Time warp

John VanDam, the guy that transported the car for me, said he offloaded it at the Amelia Island show to get at two other cars, and the "A" guys down there asked to look inside. They claimed the stitching on the door panels was clearly original, as were the seat, package tray and headliner. I'm pretty sure those haven't been changed. I'll pull the seat cushion out tomorrow.
 
One nice thing about buying a 40 to 60 year old resto,is that only the good original cars were being restored.I bought a 31 S/W sedan last summer that was restored in 72.The paint isnt perfect,but I wont freak-out if it gets a scratch on it.Nowadays cars are being restored that I wouldnt have even looked at 50 years ago.On my S/W,the tires on it had a71 date on them,had nylon cords & were weather checked.
 
columbiA said:
One nice thing about buying a 40 to 60 year old resto,is that only the good original cars were being restored.I bought a 31 S/W sedan last summer that was restored in 72.The paint isnt perfect,but I wont freak-out if it gets a scratch on it.Nowadays cars are being restored that I wouldnt have even looked at 50 years ago.On my S/W,the tires on it had a71 date on them,had nylon cords & were weather checked.
Click to expand...

Also most of the early 50's-60's resto's used original parts because good original parts were still available at affordable prices, in most cases, and there were not near as many 1-800 offshore reproduction parts available.
 
My '31 deluxe roadster was repainted, remotored and new interior/top put on back in the early '50s. I was told before I bought it. It now looks like an old original (and ragged), but road worthy unrestored car. And thats the way I'm going to leave it except for restoring mechanical (for safety/reliablity) issues.:)

Bob-A:D
 
I am not one to beat around the bush and please do not take this as saying you have a bad car.

It is a very nice car, it is just not an original untouched car.

This is clearly an older restoration. I would go on step further and say it was a body off restoration. The under body was was fully painted too.

I would put it at late 60's to early 70's. The paint is is failing like off in chips, I have seen a lot of original cars and the Ford paint does NOT fail like this. It was always well bonded. Usually it kind of wore off into areas and the original bonderized surface does not rust like you see in the pictures. It rusts, but go take a look at cars that are verified originals and you will see what I mean.

This car most likely had a rumble seat conversion. It has a repro curved inner panel and is missing the spare tire banana reinforcement that all original parts would have had. Plus you can see the well painted panel has chips falling off.

See the link to my website here: Rumble lids to see what I am talking about.

This car just appears to be an old restoration on what was probably a very nice car.

From the look at the rear springs you need to take them apart. Nice the orange rust seeping out indicating they have no lubrication. You can also see some leaking oil leaking from the driveshaft housing. Do I also see washers on the axle to center section bolts? If so they should not be there. I would be concerned what was done in the rear if they used washers since there was a reason Ford did not use washers. That indicates someone doing the work did not understand what they were working on and may have missed other important points. Also the bolts holding the driveshaft tube to the rear do not look right.

What about the window glass, what markings does it have. That will give a clue when the work was done. Keep in mind that NO windshield glass has survived and is useable. They all went cloudy by the late 30's and had to be replaced. People were getting away from the plate glass on the side windows and so glass was given date coded bugs.

For the interior, well the coupes have been a well understood car. Good quality interiors have been made for years. This car appears to have be a fairly good restoration and I would think the person spent the money for a better quality interior. From the pictures that interior looks very well done.

Now for my next controversial questions.

How does the car run and drive?

The original untouched cars are very smooth running. If the springs and shocks are working right the car should be comfortable to run at 60-65 MPH. Stepping on the brakes and the car feels like it wants to stop.

You should be be to idle down the engine and it should be fairly quiet. Many today have loose and noisy valve trains that give the engine a some extra noise. The dominate sound of a well done car is the rushing sound of the air sucking in the carb.

I hope I have not offended anyone.
The facts are pretty obvious to me that this was well done older restoration. I believe when you dig in behind panels you will find signs that this was a nice body to start with (probably rust free).
It is not a bad car, just not an original untouched car.
The path forward would be to learn about the A more and evaluate the true extents of the mechanical restoration. Odds are good that not everything is mechanically up to snuff (like the rear spring and possibly the rear axle). Then fix the stuff in little projects and have fun in the mean time.
 
I hate to rain on the party but looking at the photos the paint doesn't look original to me. In my experience original paint does not crack as it looks to have on the lower quarter panel and left rear fender. That is usually a sign of an older repaint where there is to much product on the job. Could it possibly have been repainted in the 60's or 70's ?
 
Whats that pedal next to the foot feed. two speed rear end?
It is a foot rest next to the gas pedal, I use it when I drive down a long open road with my hand held throttle on the steering column.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top