass era one!). And if there is a car better than a Stutz Bearcat? It would be a real Pope Portola roadster! Yes, I was told I could drive it if I wanted to. I said a simple short ride would be enough for me, and what a ride it was! I sometimes drive other people's cars if they are having problems, and want a second or third opinion. Done that quite a few times. Not sure about now, so many things have changed. But most antique automobile insurance used to be good about vehicles being driven by non-owners. I have known of several situations where something DID go wrong! And insurance covered it without a hassle. But to borrow a car for a day or two? I know a lot of collectors and hobbyists that do so, both lend and borrow. And almost always, good people on all sides, no troubles from doing so. But I would prefer to just drive my model T, or whatever non-Ford I may have. But that is silly me.

Ones I have seen had more of a longer curve near the bottom. It MIGHT be (or might not be?) for moving rail cars in the work yards (or even on sidings). One pops the end under the rail car wheel, between the steel wheel and the rail, in line with the rail. The purchase/leverage is incredible! A good rail man can move a loaded rail car (or a short string of empties) a considerable distance (fifty to a couple hundred feet) in a matter of minutes using one of those bars. Two inches at a time! A very handy tool for moving cars to the loading dock or lift when a switch engine isn't handy! I once used the same principles to position a four ton lathe after I was told it couldn't be done. And it wasn't on wheels!

Yeah I do know that! I don't get out and do much these days, haven't for way too long now. I got tied into too much family BS and cannot get away from it for more than a couple hours these days. Maybe I can explain that some day. Funny thing was, yesterday morning, I thought about you and your cousins quite a bit. I had gone to the deli and gotten some provolone for sandwiches. Somehow that made me think of you and your cousins! Good luck on your hunt for a pre-'16 Oakland! I want to see you on a Horseless Carriage tour with it! Hey, I want to see me on a Horseless Carriage tour following you in your Oakland! I think the Calistoga races were the most fun I ever had in my life, EVER!

Metz, probably a 1914. Metz had a standard factory model similar to this in both 1913 and 1914. The 1913 was called the "Special Roadster", while the 1914 was factory named the "Speedster" model. The 1913 Special Roadster had an about ten gallon round gasoline tank mounted onto the deck floor behind the seat, and wooden spoke wheels were standard, however wire wheels were optional. The 1914 Speedster had wire wheels as standard equipment, and an oval gasoline tank. SOME 1914 Speedster models also had headlamps mounted in the front fenders that look a lot like Pierce Arrow! However, I believe Metz ran afoul of Pierce's lawyers. It appears that the option did not last long, and most 1914 Metz Speedsters seen in era photos do not have the fender headlamps. The factory color for the 1914 Speedster was orange. The 1913 Special Roadster was red over black.

Wholly smokes! I had no idea that was you hiding behind that 32Pontiac6 moniker! Although I have known you had a 1932 Pontiac for some time now? And I heard about the Packard. I sure miss that old crowd. Maybe, somehow, hopefully not too long? And yes, I would definitely put you on the "Great Antique Car Guy" list!

Thank you ply33 and Ben Bruce! With your guidance and encouragement, I looked around a bit further, and think maybe I found it. I don't know WHAT I found, but switching a few things around, I think I got it back to where I liked it before. Again, thank you.

oldcarfudd mentioned Jim Boyden and his unrestored 1913. I have known Jim for more than fifty years, past president of the HCCA, and all-around great Horseless Carriage and Model T guy! He drives his Oakland a lot!

Maybe I can give a push to help get things rolling? Just a model T Ford, but definitely quirky. Picture has been on dozens of websites for many years, so I have no idea who to thank for it.