Talk:1932 Ford/Archives/2013

Pictures

Could someone upload images of the regular Model B? All the pictures on the page are of modified, hot rod cars. Rsnetto74 (talk) 23:08, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Rodded? This looks like a pretty stock Deuce. It's been resto'd, & I doubt those are OE headlights or turnsignals, but... TREKphiler ^{hit me ♠} 10:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

That one has still been modified. Here are some pictures of originals for reference. We still need one under an appropriate licence.

• ricksphotopage
• canaltowntraveler on flickr
• merchantcircle.com

I saw an very nice original roadster a few weeks ago and I am now sorry I didn't take pictures. -- Bdentremont (talk) 12:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Given the response to comments on the pictures and the lack of changes made on the images, I'm assuming nobody cares that the bulk of picture represents hot rod culture more than the vehicle in its original stock form. Unbias indeed. - 60.50.252.118 (talk) 06:49, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Bias is not the same thing as indifference, nor lack of task priority. None of the commenters above was averse to more photos of stock/original examples. One even lamented that he recently missed a chance to take photos of one. The only reason no one has added more such photos since the discussion above is because no one happened to get around to doing so. GFDL-licensed examples are needed. If it's a priority to you, then do it. No one's standing in your way. If the thing that you pointed out ends up not getting improved, then you're one of the ones who didn't get around to improving it. That's how Wikipedia works! Leaves no room to blame it on others, or on supposed bias. — ¾-10 01:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

This example (as referred to above) is by no mean a stock Model B (or 18, at that). Beside the mentioned headlamps, it has a reworked front mask without water filler neck (indicating a not original radiator) and logo, non-stock headlamp bar, and non-stock wheels (wider and smaller in a later 1930s style). Top is altered, too, missing the stock inserts. Chassis appears lowered, and it's an easy guess that there is no stock engine under the hood. Missing cowl-mounted position lights also might indicate a Standard model, but the chromed (instead of painted black) windshield frame is a Deluxe-only attribute.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 14:20, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

What's the sense of non-stock car pictures in an article on a certain automobile (not one about hot rods)? To me, a picture in an encyclopedic article is useless when it does not show the subject of the article in unaltered form. Others only irritate a reader who wants to learn more about the car, not what can be made of it by customizing. Hinting to "hot rod culture" does not apply here, as this article refers to the Model B Ford, not to hot rodding. At least, that's what the title implies - and what therefore is expected by the reader. Given that fact, not one of the seven pictures in this article really fits. Six show more or less customized cars (most of them more). While the seventh (in the info box) looks stock, it is a Model 18 (V-8), not a Model B (four). While there are few differences, they nevertheless need to be explained.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 14:20, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Maybe that there are just too few pictures of apting Model B Fords available. In this case, it is more fitting to show similar model year V-8s instead, of course explaining the differences (which are minimal from outside, anyway: V8 logo on light bar or grille and on hub caps.) Customs and Rods are great in a magazine article, but they definitely do not belong in an encyclopedic article; at least not in the main section.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 14:20, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Beside the fact that there is very few information about development and history of the car, the article is lacking informations about the differences between standard and deluxe models. Here, pictures of original cars would help, too.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 14:20, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

If you can find free use pix of an original B, feel free to put them in. Or if you know of a museum example, go shoot a couple. I don't, or I would have before now. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 19:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Done for the 1932 box. I'll look for more.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 11:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Needs complete rework

This article has several issues which are not easily corrected. Mostly, it suffers of the misunderstanding that the Model B designation is also applicable to V-8 models, and therefore mixes information for models 18 (1932), 40 (1933), 40B (1934), and 48 (1935) with that for the Model B (1932-1934; longer on some European markets). I strongly suggest to separate this article into a new one for the V-8 series, covering model years 1932-1948, and leave Model B here. Model B designation was replaced by Rheinland in Germany after 1934.

Further, the article is incomplete. It does not mention the Model BB truck series, or the BF series with the B engine detuned to 34 HP by reducing volume from 3.2 to 2.1 litre (mainly for tax reasons in Europe.)

I can help improving but I need to know first if this point of view is shared by others, and I'm in need of some support as English is not my mother language.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 11:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not expert in the B, but if there are decided differences in spec, I entirely agree. By appearances, tho, the difference between the B & the 18, at least, were cosmetic but for the flatty, in much the same way as a V6 or V8 option varies trim levels today. Clearly, based on what Florey says about sales switching, the differences couldn't have been glaring, even in '32-4. It may just be Ford's internal documentation segregated them for reasons of construction & equipment, in the same way the flatty IDs were changed year-to-year despite only small (perceptible) spec changes. Am I wrong? TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 13:53, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

No, you are right. Although the car was always sold as a model of it's own, it technically was an engine option. problems are the mix between V-8 and B in text, in prices, and in naming the product. I agree that we need an article that contains basic technical information. As the car was developed as a V-8, and a less powerfull and (somewhat) less expensive was made available, natural title would be "Ford V-8 (1932-1948)", with sub-articles for models 18, 40, and so on. Model B should get it's own article because this designation is widespread, widely misunderstood and the car was recognised a model of it's own by the manufacturer. Of course, redundance should be avoided. I started some work here; informations can still be shuffled between V8 and B.

Pictures are horror. As mentioned above, nearly all cars are customized. This is inacceptable in an encyclopedic article, as the do not offer true information. If it is necessary to show them at all, we should do that under the V-8 article, and there in a gallery at the end. I clearly vot for deleting them with the exception of a sample, perhaps in a chapter at the end. Do you agree with me and the changes I made in the article?--Chief tin cloud (talk) 15:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

♠I'm liking the new info, but it's making things way more complicated to follow.

♠I agree, a substantial rework would help. For a start, can I suggest a new subhead to summarize the models, then break out the individual models under their own headings, rather than by year? The years are less essential. I'd say year subheaders under the model.

♠I'm less sure about a page move, 'cause I've always heard this car called a B, & even more just a Deuce. ;p So, I'd suggest a "proposed move" notice here, the Auto Project page, & maybe History & Film Project pages, too. (It was a big deal to auto history, & made at least two absolutely iconic appearances in films that I know of.) I'd say, the more interested eyes on a potential move, the better, to avoid pushback & rv when it happens. (Presuming it does... :) ) TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 10:21, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

In fact, it's even more complicated. Other than with the B, Ford referred all new trucks as BB, giving the type of engine no consideration.

I plan to go on with this article by preparing changes on a user page rather than doing many small edits here. That might help to easy up work as these changes can be discussed easier (and reverted, if necessary). I'll follow your suggestion to add a subhead to summarize the models. I'm not sure what you mean with individual models under their own headings, rather than by year. I understand that the car was called a B, and 18, 40, or 40 applied only for the V-8s.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 11:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

1932 Deluxe

There were in fact 1932 Model B Deluxes. I mis-interpreted the article in Kimes' Standard catalogue. Thank you for correcting that.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 09:51, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Didn't think anybody actually paid attention to edits. Was going add the production numbers as well but with world wide numbers it made made for a mathematical mess. Plus numbers vary depending on the source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE71:5B60:223:6CFF:FE88:6904 (talk) 05:05, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

assembly kit based on Ford 1933 B

hi, i sow car warriors serie with assembly kit based on Ford 1933 B, so can be added to main article also? when he still alive? :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HanzP (talk • contribs) 08:33, 16 December 2013 (UTC)