How much is my '32 3 window going to weigh???

....Hi Everyone, Just wondering if anyone has a rough idea on how much my '32 Ford 3 window coupe is going to weigh??? Its a fiberglass unit from Redneck Street Rods. Wayne told me that the body alone weighs between 600 & 650 pounds. It is on a P& J's chassis, with a 9" rear {drum brakes}, 'I' beam axle {disc. brakes} up front. I have a 400 small block Chev with Aluminum heads for it and a turbo 400 trans. I haven't gotten any wheels or tires for it yet but was thinking on the lines of the ET III wheels {12x16 rear & 6x14 front}. Of course I realize that there are a lot of 'variables' involved but does anyone have a rough idea??? Not sure if you need any more info, if so please ask ;) Oh, the reason I'm asking is that the motor I have for it put out 499 Ft/Lbs of TQ @ 4000 Rpm & 438 HP @ 5250 on a flywheel dyno. This motor used to be in a Camaro that wiehted 2800 pounds and although it was fast {or at least to ME it was}, I want my '32 to be faster. And I think the '32 is going to be close to 2800 pounds. May be I need a bigger motor???
Thanks a bunch everyone ;) Oh, and have a fantastic week-end, Bill....

Thank you Streets, so mine will probably be less a little less than 2800..... Bill

:HMMM: Well it should weigh a few hundred less than the camaro but it is WAY less aerodynamic, but hey you can always add a monica.
:toocool:

Thank You Viking, So we're looking at around 2600. Ah hah, yeah, the aerodynamic thing! I forgot ALL about that . I guess having the '32 would be like bolting a 4 x 8 sheet of plywood on the front of my Camaro??? Not a good thing ;( Ok, now a Monica??? I hate to sound stupid or even ignorant for that matter, but is a Monica a supercharger??? If so, I asked some questions a while back on adding a GMC to this motor but was told not to. May be cuz the motor is bored .060 over??? Thin walls??? Bill.....

a-h-h-h-h now I get it ;) Thank you Streets ;)..... Bill....

My 32 Victoria weighed in at 3050, so I bet your in the right area.

...Thank you Pro 60, Wow 3050 lbs.??? Yeah, I had no idea the old Fords weighted that much. I heard somewhere that the all steel 3 windows weighted somewhere around 300 pounds {body only}so fiberglass is more, as the Redneck '32 is 600 or so. So I guess, as someone suggested I'll just have to 'Monica' it..... I'm worried about the overheating but may be if I use an 8:71 and then underdrive it a lot??? Thanks everyone, Bill.....

Over heating.
Not a problem !
Use a U.S. Radiator 4 core, 3 pass desert cooler.
WOW does this rad keep em cool.
Good luck on your project, keep focust.
And don't let the rest of life get in your way !
Have fun with it.
Remember, if you don't get it built
Youll just end up an old man without a hot rod.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by billlsbird
Thank You Viking, So we're looking at around 2600. Ah hah, yeah, the aerodynamic thing! I forgot ALL about that . I guess having the '32 would be like bolting a 4 x 8 sheet of plywood on the front of my Camaro??? Not a good thing ;( Ok, now a Monica??? I hate to sound stupid or even ignorant for that matter, but is a Monica a supercharger??? If so, I asked some questions a while back on adding a GMC to this motor but was told not to. May be cuz the motor is bored .060 over??? Thin walls??? Bill.....

---

Well not quite that bad, you did'nt say what year camaro but heres a few to compare,

Year...........Body............Front Area...........Drag Coef

34..........Roadster.............18.0.....................0.42

69...........Camaro...............22.0....................0.36.

77...........Camaro...............18.0....................0.35

01.....Typical Pro Stock.......18.0....................0.34



With the 4 core Radiator and the 8-71 monica underdriven you should be cool in a couple of ways. :toocool:

rocknrod, a US Radiator 4 core, 3 pass desert cooler? Ok, I'm going to check and see if they have a web site in a minute or two. It just doesn't seem possible to get 'that' much radiator in the small space of a '32 grill shell. But I guess it is.... Thank you ;) Bill....

viking, well it was an '84 so it was probably somewhere around or between the '77 Camaro & the 'typical pro stock' that you mentioned when it comes to front area {which looks like it is also right about where my '32 will be}. And when it comes to drag coef. it looks like that's where my '32 suffers. Althought I really know nothing about 'drag coef'. It seems as if that is where the '32 suffers. A .07 less for the drag coef.... Hummm, interesting, Thank you, Bill......

ps, oh I read something, somewhere about drag coef. not coming into 'play' until highter speeds? Whats up on this? Is this referring to over 50 MPH? over 25 MPH? or what??? Thank you ;) Bill....

Viking, would you have any frontal area/drag coefficient figures for a 32 Ford highboy roadster you could post?

And perhaps for a 31 A highboy roadster?
Probably a very small difference with the A's shorter radiator/grille shell.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

600-650# sounds like a lot for a glass body.
I'm fairly sure the Wescott 32 roadster body weighs 200-250#.
It can't be too heavy cuz I can turn it upside down by myself and I'm not as strong as I used to be . . . if I ever was....

Fwiw - my 462 Buick powered 32 roadster with Wescott body, T-400, 9" rear, wheels and tires similar to yours and a gasser bumper out back weighs in at 2400# on an NHRA scale.
It's a street driven roadster with 2 1/2" x .120 wall four point roll bar and folding top.
Most SBC powered roadsters similar to mine - glass or steel - come in at 2200-2300#.

Why not weigh your body?
Three blocks of wood equal to the height of your scale on three corners of the body and the scale on the 4th would do it.
Weigh each corner and add the weights up.

It's conceivable the guy quoting the weight is including the crate the body comes in.

Another small fwiw - my Brookville 31 roadster body weighs about the same as the glass 32 body.
It's also easy to turn upside down by myself.

(Upside down for paint and floorboard stuff on the 32 and upside down for fitting the 32 chassis on the 31. Padding the floor with carpet and several layers of cardboard does it. only thing to watch out for is to get some of the weight off the rail that runs around the back of the 31 cockpit. Looks like it could bend if it ends up supporting the weight of the body and a pair of frame rails.)

C9x, Thank you ;).... hmmm, Ok this is what I'm thinking;

1) '32 Roadsters weight between 2200 & 2400 lbs.
2) '32 Roadsters {body only} weight
250 lbs.
3) My '32 Coupe body weights 650 lbs.
4) So 650 - 250 = 400 lbs.
5) I add the 400 lbs more that my body weights to the 2200/2400 that your whole car weights and this means that my car will weight between 2600 & 2800 pounds.
{and to think that I flunked basic math??? ;) Anyway, this corrisponds to what I was thinking from other estimates.
Next time I talk to Wayne at Redneck I'll ask him again but I'd almost bet that he said his coupe body weighted between 600 & 650. I could have misunderstood him......
Oh, the reason I don't weight it is because the car is still at his shop in Kansas. Thanks for telling me how to weight it though. I'm going to have him do a couple of other things to it and probably have it sent out the middle of January..... Oh C9x, what did your car run at the drags???
THANKS AGAIN EVERYONE, Bill.......

Quote:

---

Originally posted by billlsbird
rocknrod, a US Radiator 4 core, 3 pass desert cooler? Ok, I'm going to check and see if they have a web site in a minute or two. It just doesn't seem possible to get 'that' much radiator in the small space of a '32 grill shell. But I guess it is.... Thank you ;) Bill....

viking, well it was an '84 so it was probably somewhere around or between the '77 Camaro & the 'typical pro stock' that you mentioned when it comes to front area {which looks like it is also right about where my '32 will be}. And when it comes to drag coef. it looks like that's where my '32 suffers. Althought I really know nothing about 'drag coef'. It seems as if that is where the '32 suffers. A .07 less for the drag coef.... Hummm, interesting, Thank you, Bill......

ps, oh I read something, somewhere about drag coef. not coming into 'play' until highter speeds? Whats up on this? Is this referring to over 50 MPH? over 25 MPH? or what??? Thank you ;) Bill....

---

Most of what I have read is figured at 65 mph, so far the best was a 70 superbird...Front area 22.0......Drag Coef 0.28 and at the other end was a 18 wheeler, no front area listed but a Drag Coef of 0.60 :eek: to which 50 % of it's fuel is used to overcome this drag, no wonder we see more and more spoilers on them.


C9x,

I could'nt find anything on the 31 or 32, I would guess they would be fairly close to the 34 roadster, I'll let you know when/if I find out.
:toocool:

....LOL, the drag coef of an 18 wheeler ;) {now this probably 'fits' my example of a piece of plywood bolted to the front, huh???}...
interesting about the '70 Superbird, a frontal of 22, which is larger than a pro stock but has a better drag coef than the pro stocker {.28 x .34).... Thank you ;) Bill...

Streets, Thank You ;), Wow, a stock '34 Ford Fourdor weights 2510? yeah that would explain why Pro60chev's '32 Victoria's weighed 3050.... I think I read somewhere that a stock '32 roadster with a V8 was somewhere around 2200 {roughtly, I don't remember exactally}.... So I'm sticking with my 'guess-ta-ment' of my '32 weighting between 2600 & 2800.... Thanks again, Bill.....

Quote:

---

Oh C9x, what did your car run at the drags???

---

Never got to run it at the drags . . . by the time I got it set up for a couple of passes at the nostalgia drags - Famoso @ Bakersfield - the rules for roll bars had stiffened up considerably.

When we can get together I tow little brothers drag race Henry J at the track - pits to staging lanes, turnoff back to the pits etc.
Makes a nice combo with the highboy 32 roadster's black paint and black top along with his all black HJ.

Comparing my 462" Buick engine which is/was built very similar to his 463" Olds engine and when his car weighed about the same as my roadster along with taking into account diff gearing differences and a little less compression in the Buick engine it looks like the 32 would run low 11's in the low 120's and perhaps touch on a high ten now and then.
His car at that time ran 125 @ 10.26.

Now it runs 166 @8.13.
What I get for standing still while little brother is improving all the time.

Here's a pic of his car.

C9x, Nice Henry J that your brother has ;) . Hey but, how about a picture of your '32??? I'll bet it's equally as nice ;).... So you figure you'd be in the low 11's with your '32??? Thats right about where I'd like to be, but of course once I'm there I'll probably want MORE! ;) . I've decided to add an 8:71 to my current motor so I should be right there...... Thanks for the info, Bill.....

Quote:

---

So you figure you'd be in the low 11's with your '32???

---

I think so.
At the time I had a set of large by huge slicks for it - came off little brothers HJ.
As well as a 4.56 Detroit Locker.
And some experience running similarly powered cars.

With the chassis science and tires we have nowadays, ten's aren't too difficult to attain.

To go along with the estimate, I've seen a couple of Deuce highboy roadsters running close to stock 327 Chevy's crank off 112 mph in the mid-12's.
Not sure what gears the roadsters were running, but both had fairly big slicks - about 14" or so wide.

Here's a pic of my 32.
462" Buick as mentioned, lotsa stuff done to the engine although it's been de-tuned a bit from when it was first running.
Went to a milder cam and single 4 bbl, but it still hauls the freight....:3dSMILE:

C9x, Wow! Beautiful '32 ;).... I really like the way the rear is set up. The '39 Ford tail lights, rear bumper style, no rear trunk handle, license plate under the rear. Thats very simalar to how I plan on having mine look. Although I wasn't planning on a 3rd brake light.... Those look like original Halibrands, Are they??? If not, who manufactured them??? Hey, thanks again for all your help, Bill.....

ps, oh, what size wheels and tires are you running??? 10 wide in the rear? Backspacing???

Thanks.
It was a lot of fun to build and even more fun to drive.

I went for the third brake light cuz I got tired of people running up behind - at the time - the no-bumper in the back car.
It helped as did running a pair of Bob Drakes direct replacement Halogen bulbs for the regular #1157 bulbs.
It helped to paint the inside of the taillight housings with 'chrome' paint.
A friend painted his taillight housings with white paint and it's fairly bright.

I never did get around to making an old style third brakelight.
Was thinking of something along the lines of a 39 Chevy torpedo style taillight either adapted to the flat area of the 32 just behind the cockpit rail or turning one out of aluminum and using the 39 Chevy lense.

The wheels are slot mags with 32 Ford re-pro caps adapted to them.

Fronts are 5 1/2 x 14" running 195/70R-14 BFG TA radials.
Rears are 10 x 15" running 285/70R-15 BFG TA passenger car radials.
Reason I point out the passenger car bit is, several years back you had to buy BFG's light truck 31.50 x 15 radial to have this size tire.
The passenger car tire with it's lighter construction is a better choice.
30# pressure up front and 20# pressure out back makes the car ride and handle quite well.
Runnin with the sporty cars on twisty mountain roads is not a problem . . . specially on the straightaways.... :LOL:

:

Quote:

---

Backspacing???

---

Missed that question first time around - the rear wheels are 2 7/8" backspace.
Rear axle width - measured outer drum to outer drum - is 55".
It works well on this car.
The rear 4-bars fit between frame and tire fairly close, but no problems.

56" rear axle width is the usual recommendation for these cars.
It works well with a number of wheel/tire combos.
I have a 56" wide rear axle in my 31 on 32 rails roadster project and the rear wheels fit under bobbed fenders very well.
The rear wheels on it are 6 x 15" steelies - I forget the backspacing on them - and tires are 235/80R-15 radials.
They're skinnier than the 32's fat rear tires, but I'm going for more of a traditional look with this car.
Front tires on the 31 are 185/85R-15 radials.
Both sets of tires look very bias-ply, but I don't care to run bias-plies on my cars.




I meant to add this pic to the above post.

It shows the rear of the 32 a little better.
Bout the best pic I could find at the moment - still in the middle of moving pics from the old computer to the new one.

Photo taken at Mugu Rock, a famous Southern California landmark on Pacific Coast Highway south of Oxnard on the way to Malibu . . . for good seafood at Neptune's Net....:cool

Hey Billlis,
One thing you may want to look at and or take into account for all bodies are not the same, alot of the Glass mfg's, alter to wheel well opening this may or may not work in your favor, I'm building a 32 3 Win Hiboy, and at the top if the fender radius is approx. 3" inset. C9 was right in the axle sizing, most 32's run a 56 " wide rear, allow yourself an inch and a half between the tire sidewall and the inner fender well wall , some like them to stick out more , " It's a personal thing " . Find an old wheel / Tire combo.with the same bolt pattern and install it and measure the distance from sidewall to inner fender wall, then take the wheel off and measure the backspacing .
The third light thing is a good thing, they really don't " Look Hot Rod " but if it can keep you from gettin rear ended and Destroying what we all work so hard for , then their worth all the effort in putting in service. and C9 also mentioned Brighter Bulbs, another good thing , lotsa LED conversions showing up, even the ones that look stock , until the lights come on and their Really Bright Too. but they have to be angled correctly to get their full benefit , C9, Nice looking Ride , how long was the car under const. ? Good Luck to you both !.

C9x, Tim, Thank you guys for all your valueable information! ;)..... The third break light is now going on my car! ..... Plus I'll use Bob Drake's bulbs. I see now that I need to wait until I take delivery of the car before I get my wheels/tires. I'll just have Wayne ship mine out with some 'rollers'.... MUGU ROCK! Yeah, before I read what you wrote I scrolled down to the picture & told myself; "Gee that looks like the view from Mugu Rock!!!" I live in Ojai, California which is about 35 minutes from there {or once I get my '32 running, how 'bout 20 minutes from there??? he,he,he...;).... Thanks Again ;) Bill.....

Thanks Tim.

I had almost all the parts by 1985 and got the car to the roller stage in a year or so.
Then I lost a couple of years building time when I moved from SoCal to Central California and was working a lot of hours.
Spent about a year and a half of part-time work and got it on the road in late 93.
Been driving it ever since.
It's a fun and dependable little car.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bill, I know Ojai fairly well.
Grew up in Ventura and lived in Fillmore for quite a while before moving to Central California.
Still have friends and family in both places.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by billlsbird
rocknrod, a US Radiator 4 core, 3 pass desert cooler?
............It just doesn't seem possible to get 'that' much radiator in the small space of a '32 grill shell..................... Bill....

---

http://www.clubhotrod.com/photopost/...t=1&thecat=500
Here is the radiator for the 32 currently being build at the shop.

...thank you Rock n Rod ;)... Bill....

I cannot say for sure on weight, but alot of the figures seem heavy. We are planning on total weight in the neighborhood of 2200#, maybe 2300#. I hope Im not let down too much! That is with everything steel except for front fenders and running boards, 351 Windsor, C4 automatic, 8'8" rear. Chassis is boxed and modified. It's also a 5 window, with no power windows or a bunch of hi-tech add-ons.

I know what the 351 did in a 68 Mustang, and the 32 has to be lighter than that. Granted, the car is shaped like a slightly rounded off shoe box, but I wouldnt worry too much about drag unless its to be an all out race car. I could see drag having an effect on the freeway a little, but not at speeds below 50 or so- but this is just my opinion I guess, as I have nothing to prove it. Either way, for what I want out of our car, the 351W should do just fine. I expect it to run pretty decent, but also will not be trying to set land speed records between stoplights. :)

Anyway, it will be interesting to weigh the car once the interior is in, as it will basically be done.

Greg

Hey, it's great to see another Big Block Buick powered street rod! Here's a pic of mine which I'm just getting on the road here in NJ.

....Beautiful ;).... Bill

I'll second that! Very nice ride Al, and c9x as well... tough to beat the looks of a black deuce!

Here's another pic