Steve Braverman

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: scott12180</div><div class="ubbcode-body">These hoods seem to come up now and because they were pretty handy when an old Franklin was being scrapped. They made a good dog house ! </div></div> I saw one once turned upside down and made into a wheelbarrow.

Just so you know, in my opinion, a '31 Lincoln is a 60mph car that steers and stops like a modern car. I'd love to have another one.

No problem. I never use it, but it's too nice to give away. The C&C cost about $15k new. My dad has a new Haulmark that you can also see in the pictures, and the difference in construction and quality is tremendous.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: keiser31</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey wait a minute....you kept it going, didn't you? </div></div> I gotta defend my air-cooled faith

I have a 1991 C&C. It's 24' long and 10,000 GVW. It's in good condition and has had little use. My grandfather bought it new, I have the receipt. The quality of this trailer is superb. I'd like $7,000 for it. Sorry for the lousy photos. The Franklin doesn't come with it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: keiser31</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The only real dependable air-cooled car that I know of was the Franklin. They performed very well in all conditions. Oh yeah.....and Vee Dubs & Corvairs. </div></div> Having owned all of the cars mentioned by keiser31, I can say that cooling problems were the only problems that these cars never had. Many motorcycles still use it as it can't be beat for simplicity and light weight. High-performance motorcycles have mostly went water-cooled to maintain tighter tolerances for engines that can rev past 15k rpm. I assume Porsche gave ti up for similar reasons. The only reason that I know of that air cooling is not in use today in road vehicles is emissions. Although, all of my air-cooled cars always passed the NYMA emissions test. BTW, what does this have to do with the 29 Dodge that is the basis of this thread?

My grandfather had two Lincolns, a 1930 and a 1931. I remember both cars very clearly. I know that the '32 is similar to the '31, but the '30 is totally different. The black sedan is the '31 Lincoln when I sold it. It was a standard four-door sedan. The body appears to be closed-coupled due to the enormous wheelbase, but it's not. The green phaeton is the '30. Many details are totally different as is the engine and chassis. They drove like night and day. I miss both cars, they were a beautiful pieces of machinery. The quality was amazing.

The Lincoln is definitely not a 29 or 30. It's a 31 or 32. They are totally different cars. I'm leaning towards a 1931. The body style is too hard to tell by the photo, but judging by the windshield header, it's a closed body style. Oh, and the latter two photos posted by Dave Moon are not Lincolns at all. I think they're Cadillacs.

Unfortunately for you, there is a huge population of Franklins in southern California due to very strong sales from Ralph Hamlin, the Franklin distributor in LA, so it may be hard to track down this particular car. Fortunately for you, there are many people in southern California that have been Franklin enthusiasts for many years. Hopefully, one of them will read this and recall your car.

1929 was Franklin's biggest production year with over 14,000 cars produced. If you know what the serial number is, the HH Franklin Club has a register of cars.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sldan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have seen many cars of the era with polished S/S spokes. </div></div> I've seen them on many cars also, even Model A Fords. It doesn't make it correct. As for the lock rings, many manufacturers started plating the lock rings in the 30s to prevent rust streaks on the sidewalls of the tires after driving in the rain. I've never seen them as original on anything prior to 1929.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: keiser31</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't know about the rest of you, but powder coating was not available in 1925, (I don't believe) either and I feel that there would be an obviously different look than paint. I guess I am just picky that way. </div></div> It looks like paint to me. If you want to get that picky, then the wheels should only be painted with Duco or whatever varnish-like paint they used in 1925.

Any plating shop can do nickel. However, I don't believe that Buffalo wheel were ever plated. Maybe somebody else can verify this. If it's your personal preference to plate parts of the wheel, that is your choice. Keep in mind, that if you ever want to sell the car, that many people will look at the plated wheels as a negative point, and it will actually de-value the car. Painting is so much less expensive, and most-likely authentic. For a car like a Stutz, the restoration should be authentic. As for durability, I've had a couple of sets of wire wheels powder coated. It's cheap ($50 per wheel) and very strong. When they finally do start to look beat up again, I'll drop another $250 and have them all done again.

NO CHROME! It is non-authentic and will greatly devalue these very desirable wheels. If you're spending the money, do it right.

I said, "How do you like my <span style="font-style: italic">pianist</span>."

Christopher, I'm afraid we've hijacked Dunton's original post, but that's how it goes. Yes, it's real wood around the windows. In 1931 it was woodgrained steel. I don't know why. I get about 10-12 mpg in my Franklin. Cooling system problems are non-existent with a Franklin. I've driven through the mountains in 95 degree heat and the only thing that overheated was me. Check out the Franklin Club web site at www.franklincar.org and look at the for sale ads. There are a few good ones on there.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Strange</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you know anyone that uses a 31-34 Franklin as a driver or tour car? </div></div> I drive my '32 sedan a LOT. This summer I did a 1200 mile run over a two-week period with my wife and small daughter. We had a great time. The car performs great. See my earlier post http://forums.aaca.org/ubbthreads.php/topics/529748/Re_No_More_Westleys#Post529748 I would think that the parts for Franklins are no harder to find than Packard parts. Our club is a very nice bunch, and parts are never a problem. When I had a '33 Chrysler, I had a much harder time finding parts.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Strange</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'd be happy with an 8 instead. So, any input on why Franklin's never managed to see the appreciation in value that packards seem to attract? </div></div> An 8 would be interesting indeed, but Franklin never produced one. The Franklin six from 31-34 makes 100hp, which puts it in the same league as some smaller eights. I think Franklins never saw the appreciation in value like Packards because their unique engineering appeals to a unique type of person. They're not for everyone.

I wouldn't assume that because the threads are old, that the cars are gone. Mine was advertised for over a year with no interest. It was sold at Hershey. Again, the Franklin Club is going to be your best resource for obtaining a Franklin.

That looks like part of an old telephone.

I'd bet those GTO shoes would be worth a few bucks today.

Just sold one There are a few around, but they don't come up for sale often. Are you a member of the Franklin Club? The club publishes a register of Franklins, so you can see how many cars exist, and where they're located. Neat little cars. Good luck with your search.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Wolk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Let me add that just because something's rare doesn't make it desirable or valuable. </div></div> Cow poop in the subway is rare, that doesn't make it worth more than regular cow poop.

Sorry Tom, I was only referring to my experiences from a driver's perspective. I agree that the quality and engineering were typically Franklin, in other words, superb. I drove a seven passenger V12 at the Trek two years ago and was very underwhelmed. Maybe it was that particular car. While it did get up and run down the highway nicely (in a straight line), around town it felt very sluggish, cumbersome and heavy. My very tired '32 Airman seemed to accelerate better. I always remember Bill Miller's comments on his V12 that he owned in the 50s. He didn't have anything nice to say about the car, and Bill could be somewhat "colorful." Maybe dad and I will make it to Philly this year. I missed your presentation at the Trek. It's hard for me to make the tech sessions at the Trek while running after the family.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Strange</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'd take a 1934 7 passenger Franklin twelve, if I could find one I could afford. </div></div> The Franklin V12 is highly overrated.