Technical 1932 Pickup Rebuild Thread UPDATED 1/11/16

Don't give yourself an ulcer over 1" in the spring. It looks perfectly good, it's barely noticeable and that's only because you're so close to it looking immediately before and after. Drive it a while and it will become normal to you and you'll be happy you haven't compromised the steering, engine, trans mounts or anything else you so carefully got right just for 1".

But that's just my 2 cents (less tax.)

 

Mart that thinking begs the question of weather or not it needs transfer case and front drive axle.

 

Moog ES 69 RL are the ones I have.

 

I have a bolt on rear sway bar too. [emoji2]

 

I spent some more time with the truck on my lunch hour today. I eyeballed how much material would have to come off the clutch housing to raise the front of the engine and that's no problem. What I do see being a big problem is the clearance between the sealing lip of the passenger valve cover to the firewall and the clearance of the distributor body to the modified original throttle lever shaft. Those are both already a really tight fit and lifting the front of the motor will also angle it back closer to the firewall. The toe board would also have to be relieved on the underside because it just barely clears the clutch housing and trans as it is.

I raised the front up an inch with the floor jack under the frame horns again and stood there staring at it for quite a while from many angles. I know some people like they're hot rods really low but that's not a necessity for me. I really like hot rods with stock undropped axles, too. For me as long as the proportions are good and the placement of the wheels relative to the frame/body are good, that's what I'm after and it looks good to me up one inch. There's still a ton of rake in the stance, too. So I think I will go ahead and prepare a stock main leaf and swap it out once I pull the engine. That will solve all of my steering clearance issue and I can move forward.

 

you know I don't have one of these era trucks (wish I did) and at my age iknow I never will,but when I see dennis has added an update I automatically open the thread. you sir should write how-to books I mean this as a compliment Tom

 

Uncle Bob,
Many thanks for the info!
Dave

 

Undropped with a stock axle, SBC and wires? Sounds like a restoration gone wrong. Unsubscribed. This is lame.

 

The fact that you're running 18s sort of nullifies going super low. If you wanted low you'd run 16s and 4:50's. What you're suggesting sounds like it will be fine.

Oh, and Dumprat.... Oh sorry, you unsubscribed..

Mart.

 

Dennis,
I'm basing my 32 woodie build on Danny and your pickups. Love this thread!

 

I like the fact that you are writing your own "book" . Did you do a build thread on your T roadster ?
i went half way through the thread before i remembered your old avatar.

 

That's right. I have stood next to Danny's truck when he drove it out here for the LA Roadster Show last year and the bottom of his frame is not low to the ground, either. His truck looks low because the rear tires are tucked right up into the fender arch bead on the bed. My previous 27/32 roadster was in the weeds and at times that made driving a little stressful because I had to remember the oil pan was 2" off the ground.

Do you mean fenderless with big & little 18's? Done right that could look really neat!

I didn't do one for the T. I didn't even read the HAMB back in '05-'07 when I was building it. I think I joined the HAMB in '08 to help promote the PRC Reliability Runs because I was a member and Chairman of that event. Maybe I should go back a do a retro-active build thread for it since I have, like, 2000 pictures covering the entire process...

 

Yes please!

 

Back in the late 50's when rebuilding a leaf spring, folks would use a strip of aluminum window screen to hold
the grease in place between the leaves. Is that still done??

 

Keep the updates coming.

 

Here's a woodie I built for a customer.

 

The 18" front tires we are running are close to the same height as 5.50-16, so it is possible to run fenders with 18's

 

Damn Danny that is niiiccce! I guess I have alternatives with fenders. But for now it's gonna be fenderless.

 

Right up front...
Yep I'm a "new guy" here, at least my sign on date says so, so I'll save you from having to remind me, but just in case you are still lurking.......
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

 

I'm sorry Dennis didn't build his truck the way you like although just about everyone else loves what he's doing. I know I do.

Go build your '34 the way you want. And Dennis will build his the way he wants regardless of what others think.

Warhol and Picasso didn't trash-talk each other's work although they were pretty different. This is called respect.

 

I'm pretty sure he was joking around. I'm also confident he knows Dennis's truck is perfect.

 

I was not trash talking.

But I am very confused as to what era this truck is supposed to be tradition wise? What is the year cut off? This seems to be the new HAMB style all its own. No eye to traditon at all.

It is absolutely his to build anyway he wants. But an explanation as to why on earth you would not cut the truck to make it work correctly at a low ride height is in order.

 

Dumprat is entitled to his opinion just like the rest of you.
No need to get butthurt because you don,t agree with it.

 

I get you point, but I don't appreciate the way it was delivered.
You could have pulled out in silence, zipped it up, and left the "party" in piece.

I find it a little mis matching, in the era perfect-ness. But I most confess I like it, and the whole tech that came with this thread is awesome beyond compare!!!!
It's a case of an traditional hot rod but not era perfect.
But if you take the mill out of the equation it, it looks the part. If you take the engine as the first step in an evolution it's good enough for me. And who's to say it ain't gonna get an drop axle or some other update later in life. Like all the true rods got back in the day, when they was outdated or broke the engine/trans/rear end stretch racing.

But for all the hardcore trad types on here I got to ask: where is all the builds with the spring behind front axle, or the heavily channeled rods with no chop, where is the chevys from the dry lake, the channeled 32's, the colum shifted A/Bs that was around ones apon a time? There was more styles of builds, that gas gotten droppped/dishonored/forgotten or plain simple got outdated in the parsuit of new, better and faster.

Sorry for the rant and back to what this is about.

 

My take on why Dennis makes the various choices on components and procedures is partly based on sentimental reasons as well as trying to honor his dads original input/sensibilities.

 

This has been one of the best technical threads out there, let's not derail it with the drama. Dennis keep at it, the truck looks great!

 

I know why I used the pieces I used on my truck. It was what I had, and it was what I wanted. I have no doubt Dennis was doing the exact same thing. It's no secret that he liked my truck enough to want HIS version of it. I'm honored by that. I love being able to inspire people to make their own path. When I read, or hear, people dogging someones work, the first thing I want to do is ask "where's your stuff?"

Just my $.02

 

That unsubscribe didn't last long.....Loving the truck Dennis....

 

We all know that Dennis does not need to justify his truck in any shape or form. Well, most of us do anyway. His work speaks for itself, and if some guy feels strongly enough that it offends his sense of traditionalism and period-correct-ness that he's owed an explanation or needs to hissy his way out of the room, so be it. Because, ya know, they were all built to a strict set of rules the first and second times around too, right?! lol

That Woody is damn cool, Danny. Dennis, what's the word of the day? Any lunch hour breakthroughs?

 

Dennis.. I heart your truck.