Why not Chevy?

[TerryB]

There is a thread in this section where pricing advice is requested on two cars, one is a 30 or 31 Model A Ford and the other is a 1930 Chevy sedan.  Both appear to be nice examples of cars from this period.  My question is why the Chevrolet is more of an orphan in the comparison?  It would seem the Chevy with its 6 cyl engine would be a better driver.  For sure the Model A has a larger fan base and good parts supply but what is it about the Chevys of that era that make them less desirable?   From what I see in the marketplace, Chevys from 1932 on start to get more interest and better prices.  I have been a Chevy guy for many years but the oldest one I ever owned was a 1955 model.

I'm interested to hear your comments!

Terry

[keiser31]

I have heard from numerous folks, especially my Dad, about the weak rear axles in the early Chevrolets. My Dad loved his 1932 Confederate roadster except for the fact that he kept having to replace the rear axles. He did not race it, just normal driving. Also as you said, a LOT of folks could relate to a Ford since their relatives had them and they were an easily fixed car when they broke down.

Edited March 21, 2016 by keiser31 (see edit history)

[Hudsy Wudsy]

GM bodies of the era you mention notorious for their high wood content. These bodies were constructed out of sheet metal stretched across wood frames which were very susceptible to rot. The wood frames are naturally concealed by upholstered panels and thus not easy to inspect. It isn't very surprising that buyers are often dubious of what they can't see, so that affects their reputation which, in turn, effects their value. While some replacement wood kits are made to help in the restoration of these cars, the number offered is fairly small. As I said earlier, the sheet metal is mounted onto the wood framework, so it's not a matter of simply removing an interior or door panel and installing the replacement wood. As these cars aged, the bodies often sagged and left the owner with doors that wouldn't close. As a result, a lot of nice cars were lost to history and those that are left suffer somewhat from the bad reputation. As for those that are left, it's sort of ironic that while their diminished numbers should make them more valuable, their reputation and difficulty to restore make them less valuable. Of course other factors such as parts availability and sources for reproduction parts play a big role, as well.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Hudsy Wudsy (see edit history)

[Guest]

Terry, I do not understand it either. It might have something to do with the hot rodding of the Ford after 1932. For myself I think that the Chevrolet was a better value than the Ford. When I look at my friends 1931 Cadillac 370 roadster and I look at a 1932 Confederate I'm thinking My God, this Chevrolet is a baby Cadillac!  After reading GM's Art and Color book I found out that Chevrolet's 1932 Confederate was designed to look like a baby Cadillac.  It may not have a 370V-12 but for power to weight the six is just fine. That's VALUE. The same holds true in the 39 Chevrolet, it's got a 39-40 Cadillac front end on it !! And this was done on purpose. 1940 Chevrolet has a 1940 Buick front end on it. GM saw the advantage of linking it's divisions together.

[1937hd45]

As mentioned above the body wood killed interest in the early Chevrolets. If you are a Ford guy like myself working on two 1939 Chevrolets a few years ago, the basic nuts and bolts (or lack of them) is a lot different than Ford. Lots of sharp edges on things under the hood to turn your hands bloody. Bob

[TerryB]

I was not aware of the wood issue being worse in the Chevy, I thought all the early cars had wood installed and were pretty much the same for needing replacement.  When I was shopping around for an old car many years ago and pre-Internet I looked at a 1930 Chevy coup but purchased a 1937 Dodge pick up instead.  

Another reason for my question was some early automobile paperwork my wife and I have found as executors of an estate.  The family's first car was a 1917 Ford, later replaced with a 1922 Ford, which was replaced by a 1925 Chevrolet.  The Chevy was then traded for a 1929 Essex.  After the Essex a Hudson was next but we are not sure of the model year of the Hudson.  

Thanks for the replys.  Great background info on cars of this era.

Terry

Edited March 21, 2016 by TerryB (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

I think it's more like asking why 1957 Fords aren't as popular as 1957 Chevys. It wasn't necessarily because one is inferior, it's just that personal preferences run to one make or model over another. It seems that a lot more 1957 Chevys survived than 1957 Fords, but it wasn't because the Fords were vastly inferior. People just liked the Chevys and kept them, even when they were simply used cars. Not so much with the Fords.

Did more 1930 Ford Model As survive than 1930 Chevrolets? Undoubtedly. Why? Who knows? The wood body might be one reason, but the other might simply be that people simply liked them or that parts were easier/cheaper to get. Nobody can argue that they aren't fun to drive and perhaps the Chevrolet is lacking that joie de vivre that the Model A offers.

I don't think you can point to one single Achilles' heel of the 1930 Chevrolet that is the cause for its lack of collectability today and therefore its relatively lower survival rate, it just happened that way.

[Guest AlCapone]

I have both the cars in question and on any given day a different one is my favorite.  The Model A is desirable because you can find parts for it in just about any barn. Parts for sure are easier to come by. Wayne

[60FlatTop]

It's probably a "had to be there" nuance. I WAS there for the '57 Ford and Chevy thing. The Ford wasn't vastly inferior. It was just inferior enough so the doors didn't close right after a year or two. That sucked and I remember a lot of guys holding Ford doors closed with their arm out the window on cold winter days. AND that hidden third starter bolt that was a PIA when the starter drives failed. Oh, and the bullet terminals in the wiring. So I know why I drove Chevys and Buicks in High School.

Bernie

 

[Hudsy Wudsy]

Matt is very right about the '57 Chevs and Fords.  I won't go into details much here, but I'll mention that Fords release of the larger bodied "57 model did give GM a bit of a surprise (corporate espionage, notwithstanding) and is said to have played a part in the use of the "B" body line up for '58. Others with better memories may weigh in on that particular thought of mine. The speedy, though occasionally quirky, Ford flathead V8 was instantly popular with folks during the Depression. The overhead six Chev engine was wonderfully dependable and economical, but not as fast. The Chev six also became louder and louder the longer a person owned the car. Overhead valve trains with some miles on them were prone to racket if not kept in adjustment, but I think that Chevies were particularly prone to wrist pin knock after time because of the use of cast iron pistons. When you think of how many times a wrist pin would have to stop and reverse the direction of a cast iron piston in a mile, it's no wonder that they grew loose and noisy over time. Most other manufactures choose alloy piston, despite the small cost increase. I want to add here that I've owned '30s Chevies and loved them, but some of the things that I've mentioned are likely reasons why they don't have the same dollar value to collectors as Fords and some other makes do. I'm not declaring war on Chevs or there owners!

[F&J]

That persons Chevy interested me more than his Ford.  But the question you asked, brings up another "pricing issue" with many makes of blue-collar cars built from 1920 to around 1927.  Those cars have never been popular enough to drive prices up.  It's been a soft market for those cars since before I first went to Hershey in 1971.

Soft prices does not mean that the car was "not as good".  My own personal example is a 1925 Star.  That dang car should have put Henry out of business, as it was fantastic as far as easy to drive, and a rock solid, easy starting motor, and good drivetrain.  It was twice the car that a same age T was.... I would not trade a Star for 3 Model T's. LOL

Back to that Chevy, if it is structurally sound as far as wood, I'd bet anyone who rode in both of his cars, they would like the ride quality on the Chevy better. Ford did make an A four door that had the same amount of wood as the Chevy, so it also rode better than a steel framed A.

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

I think it's more like asking why 1957 Fords aren't as popular as 1957 Chevys. It wasn't necessarily because one is inferior, it's just that personal preferences run to one make or model over another. It seems that a lot more 1957 Chevys survived than 1957 Fords, but it wasn't because the Fords were vastly inferior. People just liked the Chevys and kept them, even when they were simply used cars. Not so much with the Fords.

Did more 1930 Ford Model As survive than 1930 Chevrolets? Undoubtedly. Why? Who knows? The wood body might be one reason, but the other might simply be that people simply liked them or that parts were easier/cheaper to get. Nobody can argue that they aren't fun to drive and perhaps the Chevrolet is lacking that joie de vivre that the Model A offers.

I don't think you can point to one single Achilles' heel of the 1930 Chevrolet that is the cause for its lack of collectability today and therefore its relatively lower survival rate, it just happened that way.

It seems we are back to the same reason 32 Fords are more popular than the 1932 Chevy. Ford enthusiast and the Ford flathead V-8 did more for brand imaging that even Ford Motor co.  could ever have done.

!957 Fords IMO are equal in styling and performance than any 1957 Chevy, However it was the reputation and continued support of the Chevy small block that propelled hot rodders that built a brand reputation that Chevy marketing would have been envious for. Remember 1957 Ford outsold Chevy, but Chevy's mouse motor is what, just like the flat head Ford V-8 did in it's day built the image and reputation for younger generations to feed upon.

It is ironic today that of all the early cars of the late 20's and early 30's cars that are hot rodded, the most popular has always been the Ford, and as when we were kids it was the 32 FORD, but the most popular engine for those Ford  hot rods is the Chevy V-8. 

[Dave Henderson]

I think the reasons '30 Fords survive in greater numbers (despite the fact that Chevy outsold Ford every year in the '30's except '35) and commands a higher price than '30 chevys has been pretty well covered...except, how about that wonderful Model A exhaust sound!

[cahartley]

5 hours ago, helfen said:

Terry, I do not understand it either. It might have something to do with the hot rodding of the Ford after 1932. For myself I think that the Chevrolet was a better value than the Ford. When I look at my friends 1931 Cadillac 370 roadster and I look at a 1932 Confederate I'm thinking My God, this Chevrolet is a baby Cadillac!  After reading GM's Art and Color book I found out that Chevrolet's 1932 Confederate was designed to look like a baby Cadillac.

I think the '32 Confederate is one of the prettiest cars ever built that a reasonably common person could afford.......AND it "borrowed" Cadillac's synchronized transmission to boot....... 

[Paul Dobbin]

Having owned both a 1931 Chevy 5 window Coupe and a 1957 Ford Convertible, I see why they outsold the competition in their days, but failed to pass the test of time.  The 31 Chevrolet had the wooden body framing as a downfall, the 57 Fords bio-degraded so fast that nobody bothered to keep them up long enough to become old cars.  Once they became old cars, parts availability was awful because they were not worth fixing.  Years later that could be argued but by then it was to late to save the masses that had lost favor before they could become collectible.   Saving an awful car like either of the subject ones had to begin when about 7 years old.

[Hudsy Wudsy]

I was just a kid at the time, but I recall people talking a lot about how the doors on Fords of the mid fifties would pop open in accidents. I was too young to gauge how widespread that talk was, but if it was common talk, it sure would damage reputation. Do any of you recall such talk?

[smithbrother]

The 32 Ford radiator cover/shell was an instant hit.  That played a major role in the folks preferring the Ford.  As stated the FLAT HEAD was another reason, IMO

Dale in Indy 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Hudsy Wudsy said:

I was just a kid at the time, but I recall people talking a lot about how the doors on Fords of the mid fifties would pop open in accidents. I was too young to gauge how widespread that talk was, but if it was common talk, it sure would damage reputation. Do any of you recall such talk?

In 1956 Ford motor co. introduced the Lifeguard safety package. This package consisted of safety door locks and optional seat belts, a first for the industry. Maybe this is what you are referring to.

Edited March 22, 2016 by helfen (see edit history)

[Hudsy Wudsy]

Helfen, I can't help but wonder if that wasn't in response to a situation or problem  that they had in earlier models. Too many years have past for me to have much recollection in the matter.

[Guest]

11 hours ago, Hudsy Wudsy said:

Helfen, I can't help but wonder if that wasn't in response to a situation or problem  that they had in earlier models. Too many years have past for me to have much recollection in the matter.

  I'm sure it was, but it was not just Ford that had door opening problems in a crash. Even so if you hit something at the right angle, the right amount of force etc. with all the precautions the situation is not exactly exempt from mishap.

[Rusty_OToole]

Ford was cursed with an unreliable Y block V8 engine. It was notorious for sludging up the valve train oiling system causing premature valve train wear. There were various fixes for this,none much good short of removing the heads.

 

All cars suffered rust problems and Chrysler products had a lot of problems with rust, water leaks and poor all around body quality at that time. 57 Chevs may not have been the greatest car in the world but the body was in its 3d year of production and they pretty well had the bugs worked out. But, it was the Chev V8 that made it the favorite of hot rodders and they kept thousands of them on the road through the sixties and seventies.

[Ozstatman]

On 21/03/2016 at 10:43 AM, Dave Henderson said:

except, how about that wonderful Model A exhaust sound!

 

Agreed Dave, nothing like it!

 

Owned a couple of Model A's back in the '60's but about 15 years ago, walking home, heard that unmistakable sound coming up behind me. Sure enough, turned round and there was a 28/29 Roadster Pickup approaching!

[Dave Henderson]

On 3/22/2016 at 10:21 PM, Hudsy Wudsy said:

I was just a kid at the time, but I recall people talking a lot about how the doors on Fords of the mid fifties would pop open in accidents. I was too young to gauge how widespread that talk was, but if it was common talk, it sure would damage reputation. Do any of you recall such talk?

Speaking of things flying open on mid '50's Fords, I worked for an insurance company in the era, and the claims department received several claims from '57 Ford owners about their spare tires being stolen, right out of the locked trunk.  Someone figured it out, a karate chop to the area of the trunk keyhole did it, the lid would pop open! 

[kings32]

I have  a 1932 chevy 4dr . Have had it for over 40 years.  It has been on 13 Glidden tours , has only let me done  once . I broke the universel.  It is a great car to drive , easy to work on  . There are a lot of places to get parts , I have restore a lot of differ cars .  They are about the same to work on .  I have done a few A  To me not a great car . Just me

[Binger]

I agree with above that the chevys are loaded with wood and are more difficult to restore. The wood rots and the bodies collapse on themselves. I like my '30 sedan very much and it is more comfortable and a bit more powerful than my model As. 

[60FlatTop]

Mentioning wood in bodies, I cringed when I saw that Model A and the Chevy setting on that open trailer and imagined it rolling a 70 MPH or more on the highway. The Chevy may have actually suffered some.

 

Back around 1980 a friend had a Model A leatherback delivered on an open trailer from Oklahoma. I think they met in Ohio, somewhere about half way. The Model A had become more aerodynamic by the mile and the body was lying in a pile on the frame when he first saw it. He ended up keeping only the cowl and buying one of the Hudson Wagon Works station wagon bodies to put it back together.

 

Over the years I have had some of those flat front cars moved. An enclosed trailer is safest. I had a Model T C-cab truck moved locally once and gave strict instructions not to use the expressway and not to exceed 40 MPH.

 

Bernie

[Dandy Dave]

When buying a Chevy of that Vintage, Be sure to slam the doors and look for sawdust and termite remains when opening them.  Dandy Dave! 

[poci1957]

In both comparisons--the 1930 models and the 1957 models--I think the lesson is that new car popularity often does not correspond with collector interest or even the used car market in a few years.  Model A Fords are so ubiquitous that we sometimes forget that they were only made for 4 years because the Chevy was considered by many to be more desirable and a replacement was needed to compete.  And why was it more desirable?  Presumably the six cylinder engine and wood framed "Body by Fisher" that gave the Chevy some features of higher priced cars compared to the cheaper four cylinder Ford, not to mention just a little more snob appeal.  But the Ford four cylinder and (mostly) all steel body proved to be more durable and serviceable during the ensuing depression and war years, supported by easy parts and service availability.  The roles reversed in 1957, with the Ford being "longer, lower, wider, all-new", etc. compared to the Chevy, but the Chevy's smaller engine and body being the more durable and serviceable this time.  Always an interesting topic, Todd C         

[60FlatTop]

The difference between a Chevy and a Ford is pretty easy. After a couple thousand miles everything on a Chevy is worn and sloppy and it just continues to run. A Ford keeps breaking from the first day so you have to fix it all the time.

 

Then there is that other brand, Walter P's, with the wooden tool box. The first one of those I had would leak water through the two piece hood directly into the water collection pools the spark plugs nestled in. About one of those was enough.

Bernie

[john2dameron]

I would have been coming up on my 18th birthday when the '57 cars came out.  I don't know how I missed hearing about Ford doors coming open.  Of course, if involved in an accident doors had a habit of coming open on any car.  I really think automotive writers took to the Chevy V-8 because it was a new design and I think the media was 95% to blame for the popularity of the '57 Chevrolet.

[cahartley]

My old friend Chet Krause has one car left.......a '57 Chevy.

Some time ago I asked Chet "What's the deal with '57 Chevs anyway?" as i'm not particularly fond of them.

His answer was "1957 was the year Chevy got it all together" and I have no reason to doubt him.

[Dandy Dave]

14 hours ago, 60FlatTop said:

The difference between a Chevy and a Ford is pretty easy. After a couple thousand miles everything on a Chevy is worn and sloppy and it just continues to run. A Ford keeps breaking from the first day so you have to fix it all the time.

 

Then there is that other brand, Walter P's, with the wooden tool box. The first one of those I had would leak water through the two piece hood directly into the water collection pools the spark plugs nestled in. About one of those was enough.

Bernie

 

The Fordson Tractors did the same "Puddle in the Plug Pond" thing Burnie. First one of them I had when I was a youngster, I had to cut the rusted and broken plugs out of it. . The oval shaped fuel tank let the water drip right on top of them.  Dandy Dave! 

 

 

Edited March 25, 2016 by Dandy Dave (see edit history)

[Guest]

13 hours ago, john2dameron said:

I would have been coming up on my 18th birthday when the '57 cars came out.  I don't know how I missed hearing about Ford doors coming open.  Of course, if involved in an accident doors had a habit of coming open on any car.  I really think automotive writers took to the Chevy V-8 because it was a new design and I think the media was 95% to blame for the popularity of the '57 Chevrolet.

 The engine design was not new, but new ( 1955) in a Chevy. It was thrown together in a fast way in a crash program, it didn't even have a oil filter provision at first. The engine at first had many teething problems. The one problem it didn't have was with it's valve train and that's because it was allowed by the corporation to use Pontiac's against corporate policy.

 After the engine began being perfected it became a great small displacement engine especially for racing. After the car became a few years old / affordable and with the engine being perfected it was the kids that were hopping these cars up that generated the great myth about all TRI Year Chevy's. Fords on the other hand did not have the corporate back up for performance parts for the "Y" block and very little in the aftermarket, while HOT Chevy parts were and are TODAY everywhere.  When you talk to the Baby Boomer generation about cars of their youth, they are talking about the hopped up cars that they either drove or admired in their youth, NOT What came off the assy. line. That is why they are popular today. Just go to any cruise night or local car show and look for a 55-57 Chevy and you  see most of them are modified. Either built like their owners did when they were young or built like their owners dreamed about when they were young. Those Boomers also told their kids what things were like, showed them the pictures of their cars and showed them the cars like they had on cruise nights. Those are the images of young and old car people have  today of the 55-57 Chevy's. That's why they are popular today. 

When you look at the movies of kids having a fun time, hanging out , street racing etc. Like American Graffiti , just look at the cars you see, sure some girl is driving around in her parents Edsel, but the kids who are the stars are all driving modified cars. Those are the memories we have.  

Edited March 25, 2016 by helfen (see edit history)

[TerryB]

Memories of modified cars is a true statement.  Most of my friends and I had modified cars.  For example, my 55 Chevy was a four door sedan yet it had Corvair bucket seats up front and a three speed on the floor.  The engine was a 283 out of a 64.  

 

Terry

[F&J]

1 hour ago, helfen said:

1 hour ago, TerryB said:

Memories of modified cars is a true statement.  Most of my friends and I had modified cars.  For example, my 55 Chevy was a four door sedan yet it had Corvair bucket seats up front and a three speed on the floor.  The engine was a 283 out of a 64.  

 

Terry

 

When you look at the movies of kids having a fun time, hanging out , street racing etc. Like American Graffiti , just look at the cars you see, sure some girl is driving around in her parents Edsel, but the kids who are the stars are all driving modified cars. Those are the memories we have.  

 

Modification is a big part of car history since the first car was invented.   Then the first forgotten "race" between 2 early cars, when two owners gave it a go.

 

I see that old time modified hotrods are somewhat accepted by some of the major "antique car clubs".   I like stock, but also old time hot rods, always did, and still do at age 64.  It's part of my younger memories, so I have both types

 

Before the Chevy 265 was invented, the kids were using the new OHV 8's from Olds and Cadillac in their old Fords.  Olds was far more popular than Cad's...

Here's my other 1932 car; 1955 324"-Olds power, 1937 Buick top shift trans with Olds gears, dropped axle, and the ever popular 40 Ford dash.  It's almost done, and I'd better hurry up before I can't drive anymore..lol

 

[60FlatTop]

Memories of modified Chevies.

In 1971, a few months after getting out of the Navy, I was driving a 1958 Chevy Brookwood 4 door wagon with '64ish bucket seats, a close ratio Camaro 3 speed on the floor, with a 283 running a 4GC. It had a pair of new red Cheery bombs and 4.11 gears on a peg leg. A pair of Mickey Thompson mags were on the front and wide wagon wheels on the rear.

My Dad gave me a '57 Chevy for a High School graduation present. I had already owned a ;58 so the '57 felt like a lumber wagon with its big steering wheel and tall body. I only drove it a couple of months and replaced it with a black '60 Buick Invicta.

 

I was pretty deep into cars by then. I might have lacked a bit of polish in engine removal.

 

Edited March 26, 2016 by 60FlatTop (see edit history)

[Hudsy Wudsy]

Despite the fact that they can be found on premium autos, I've never much cared for the look of disc wheels. They have a sort of "I meant to do that look" on Packards, but I've always thought that they detracted from the looks of late twenties Chevrolets. In that one respect alone, I think that Model As are much better looking.

 

Edited March 30, 2016 by Hudsy Wudsy (see edit history)

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, Hudsy Wudsy said:

Despite the fact that they can be found on premium autos, I ve never much cared for the look of disc wheels. They have a sort of "I meant to do that look" on Packards, but I've always thought that they detracted from the looks of late twenties Chevrolets. In that one respect alone, I think that Model As are much better looking.

 

Couldn't you get a Chevy with wires or artillery wheels also.

 

 

[Hudsy Wudsy]

Helfen, first of all, let me say that my prior post about disc wheels was just my own opinion about appearance and nothing more. I wouldn't want anyone who had discs to be offended, it's just my personal taste and I have no idea what the general public prefers. Perhaps some of you will say that you prefer the look of disc wheels.  I presume that disc wheels cost less than spoke wheels, and by extension, wooden artillery wheels were probably the most expensive. However, I don't know any of that for a fact. Yes, I've seen Chevrolets with the other style wheels and, to my taste, they are all the cuter for it. I'm sure that they were available for an upcharge. You know, it just occurred to me for the first time that disc wheels remind me of tractors and farm equipment. It's probably their utilitarian look that I find cheap and unattractive. Again, that's just my opinion about appearance and not the quality of Chevrolets. Have any of you ever seen a Model A with disc wheels?

Edited March 30, 2016 by Hudsy Wudsy (see edit history)

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Hudsy Wudsy said:

Helfen, first of all, let me say that my prior post about disc wheels was just my own opinion about appearance and nothing more. I wouldn't want anyone who had discs to be offended, it's just my personal taste and I have no idea what the general public prefers. Perhaps some of you will say that you prefer the look of disc wheels.  I presume that disc wheels cost less than spoke wheels, and by extension, wooden artillery wheels were probably the most expensive. However, I don't know any of that for a fact. Yes, I've seen Chevrolets with the other style wheels and, to my taste, they are all the cuter for it. I'm sure that they were available for an upcharge. You know, it just occurred to me for the first time that disc wheels remind me of tractors and farm equipment. It's probably their utilitarian look that I find cheap and unattractive. Again, that's just my opinion about appearance and not the quality of Chevrolets. Have any of you ever seen a Model A with disc wheels?

 I agree with you and I prefer wires. I thought you meant Chevy didn't offer a alternative. It would be interesting to me what wheels were the basic stock wheel. I found a steel wheel on a 26 Cadillac ;