Question for 4 Banger boys! Period Correct rear axles, early rods 30s-early 40s??

Just a quick one here. Need info on early rear axles that were seen and would have been in use in the EARLY days of rodding SPECIFICALLY the 1930s and EARLY 1940s,...pre wwii NOT post wwii.

Of course there is the standard Model A rear, and the Ruxtall if you were running a T,....but this would be on a modified A hot rod. Were the Columbia two speed rears and the Twin-x (or twinex??...not sure how its spelled) Model A rears seen/used??

Need a kind of history (with pics if possible!!!) of this time period and rear gearing. Thanks in advance guys!!

PS. need info from those who have historical info or are actually running ro have run the rear axles they will pass the info along on. Thanks again!!

 

Good god you are a tortured soul. I would dial 1 800 old bastard and see what he says. You can't beat the horses mouth.

 

found a twin x (2.84 to 1 HWY) (3.93 to 1 traffic) advertisement from 1931, strong enough for racing? doubt it.

 

I'd look at the newest banjo that fits your time frame. Get hydraulic brakes for the real world anyway.

IIRC, you're putting a banger together, so a Model A rear end will hold the power you'll make (from what I've been told).

 

Well, I think it would have been,...being that a LOT of guys ran stocker rears back then,...I know a guy in our club that was around back then,..that's actually all he ran,..went 102 mph with it,..(102 or 104??)

Of course it was not the twin x, just the stock A rear,..not sure if there was a mechanical difference in structure and strength.

 

My banger engine wont be your average banger though,....its going to be a big improvement over your average stocker... a period mild race engine really. juice brakes are correct for the early 40s so it will most likely get juice, especially if i go with the Columbia, it will ahve to be juice.

 

No doubt the stock rear is strong enough, I have my doubts about the o/d setups. Don't see many around. Any rear will work for top speed, it's gear banging and hookin up that breaks parts.

 

I'll be going with a 1930 Plymouth rear end with my banger speedster. It has stock hydraulic brakes from the factory. Using the front spindles and hydraulics brakes from the same 30 plymouth adapted to a Model A Axle.

I'll have hydraulics with period correct parts, alog with the beautiful 19" wires to fit the mopar hubs.

 

Hmmm,...very interesting, do you have a photo of the 1930 Plymouth rear??

 

The model "A" rear end was used in all types of race cars. I once asked Joe Mac about the relative strength and he said that it was a popular rear end for sprint cars. The old wives tale at that time was that an "A rear end could only handle up to 60 horses, but with the addition of a snubber they will take a lot more. The old story was that the pinion climbed the ring gear and things started to break but what actually happens is the ring gear is forced away from the pinion and then it climbs. The fix is the snubber. I learned this from Vic King ( midnite oil ). He also told me that they turned their axles slightly thinner in the center and they worked like a torsion bar with less breakage. Also, lap the rear hubs to the axles and torqueing to 200 lbs. helps The model "A" Halibrand quick change rear ends that use the full size pick off or change gears were called sprint car and the ones for midgets used a 1" wide gear. The exteriors were the same. Most early hot rods used V8 rear ends with V8 boxes or in the current terms 3 speed top loaders because they just required length adjustments and then bolted together still using the enclosed driveline. I do remember a lakes modified that had a Ruxtell powered with a chevy 4. I believe Art Chisman's modified still runs an "A" Halibrand

 

I think Bills covered most of it. Also remember during the prewar period people were concerned with money. Just keep that in mind when you are building.

 

Bill you are a real asset to the board!

 

I think there were very few hot rods with a columbia prewar as the columbia came out in 1940 and 1941 with what are known as long Lincoln gears. The trans ratios required a lower rear end ratio to get off the dime but then you needed something higher for cruising.
One thing very popular out of a prewar Lincoln was the side shift trans 1938 -39, this was still a top loader but the gearshift tower is 3" to the right and 3.5" forward. A lot of room for big feet. A really odd thing to see is the gear shift lever itself as it is bent to clear under the dash. When you install your first none it is hard to visualize as the gear shift stub come out at 15 to 20 degrees off vertical These transmissions are also desirable because they have a shorter throw between the gears. But they had the same ratios as a standard ford trans. More old trivia to confuse you with!

 

There were both OD and 2-speed conversions, as well as close ratio trans, for A's, but all were and are vanishingly scarce...Ford type Columbia actually came out in '35 or 6, but would have been a rare and pricey junkyard bit before the war, as well as requiring machine work for shortening. A rear would have been normal, there werte lots of sprintcar full floater mods for the high tech. The Chrisman Model A QC drove the first run that exceeded 1 G all the way through the 1/4...somewhere in the 9's.

 

Were the '35 or '36 Columbia's factory or dealer installed, I remember the Zepher's but nothing earlier. Of course my memory about this type of thing starts in the late "40"'s My friends mother had a 37 or 38 with a 85 horse Ford engine and had a water pipe extension on the fan as there was a length difference from the V12, it had the gear shift lever coming out of sort of a console. All these cars were kept running through WW 2 so when I was a kid they were still around.

 

i'm running an early model b banjo... which is internally the same as a model a. I haven't had any problems and I'm running an overhead. But just like any of these old parts if you plan on beating the shit out of it your gonna break it. Not that I don't mess around with mine!

 

I have a book here from the early 50s where a guy was blowing rears faster than he could haul them home.He found that if he turned the drive shaft center down that it acted as a sort of torsion bar.He turned a elongated hour glass shape out of the middle of the shaft.that is a long taper to about 3/4 drive shaft diameter then about a foot straight section and another long taper back out to the stock outside diameter and once he did this raced 2 full seasons on a rear end

 

Ford Columbias were all aftermarket, though many were sold directly via Ford dealers; Lincoln ones I believe were factory.

 

The console shift was a wierd floorshift on LZ's...it came up right at the firewall, then straight back under the dash out of sight til it emerged at the center. Most of the long, kinky lever was invisible, leaving an open floor like a column shift.

 

My Riley overhead is hooked to a stock 31 rear end.

 

I recently gave one of the levers away, it is quite a conversation piece on my buddies' shop wall. I have one of the transmissions in my modified and another in storage. There are a few out there but most are missing the pin or lever that actually shifts the forks. Story is that guys went to junk yards and pulled the covers to count the teeth and left the covers off. But you would have to pull the gearshift lever and the retainer and spring so I'm not sure about that story. The last one I bought had just the pin missing but I had to buy the side cover and forks to get a replacement. $195 if I remember. If you have a problem with not enough space for your foot and you find your pressing on the gas pedal when you apply the brakes then it is worth looking for one. Think about it, they were only used for 3 years and then only in Zephyrs

 

Nice, very nice, thank you for posting that.

 

I was talking with a friend today. Was saying that you would have thought that you would have seen more use of Culumbia's and twinX rears in the early dry lakes eras of the late 30s early 40s. Instead of winding your engine and trans up till it screams, you'd have the added ability to wind it out, then get yet another gear??!!

 

So, all in all, I want to be able to drive my jalopy on the highway, possibly on long trips now and then, with the ability to tug a small teardrop trailer (seen this done in old photos and recently also),....hit sustained speeds of about 65-70 (maybe 75?) Of cousre i'd like to scoot around and pull out with a leap at the stop light s too.
The engine should handle it no problem after she's done,....I'm planning on using a 39 trans, so what would I be better off doing in the rear for what I want to accomplish??

1. Using a proven formula of trans gears to rear and staying with either a rebuilt A rear (or 39-40 rear with juice if plan on juice conversion)

or...

2. Using the Columbia with the 39 trans and go from there??

 

i think personally i would stay away from the columbia rear for your stripped down T
unsprung weight would be my biggest concern
i dont know how much you drove the car before...but i know on my A roadsters that the body and back half of the frame is lighter then the banjo rear's im running...so the ride is pretty rough
I'd think if you went to a columbia it would make this even worse??

i cant seem to find much information on cutting down torque tubes prior to WWII..i know "everything" was done...and not much info on any of it...but just doing a quick search im not finding much
people were pretty ingenious back then so i have no doubt it was done even the people i talk to today who ran columbia's ran them in a car that they would directly bolt into (36-40 fords in my case)
i have a lincoln banjo type rear that was in a 36 ford with a lincoln overdrive transmission, this torque tube was cut down but im not sure what time period it was done
i do know that the race cars had cut down torque tubes of sorts...i have a marion center section for a midget that takes model-A type gears and would have needed a cut down torque tube and short driveshaft
i think alot of them used chevy torque tubes with the slip joint so they would be able to split the rear wishbones and not have it bind up?

for the weight i would think the O/D on the back of the tranny would be better as it would be weight up on the frame but it'd make your torque tube pretty short?

I would look at the columbia as a pretty high end upgrade at that time...meaning it might not be as easy to get for the average joe but none the less available
so look at the higher end cars running at the time Karl Orr's modified, the Motimuro/Caruthers car, etc. all have gone to alot of effort to build a car and it ends up with just a standard banjo rear
at the time gears were available to run 3.27 or 3.54 and im sure the swap wasn't as mechanically involved as it is now(the parts fit?)
so im sure the lakes guys would swap them in and go!

personally to me...i think a really good set-up for you would be a 28tooth cluster in your transmission and then 3.54 rear gears
the 28tooth first will get you moving and surely spin the tires on your light car
the split in the gears may cause a little drop off compared to the lincoln gearset....but really its not that bad
then the 3.54 rear with say 30-31" tires will get you cruising along as fast as you 'd really need to go
100mph isnt out of the question but your not going to cruise that fast
my car with a 3.54 rear also has an overdrive that was added into the torque tube...by the time the O/D plays into it your going so darn fast that you dont feel comfortable cruising at that speed...
I've often considered swapping it out for a normal 1 piece driveshaft
and eliminating weight and unnecissary moving bits and possible weak links in the driveline??

thanks for getting me thinking about hot rods at 6:30am!
i good start to the week at work!

Zach

 

Guys,...THANKS a MILLION!

Bill, Zach, Bruce and Skidmarks, you guys really cleared it up for me. Zach your post was great,....really delved into what I'm looking to do since we've talked back and forth about the period cars. Awsome,.....thanks so much,...this really IS a huge help to me!!! MUCH APPRECIATED!

 

The method used to shorten early V8 driveshaft housings was or is to calculate amount to shorten, cut housing leaving about 1/8" on a side then chuck in a lathe centering with a steady rest, face the required amount off each piece and chamfer the edges. Then use a long piece of threaded rod or join 2 pieces of all thread and clamp the 2 pieces together with plates over each end, Tighten until the parts are held securely and weld. I have seen the length determined by assembling the units together and then measuring the spring to crossmember difference. If you use the stock radius rods you can cut or grind the weld on the small end and then lay it up and figure amount to cut. The last driveshaft I had resplined cost $40 last year.
If you could find a copy of a Getz Gear chart from the "40"'s or "50"'s you can see why the "A" rear end was popular with racers.

 

Halibrand A quick changes are 3.5 wide, the V-8's are wider!
A lot of us run A's (and early 32's) with no problem. Mostly depends of tire width and right foot.

 

With my stock b trans, 3.78 gears and 32" tires, I run 65 to 75 for extended periods no problem... Had it up to 90 but not for long at all. Keep it simple.

 

You ever think about doing a home built banjo rear quick change conversion? You know, the one where they turn the banjo up-side-down and put quick change gears out back.

I was talking with an old dirt track racer who ran one built by Pappy Hough back in the 40's. Bobby Green is running one in his belly tanker made by Frankland. They were building these way back in the 30s. Strong as a stock rear, versitile in regards to gearing, and looks period cool!

Bobby Green's home built quick change just to get an idea.