|
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Solihull, England.
Posts: 9,088
|
![]()
Could you guys clue me in as to what the differences are?
I know the wheelbase is longer. I know the wheels are wide 5's, and 16's. Any differences at the front axle? How about the rear? Were they open drive? What gears came in the back end? Parallel rear springs or transverse? Heavy duty gearbox (with the external reverse release)? How about the frame? X-member or ladder? Gotta turn in now, will looks forward to reading some replies in the morning. Thanks. Mart. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Central Coast, Calif.
Posts: 868
|
![]()
Mart - Many differences between the two.
The front axle, spindles and brakes are the same. 3/4 ton uses a different wishbone. The rear is closed drive on parallel leaf springs. The rear is a full floater, like the tonner. Wheels are 16x5 or 16x5.5 wide five, without scallops. They are a desirable hot rod wheel...it's what I ran on the back of my 32 RPU. The frame is a ladder frame, like the tonner as well. Cab and hood would be the same, but fenders, running boards and bed are all of the larger variety. Neal |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: MN
Posts: 7,063
|
![]()
Wait. Are we talking the tonner as a 3/4? I didn't think there was a true 3/4 in 39. 1/2, tonner (1ton commercial) and the 1 ton industrial. Interested to know the responses too.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Central Coast, Calif.
Posts: 868
|
![]()
1938 was 1/2 ton and tonner only, then the 3/4 ton was introduced in 39 and was built from 39-41.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Solihull, England.
Posts: 9,088
|
![]()
Thanks guys.
The floater rear axles - what gears did they come with? I have googled the heck out of it but keep coming up dry. I'm thinking they will have pretty low gears - 4.11's being the tallest? Very much a guess. Any info gratefully received. Mart. Mart. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 1,787
|
![]() Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
__________________
I dig coal, which provides motivation for EVs. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 17,411
|
![]()
All of the 38/39 122" wheelbase trucks shared the same rear axle and ratios available. The 60 HP would have used the 6.66:1 and the others could have had 4.87:1 or 4.11:1 depending on owner preference. Higher ratios were available for 1-ton or larger after 1940 but most had the longer wheelbase and different rear axles.
The 4.11 would have been prefered with the 95 HP V8 in 1939 unless the customer wanted to haul a 1-ton load with 3/4-ton springs. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|