1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...erg/Shell1.jpg

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...erg/Shell2.jpg

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...erg/Shell3.jpg

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...erg/Shell4.jpg

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...erg/Shell5.jpg

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...erg/Shell6.jpg

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...erg/Shell7.jpg

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...erg/Shell8.jpg

Hopefully it will be obvious that the shiney one is the nickel plated repro which I bought from Mac's in the early 90's. The other shell is a good original that I hope to get replated someday.

The original has better defined crisper lines. That is the folded inside edge at the front has two folds closer to 90* vs. the gentler bends on the repro, and this older repro looks better than some of the later ones I've seen. The originals also fit the radiator neck much better.

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

very nice. Can you add a pic of the crank hole on the oringional? I realize now that it's supposed to be oval vs. round (28) but I would love to see an actual picture of the hole. Thanks, Chris

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o...g/c64e4d41.jpg

The top one with the bell shaped outline is used with Twolite headlamps on 1929 cars, and the bottom with the oval outline is used with 1928 and early 1929 cars with fluted headlamps.

You can see the top one has a crack at the bottom center of the hole, and they both show quite a bit of wear on the top of the hole from hand cranking.

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

Thanks Tom. That shows some things I wasn't aware of. The neck part, in particular, just isn't right on the repros. The hood bushing sits too far forward to accommodate a quail (hood hits the tail when opened); and the whole front view is just mushy and puffy compared to originals. Plus the light holes are for earlier 28. If you use it for Twolite cars, as I did on my coupe, you have to enlarge those holes.

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

Good pics thanks Tom. Would you mind measuring the distance from the crank hole centre, up to the top of the shell, and letting me know what you find (on the original)? My crank handle is rubbing badly on the bottom of the crank hole and I suspect an old repair has shortened the whole shell a little.

Thanks, Gus

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

Gus, it is more likely that your front motor mounts are too low or you don't have the right pads under your radiator. I know this can effect your hood alignment, hood and doors should be aligned from the front to the back anyway. Sorry to butt in, but those are my thoughts.

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

I think Ray is right about the engine height maybe being the problem.
Center of crank hole to top of bottom face is 2 3/8", or to the bottom of "widow's peak" is 21 1/8".

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

Thanks Tom. Very educational. I'm starting to feel like an informed buyer.

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

Tom, these are v. good photos of '28 '29 'shells, both repro & originals.
The last ones of the crank hole area is maybe not 100% correct for all Model A's.
Although US production in '29 used the 'shell with the 'bell'' embossing [ to strengthen crankhole probably], the '28 style [ not bell embossed] was also used with '29 Twolamp headlamps that had the larger conduit hole. I have seen many ''29's, all Canadian export cars,& nearly all did not have this feature; the one I do recall had been put on a '28 54A by mistake. My late '29 Canadian has the '28 style crankhole.Until recently [ Ive owned my car for 43yrs] I did not know there was a difference in this between the US '28 '29's.

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

I'm thinking the bell shape was to identify the later shell with the larger headlamp conduit holes. Every original bell shape I've seen was on cars using Twolite headlamps and every original oval had the smaller conduit holes and was used with fluted headlamps.

It would be interesting to do a study on this at the Benson Ford Research Center to see what Ford had to say about it.

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

Thanks Tom and Ray. I have rebuilt the front motor mounts (entire car actually) with new springs and bushings so maybe I have not got it quite right? Thanks for the info.


Gus

Re: 1929 Repro vs. Original Radiator Shell
 

OK, just got this photo. Late '29 roadster [ Sport] which was a Canadian 'deluxe' type. Notice the Twolamp headlamps, so it has the large conduit holes in the 'shell. The crankhole should be what you have been saying is only on the '28 & early '29's using the single bulb lamps. If it is not, should have had some points knocked off in the fine point judging!! It also has the correct Canadian finish on the Ford badge which were not enamelled after early '29. My Tudor also has the same features , but it does not compare to this beauty.