Carl Heideman said:It's funny that he calls it the muffler shop special because it's got three open pipes on each side. It's not as loud as you'd think and sounds great.
Preach it. Flatheads with straight pipes are right up there with a baby's laughter on the list of sounds that just inherently make your heart happy.
I scored a couple of supposedly good used flatheads a few days ago. Considering I have 4 cars that use this flathead I thought it would be good insurance for the future. Especially for the pickup due to the issue with the water damaged cylinder.
In reply to Carl Heideman :
Envy. Lust. Want. What is the going price on a worn but mostly crack free later engine? 47-53?
Have a lust to build the engine and find a car to put it in.
In reply to frenchyd :
These are pre-war 81a engines, which are the early 24 stud (desirable) but smaller displacement (221ci, less desirable) with the hard-to-service front mount distributor (less desirable). I paid $700 for both, including 2 starters, 3 distributors, new water pumps on one of them, and some other extras. That's pretty fair. The later 8BA engines you're talking about are more desirable and harder to find but don't seem to command much more around here. I bet I run across a motor for $300-500 once a month. It's always a gamble, but I've had pretty good luck with used engines.
Since all my cars use 81a engines, these will be easy to swap in when I need them. Swapping to other variants is pretty straightforward, but there are often small parts hunts for things like pulleys or brackets.
In reply to Carl Heideman :
I'm sure it's the same thing I have with finding cheap Jaguars. Knowledge and connections.
Thank you, I'll file that away in my brain so when I come across something in those price ranges I'll act.
My goal is to build a true hot rod even if 90% of it is reproduction or aftermarket.
I've been driving the pickup several times a week and doing some minor sorting. It still needs front shocks. It's got the stock Houdaille lever shocks but they leak and don't damp anymore. It turns out the tube shock kits on the market don't fit when the mechanical brake linkage is still there. I think I'm going to use MGB rear lever shocks in place of the Houdaille's because I've got a lot of good used ones. I'll just have to make some brackets and links, no big deal.
But distractions are always there and I wanted the 1938 Ford's stance improved. A few years ago, I bought a Chassis Engineering reverse eye spring, tube shock conversion kit, and front sway bar. I thought I'd mount them one component at a time and see how the ride is affected. First up was the reverse eye spring, which in theory would give me about 2" of drop.
You can see the spring is wrapped in the opposite direction for the shackles, which gives about 1" of drop. The other 1" was supposed to come from the spring itself.
But when I mounted it on the car, it was the exact same height--14-1/2" to the bottom of the front bumper. Maybe the stock spring was sagging. In addition to the disappointment about the height, the spring squeaked badly even though it had teflon sliders between most of the springs. Everyone says, give it some time to settle. I rarely see quality springs settle--just junk ones. I put about 100 miles on the car and waited a month and it didn't settle. So that made me happy.
I still wanted my ride height down about 2", so I removed the 2nd and 4th spring leaves from the top. I added two 1/4" spacers at the bottom so the spring clamp would still fit. The stock Ford springs are pretty hard, so I hoped softening the ride would be okay, especially considering I'm using modern(ish) shocks and a swaybar. When I took the spring apart, I found that the top leaf didn't have the teflon sliders. It also had a harsh 90 degree edge on it, which was most likely the cause of my squeak. I taper-ground the edges on a belt sander, liberally greased every leaf on the spring, then put it all back together.
The car ended up 1-3/4" lower--close enough to 2" for now. It was quite a bouncy ride as this car had junk Houdilles too.
I installed the tube shock conversion. It uses the 2 mounting holes for the stock shocks and requires drilling a 3rd hole in the bottom of the frame rail. It also uses a special shackle to mount the shock at the bottom.
No more squeak and the car is riding very nicely. I'll install the swaybar in the next few weeks. And get back to the '32.
The photos don't show it very well, but the stance is much improved in person.
Heck yeah, that looks a lot better with just a tiny bit of rake to it. I think it’s just right.
Also I guess I’m just noticing for the first time just how small the rear wheel arches are. Or maybe I’m reacting more to it because the rear tire sidewall looks to be almost flush to the opening. Is it a challenge taking off the rear wheel or does the suspension droop enough to make it no big deal?
That is a great looking car!
jerrysarcastic (Forum Supporter) said:Heck yeah, that looks a lot better with just a tiny bit of rake to it. I think it’s just right.
Also I guess I’m just noticing for the first time just how small the rear wheel arches are. Or maybe I’m reacting more to it because the rear tire sidewall looks to be almost flush to the opening. Is it a challenge taking off the rear wheel or does the suspension droop enough to make it no big deal?
Thanks Jerry. I'm pretty happy with the rake. A lot of people go for cartoonish proportions, which can look great, but aren't very good on the road. I know you've been working on this on your car, so I appreciate your feedback. You've got a good eye for the rear. They are a snug fit, but come on and off just fine with the suspension in droop. They'll just barely come on/off even with the suspension at ride height (jack stand under the rear axle). On these fat fendered Fords, one fairly common issue is that the wheels aren't centered in the wheel arch. They're usually about an inch too far forward, and some guys go to great lengths to center them. In this case, they're actually a little to the rear of the arch. This car has had some rust and patch panels, so maybe that's why it's not like the others. I'm not going to do anything about it anyway.
This rear 3/4 picture gives a little better picture of the rake. My iPhone, the black tires, and the dark blue body don't make it look as good in photos as in real life.
Some parts are coming for the 1932 Pickup today, so hopefully I'll get this thread back on track soon.
You'll need to log in to post.
