Page 1 of 1
Re: I'm completely glueless
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2001 5:28 pm
by mrbadger
Well,
I don't know if anybody will pay any attention to the poor old Badger
but, back in the olden days when I was restoring lots of T-cars, I used
a variety of glues on TD and TF bodies but NEVER any glue at all on TC
bodies! Why? So they could FLEX. A TC chassis, and body, actually
move around quite a bit and if you don't believe me, try driving your TC
diagonally up a gas station curb-cut and watch the crack at the front of
the doors and at the rear of the bonnet where it meets the scuttle. I
mean, it MOVES. TD and TF chassis are quite rigid and you can use any
kind of glue you like the smell of but a TC or earlier, just a very good
fit and wood screws thank you. I used to apply Cuprinol to the finished
tub before attaching the tin with proper panel pins - not nails.
You can use any kind of space age goop you want but this Badger believes
the old ways are, more often than not, still the best.
Re: I'm completely glueless
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2001 7:56 pm
by Charles Hill
Wonder of wonders, I actually find myself totally in agreement with
Badger. TCs flex too much to be solidly glued together. FWIW, Morgans
were/are assembled with hide glue on the joints from the information
I've seen about the Morgan works. When I was restoring my +4 years ago,
I didn't see much evidence of the glue. Maybe the glue was more of an
aid for assembly to help hold the sticks together till the sheet metal
was tacked on. Don't have the +4 any more, but thats another story.
Regards,
Charles Hill
Re: I'm completely glueless
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2001 8:49 pm
by Jack Stehr
Ditto, glueless. When I assembled my tub a couple of years ago using Craig
Seabrook's wood I only used #10 flat head slotted screws to secure the
joints. I received the same advice that The Badger and Terry have stated
already, that is the TC body was meant to flex. In addition, during the
construction process you may want to move a piece slightly, especially when
fitting the doors and the sheet metal. This would be much more difficult if
the joints were glued. Another argument for glueless construction is the
difficulty that would be encountered if a rotten or broken wooden member had
to be replaced later. Now, I just need to finish my restoration so I can
experience the joy of my body flexing.
Jack Stehr
Piedmont, CA
Re: I'm completely glueless
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2001 2:17 am
by Roger Furneaux
Good advice from the Badger Sett - I'm pleased to see we agree on this, viz
my reply off-list:
>If you are talking about the wood joints, don't glue them - the chassis is
so flexible that the tub has to move about as well. Rolls Royce
coachbuilders used to put thin leather between wood sections to stop any
squeaking.
another thing, do NOT use brass screws, they are too weak, and even zinc
plated steel gets corroded by the acids in the wood - use Stainless Steel,
you should have no trouble getting them.
ocTagonally Roger
Badger wrote:
>Well,
>I don't know if anybody will pay any attention to the poor old Badger
>but, back in the olden days when I was restoring lots of T-cars, I used
>a variety of glues on TD and TF bodies but NEVER any glue at all on TC
>bodies! Why? So they could FLEX. A TC chassis, and body, actually
>move around quite a bit and if you don't believe me, try driving your TC
>diagonally up a gas station curb-cut and watch the crack at the front of
>the doors and at the rear of the bonnet where it meets the scuttle. I
>mean, it MOVES. TD and TF chassis are quite rigid and you can use any
>kind of glue you like the smell of but a TC or earlier, just a very good
>fit and wood screws thank you. I used to apply Cuprinol to the finished
>tub before attaching the tin with proper panel pins - not nails.
>You can use any kind of space age goop you want but this Badger believes
>the old ways are, more often than not, still the best.
Re: I'm completely glueless
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2001 10:15 pm
by seabrook@en.com
Dear Jack & Group,
Not wanting to get blasted into cyberspace by mrbadger, we will not
give our opinion about glueing coachwork on line. If interested, please
contact me off line.
Craig Seabrook
Fred Kuntz
Whitworth Shop
Coachbuilders
Jack Stehr wrote:
>
> Ditto, glueless. When I assembled my tub a couple of years ago using Craig
> Seabrook's wood I only used #10 flat head slotted screws to secure the
> joints. I received the same advice that The Badger and Terry have stated
> already, that is the TC body was meant to flex. In addition, during the
> construction process you may want to move a piece slightly, especially when
> fitting the doors and the sheet metal. This would be much more difficult if
> the joints were glued. Another argument for glueless construction is the
> difficulty that would be encountered if a rotten or broken wooden member had
> to be replaced later. Now, I just need to finish my restoration so I can
> experience the joy of my body flexing.
>
> Jack Stehr
> Piedmont, CA
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: I'm completely glueless
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2001 4:42 am
by Mark McCombs
The technology was there, if the factory intended on glued joints. One need
look no futher than the mosquito bomber. I think we can say that they werent
glued, but then was it cost cutting or flexure? What about the other
coachbuilders, did any of the higher quality ever glue?
Mark TC8126
----- Original Message -----
From: seabrook@en.com>
To: "Jack Stehr" mgtcmd@pacbell.net>
Cc: mg-tabc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 1:16 AM
Subject: Re: [mg-tabc] I'm completely glueless
> Dear Jack & Group,
> Not wanting to get blasted into cyberspace by mrbadger, we will not
> give our opinion about glueing coachwork on line. If interested, please
> contact me off line.
>
> Craig Seabrook
> Fred Kuntz
> Whitworth Shop
> Coachbuilders
>
> Jack Stehr wrote:
> >
> > Ditto, glueless. When I assembled my tub a couple of years ago using
Craig
> > Seabrook's wood I only used #10 flat head slotted screws to secure the
> > joints. I received the same advice that The Badger and Terry have
stated
> > already, that is the TC body was meant to flex. In addition, during the
> > construction process you may want to move a piece slightly, especially
when
> > fitting the doors and the sheet metal. This would be much more
difficult if
> > the joints were glued. Another argument for glueless construction is
the
> > difficulty that would be encountered if a rotten or broken wooden member
had
> > to be replaced later. Now, I just need to finish my restoration so I
can
> > experience the joy of my body flexing.
> >
> > Jack Stehr
> > Piedmont, CA
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Re: I'm completely glueless
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2001 6:04 am
by joecurto@aol.com
Gee-Whiz Craig I am sure Badger would respect your expertise in the area of
coachbuilding, and I suspect the group might be interested in your opinions,
Share it if you will.
Curto