I would second the Brinkley book it is more a bio of Ford Motor company. It does not always portray Henry in favorable light. Worth getting for the references.
What a shame that a man's 80 year lifetime is summed up in a simple sentence. I guess we don't have to read any of those books recommended, or actually pay attention to facts, or truth, good or bad, now. I know that I have enjoyed many a day in the museum and the Greenfield village. I also know from reading a few of these books that Henry Ford was a racer before he started his company. I know that he developed Vanadium steel that made the Fords strong and light, so they would survive to this day. He also helped develop the cast block and the removable head. I was told early in life, take the time to read, gather facts before you make a judgement, it will serve you well.
Pretty shallow and silly if you ask me. Have you studied up on Henry's whole life? I'm sure he was'nt a "bitter old *******" all his life. Flawed? yes he was just like you, but be fair at least when you characterize someone publicly. Tell me do you know the scope of Henry's direct contribution to American life? Things like tractor technology, build techniques for the Ford factories, historical preservation of Americana, the very early promotion of minorities in the factories,scientific research in agricultural technologies, airplane and airport advancements, recycling of industrial material, research and support for the development of community mills and power generation, hospitals, schools etc.etc. I have spoken with a couple of senior folks that met him personally. One fellow met him in the Henry Ford school while he was learning lathe operation. This man said Henry was kind to him and was genuinely interested in what this guy who was 15 yo at the time had to say about what he was learning. Another lady I met said she was with her dad, an electrcian, working at the then new Greenfield Villiage when Henry walked over and just started "shooting the breeze" with them. There are lots of people with firsthand stories that echo Henry's approachability and respect for the working man. Antisemetism? Yes but not in the way you vultures think. Henry ignorantly and unfortunatly equated being Jewish with negative behavior. Many people say it was Henry's early relationships with bankers and lawyers (many of whom were Jewish) that formed this viewpoint. He was distrustful of those people because of a combination of some real bad experiences and some genuine ignorance on Henry's part. On the other hand Henry was a pascifist who hated war and tried to stop WWI. In 1942 when it became obvious that war was unavoidable Henry put his company's full effort into production of machines and materials in order to defeat America's foes which included nazi Germany, albeit this was near the end of Henry's life and Henry II had to come home and take over. There is waaay more to this subject, of course, than can be summed up in one or two sentences. One of the more unfortunate automotive issues with Ford is what happened to Ford during and after WWII. Edsel died of cancer in `43, Henry in `47. Ford Motor Company was in tough shape and could not retool as quickly as the mighty GM. Henry II hired the "whiz kids" which brought about the breakthrough `49 Ford, Mercury and Lincolns. There simply was not enough money resources and time to bring forth the overhead V8's that were on the drawing boards at the time. Plus the Flathead was still a respectible powerplant in it's own right. GM got the jump on ohv V8 technology. If it were'nt for the war Ford may have been able to to introduce their ohv's earlier and fended off the compe***ion from GM. In my view Ford kinda gets shafted for their efforts to help America win the war. Yep when you see the sea of GM powered early Fords this phenomenon's roots can be directly traced to Ford's product predicament resulting from wartime production. That fact has never sat well with me.
The story of the Ford family is an amazing story. All his adult life, Henry Ford was in total control and had the money to back it up. At a moment in time, Eleanor Ford put his feet to the fire and threatened to sell her stock if Old Henry didn't turn over control of the company to Henry Ford ll. Old Henry gave in, and young Henry, at the age of 25, took over the company from Harry Bennett, with a gun in his pocket. Harry Bennett, was head of security, and still had the ear of the old man. Now, at 25, Young Henry Ford ll was in complete control of Ford Motor Company. I never tire of reading about that dynasty.
You need to get a screen actor guild license with that act. I think the small block chevy is in a lot of cars because it produces power and torque at a cheap price, is light, reliable, and good looking. Please! Register this act before someone else steals it.
Here's a cl***ic Henry quote: "History is more or less bunk. It's tradition. We don't want tradition. We want to live in the present, and the only history that is worth a tinker's damn is the history we make today." -Henry Ford So take HIS advice and wipe your *** with his biographies.
If you had read his biography, you would know that this is a response describing what he thought about the way history was portrayed in the textbooks of the day. He didn't think that they were accurate. He quoted in 1919, "I'm going to give the people a real idea of history, I'm going to start a museum. We are going to actually show what happened in days gone by." He opened the Museum in 1929, and it still draws thousands of visitors every year to view history as it was. I may take his advice, but I will p*** on yours.
Funny as it is,but in every arena of automobile interest and performance, Ford Motor Company produces engine designs that are more than compe***ive except it seems in this genre' called "hot rodding". In my post I was speaking more of the high compression short stroke ohv V8's that Caddy and Olds introduced in `49. The sbc as you know did'nt come about till `55. No doubt the sbc was/is a good engine. My point is the pattern was set 6 years earlier. I also happen to think that the sbc owes alot to the Ford Flathead at least in concept. Simple light rugged and cheap to manufacture were the bywords for both engines. I would'nt be surprised if a couple Flatheads were'nt sitting in Chevrolet engineering at that time at least as a model for size and weight targets. Your response lolife, smacks of sarcasm, which while mildly funny detracts from your argument. You see each manufacturer produces cheap light and powerful V8's and have for along time. In fact Chrysler, Ford and some others all had engines with higher end features like shaft rockers vs the press in stud stuff. I'm sure you cannot deny that the sbc has greatly benefitted from strong aftermarket support. I never denied the merits of the GM engine lineup in the `50's just that it was an unfortunate turn of events that caught Ford out and got them behind. The result is what you see today, a tradition of shopping the rivals powerplant offerings while nearly totally ignoring the excellent choices Ford themselves have to offer. Please provide facts pointing out my errors if you care to rebut. I'd also like to submit evidence supporting my argument by providing to you this internal letter to Chevrolet from Zora Arkus Duntov himself. The creator of the ARDUN Ford V8 and the father of the Corvette. Please read. THOUGHTS PERTAINING TO YOUTH, HOT RODDERS, AND CHEVROLET The Hot Rod movement and interest in things connected with hop-up and speed is still growing. As an indication: the publications devoted to hot rodding and hop-upping, of which some half dozen have a very large circulation and are distributed nationally, did not exist some six years ago. From cover to cover, they are full of Fords. This is not surprising that the majority of hot rodders are eating, sleeping, and dreaming modified Fords. They know Ford parts from stern to stern better than Ford people themselves. A young man buying a magazine for the first time immediatly becomes introduced to Ford. It is reasonable to ***ume that when hot rodders or hot rod-influenced persons buy transportation, they buy Fords. As they progress in age and income, they graduate from jalopies to second-hand Fords, then to new Fords. Should we consider that it would be desirable to make these youths Chevrolet-minded? I think that we are in a position to carry out a successful attempt. However, there are many factors againt us: Loyalty and experience with Ford. Hop-up industry is geared with Ford. Law of number-thousands are and will be working on Fords for active compe***ion. Appearance of Fords overhead V8, now one year ahead of us. When a superior line of GM V8s appeared, there where remarkably few attempts to develop these, and none too successful. Also, the appearance of the V8s Chrysler was met with reluctance even though the success of Ardun-Fords conditioned them to the acceptance of Firepower. This year is the first one in which isolated Chrysler development met with succsess. The Bonneville records are divided between Ardun-Fords and Chryslers. Like all people, hot rodders are attracted by novelty. However, bitter experience has taught them that new development is costly and long, and therefore they are extremely conservative. From my observation, it takes an advanced hot rodder some three years to stumble toward the successful development of a new design. Overhead Fords will be in this stable between 1956 and 1957. The slide rule potential of our RPO V8 engine is extremely high, but to let things run their natural course will put us one year behind-and then not too many hot rodders will pick Chevrolet for development. One factor which can largely overcome this handicap would be the availability of ready-enginered parts for higher output: If the use of the Chevrolet engine would be made easy and the very first attempts would be crowned with succsess, the appeal of the new RPO V8 engine will take hold and not have the stigma of expensiveness like the Cadillac or Chrysler, and a swing to Chevrolet may be anticipated.This means the development of a range of special parts-camshafts, valves, springs, manifolds, pistons, and such-should be made available to the public. To make good in this field, the RPO parts must pertain not only to the engine but to the ch***is coponents as well. In fact, the use of light alloys and brake development, such as composite drums and discs, are already on the agenda of the Research and Development group. These thoughts are offered for what they are worth-one mans thinking aloud on the subject. Signed: Z. Arkus-Duntov dated: 12/16/53
Zora had a brother Yura, who was also instrumental in developing the Ardun kit. Their companies intent was to solve the fords overheating in trucks. The fact that it made a lot of horsepower was secondary. Yura doesn't get as much mention after 53, but the pair was often seen together in Popular Mechanics in the early 50's, or at least until Zora left for England, and then of course Yura was never mentioned again after Zora became famous. There's been a lot of jokes about what Henry said when he saw the Ardun, but I guess he saw it as too expensive for his market. You could buy a whole car for what the Ardun kit cost, but ford could have reduced costs considerably in volume.
Henry Floored great information. I really enjoyed reading your posts. To the guys who wrote negative posts towards Henry please take some time and read about him before you form a negative opinion of a truely great man. I am going to make an effort to learn more about Henry Ford, but what little I know is very positive. 1. I own 5 early Fords and they are engineered with so much thought and designed to last many many years. Good metals and heavy duty parts. I have seen Model As sit outside for 50 years and with minal work become roadworthy. Try parking a disposable Hondatoyotadihatsuthingy outside for that amount time. 2. Henry Ford evented the 5 day work week and weekend so people could enjoy his cars. 3. He evented the modern ***embly line
The Jalopy Journal
