Classic cars forum & vehicle restoration.

[clan chieftain]

I was reading the topic about the model of the 1932 Deusenberg and could not think of a British equivalent. When you watch the American car restoration programmes their cars seem much more advanced than ours were. When you compare our cars to theirs we were running about in old Fords and Austins and theirs were much more modern looking.
_________________
The Clan Chieftain

[Keith D]

American cars were definitely far more advanced than British vehicles in the vintage years.
I have a 1926 Chrysler series 60 and a 1928 Morris Cowley. The Chrysler has hydraulic brakes compared to rod brakes. It has coil ignition compared to a magneto, it has a water pump and fuel pump that the Cowley hasn't. The fuel tank is safely under the back of the car instead of over my knees! The Chrysler has a 'real' starter motor instead of the Lucas dyno-start joke on the Cowley.
The only advanced part of the Cowley is the 12 volt lighting. (6 volt on the Chrysler) Remember the Cowley is also two years newer!
Of the two I prefer driving the stars and stripes!
Keith

[Rick]

[BigJohn]

I had a 1933 Chrysler which had hydraulic brakes with iirc 15/16" hex. adjusters, not those silly little 1/4" sq. things made of putty (which are always round when you come to use them) fitted to British cars of the 50's and 60's. You could get a meaty ring spanner on the Chrysler, it was actually a Plymouth with a Chrysler badge.

[V8 Nutter]

American cars have always been advanced in many ways. I could write a book on American firsts such as power steering, electric windows, air con,
O.H.C, automatic transmission, superchargers. Any one care to guess when those few items first appeared

[clan chieftain]

Following on from Big John about 1/4" brake adjusters. I remember brazing on nuts over them so I could adjust the brakes.
_________________
The Clan Chieftain

[47Jag]

V8,

I don't think the Yanks were first with OHC. There's mention of a 1912 Fiat with DOHC and although the Roots brothers patented an 'air mover' this was for blast furnace applications. Mercedes claim to be the first mainstream manufacturer to use superchargers in an automotive application. In terms of engine development, I'm sure that Chrysler still used a sidevalve engine well into the 50s, Packard too.

Art

[Keith D]

Art,
Chrysler certainly did use the side valve engine into the 50's. Ford UK used them into the early sixties!
Keith

[Kelsham]

Duesenberg was a top quality car, it should be judged against red label Bentley, Aston Martin, Rolls Royce and Sunbeam.

I recall the main complaint against American cars in Britain being their vast size, bouncy suspension and poor brakes.

Of course there was only the M1 motorway at the time.

Kels.

[47Jag]

It's quite amazing that they resisted fitting disk brakes for so long. I don't think they liked paying anyone royalties. I think the Corvette was the only car with disks for a long while. It was probably the U.S. safety regulations that came into force in 1968 that forced them to start fitting disk brakes.

Art

[V8 Nutter]

Welch had a supercharger pre first world war Chadwick had O.H.C. about the same time or it could be the other way round I will have to look it up.
Plymouth and Dodge used side valves until 1959.
Chrysler offered disc brakes in 1951 they were different to modern ones, but front discs were available on most makes by the mid sixties

[V8 Nutter]

I have just looked it up.

Welch introduced a single over head cam in 1904, the engine also had hemi heads and inclined valves. The valves were operated by rocker arms running directly on the cam. B.M.W. was using a similar idea in the 70's and 80's, they may still do.

Chadwick had a belt driven supercharger, on their race cars from 1906, it wasn't offered on their road cars

[V8 Nutter]

In a thread entitled How Far Back, FalconRiley says he enjoys the crash gear box on 1930's Brit cars. Cadillac introduced synchromesh in 1929 for the 1930 model year, and most American makers soon followed suit

[Salopian]

Maudsley produced their first OHC car engine in 1902 followed by an OHC six in 1903. All their pre WWI cars were OHC - I think there is one in the Coventry museum.
I think it is fair to say the American mass producers were selling to a market which had a different requirement to the Europeans due to the vast distances and road conditions. Their buyers wanted easy to use utility cars with creature comforts - self starters etc etc and low cost hence the replacement of expensive magnetos by coil ignition (actually I rather prefer this) unplated black painted radiators and central ball shift gearlevers plus much low cost presswork rather than expensive alloy castings. These features were not popular in the UK market and regarded as "cheap". The original Rolls 20 had a ball change and a three speed box both not liked at the time and when upgraded in 1925-6 a right hand change four speed box was fitted. It is not surprising that features making use easier and costs lower sold well to a largely non enthusiastic buyer and in vast quantities - just look at the production figures. I always wonder how such an outdated under powered and braked car such as the Model T sold so well as late as 1926 - I suppose it was price and ease of use and repair they were certainly cheap and even I recall reading comprised half the vehicles on UK roads in the mid twenties in spite of the horsepower tax.
Different times different conditions - the demand for easier use brought applications in production earlier in a market for utility rather than the perhaps more motoring minded for its own sake UK market. Many of the innovations V8 lists are you note to ease the use of the car not improve handling or brakes. I regard the American cars as job rated for the conditions very well. As with our makers it is a pity the mass producers confused styling with progress for so many years in the 50s and 60s.
Oh Lanchester first used disc brakes in 1902 ----
Having said all that give me a big V8 with slushbox and I'll happily drive coast to coast USA enjoying every mile of the travel and sound. If it can be done please fit it in a 1956 or 57 Chevy 2 door.

Wish I could afford the juice for one of those Rover 75 V8s ---
_________________
Jonathan Butler
Alvis SD 12/50 1928 MG TD 1950

[V8 Nutter]

I stand corrected concerning the Maudsley.

You are right about the Model T. I think it was 1920 when the horse power tax was introduced, the main reason for its introduction was to keep American cars out, as you say Ford alone had almost 50% of the U.K. market. Probably from about 1920 onwards the main reason the Model T sold well in the States was price. The only reason it stayed in production so long was Henry Fords resistance to change, a bit like Rolls Royce owners here. In the end sales were falling so much even Henry had to admit the T had had its day.

Production methods and sheer quantity of production kept the price down in America, almost any one could afford a car whereas here cars were the preserve of the well to do. I think it was Will Rogers who said, after the Wall Street Crash, something like "America was the first nation to drive to the dole queue".

Production methods and quantities. Oldsmobile was making about 5000 cars a year by 1904. Right from the beginning Henry Leland the boss of Cadillac insisted on parts interchangeability and no hand finishing. Cadillac was awarded the Dewar Trophy in 1908 for interchangeability. Ford had a moving production line by 1913. It was the late thirties before one of our biggest manufacturers Morris caught up