M.Kube,Charlie,NY,52Henry

[ken ct]

Disagreement on whats correct carb for late 38 + all of 39. Chandler Grove or Ford or Ford-Holley. Evidently the Club published 38-39 book says different. ??????? ken ct.

[1952henry]

I always believed C-G from 38 til early 39, then 91-99. I do stand to be corrected.

[ken ct]

Thanks 52. ken ct

[DavidG]

The engineering release forms from Ford's Archives shows that the Chandler-Groves carburetor was released for partial production on March 30, 1937, which I suspect is much earlier than most folks realized.

[JM 35 Sedan]

Also, keep in mind that sometimes even the books are wrong . The guy who wrote that book (Gary Mallast sp?) could have been wrong or at least not 100% correct on what he wrote in that book . It has happened before and will again even on those new books the V8 Club is allowing to be published or reprinted these days

[ken ct]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Well ive rebuilt and sold dozens of CG to people with pristine 39's and have never heard a complaint from any of them that concourse judgeing knocked points off for having the wrong carb. Are all these people wrong.You know trailer queens want only whats completely correct for there boxed toys.And they pay a premium price for them as supply of CG is very small out there.Like to hear from Gary Mallest on this subject. ken ct

[Charlie ny]

Ken,
I'd have to go with Kube.
I invite the customer to decide and suggest he discuss with Gary Mallast the
'38 advisor from the V8 club or Mike Kubarth. A look at the date etching on the glass
of the vehicle in question as well as early vs late or later features is a good way
to pin down what's right and not right.
Charlie ny
Charlie ny

[ken ct]

Thanks Charlie, ken ct. I just talked to Allen Darr in Wa. ,He is the club advisor for 39-40 fords. He says Chandler Groves was used on all 39's and were marked 91-99 so i have to assume the Chandler Groves that were not numbered were early production ones,that is late 38's. when they replaced the Stromberg 97's.on the early 38's.

[Old Henry]

Originally Posted by ken ct

.You know trailer queens want only whats completely correct for there boxed toys. ken ct

If it's documentation that you can show them that you're after, the official Ford parts book is pretty good. As you can see, it shows Chandler-Grove in '38 and "91-99" in 39-41. Ought to be pretty convincing documentation I would think. Of course, Ford specified the Holley 94 (Ford "59") to replace all of them beginning in '32. Highlights are for my car.

[ken ct]

There are many mistakes in the green bible and there were CG that were marked 91-99 i have 1 of them.The rest of the ones i have have NO # on them.ken ct. I guess its up to the judges frame of mind and their not always right either.I'll leave it up to the buyer as to which one he wants so if its wrong as far as the judge its on there shoulder not mine. so be it. ken ct.

[Vic Piano]

So, how about a hypothetical question; What if someone discovered a “barn find” original ’39 Ford (any body style) that was a low mileage, mid to late year production car, with a CG carburetor on it (but with documentation found in the glove box) that the same dealer that sold the car replaced whatever carburetor was on the car (when it was delivered from the factory) with the CG carburetor, just prior to it being stashed in a barn for its long nap. Would it pass muster under the scrutiny of the EFV8 Concourse and/or Dearborn Judges? I’m just curious as I prefer function over questionable or proven originality. I’m actually running a Model 21-29 on our ’39 CS, as I did not have a CG or a Model 91-99 available. Correct carburetor or not, the ’39 CS runs just fine. But I guess that doesn’t count when being judged…

[ken ct]

Originally Posted by Vic Piano

So, how about a hypothetical question; What if someone discovered a “barn find” original ’39 Ford (any body style) that was a low mileage, mid to late year production car, with a CG carburetor on it (but with documentation found in the glove box) that the same dealer that sold the car replaced whatever carburetor was on the car (when it was delivered from the factory) with the CG carburetor, just prior to it being stashed in a barn for its long nap. Would it pass muster under the scrutiny of the EFV8 Concourse and/or Dearborn Judges? I’m just curious as I prefer function over questionable or proven originality. I’m actually running a Model 21-29 on our ’39 CS, as I did not have a CG or a Model 91-99 available. Correct carburetor or not, the ’39 CS runs just fine. But I guess that doesn’t count when being judged…

No they dont care,it will run fine with almost anything on them,If i was the judge in your case i would deduct points a 21-29 carb was only used on 42 only fords and mercs. I have the correct one if you want to pay the piper. lol there pricy.ken ct.

[Vic Piano]

Ken, I don't care what a judge thinks, I'm my own judge and as long as our cars/trucks run well, I'm fine with that. Vic

[flatjack9]

Originally Posted by Old Henry

If it's documentation that you can show them that you're after, the official Ford parts book is pretty good. As you can see, it shows Chandler-Grove in '38 and "91-99" in 39-41. Ought to be pretty convincing documentation I would think. Of course, Ford specified the Holley 94 (Ford "59") to replace all of them beginning in '32. Highlights are for my car.

However, there is no indication as to who built the 91-99's.

[Charlie ny]

Ken,
What the hell happened to Mike Kubarths' reply....it was there this
morning........................................was n't it ?
Charlie ny
PS
By the way the '52 Olds Rochester 4 brl carb on my stroker Flathead
appears to be exactly the correct carb for my '41 1/2 ton

[ken ct]

Originally Posted by Vic Piano

Ken, I don't care what a judge thinks, I'm my own judge and as long as our cars/trucks run well, I'm fine with that. Vic

Im the same way Vic,i run a 47-48 glass bowl FP on my 36 completely wrong but thats what i want on it. also duals w/o mufflers.Its some customers that have the problem. ken ct.

[ken ct]

Originally Posted by Charlie ny

Ken,
What the hell happened to Mike Kubarths' reply....it was there this
morning........................................was n't it ?
Charlie ny
PS
By the way the '52 Olds Rochester 4 brl carb on my stroker Flathead
appears to be exactly the correct carb for my '41 1/2 ton

Hey Charlie it looks right to me too. lol ken ct.Aint this fun. he he.

[39wdy]

Hey Ken, Do you mind if I chime in on the 91-99 debate. I've been working on 39 Fords for about 25 years and collecting all kinds of parts for all of that time. I have about 15-20 of the 91-99 carburetors and I have never seen a Chandler Groves with that designation. There certainly were a variety of these carbs, some have 91-99 in a circle, some just the number in the usual place but most also have an H which I always thought meant Holley. The only other clear anomaly has to do with the cast base of these carbs. Walt Dupont posted a picture the other day of what he thought was an aftermarket carb. Fully half of my 91-99's have that base and the others the more traditional "arrow" base. I have even a variation of the more rounded carb base with some metal removed in some areas for some purpose. Perhaps it was for weight, to lessen heat transfer, or to save on manufacturing materials, who knows. However, they exist and are factory made not altered by someone tinkering in their garage. You are the most knowledgeable guy I know about carburetors, I almost want to drive down and show you my collection of 91-99's. AND I found a couple more of the early fuel pumps. Thanks for listening, Toby Lampert

[ken ct]

Out of 5 CG's i have only 1 of them says 91-99 on the side.Others are blank there.Would be interested in the pumps only if they have the off-set inlet and outlet. And its like a 1/2" diff in the levels not 1/16" like the common ones,and have the "T" handle petcock on them.I would also buy any glass bowl pumps that say"AC" in big letters on the top section.let me know what you have. ken ct Thanks Toby. I have both styles of bases also arrows and scalloped. ken ct.

[ford38v8]

Toby, the fact that you've never seen a CG with 91-99 should be a clue as to the scarcity of the animal.

Chandler Groves 94 was in mixed production with Strombergs for 1938. Not early, not late, but mixed. CG 91-99 and Ford 91-99 were mixed in production for 1939. There MAY have been a few unmarked CGs make it into early 1939 production, and there MAY have been a few CG 91-99s make it into early 1940 production. There has been no documentation to date that specifically denies those very slim possibilities, but to avoid Concourse day controversy, many if not most guys would rather not push the envelope without documentation, as to do so would surely cost some points. So, for '38, what is known to be correct is a CG or a Stromberg, for '39, a CG 91-99 or a Ford 91-99, both of which may have had an F, an H, or without either.

There is a theory that the 91-99s within a circle* were not original equipment on early '39s. There has been no documentation of this, it is just a theory, and both types are considered correct. It would be helpful if anyone could offer Pro or Con to this theory, and especially if anyone had in his possession a CG having a 91-99 within a circle.

*The circle, or "coin" model designations continued beyond the early years, as the body of the carburetor remained interchangeable while the controls evolved to suit the model year. Model designations on the molds could be easily changed out to a different "coin" as the production need arose, thereby gaining full use of older molds. This production method was particularly useful in the manufacture of service replacement carburetors for previous model years than those in current production.