I agree with Mac that, from the angle of the photos, it looks like a Speedway. And, I agree with '37 that the tail is too long to be a typical M&B.
Fur Biscuit, I don't think that comparison is quite fair. You're comparing a Model T speedster to a racecar. That is apples to oranges. The racecar should be in comparison to a Model T racecar, like this 1922 Fronty:
Okay, I'll try to clear this 4 banger thing up. My friend Jack had a 30 tudor with no windows and a cracked windshield no left rear fender and only 1 headlight worked No interior other than springs with a blanket or 2. That might have been called a banger or an "A" banger but not a 4 banger. If you had a model "A" and you had a milled or after market head, one of the round distributor caps with round wires, a downdraft manifold and a Winfield or Stromberg 97, or one of those glass float chamber Holley's from a Ford 6, "B" cam, and maybe, it you were brave, a straight pipe, You were then driving a car with a 4 barrel. In the late "50"'s The problem was that you might be talking about you 4 barrel engine but the other guy, usually younger, was try to figure out just what kind of carburator you were talking about, especially after the NHRA dropped the 4 barrel class designation. That's why the 4 ever 4 club began. In your reading and research, have you ever read of a "Banger" class at the lakes? You will see Gow Jobs (which actually was Go job) Soup Jobs (started with souped up engine) and other similar terms referring to modified cars and or engines.
Only a short time ago, I would have agreed that the term was not in use until relatively recently. In fact, I said so a few times on the HAMB. However, finding "four banger" defined as a four-cylinder engine in the 1952 Hot-Rod Dictionary proved me wrong.
I guess I should clarify my point. Both cars are "speedsters and racecars" One is T powered and the black car A powered. what I am trying to point out is the difference in the feel and visual inpact between the cars. The T speedster, like a model T, is a spindly affair. You feel daring going 50 mph in one, it is not refined. it is raw. The model A is a race car or a special, not a speedster in my mind. Most model A's are cut down and look more like bugs, than a traditional speedster. A model A is just to much like a real car compared to a T. Which is why some of the "purist" won't let the A's run with the T's. Finally drive a T then hop in an A or vis-a-verse and you will know exactly what I am getting at.
I wouldn't say it proved you wrong as Popular Mechanics was not where a hot rodder would have looked for information in regards to terminology. The magazine was a great source of general auto info but not much into hot rodding. I can see where they might use it as a general term but when speaking of hot rods not. A banger, as I posted, in the area where I grew up was any old junky or other 4 cylinder abused car. The term was used in regards to beat up model "A"'s because they usually had a blown muffler caused by turning the switch off and retarding the spark holding the throttle wire open then when you turned the ignition back on BANG! This would blow the muffler wide open. I don't disagree with callig 4 cylinder engines bangers but when referring to hopped up model "A"'s they were 4 barrels.
Yeah, you're right from that perspective...but I think that the opposite is the case. It looks to me like Popular Science (not Popular Mechanics) got the terminology from the hot rodders, and then published it. Did you read through it? The dictionary is very accurate.
Thanks for the support there, T-Time. noe thing that puzzles me, is that the end of the body looks like it's welded on vertically. Weren't most speedster bodies more of a one piece design from the seat bulkhead to the tail?
I guess that I just don't agree with that. A speedster is not necessarily the same as a racecar and a racecar is not necessarily the same as a gow job (aka soup job). I know that a lot of folks lump all these different things into one category sometimes...but they are just not the same, but they do have some overlap. But that T is not in the same category as that A. The Fronty T that I posted a picture of is in the same category as the A racer. Those are the two that should be compared. There's just not that much difference in refinement between that T racecar and the A racecar. I've seen plenty of spindly A speedsters. I don't know if they are period or modern builds, though. See photo for example. One reason that A speedsters tend to look less spindley is tire/wheel combos that A owners tend to use vs. those that T speedsters tend to have. I don't mean to sound argumentative...mostly just thinking out loud.
No supprise to me that this body has had more interest on the HAMB than a T site I posted it on as well. The tail is made of at least 4 pieces, knife edge point as you can see in the photo. Looks like it was riveted together then the seam was leaded in. Once I have time to set it up in a clear area I'll take some real good detail shots. Hard to believe someone would cut the holes it the tail for tail lights. oh, Did Craig Hunt "Speedway" bodies merge with Morton & Brett? T speed equipment it tough to trace since all the catalogs used the same illustrations.
th back of the tail section looks almost flat sided with no compound curves. normally i am not a boat tail kida person, but that really got me thinking. per your question, I think that Craig-Hunt was bought out by Speedway. But I don't know if Morton and Brett bought Speedway.
Just answered a few of my own questions after reading the original Morton & Brett flyer! The top of the flyer clearly states that Morton & Brett are the manufacturers, originators and pattentees of SPEEDWAY BODIES, pattent # 54668. They refer to the Wedge Tail as being of special design and able to absorb a direct hit by a radiator of a car behind it. List price was $100.00, wholesale $57.50. It may have been faster and less costly to make the tails in four pieces rather than wheel then out in two or three. The riveted construction was used by Bugatti in the seat back to tail panel, so maybe this was more common than we think today. Next thought is the wheels, I have one Buffalo front hub, but disk wheels are starting to work on me.
Doug, Here are a few more shots of the tail. I wouldn't call it flat sided, that razor edge tail tip had to make it easy to produce.
In regard to wheels- any thoughts on Dodge disc wheels from the 20's? I am looking at a set from a '27... Sorry for the attachment- still learning how to post pics...
My thoughts center around...I'd like to own a set of 4...... Are those 5x5.5" bolt pattern? And what is the diameter?
Alright, I found the info on measuring using search (novel concept, huh?) If I measured correctly, they are 5 X 6 9/16 ? Doesn't seem right (the fellow made a cardboard template for me), but I followed the directions. The center hole is approx 4 3/4 alone.
Yup- I like the look of sold discs on a speedter (a good bit less expensive than Buffalo's , too ) Plus, these don't have the separate rims! Here's a pic of the back- wonder how they would look "reversed"
The shell and the cowl didn't change, but the tails became more refined as the years progress. Yours looks more of an early twenties, where as that looks more like a late twenties tail (I like your better...)
fur biscuit: I see your speedster has discs witha a six bolt pattern, any idea what they came off? How about the axles, do you have an adpater to Ford axles? Here is a picture of the 19" Buffalo style wires I'll be using for the speedster I am collecting parts for. They sport a 6 bolt pattern and I have a late 20's early 30's set of Mopar axles with factory hydraulic brakes with them. The picture is from a mock up of a T the seller of this setup had. Would love to know more about them.
I have always heard of a 4 banger as a 4 cylinder engine (4 bangger, 4 popper, 4 lunger). I don't know if an A is traditional or correct as a speedster or not, but I hope it is as I'm gathering parts for one (I have the frame and drivetrain, and soon I should have a dual intake and some Strombergs). Hope to have it running and driving in the next year or so. With bodywork that is. If I just wanted to drive it, all I would have to do is shore up the steering collumn and find something to sit on. Wouldn't be the first time I (or anyone else for that matter) took their first ride in their new project sitting on a crate.
nexxussian, I grew up in a little town with only one police car who drove a VERY predictable beat- once he had passed, we knew we had about 30 minutes to go around the block a few times "on the crates"
A friend of ours owns that car...for some reason I thought it was a Mercury body, I stand corrected. Regarding the topic at hand, to me it falls under the term "race car" as opposed to speedster. Cris
Well, dad always used to tell me that he and some buddies of his were puting a car together and got impatient to drive it, so they put a wooden apple crate in it to sit on and rallied it around the railroad yard (they were puting it together in a shop that was in an industrial complex right next to the yard). So Dad gets a little bolder and winds up drifting the car across a RR X ing and catches a wheel, to this day he (and the freinds in question that I have met) swears he barrel rolled the car, in midair, and landed on the tires. Broke the crate down to splinters, and he didn't even get a sliver. Or so the story goes.
The Jalopy Journal
