Technical When did auto manufacturers quit using wood for structure?

Hello,

We always liked the idea of a custom station wagon. But the Model A wagons left much to be desired. Then along came the 1946-48 Ford Woody Wagons. Large wood support beams, outlining the whole rear structure of the station wagon. Also, additional large pieces to make up the outline of the doors. Upon appearance, the wood looked good. The wood added 200 to 300 additional pounds to each vehicle.

Most of the hot rod versions we saw were finished with nice paint, shiny wood and accessory wheels. But, there were a few that were pretty raw. The wood was not straight, the rot was evident and even the window frames were not secure. So, wood had its disadvantages.

For some reason, our search for a woody wagon ended with the 1949 Ford Station Wagon. Now, the structure was steel and the wood, as we saw at the West Long Beach side of Terminal Island Ford factory ***embly line, was not real wood. It still looked like a real wood.

While we were on tour with our elementary school cl***, an ***embly line worker gave me a strip of wood paneling from his section of the ***embly line. It pays to wander off and touch things… I was the only kid with a strip of real, "fake" wood. Everyone wanted to know where I got it… I told them it was on the floor. Even the teacher wanted to know what it was and if it was real wood.

Jnaki

So, over the years, the real wood structure turned back into real steel structure for a better fit and finish. But, to keep the look of a woody station wagons that were used at old railroad stations, hence the name “station wagon,” the look and style moved on in the 1949 Ford and later years as a simple way to “look like wood,” but it was cost effective.

“In 1950, Plymouth discontinued their woodie station wagon. Buick's 1953 Super Estate Wagon and 1953 Roadmaster Estate Wagon were the last production American station wagons to retain real wood construction. Other marques by then were touting the advantages of "all-steel" construction to the buying public. By 1955, only Ford and Mercury, joined in 1965 by Chrysler, offered a "woodie" appearance – evoking real wood with other materials including steel, plastics and DINOC (a vinyl product).”


old Friday Art

One idea we had was to convert an old 1946 Ford Woody into a steel panel version for structural soundness and security. Our version of a Woody Sedan Delivery for the hot rod style and design. YRMV

 

if i remember correctly my 48 chevy sedan delivery had wood framing behind the front door area to the rear door.

 

There's a different possible ****ysis. I'll try to keep politics out of it, but it's all about establishing capital investment in the manufacturing process as a prerequisite for participation. If you can't pay for presses and dies, and then unload enough output volume to pay for that, you can't play. It redefines the game, to continue the metaphor, to one with far fewer seats at the table. To that end it wasn't so much about making pressed steel construction possible as making it necessary.

Budd were the pioneers there, via the Dodge Brothers. Ford took their overtures as a challenge, and retaliated in kind. That was neither here nor there until certain world political events, beginning in 1922 but having really appreciable effect after 1933, resulted in the gradual transformation of the international motor industry, a process which would arguably not be complete until c.1990. I shall not go into that: suffice it to say that it wasn't simply about piecemeal product performance improvements.

But that is why I have trouble understanding why hot rodders are so afraid of wood. Structural woodwork is a technology which is open to anyone with a certain level of skill, and people can and do learn that. Pressed steel is a technology which is only open to people with lots of money — but note how craft metal-shaping has lately pried that open, too — even if that is still a level of skill above woodwork. What can I say? we love to see people doing the impossible with the tools they've got.

Today we've got CAD; we've got laser-cutting; we've got better adhesives, better laminating techniques, clever ways to form joints. Wood ought to be easier than ever.

 

Well its not.

 

I am damn sure using steel tubing when I build my Packard. I have no interest in becoming a cabinet maker. I've spent most of my life learning how to fabricate metal and metal will be the dominant component of any of my builds. YMMV.

 

I think my 1983 S-10 Blazer was made out of recons***uted sawdust. It got wet and dissolved.

 

I reskinned my 1929 ford cabriolet over a wood structure a few years back. It was a job that made me learn a lot about working with wood and how to incrementally ease a body over the wood shell. Doing it once, I would not be afraid of doing it a second time. I think the manufacturers needed a volume of vehicle production to make the investment worthwhile. Reskinning a body under a metal structure, when the original was a body over wood, does not seem to be that easy either.

 

I know this is an old thread, but I found it interesting. Franklin used wood frames through the late '20s, not only wood body framing, but actual wood frames made of Ash (if I remember correctly). Apparently they were quiet and extremely smooth riding. More recently, the C5 Corvettes (1997-2004) had composite balsa wood floors that were lighter than normally used materials and very strong. I don't know if that practice has been used on more recent generations or not.

 

a little off topic but i worked for a volvo dealer and the 245 had the wagon interior rear floor madw of plywoood until the mid 80s ( not structural)