What is the difference, if any, between '39 and '40 Ford pedal setups? Are they the same? I always hear using '39 pedals for hyd conversions. I'm think this may be a way to go in my '33 Plymouth w/ 331 Hemi w/ LaSalle tranny. Thanks, Dave
39 pedals have the clutch pivot on the end of shaft, 40 & up its on the pedal. Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
^^^ what he said. The 39 pedals have a lever on the end of the pedal shaft that connects to a lever on the clutch bar in the trans case. The for pedals have the linkage on the pedal which then attaches to a frame mounted cross shaft that attaches to the clutch bar in the trans case in tongue and groove fashion.
The '39 is popular because it is useful in converting earlier cars from mechanical to hydraulic brakes. Note, both '39 and '40 brackets are angled to attach to the x-member and may not be a good fitment to your Mopar. One of the many Ansen style setups might work better for you. Sent from my SM-G965U using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
Ok, armed with this info I searched the classifieds for pedals and found pics of '39 and '40 pedals and it all makes sense now. However, there is a set for sale advertised as '39 and I see now they are '40's because of the pivot on the clutch pedal instead of the shaft. '40 wouldn't work on mine, '39 might. Portland swap meet in about a week so guess what I will be looking for?! Thanks again, Dave
As far as the hydraulic conversions reference is concerned, I think this is more for the 35, 36, 37, 38 maybe earlier, Ford hydraulic conversions because of the clutch leaver position on the 39 pedal assembly is almost a bolt-in to those years. With the 39 clutch lever this is the ultimate pedal assembly for this swap. I don't know how this would help your application in your Plymouth.
Great pics Pensive! Thanks. Some issues I can see from those is I would need the clutch lever to PULL rearward rather than push and I think my X member may be farther back than on the Fords. My clutch will use an arm that pivots on a ball instead of a lever and shaft.Also the '39 pedals mount THROUGH the X member but that could probably be over come. Dave
I have a little different twist on the 1940 vs 1939 petals: I have a 1939 Ford Coupe - 327 Chevy and 4 speed Muncie. This car has 1940 petals and the 1965 or so Chevy car Z-bar - to work the clutch. Refer to pic attached. The Z-bar is sorta in the way and I need about 3/8 more disengagement on the clutch fork - scrapes in reverse - forward gears are good. I bought the Bob Drake 1939 repo petals - and using the Mustang - later dual bowl master cylinder - which the Drake 39 petals are drilled and I can omit the adaptor in the 1940 petals - and I would like to reclock and I think lengthen the 1939 clutch petal fork. I saw a pic of this adaptation in Frank Oddo's Street Rodder build book - but not measurements. Has any one adapted 1939 Ford petals to the Chevy 4 speed trans? If yes - please provide pictures and descriptions.
The ‘39 pedals work well for the Flathead & early trans. For me, using SBC & T-10 4 speed, I prefer the ‘40 pedals. It’s rather simple to make the ‘40 pedal pull the clutch fork, rather than push a bell crank (z bar).
BJR, I do have the stock pedals and I may use them. I have trimmed the crossmember/pedal mount down to just a left side bracket but with the extended bell 331 Hemi there is not a lot of room. The master cylinder goes forward too and that wants to interfere with the steering shaft. the stock setup mounts to the frame rail, not the x member so it is all very tight, but not ruled out as of now.
There are good repro 39 pedals available if you cant find any, not cheap, but brand new. I used two 40 brake pedals on my 40, because the brake pedal has the arm on the bottom, so pushes backwards to operate a clutch master cylinder. I would have like to have gone mechanical, less to go wrong, but i didnt have the room. Pedals are in my build if you want more info.
Thanks Neilswheels - nice build info and impressive work. I am trying to keep manual linkage from petals to the clutch fork vs slave cylinder. However - might convert to slave cyl if I can not get this worked out.
Reworked my 1940 petals - with new clutch fork position and z- bar rod - moved mounting area out for better leverage and fabricated a long connecting rod from the Z bar to clutch fork while keeping the 1940 petals - Car is on jack stands - fired her up and forward gears shift good and no grinding in reverse. Will road test next weekend - hope this works. So for now I will not change to the 1939 petal set. But for a new installation - I think the 1939 Ford petals are better to do a manual activation on clutch fork - vs slave cylinder. Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
Simple solution to the PUSH vs. PULL; Drive out the pin that holds the shaft to the clutch pedal. Clock the shaft 180, then repin. It'll now PULL rather than PUSH. I installed 39 pedals in my SBC/Muncie equipped '34 but have yet to build linkage, so like Mike Stewart, I'm curious to see what others have devised.
When you fab up the linkage - please post pic back on this tech post. I really would like to see your linkage. Or PM me the pic. In the first edition of Frank Oddo's book - How to build a Street Rod - he has a pic of the 1939 petal set - with clutch arm clocked 180 around and a longer lever. However no specifications are revealed.
^^^Sure will Mike. It'll be awhile though. You do the same please if you see or come up with a solution, shoot me a PM. I'm hell bent on making the linkage all mechanical for dependability. Don't want to mess with hydraulic lines, slave cylinders, etc. Thanks.
I will be watching this one I am close to doing my brake and clutch peddles on my 40 Ford coupe with Chevy 348 with Muncie 4 speed and am in the mechanical rather than slave cylinder group also. I have both 39 and 40 peddles and need to decide which will be better.
The Jalopy Journal
