I said above that a Timken B100 was the stock axle for a 1957 F-350. But what wasn't said was that F-350s in 57 could be SRW or DRW, and that the rear axle width might be different SRW to DRW. The 1957 Ford Body Builder's Layout Book shows both body styles to have 55.77" between rear tires when the truck is equipped with 8-19.5" tires. Would be similar for your 7.50 x 17s. That says that the wheel mounting surface (WMS) of the DRW version was further out from the center line. I would post the diagrams showing these dimensions but they are too large and too faint to read well when reduced. If you wish I'll mail you hard copies of the F-350 pages to let you see it, and to retain the documentation for your records. Just do me a PM with your mailing address.

Error above, I misread the chart which changes much of what's I've said here. The DRW spacing is 47.66", not 55.77". My apologies, now it makes more sense. Stu

The rear duals are period correct. I found the number in the 1960 Budd catalog. Stu

Edit: It's also possible I guess that rear spacers could have been fitted to a B100 on DRW models if there was only the one axle width available. This is what M-H did on my trucks to allow them to mount 5 x 8" DRWs to the stock Timken 51524 axle having either 5 x 6 7/8" pattern (1947 and earlier spec), or 8 x 6.5" (1948 and later spec). Pictures below. Stu

1947 version:



1948 version:



Edit edit: other things pop into my head. Since the truck is a conversion from SRW, Napco might have added adapters similar to the M-H ones. The below are called Stemco adapters, but Dayton made them too. These are 8 lug to 6 lug x 7.25" but other patterns were available too. Stu

 

This photo shows my '53 and the lack of axle hub protruding through. The rear hub was made with the offset cast into it. This way the inverted wheels lined up in the rear fenders. It did not have a removeable spacer like Stu's MH parts. The reason I sold this truck was because it was SO original it would have been a shame to modify it for higher road speeds, which I wanted for trips to the mainland. When I found my current 9' flareside box as a utility trailer in Spokane, I bought it for a future conversion, which turned out to be my '59 F350. Back to your dually rears. It seems to make the most sense that Napco delivered it with the duals. With it sitting 'way up firm and high' like that it really didn't need to be tubbed and maybe they didn't care if the outer duals sprayed up a bit of mud now and then. Plan B for my '59 would have been, keeping it chassis cab width dually axle, tubbing the wheel wells and buying fiberglass rear fenders from a hot rod vendor which are available in 4" extra width for those fat rear tires seen on hot rod trucks. I think in retrospect I would do it that way if the glass fenders fit the one ton (not sure). I wanted to keep the 49" between fenders so I could haul plywood and use my old alaskan camper in it. I've only had the camper in briefly and hauled plywood a couple of times. Oh well......

 

FWIW, I took a rear end from a 58 single rear wheel and found duals, then put it under a 1970 F-350 dually and it was a bolt up deal

 

Glad there is a line there somewhere's and you wouldn't cross it! LOL

 

And yes this would certainly work as long as the inner wheel cleared the leaf springs, but only on a flatbed. Your setup most likely ended up with something like 47 or 48" between the rear tires which is normal for a cab/chassis truck, but for a drw pickup this hub face dimension needs to be wider so there is a minimum of 52" between the rear tires. After I built my '59 pickup, a local realtor called me and said some old hermit had died in an old rental cabin he had charge of. The old guy had left behind 3 old trucks they needed to get rid of. I took this M715 got it running a day later and drove it around a bit. Two months later this 25 year old punk showed up at my place with a signed title from the old guy, so I had to let it go. Why I'm telling you this is that it was 6 lug and that rear axle would have gone right under the '59, turning it into a 6 lug all around and original looking with no spacer needed. 7.50 x 17s BTW...I won't even think about if I had both of those axles. I do know where another one is on the island about a mile from here...... Hmmmmmmm

 

Boomer, I understand where you're coming from re: your duals. Yeah, it looks goofy coming down the road, but to me, it's goofy in a good way. As in "get outta my way". Actually, my Napco is going to look very similar, with the rears hanging out. In my case, I'm stuck with it, as l have to keep it as delivered. I really can't consider extra wide fenders, or fender extensions. I suppose you could, though, depending on the level of accuracy you're intending. My Dodge, shown earlier in this thread, has fender extensions, and the hub and lug extenders, and I still consider it to be historically accurate. It received a "dually kit" when it was new to haul a giant camper. That kit consisted of a big cast iron spacer, foot-long lug extenders, and a pair of aluminum fender extensions. You could buy kits like this aftermarket back in the days of the giant camper craze. Yeah, the hubs are burried down inside the spacer, and it's not a real dually set-up, but it worked, apparently. Anyway, my Dodge only hauls dog now, so I don't see the bearing load issue being a problem. Unfortunately, the aluminum fender extensions were disintegrating by the time I got the truck, and were replaced with sheet metal. A street-rodder friend of mine made them for me. We had sheet steel flanged at a shop, and then spent 14 hours with a shrinker/stretcher forming them. Just depends on what you like. There's a truck around here that is a factory 9' dually with extended fenders. Same era as yours, but a 2x4. The extensions are wider than yours, like the yellow truck at Gold King.

And I was drooling over the green 140 a while back too. But the guy kept listing it with a couple of crappy pictures, and no description. I didn't really know what it was at the time. He even listed it as a Dodge at one point. That's how I first found it on C/L. BTW, I have a 1966 Chevelle SS that's been in my garage for 26 years. It's a beautiful, trophy winning car, but I hardly drive it. I think that old trucks are a more graceful way to age...

 

Napco - I hope you take me up on the offer of hard copies of the Ford reference I cited. It shows concretely in a chart that the SRW and DRW inner track width measurements match. Why they do isn't clear, which gets you back to potential differences in WMS-WMS figures for the B100 axle. Stu

 

I don't know how I missed this thread, but I'm glad I found it!

I've seen a few other one ton long box trucks from the same era, they weren't 4x4 but they had duals on the back and fender extensions. Makes me wonder if it was a local company that did it.

My plans are to (eventually) build a 4x4 dually with 9ft box out of my 73 F250, but it's going to be a while before that project gets started.

Sam

 

Bill is back to posting, but still not taking PMs. You might start a new thread with a more specific sounding title to catch his attention. Some guys even mention in their title that the question is aimed at him. He's the only one I know who can explain the DSO arrangement as it applies to a Napco. Stu

 

Thanks Stu. PM sent. DSO...?

 

Domestic Special Order.

 

I like the duallies too, Napco. In fact, I'm planning to supplement the SRW with a DRW model at some point. The trucks made with duals from the factory lack the extender like the one Stu showed, so the wheels sit back in the fender maybe half a wheel or a little better. Less of a 'tricycle' appearance, more of the wedge look. Like the brush truck you posted above.

BTW, no idea if it's still around but there was a dually R-140 sitting in a yard in WI last year that a guy made a video of. Still has all the pole-setting gear on it but remove the body and add a 9' bed from a 130 dually and voila!

 

Boomer, Seen this, and hoping someone will save it. I can't do it right now, with the Napco project, and pending arrival of the parts truck. Do hope for a 130, or 140 someday, but it's going to have to be a runner, or close. It's a huge commitment for this senior citizen on a limited budget just to keep all my existing stuff going. (20 vehicles).

There's an amazingly well preserved R160 4 x 4 on eBay now. Love the sad-face era. I really am in love with the yellow truck at Gold King... Totally my thing. Nasty-*** dually one ton pickups from the 50's and 60's.

Dan

 

Stu, Did get a hold of Bill by hitchhiking on a recent post "Paging NumberDummy". Not sure if that's ethical, but I did it anyway. Same title I would have posted on a new thread if I had thought of it. Just hit him with a few specific questions.

Like I say, I'm learning here. Never been on a forum before, and the last Ford I owned was a Model A back in the early 60's. So, over 50 years ago... Lots of catching up to do.

Dan

 

11/13/2014 - 12/04/2014 = 21 day Caribbean Cruise.

I was receiving sooo many P/M's and emails on daily basis, many that had nothing to do with trucks, that I decided to turn these FTE features off.

Y'all can reach me here: sylhall@aol.com