Thoughts on a chassis swap for a 40 ford coupe

Toyota 1/2 ton PU frame very stout frame .I set my 37 pickup cab and box on one and it looked real doable.I believe they are the same 84/98.Over here guys put model A trucks on those frames and you have to look under it to tell. I have one here if you want measurements.

 

I believe that years ago, one of the car mags did an article on swapping the 40 coupe or pickup body onto a Ford Ranger frame. It fit well, but the end result sat too high, IMO.

If you are planning to have running boards, then stay with stock. No perimeter frame will fit better than the stock one.

 

no not dead.....just hanging at the Jockey Journal, and building bikes. Doing some car stuff for customers, but nothing with 4wheels for me right now....but that might change.

Here's a sample of what I'm doing (new issue of American Iron Garage magazine)....1965 xlch that had 5500 actual miles on it when I attacked it with a sawzall. Just raw material!!!

 

Yeah, I hung out over there when I was building a bike. You were bitten by the brit bike bug.

You're old roadster is still one of my favorites.

Rich

 

Make it look like Doug Rice's 39,then ask the haters if they have any other comments

 

Seems like an enormous amount of work for little gain. The "canoe" shape of the front half of the frame is going to make frame swapping difficult at best. Track widths and such are also going to give you fits.

If you are looking for comfort and a bit of ease, how about early Jag XKE front and rear, ala John Butera and Jerry Kugel. Seems to me using something known for good ride attached to a frame known to fit would get you to the end you desire.

 

please-to all the frame swap fans,show us non believers a late 30's to mid 40's frame swap that: A-got finished
B-looked ok
C-was cheaper/easier than using the stock frame
to make it fair pick any two of the above

 

That's why I'm looking all options....make sense??

 

I forgot about the jag stuff.....thanks,great idea!! (from a highly respected builder)

 

yep-thats why a photo[better yet several]is better than"my friends mothers cousin" did it one time

 

If you have a Facebook check out Hale's Hot Rods out of Texas. They have pics of the frames they built for their 36 coupe and 40 convertible.

 

Here is my friend Duke's 39 ford he built in 1951. It's on a bone stock 39 frame. Channeled 8", chopped 3 1/2" in the front, and 4 1/2" in the rear. Fenders and hood sectioned 6".




He still owns the car (62 years later), and here is how it looks now. Still a stock chassis, however he put a 3" spacer in the rear spring when he took the skirts off in the late 70's.

 

Damn Nice!
.

 

very cool!!!!!!

 

Too bad you're so far away. I have both front and rear jag I'd let you have cheap. (sefl serving comment I know)

 

Is it snowing there yet? Hmmmm.....roadtrip in the future??

 

For the cost of material, you'd probably be better off fabbing a rectangle tube chassis.

 

We don't get snow but once a year; not even that some years. Gray skies and drizzle interspersed w/rain for months and months.

Any HAMBers headed Hatch's way? Relay?

 

Hey Hatch I'm in the side that thinks a chassis swap would be a pain in the ass.
Too much cutting and pasting of old junk to try to make it fit.
However,
I think the project would be perfect for a simple rectangle tube frame!

I'm not trying to hijack your thread as I've got this builds thread on here.
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=335174
Since the pictures are on photobucket already,
at least you can use them to think or modify for your own project.

The measurements were mainly taken from the wescott's website,
however I do have a stock car that made it easy to visualize where I could be sloppy or critical.

This all started with 2"x5" rectangle tubing,
(special order $400 for 2 sticks)
cut and pasted for a mild kickup front and rear.
Years earlier I did a 2x6 rectangle frame for a '36 coupe,
so this one was my updated version.

This was the first mockup.
Most everything is just wood blocks and tacked angle here.

Well not many people know this,
but the frame was made with the possibility to put independent front and rear suspensions,
and multiple engine/tranny combos.
It was just easier and more economical at the time to put the stock transverse leaf springs.
I had a stock mustang II that may have gone in if it didn't need so much work.
I've also had an appreciation for 70's mercedes IRS,
although gear changes would be impossible compared to the jag.

This project goes with the spend time and no money theme,
but I'd have it no other way.

Couple inch chop, couple inch section, couple inch channel.
Go for it!
You'll definitely appreciate working on little bikes and fenderless hot rods after!
TP

 

^^^^^

VERY cool.

Rich

 

Zibo is the bomb!!!!!!

 

couldn't agree more with the above thoughts..

personally for this project I think a tubular chassis would be the way to go.. especially if you dont already have a spare frame..

one publication did print an article about a guy swapping a 40 pickup onto a ranger frame, but the front suspensions of rangers (in my opinion) suck,

not sure if a lincoln mark vIII independent rear would work in a 40 but I did see one stuffed under a 46.. (and my next project MIGHT just get one.)

 

Now I'm getting the info I had hoped would be here....Great stuff...!!!!!!

 

My bro used an '83 Regal chassis under a '41 coupe. Yes, the wheelbase had to be tweaked, & new side rails that were closer together, but it worked well. But, wide wheels would be impossible. And, the floor had to be completely fabbed. This all started as a fix for the po's vision: it was on a 50's Chev truck frame w/ stock suspension. When you opened the door, you saw the channel @ about 18"! Now, the '41 is fatter than the '39, so track width might be an issue. But, if you are going that far, you can narrow the front frame section too. After doing all that modification, it seems like it would make more sense to start from scratch & build a perimeter frame & add suspension of your choice.

 

This sounds interesting....

 

zibo....the work you are doing looks just plain great. Style and constructions looks spot on!!!

 

Hatch, check out this thread....

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=497209&highlight=40+ford&page=4

Rich

 

I would just build the rails hatch. Pie cut or mandrel bent, end result is the same. Glad to see you back working on cars.

 

Hey Rich...that's a great swap. I love the thoughts on "traditional" vs "period correct"...especially when comparing the frame/body swaps of yesteryear. I'll vote for traditional everytime, if not for only one reason....cost. Thanks for the link