1935 terraplane driving characteristics???

Old Fogey UK

If you drive an unmodified 34/35/36 car as many of us do, you have to remember it'll be getting on for 90 years old and you have to make allowances. Not just in driving style but also in terms of noise, acceleration, cornering and braking.
It's all part of the charm, challenge and fun of driving an old car in this day and age...

JACK356

It was just to see. Because on mine I have the axle flex and the old shock absorber with Gabriel brand of origin

dholck

Wow! This is a thread with some legs... 10 years worth.
I put 16" radials on my 34T coupe (from 17" bias) - they make them now in the "old look," so you do not lose anything in the styling.  I'd say; it drives better (less wander), but the difference is not astounding.  The main benefit to me was that I think the car looks better down on the 16" (optional in 34) radials than perched up on the skinny 17" bias ply tires.   I have the 'geared down' rear end that made it run a little quieter as it runs at lower RPM.  However, it still feels "most right" cruising at 45 or 50 MPH although it will go 55 or 65.  As others have pointed out, this was another age and the cars are never going to be quiet and smooth by today's standards.

Oh... and I hope Geoff got his computer fixed in the past 10 years - obviously his "4" did not work, as he said the 33 and 35 were best looking.  Everybody knows the 34 was the best ever; neither the 33 or 35 can compare with that swooping, vertical bar grill and 2-winged hood ornament of the 34.     
OK, to each his own... there are people who even think Fords are beautiful.

Old Fogey UK

dholck said:

Wow! This is a thread with some legs... 10 years worth.
I put 16" radials on my 34T coupe (from 17" bias) - they make them now in the "old look," so you do not lose anything in the styling.  I'd say; it drives better (less wander), but the difference is not astounding.  The main benefit to me was that I think the car looks better down on the 16" (optional in 34) radials than perched up on the skinny 17" bias ply tires.   I have the 'geared down' rear end that made it run a little quieter as it runs at lower RPM.  However, it still feels "most right" cruising at 45 or 50 MPH although it will go 55 or 65.  As others have pointed out, this was another age and the cars are never going to be quiet and smooth by today's standards.

Oh... and I hope Geoff got his computer fixed in the past 10 years - obviously his "4" did not work, as he said the 33 and 35 were best looking.  Everybody knows the 34 was the best ever; neither the 33 or 35 can compare with that swooping, vertical bar grill and 2-winged hood ornament of the 34.     
OK, to each his own... there are people who even think Fords are beautiful.

People tell me I'm better off with my rigid front axle rather than Axleflex because if the latter is worn you get far worse handling than with a beam axle - an advantage of having the entry level car, I suppose !
I have 16x6.50 crossply tyres (an option on LTS Hudsons instead of the standard narrower ones).
They look better on the car and it does corner surprisingly well compared with the large 30s British cars of some of my friends.
 

JACK356

My survivor original Englebert super ballon renforcé 6.25X16

Old Fogey UK

JACK356 said:

My survivor original Englebert super ballon renforcé 6.25X16

That size was standard equipment on 1934 Hudson Eights.
16x6.50 was an extra cost option.

JACK356

Thanks for the info because 6.25X16 is no longer manufactured.

Geoff

You will find variations in size between different makers, but 650/16  4 plies are generally suitable for all '34-'39 models. 

JACK356