another project in waiting perhaps
Thread Starter
|
I'll have the Roast Duck
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,622
Likes: 110
From: Northshore, MN
another project in waiting perhaps
Well, I recently picked up this '46 chassis. Don't exactly know why, other than I had $150 burning a hole in my pocket.
That said, I wouldn't mind finding a '40/41 tonner body for it.
That said, I wouldn't mind finding a '40/41 tonner body for it.
Thread Starter
|
I'll have the Roast Duck
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,622
Likes: 110
From: Northshore, MN
I suppose I could! lol.
I've got a 59a V8 and older 4sp. I could use. Some time soon, I'm going to pick up the gas tank and other parts that go along with this truck for a 12 pk of diet coke. Not a bad deal.
Yesterday I went to French Lake Auto Parts, and though they didn't have anything for 40/41 truck body parts, I did spend a lot of money for some other projects. That place is crazy cool!
I've got a 59a V8 and older 4sp. I could use. Some time soon, I'm going to pick up the gas tank and other parts that go along with this truck for a 12 pk of diet coke. Not a bad deal.
Yesterday I went to French Lake Auto Parts, and though they didn't have anything for 40/41 truck body parts, I did spend a lot of money for some other projects. That place is crazy cool!
Lead Driver
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,104
Likes: 138
From: Orcas Island Wa.
The tonners have the coolest hubcaps. Do they say V8 or Ford? After they brought out the inline six, they changed the tonner's hubcaps. Not sure when that was. This might not be a bad way to build a truck. You will know the condition of each part, as opposed to pulling one apart and finding no flange left on the rear fenders, or floormats with no floors underneath.....
Thread Starter
|
I'll have the Roast Duck
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,622
Likes: 110
From: Northshore, MN
Some details on the chassis I got.
1946 Ford tonner, 122" WB standard, but the rear frame is bobbed for a dump bed, along with the bracketry welded to the frame for holding twin lift cylinders.
Rear axle is the stock split Timken with 4.857 gears.
Wheels are stock 17's 5x6.875 BP, with the meaty rears, and newer fronts (radials I assume) that don't sit right, so I need two front tires.
Steering column is intact, as well as short running boards, but there's no engine, trans, or body sheet metal. Really not sure what I'm going to do with it yet. I have enough irons in the fire as is.
That said, if a tonner panel body becomes available, I'm all ears.
1946 Ford tonner, 122" WB standard, but the rear frame is bobbed for a dump bed, along with the bracketry welded to the frame for holding twin lift cylinders.
Rear axle is the stock split Timken with 4.857 gears.
Wheels are stock 17's 5x6.875 BP, with the meaty rears, and newer fronts (radials I assume) that don't sit right, so I need two front tires.
Steering column is intact, as well as short running boards, but there's no engine, trans, or body sheet metal. Really not sure what I'm going to do with it yet. I have enough irons in the fire as is.
That said, if a tonner panel body becomes available, I'm all ears.
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
|
I'll have the Roast Duck
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,622
Likes: 110
From: Northshore, MN
Some details on the chassis I got.
1946 Ford tonner, 122" WB standard, but the rear frame is bobbed for a dump bed, along with the bracketry welded to the frame for holding twin lift cylinders.
Rear axle is the stock split Timken with 4.857 gears.
Wheels are stock 17's 5x6.875 BP, with the meaty rears, and newer fronts (radials I assume) that don't sit right, so I need two front tires.
Steering column is intact, as well as short running boards, but there's no engine, trans, or body sheet metal. Really not sure what I'm going to do with it yet. I have enough irons in the fire as is.
One possibility is to make a small metal dump box for firewood or scrap metal, based on Stu's diagram from my other thread https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...-diagrams.html
That said, if a tonner panel body becomes available, I'm all ears.
I have one other option up my sleeve, but I won't reveal that until it actually becomes real.
1946 Ford tonner, 122" WB standard, but the rear frame is bobbed for a dump bed, along with the bracketry welded to the frame for holding twin lift cylinders.
Rear axle is the stock split Timken with 4.857 gears.
Wheels are stock 17's 5x6.875 BP, with the meaty rears, and newer fronts (radials I assume) that don't sit right, so I need two front tires.
Steering column is intact, as well as short running boards, but there's no engine, trans, or body sheet metal. Really not sure what I'm going to do with it yet. I have enough irons in the fire as is.
One possibility is to make a small metal dump box for firewood or scrap metal, based on Stu's diagram from my other thread https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...-diagrams.html
That said, if a tonner panel body becomes available, I'm all ears.
I have one other option up my sleeve, but I won't reveal that until it actually becomes real.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
Marmon-Herrington Man
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 11,986
Likes: 444
From: Central Illinois
I have a hair brained project idea too, but Ill-annoy makes it a giant pita if you don't have a straight path to get it legal. Plus, my project would require a HM, CH, or LU VIN. Stu
Edit - looking through one of my books, I wonder did the 47 and earlier trucks not have the production plant in the VIN? Stu
Edit - looking through one of my books, I wonder did the 47 and earlier trucks not have the production plant in the VIN? Stu
Cargo Master
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,927
Likes: 135
From: Houston
The 47 and earlier trucks did not have the production plant in the vin. In those years the vin was based on the number stamped on the transmission when the engine / transmission was built. Typically this happened at the Dearborn plant. Then the engine / transmission was shipped to an assembly plant (or used at the Dearborn plant). When the engine / transmission was installed at the assembly plant the transmission number was stamped onto the frame and became the vin. Vehicles came off the assembly line out of order compared to their vin... it must have caused confusion.
Marmon-Herrington Man
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 11,986
Likes: 444
From: Central Illinois
The 47 and earlier trucks did not have the production plant in the vin. In those years the vin was based on the number stamped on the transmission when the engine / transmission was built. Typically this happened at the Dearborn plant. Then the engine / transmission was shipped to an assembly plant (or used at the Dearborn plant). When the engine / transmission was installed at the assembly plant the transmission number was stamped onto the frame and became the vin. Vehicles came off the assembly line out of order compared to their vin... it must have caused confusion.