1938 SS saloon fuel tank supports

[Peter_Scott]

Hi Rob,

How does your clearance look between the long rod to the near side and the near side tank support?

When I first got my car the suspension movement had worn a notch out of the rod where it was rubbing on the metal strap that retains the tank in position. If I swapped my compensator over like you I’m sure it would rub again. I think Graham’s chassis is more like the MkIV that uses a totally different petrol tank and has a flat boot floor so clearances are probably not the same.

Here’s the MkIV brake arrangement.

Peter

[Rob_Reilly]

I have clearance, but that tank support cross beam is really flexible. I think it ought to be strengthened.

What is item 7, a turn buckle?

[Peter_Lloyd]

It’s a rubber sleeve as an anti-rattle cover for the rod because it could flex against the banjo housing on rough roads.

[Rob_Reilly]

Ok thanks. I see Allan Crouch has a photo of a 1938 chassis on page 14 of his book, and it has the brake rods configured the same as mine.

[Peter_Scott]

Yes. that’s the same photo that I posted earlier in this thread that was used in “The Automobile” article. So October 1937.

Looking at the MkIV drawings that I posted I see that they show the compensator completely upside down which I think is a nonesense and doesn’t agree with the MkIV photo I posted.

Peter

[Rob_Reilly]

Barrie Price has this same photo in his book on page 89, and he calls it the “second attempt”, which I suppose means it is still in the development stage. The front fuel tank support is very difficult to see, and I missed it at first.

My rear fuel tank support cross member had patch tabs that were poorly welded and bent by the weight of the car on the rear springs. I have removed it and will clean it up to evaluate how to repair it.

Is anyone able to get me a picture of how this piece is welded to the main side frames?

[Peter_Scott]

I’m not sure if this helps. It’s a difficult area to access with the body on.

[Rob_Reilly]

Excellent, thank you so much, Peter!
I see there is a pad underneath the side frame, the existence of which I was not aware.
The black one seems to have piston shocks, where the one with gray primer has vane shocks like mine.
I note another interesting bit, that both these main cross beams seem to be one press-formed s-curved piece side to side, where mine is made up of little straight pieces cut at angles and welded to make the same general shape.
Probably an indicator of the chassis still being under development after mine was made.
I also note the location of the rear vertical body mounting brackets; mine came to me loose in a box.
I know what to do now. Remake some of those little bits.
Thanks again!

[Peter_Scott]

Hi Rob,

Yes, I think with your’s being an early car, that explains the difference in the form of that rear cross member. Here’s another photo from the Oct 1937 “Automobile” article and both rear cross members differ from the eventual designs.

Peter

[Rob_Reilly]

Thanks, Peter & Graham. Graham sent me some photos off line which show something else interesting. His cross beam sits both on top of and below the side rails. Obviously stronger. I think if the DPO of mine had done that it might not have twisted.
Mine is made up of a lot of little flat and bent pieces, so I can make those easily. I think I do not need to hold myself to duplicating exactly what was there originally, I can add these improvements I see in your later cars.
I also note the tail pipe hanger brackets, missing from mine.
Thanks for everything!

[Peter_Scott]

Hi Rob,

Graham’s is a 1940 car. There were significant changes made to the SS for 1940 and rear end is a totally different design that was used in the MkIV.

Here’s a MkIV chassis.

Yes, the MkIV has plates welded onto the chassis sides for the exhaust hangers but in the SS the hangers are mounted directly onto the chassis sides as you can see here.

Peter

[Rob_Reilly]

I discovered my rear exhaust tailpipe hangers, they are on the forward side of the forward fuel tank support cross beam. So yet another difference from later cars. Why should I be surprised?

I finished repairing the rear tank support cross beam.
Bad parts cut away.

The spring saddles were both riveted and welded to the cross beam; I salvaged them. Trial fitting new parts.

Tack welding new parts to old.

Final welding.

The rivets were 11/32" diameter, what a weird size. I made new ones by cutting up a Spax lag bolt.
Locations of spring saddles carefully measured, holes drilled, attached by both riveting and welding. Oxy-Acetylene torch to heat up the rivets bright orange and hammer them against an anvil; I felt like the mighty village smith under the spreading chestnut tree with sinewy hands and brawny arms.

I discovered the DPO had welded on this cross member crooked, the left side ahead of the right side by about 1/2".
I spent four hours calculating the correct position of the spring saddles relative to the nearest reliable reference points I could find, the shock link mounts, which are riveted to the chassis so I figure are pretty accurate.
Measuring, marking, measuring again, fitting and welding the cross beam to the chassis.

Next step, attach the springs.

“Each morning sees some task begun,
Each evening sees it close,
Something attempted, something done,
Has earned a night’s repose.” - Longfellow

[Wiggles (Paul Wigton)]

Before welding, even new metal, it is critical the weldment area be ground to new metal.

Forgive me if this step was not apparent in your pix.

[Ed_Nantes]

Rob
Will the chassis eventually be sand blasted?
I find it easier to get the whole thing dne separately and the inside of things like wheel arches etc.
The bodies are easy to remove and replace, they just take a lot of space while ding it.
We drill a 1 /8"hole through each of the mounts into the chassis so that when it goes back you know the adjustment is the same as originally.

[Rob_Reilly]

Yes, of course.
This rear cross beam was a necessary immediate repair because the old welds were poor and it was twisting due to the spring force and the gas tank was not supported right because the beam was welded on crooked. There was no “same as originally” to work from.
In this case I have to work with the body on the chassis so I can be sure the gas tank is in right. Also the rearmost body support points are gone, so I will have to work those out before the body comes off the chassis.
But that is a year or two down the road.

[ptelivuo (Pekka Telivuo)]

Wow! A lot of work,but it seems you are progressing, keep it going!

Cheers!