later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

Yesterday, I started a thread about which flathead to use in an otherwise stock 34 Coupe. My goal is an increase in power for highway cruising. In your expert opinion would I be better off with a 21 stud engine and trying to round up a Columbia rear end or making the modifications necessary in order to use a 24 stud or higher hp later version of flathead? I do not want to alter the coupe's firewall in any way.

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

Personal opinion, not expert. I have a number of 30's Fords with Columbia
rears. Your not going to see much difference between a GOOD running 21
engine and a later one for normal driving. I have some with 21 stud engines
and 24 stud engines. I like a 3:78 rear with the Columbia in all years. With a
Columbia it's like a 4th gear. Very seldom do you use Columbia in 2nd or 3rd,
at first it is experimental to play a little. You need to learn how to drive in
Columbia OD. At 65 no Columbia the engine is running pretty fast, in Columbia
at 65 it the engine sounds like it's going 45 MPH. You never start out in Columbia
and you plan ahead when coming to hills or small mountains, I get up to a faster
speed before getting into a large hill and very seldom have to drop out of OD. I
have all the controls installed so as soon as I press the clutch it drops out of OD
without pushing any switch. Non of mine are so called bullet proofed and never
had a problem in several hundred thousand miles in over 30 years. The only maintenance is squirting MMO in the inlet pipe of the shift cylinder once a year
to keep the leather cups soft. It's hard for me to drive an old Ford without a
Columbia. The Columbia is a 28 1/2% overdrive. G.M.

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

I will have to ditto G.M's comments with a few supplements..
My '36 had a Columbia under it when I purchased the car in 1952, the car was dead stock w/21 stud engine and a 3.78 rear end. The engine was a Meyer's/Welsh Ford engine which probably had been over-bored.
Having driven farm trucks with two speed rear ends I had no difficulty adapting to the proper way to shift a two speed rear end.
I drove the '36 almost 40.k over a two year period before I pulled the '36 engine, replacing it with a well built 59 AB. The added power of the built 59 AB engine did improve the power and performance of the Ford.
In 1955 I replaced the original Columbia with a '46-48 Columbia. The application was done using the stock '36 drive-line and center section. I used a complete '46-48 Columbia with '46-48 axles and housings and '37 radius bars. All of the controls are the '46-48 electric over vacuum, which I placed on the fender splash pan in lieu of on the left head.
The whole conversion has been running for over 50k with no problems...

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

If I might ask?
I have heard the term "Bullet Proofing" a Columbia and have always wondered what that meant, OR if it was a useful upgrade?
I remember several years ago that Paul, "Rumbleseat", had one done by some "expert' and it failed leaving him a few hundred miles from home and not too happy.
Not meaning to hijack the thread.
Jim

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

If you do a search and mayby it is listed on Fordbarn vendors under John Connely or Columbia two speed .If you find his site for his rebuilding business in Temecula Ca. click on bulletproofing and it will show the band that is essentially the bulletproofing. I actually did my own machining and bulletproofing years ago with the guidance of another Columbia rebuilder Johnny Stooksberry I believe was his name. If you had a parts list or when you see John Connely's pictures you will see that part # A-24 the differential case was a poor design or poor machining.The four slots for the differential spider were machined with a straight cut instead of a perfect "U" shape and was inclined to crack in these four spots,think the case is cast iron if I remember,mine was cracked I do know this. The stainless or other type of steel band basically just reinforces this area. The guys who used Columbias to race with were the ones who had the most failures as I am sure the original designers did not count on drag racing abuse. Only people I ever heard knocking the Columbias reliability were old time drag racers and a guy I know in Canal Winchester Ohio that makes his own type of overdrive conversion.

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

I very much appreciate these perspectives. Great insight as usual on this site.

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

Jim, I have my Columbia apart, and I took these pics show the drum which carries the diff spider.

For ease of manufacture/assembly, the spider drops into open ended slots in the drum. So it is not as strong as it would be if the slots were closed at the top. Evidently, these can open up if abused. The bullet proofing requires some of the spider ends to be ground off, then the drum outer diameter to be turned off, and a steel ring pushed on. This has been done in the third pic.

Mine is in as new condition, looks really well made, and I dont think I need to do the proofing.

Cheers, Tom.

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

It all depends on where you drive. Long hills with slight grade will send the temp up when running a stock 221 with a 3:78 and stock diameter wheels. If you are in flat country, no problem. Here in ET, a 4:11 is ideal for the bottom gear. I have run a 3:78 in a 40 cp running a 60 over 59ab with no problems. Ran so quiet it was hard to tell it was running.

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

Thanks for the info re "Proofing" the columbia.
Great info

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

If you use the Columbia, Bullet proofing is a must in my opinion.
There are three things to the "process".
37 coupe has described the first by reinforcing A-24 differential housing.
The second would be to re-build the synchro clutch (part # A-32) to replace the cork clutch linings with a synthetic material such as Teflon. I think Connely has a kit for this.
Third, and probably the most common failure ,is breakage of the welds that hold the planetary gear cage in the front half of the assembly (pt.#A-17).These welds can be strengthened by welding on the back sides of the areas with the weak welds. I have a Colombia in my 39 that I ran for some years behind a 61 corvette engine. I have long since replaced the Vette engine with the proper flathead. The Colombia still works great with no after effects.

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

I do remember the extra welding but I think I still am using the cork. Dan Kreihbiel rebuilt that area for my Columbia and that must have been before he and Connely started using Teflon.

Re: later flathead vs. columbia for stock 34 Coupe
 

I agree with KGS, bullet proofing is a must. Why would anyone take a chance installing a 70 + year old Columbia that cost thousands of dollars and not spend a few hundred to have it upgraded before installation? The parts that break A-17 and A-24 are not easy to find. I also had all my parts magnafluxed before I installed it. I run 4:11 and a hopped up 59A flathead in my 40 coupe for the hills in Western PA.