Jump to content

1929 or 1930 Ruxton


X-Frame
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have many, many photos of this one that I've attached (called the "Alligator"), including the chassis. It is, however, a prototype, so I don't know if the way it is assembled matches the production versions. But if it would be of assistance to you, I have about 220 hi-res photos of the car, inside, outside, top, bottom, documentation, etc., and would be happy to share.

Let me know if I can help.

post-31138-143138717463_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138717477_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138717491_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138717505_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have many, many photos of this one that I've attached (called the "Alligator"), including the chassis. It is, however, a prototype, so I don't know if the way it is assembled matches the production versions. But if it would be of assistance to you, I have about 220 hi-res photos of the car, inside, outside, top, bottom, documentation, etc., and would be happy to share.

Let me know if I can help.

Matt (and FE) these are wonderful. Thanks for the offer to share.

Are there any diagrams such as shop type, lube charts, etc... that may show the chassis?

What I am trying to establish is how the actual production layout is but going by the Alligator, it seems to have a ladder type frame? I am seeking this because I know that the Cord L-29 front wheel drive had torque issues with its frame and an X-brace was added to remedy this. The 1928 Alvis (England) also a front wheel drive utilized an X so was wondering if Ruxton followed suit for the same reasons or went another route? So any help establish that would be greatly appreciated!

Matt, being you are very familiar with the prototype I am sure you can say one way or another about it but if you have contacts with owners that would help tremendously!

Thanks!

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Eric,

Looking over my photos of the Alligator, I don't see any X-bracing, but it was also the first of its kind, so perhaps that came later. It's also a tiny roadster body, so it may not have needed much reinforcing compared to something larger and more substantial. I don't have any photos of build diagrams or frame layouts or even restoration photos of the car that would show a naked frame, I'm afraid. Just the finished car and a few articles about it.

One of the articles details how the Alligator challenged a new Cord L29 to a "tug-of-war" contest and won handily, but I think that's more a function of tire traction than any particular design advantage of the FWD systems. Of note, however, the Ruxton does indeed use real CV joints as we know them today, rather than the simple U-joints that the Cord used. Also note the different design of the front axle, although for sheer innovation, I think the Cord's curved axle hanging off a quartet of half elliptic leaf springs is a brilliant example of thinking around the problem.

I wish I could be more helpful. Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Matt... I believe the Cord may have lost due to traction because that was an issue for the car... bad weight distribution and the engine wasn't as powerful as it should have been.

On the Cord, even roadster coupes had the X but not sure about Ruxton. I saw a factory photo of a rolling Ruxton chassis but it was a side angle with floors installed so couldn't see the bare frame but may have been the same layout as the Alligator.

Many of the long gone brands which were also low prodution seem to lack shop manuals and diagrams.

The Cord-Auburn-Dusenberg museum has a 1930 on display and waiting on a reply from them about the frame. I'll post the result when I get them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...