50 Hood insulation

russmaas

Does anyone know if there was insulation on a 50 hood? If not undercoating or just plain color!

Unknown

Based on factory photos, my car and all the other Hudsons I've seen, the underside of the hood was just painted metal.

rambos_ride

This is a picture of my 49 Hood - which was completely stock no repaints -
sorry for the dirt and customizations but this shows some points of
interest if you were trying to restore something...

Ignoring the surface rust - there was one plainly visible area where the
factory paint was thin...I remember cleaning the dirt off and seeing that
the paint on the underside was not covering fully in more than that
area...this makes me think that the painting may have been

1. focused more on the hood edges and front section
2. was mostly overspray (maybe just a little heavier than overspray)

I posted this question a long time ago - I've always wondered whether
the markings were factory?

nick s

russmaas wrote:

Does anyone know if there was insulation on a 50 hood? If not undercoating or just plain color!

Russ, I believe 54 was the only year with factory insulation. I have seen at least one parts car where the hood was undercoated (i would assume by the dealer). my 50 which is pretty well unmolested (except by the squirrel that stored his nuts in the carb and the mice that lived in the seats and headliner), shows no signs of insulation ever being present.

Unknown

nick s wrote:

Russ, I believe 54 was the only year with factory insulation. I have seen at least one parts car where the hood was undercoated (i would assume by the dealer). my 50 which is pretty well unmolested (except by the squirrel that stored his nuts in the carb and the mice that lived in the seats and headliner), shows no signs of insulation ever being present.

My 52 Commodore 8 had traces of the Jute type insulation glued to the underside in a square section in the middle of the hood.

Would the upper end models have had the jute insulation where the lower models did not?

Dan: Looks like your carb hic-cupped a couple of time and scorched the hood.:eek: My hood was also original underneath and I did not have any of the type of markings yours has. Replacement hood from a junk yard, maybe?

[Deleted User]

rambos_ride wrote:

This is a picture of my 49 Hood - which was completely stock no repaints -

sorry for the dirt and customizations but this shows some points of

interest if you were trying to restore something...



Ignoring the surface rust - there was one plainly visible area where the

factory paint was thin...I remember cleaning the dirt off and seeing that

the paint on the underside was not covering fully in more than that

area...this makes me think that the painting may have been



1. focused more on the hood edges and front section

2. was mostly overspray (maybe just a little heavier than overspray)



I posted this question a long time ago - I've always wondered whether

the markings were factory?

Dan, Actually that really isn't insulation. That was put there to prevent squeaking from the cross hood brace and the hood itself.. Same stuff used on the gas tank and in the doors-same idea.

rambos_ride

It's insulating the squeeks!
What do you guys use for replacement pieces in this area?

If I remember the gunk above the carb was mostly oil and dirt - never caught fire that I could see.

hdsn49

Dan,



I used the material that was glued to the underside of the roof. It can off in large enouth pieces that I was able to cut pieces for the hood. I used modern day sound deadening material for the roof. Nobody will see it of course.



You are right about the paint job under the hood, not very good. The trunk lid is even worse. It looks like someone just gave it a few passes of paint as it went down the assembly line.



I checked the underside of the hood on my '49 sedan and there are markings in red crayon that say 455 ck. It must be a factory marking.

[Deleted User]

My '50 has undercoating under the hood, but than its got undercoating all over the friggen car!

faustmb

My 50 Pacemaker still has the original body color paint under the hood. There never was insulation installed anywhere in it, just the anit-squeak pads mentioned above.



Undercoating may have a been a dealer option?

Hudsy Wudsy

My '50 Commodore is fairly original in all respects. It has undercoating over the original paint. Perhaps some that don't are cars which had their hoods replaced at some point.

hudsonguy

rambos_ride wrote:

It's insulating the squeeks!

What do you guys use for replacement pieces in this area?



If I remember the gunk above the carb was mostly oil and dirt - never caught fire that I could see.

My '49 uses small wooden shims wedged into these areas. Not sure if it's right, or original, but it certainly works. Seems like one is slightly thicker than the other one, too. This may have been done when the body was restored and painted back in the 80's, but I'm really not sure.

kamzack

My ten cents worth, My 50 Commodore is 51K original and is heavily undercoated everywhere, trunk car bottom and hood underside on top of paint. Only rust is in the rockers.

Kim

Unknown

jsrail wrote:

My '50 has undercoating under the hood, but than its got undercoating all over the friggen car!

Yah same here its every where and hard to come off it must have been cheaper than the paint and we still have rust issues. Some places i have paint and no primer so go figure

faustmb

James P. wrote:

My '50 Commodore is fairly original in all respects. It has undercoating over the original paint. Perhaps some that don't are cars which had their hoods replaced at some point.

My pacemaker has no insulation or undercoating, and the hood is 100% original. The car has been in my family since new, and the hood has never even been removed. My dad has a 50 C6 that he bought in 1961, also original paint under the original hood with no insulation or undercoating. I have seen cars with undercoating, but don't know when it was installed. I am thinking that it was either done by the dealers or for specific regions. Both the cars mentioned above were originally sold in upstate NY.

53jetman

Back in the dark ages when these cars were new, Hudson encouraged it's dealers to invest in Undercoating equipment and offer undercoating to our customers. It was additional revenue for the dealer, and perceived as an additional value for the customer. I beleive it was during the 1952 model year that the fiberglass hood pads showed up as standard equipment on Hornets and Commodores, optional on the lower series. My '53 Superjet had the fiberglass pad under the hood, and I can't find any info in my files where this was offered as an option, so it must have been part of the "Super" Jet package. I was 16 years old at the time, working in my fathers dealership shop - you know - the clean-up boy! ! This forum is great - it really does bring back memories of things that went on back then.



Jerry

53jetman

Clutchguy

faustmb wrote:

My pacemaker has no insulation or undercoating, and the hood is 100% original. The car has been in my family since new, and the hood has never even been removed. My dad has a 50 C6 that he bought in 1961, also original paint under the original hood with no insulation or undercoating. I have seen cars with undercoating, but don't know when it was installed. I am thinking that it was either done by the dealers or for specific regions. Both the cars mentioned above were originally sold in upstate NY.

I think that Hudson started putting the insulation under the hood in about 52.I have seen my share of original cars,and I can only remember 52 and up.The "undercoating"we are discussing here was usually used for sound deadener.This stuff was sprayed on in all kinds of places[along the rockers,inside the floor pans,all around in most of the trunks have it-real heavy-,all in and around the fenders wells-NOTE-if you remove this when restoring the front fenders,replace it with something,if you don't,rocks will ding the finish from the inside out..If you look,it usually is located everywere there is possible road noise and/or engine noise.I have found the body seams all had this real thick layer/layers of the seam sealer that usually turned hard as a rock,would shrink up,put away from whatever it was sprayed on and then become a trap for water and other road elements.I think when they put the Step-Down cars together,they anticipated some creaks and groans,so they put LOTS of the deadener/sealer on as many seams as they could.I think that as time went on for the Step-Down cars,the more they used this stuff.They knew it did work for the noise!!!The doors all had the black paper material in them,and when you remove the door panels,most of the time it is all bunched up at the bottom of the door/doors.Most of the trunks all have the paper in the lid.If you look at how this stuff was installed,you can see that it was done before the outer skin was put on,same on the doors.The rockers on Step-downs had these foam rubber quarter round pieces in front of the rocker and then one just before the rear fender,and the rocker had like a chalking material at the bottom of where it bolts to the frame.I also think this was because of a noise concern.I really haven't noticed that much of this sound proofing stuff on the earlier cars.

Unknown

I've never seen hood insulation on any full sized Hudsons. If such an animal did exist, how was it fastened?

7XPacemaker

Dan, Actually that really isn't insulation. That was put there to prevent squeaking from the cross hood brace and the hood itself.. Same stuff used on the gas tank and in the doors-same idea.



I believe that another reason for these pads were to raise/lower the rear angle of the hood to get it to line up with the height of the cowl. removing these pieces won't necessarily cause a "squeak" but more of a rattle. When installing the hood, shims are put underneath of the cross brace to "lift" the sheet metal up in the back and making everything look good. If that wasn't the purpose, then I just invented something! Another thing, I see numbers written in chalk under your hood Rambo. Those are factory. There was a NOS '49 hood put on my father's '49. It had numbers written in chalk on it. The other markings could have been the inspectors mark off of the assembly line, I am not sure about that.

nick s

Dave53-7C wrote:

I've never seen hood insulation on any full sized Hudsons. If such an animal did exist, how was it fastened?

short answer: glue

Dave, picture a 4' x 4' piece of fiberglass insulation (like the pink stuff) about an 1" or so thick glued to the center of the hood. FWIW the 48-54 parts book lists a "silencer and insulation" for 53 hornet and 54 hornet and hornet special hoods. I am positive that the 54's had it and it seams that there are several who can attest to it starting in 52 and also included some jets. now some of that may have been a revenue generator for the dealer, perhaps (as seen by the number of posts attesting to undercoated hoods) there were dealers who undercoated the hood for sound deadonning, the insulation would have been a neater, cleaner and quicker process.

Unknown

Not that I doubt the info you say is present in the 48-54 parts book, but I would think that air movement under the hood would cause a glued pad to get tattered in short order. Is there anyway to verify to what degree, if any, hood insulation would be correct on cars from 52 on?

nick s

Dave53-7C wrote:

Not that I doubt the info you say is present in the 48-54 parts book, but I would think that air movement under the hood would cause a glued pad to get tattered in short order. Is there anyway to verify to what degree, if any, hood insulation would be correct on cars from 52 on?

Dave, here's a picture that almost shows it on an origional 54, I've been under enough 54 hornet hoods to be confident that they had it. I don't remember seeing it on other years but i can't recall digging into any 52-53 parts cars. as for doubting the parts book there are certainly errors and omissions.

[Deleted User]

53jetman wrote:

My '53 Superjet had the fiberglass pad under the hood, and I can't find any info in my files where this was offered as an option, so it must have been part of the "Super" Jet package.

Jerry,
I never noticed before your post that my Super Jet is missing the hood insulator....another item to put on the "want" list.:)

BTW, my '50 C6 doesnt have any undercoating under the hood.

nick s

Dave53-7C wrote:

Not that I doubt the info you say is present in the 48-54 parts book, but I would think that air movement under the hood would cause a glued pad to get tattered in short order. Is there anyway to verify to what degree, if any, hood insulation would be correct on cars from 52 on?

dave, here a pic from a 53 on ebay right now showing the remnants.

Unknown

Well, not be be a stinker, but how do we known this is original? Anyway, the nice thing about the HET club is the fact that they don't judge cars. Even if they did, Hudson was in a whirlwind near the end and pretty much did whatever it took to make a buck. So, at least to a point, anything goes.



Now, let's talk about the advantages and disadvantages of hood insulation. Obviously, it helps to muffle engine sounds and keeps the hood paint from getting excessively baked. But I'm sure there are many other thoughts out there.

Unknown

my 54 wasp doesn't have insulation on it , probably cause its a lower end car. It does get a lot of insects under there though.

Unknown

Jimalberta wrote:

my 54 wasp doesn't have insulation on it , probably cause its a lower end car. It does get a lot of insects under there though.

Big surprise that you've got insects under the hood of your WASP!

[Deleted User]

Under the hood insulation was a dealer installed option so it would be hard to track its use. Some would have it some wouldn't.

Walt-LA

Has anyone with experience with under the hood insulation found that it had an effect on vapor locking? I've wanted to do something to reduce engine noise (insulated firewall and floor pans) but have held off hood for that reason. Walt-LA

Unknown

I guess the answer to eliminating vapor lock would be to install an electric fuel pump or a return line from the carb(s) back to the tank. Without either, I think hood insulation would intensify vapor lock.

[Deleted User]

I stopped the vaporlock problem by cutting the line from the fuel pump and turning the hard line to the right, then running a rubber hose over to the fenderwell to an inline filter, (made a mounting bracket out of two L brackets that I had laying around) then ran a hose to the carb. I have had no problems since then. I do have an electric pump but it is in the trunk in a tupperware box with some other parts.
Bob