1932 Roadster Frame without reveal?

MacGyver could have done it with a bobby pin and chewing gum.

 

If Billy Shakespeare were reading this, he'd entitle this thread as "Much Ado About Nuthin!"
With thousands of postings here about cutting up nice Stock vintage bodies and chassis to build what we individually like, some have to get anal about reveal or not reveal on the '32 Deuce rails?
Ford used side splash aprons to the end of the '31 production year. In '32, FoMoCo made the frame to replace the splash apron: two less panels to stamp out, two fewer pieces to install on the assembly line. Car companies looked for ways to cut production costs, especially during the Great Depression, in order to present to the cash-stapped buying public a quality automobile at reasonable price.
Some have already alluded to Lil John, and I'm pretty sure many on here would flame this very imaginative and talented metal crafter. Why? Mainly because he made a lot of his stuff out of billet and refused to polish the machined finish. Are we not allowed personal preference anymore?

 

Henry Ford stamping the first V8 18-1.



Note the reveal.

I aint ruling out the very early frames not having the reveal theory, but weren't the first 32's 4 cylinders?

4 cylinder cars had serial numbers starting with 500000 (not sure on number of zero's.

So if the frame number is 5 - something and the theory is true, then could be original. If the frame number is 18- something, then it is not a ford frame but a re-stamp.

It's a million to one chance it was made by Ford. If I were a betting man I would say repro. It is probably not a good idea to ask such questions on an open and popular internet forum.

Mart.

 

It was originally a truck and it did originally have a 4 banger.

As for the forum. I don't need to, nor will I likely ever need to sell the car so frankly, I would rather figure out the mystery than worry about needing to sell the car someday and someone on this forum familar with this chain wanting to buy it.

I have a clean title and a VIN inspection. No harm, no foul. I have other chains going on and other questions out there and am gathering a lot of information.

I have now spoken to 3 people who had 32 frames without the reveal, but still no proof that I would conisder authoritative. I will find it.

 

Mike, is it a number in the low 5000000s?

Car was a 4 cyl, Early cars were 4 cyl, Some say the very early cars had no reveal.

Could add up. Especially if the numbers are stamped with the heavily stylised ford stamps correct for the period.

Mart.

 

Yes, I have heard that as well, several times, that the very first frame rails did not have the reveal.

 

The existence of the cowl tension divot certainly suggests original source. I think further research here requires heavy work unlikely to happen until car gets total rebuild...if it is original there should be a lot of visible heat marks and such under the paint where reveal was worked out, and of course the serial stamping would offer clues that would suggest but not prove originality or tampering.
If frame isn't too altered, some things should likely be visible, like kickup doublers that were on most or the little tack weld that once retained them on the line, holes that were welded, and nature of any empty holes found. Advanced forensics...

 

Most of us are just trying to find out the origin of this frame, because it APPEARS to be very original in every other way. Many of us, myself included are fully aware of the reason for the reveal, and have never seen a real, unmodified, Deuce frame without it.

I believe it is possible, although unlikely, that it came from the factory this way, and I want to know, as I have spent my entire adult life trying to learn all I can about these old Fords.

And I certainly can't imagine ANY hot rodder or fabricator worth talking to ,disrespecting Mr. Buttera . He was the man, and anyone on here should know that, even if he was the innovator of mainstream billet. The guy that spoke poorly of him would be the one to get flamed, I think.

Anyhow....we're just trying to figure this deal out. That's kinda why we're here

 

I have contact the Ford Reearch Center and am going to pay someone to research for me. I will keep you all updated. In the mean time, please feel free to keep the comments coming.

 

This Thread is about the owner of a car trying to get information, about a part on that car.

He'd like to find out a bit more history.


I dont see how this could be a bad thing...

 

On the research...Ford has the drawings of parts filed by part number, the PN's of the rails in this case, with changes dated and new drawings of the changed part. The records are not complete as stuff can disappear over 75 years, and I suspect that the numerous early changes on '32's are not necessarily well documented. The whole organization at Ford was in frantic thrash mode for the first part of the '32 production span, trying to iron out dozens of problems simultaneously. This is reflected in the parts book, which does not note many of the known changes.
I think there may be:
Parts drawings with changes for B-5015 and 16
Service letters on things changed at dealer level on existing cars, like the various frame braces added early in the year
Production change letters to assembly plants telling them about new parts, with the changes in assembly procedures and orders to either use up or scrap the obsolete version

And of course all is likely to be incomplete...
How about we just tear your car apart and sandblast the rails so we can see the tracks of any mods??

 

Bruce this is excellent info. Thank you.

 

We fellow HAMB'ers, so exciting news. Not yet complete, but exciting none-the-less. I contacted The Ford Research Center with this question www.thehenryford.org

I have had a couple of exchanges with the research center and it is some very exciting stuff! I want to finish my conversation with them before I post all of the details, but for now, I will leave you all with this quote (caps added by me). "....however, there was a stamped line following the fender & running board line added to the frame rail AFTER October 13, 1931." Stay tuned for more info.

 

I'll be waiting

 

If your K-member is original to the rails it could give another clue to this mystery. The earliest K-members had the pedal bracket built into it. The pedal assembly did not unbolt from the k-member. It would be interesting to know if your frame has this early K-member or not.

 

Junk hunter, I will let you know.

 

Lots of early parts are described in Rehor's books. If you really do have one of the first production frames, the K member is not a K at all. There are no front legs. Ford did send legs to dealers and the local distribution facilities for installation, but I'd bet they were not riveted.

Let us know the serial number on your frame. You can X out the last digits, but we need to know how early it really is.

I would find it hard to believe an October 1931 frame made it out of the factory for sale to the general public.

 

Good morning. A good friend of mine who is familar with my "reveal" quest was in Las Vegas yestrerday with the owner of the SoCal Speed Shop there. He was discussing my frame and the owner said, "I have a friend that has one of those old 32 frames WITHOUT THE REVEAL". He is going to give my buddy his friend's phone number. My friend is going to call him and get pictures and get his story. This is now the 4th person I have spoken to or heard of who says they have "an early 32 Ford frame without the reveal". I hope to hear back from the reserach institute today.

 

How about we just tear your car apart and sandblast the rails so we can see the tracks of any mods??
______________

I would be courious if the two other vin stamping areas show anything. Most people that would do a restamp would probably do just the firewall position.

 

Big Duece, that is not out of the question depending on what I hear from the Ford Research. Trust me, if I think I have something unique, I will do all I have to do to prove it and to document it.

 

You learn something new every day. We still don't know what you have exactly, but it sure is looking like FOMOCO made some frames without the reveal...........

 

I hope so MetalMan. Just wish Ford research would be faster. My theory is that if it was an outright "no, Ford never made a 32 frame without the reveal", first, I would have already heard back and second the researcher would have said, "the line was added after Oct. 1931". I think we shall know soon enough. My thought right now is that it is an early frame and that it was a 4 banger car. I already know it was a 4 banger so we will see.

 

Makes a guy wonder why someone would build an aftermarket frame to look as close to original as possible; rivets, K member, etc... even down to the smallest details that the purist have trouble seeing, and not have the most identifiable feature of a Deuce frame; the reveal. You could be on to something. None of us were around then when these frames were first stamped, it could be a prototype that went out the back door, with no documentation to show it.

 

exactly BigDuece

 

If I could drive it through the mountains for an hour or two, I might be able to tell if its real or not....

 

BigDuece, come to Denver, you can drive it. Update on the Ford research center. I heard from them today and they said it will be a couple of weeks as they are doing a write up. Stay tuned.

 

Bronson did it with a "Rock"

 

This is a very good point, Greg...


this is getting interesting!

 

It obvious that this is a modified frame with a bunch of holes being filled ,like the fender holes ,steering on the passenger side ? How does that look from inside the rail? Is the body real?

 

Modified might be a streach. Yes, there are several of the holes filled. The orignal builder told me this. Here are some pictures of the rails. No, the body is not original. This frame was originally a truck, just like the one pictured below.