Joined: Jan 07, 2011 Posts: 63 Location: Idaho Falls, ID
Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:24 am Post subject: Frame front end rebuild
I need to rebuild a small portion of the front end of my frame rails, but since both sides have been chopped in the same way, I have no dimensions to work off of.
Could somebody with access to this part of their frame get these four dimensions shown in the diagrams below (A, B, C, and D)? Photos of a correct end would also be greatly appreciated so I can get the right profile.
Side view: Red shows the missing portions that need replacement.
Front view
Top view
Also, the bolt shown in the first photo is secured using a square nut. From what I've read, that nut should be welded to the frame. Is that correct (mine isn't welded)? And, yes, I know that plate isn't original. It was part of a modification which also converted the lifting shackle mounts to mounts for a towing hitch.
Joined: Aug 31, 2010 Posts: 1741 Location: SO IDAHO
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 8:38 am Post subject:
my '51 m38 frame is bare and i can get accurate dims
for you if they apply to your project. you dont say which
jeep you're working on-and i dont know of/if there are
differences in the m-38 or a-1 frames. yours appears
to be of the early m-38 type. _________________ keep 'em rollin'
RICKG MC 51986 DOD 01-52, '50 CJ3a
The horn and bumper attachment are the same for both M38 frames. The change was on the mounting holes for the front lift shackles. Shape and dimensions remain the same and only hole location and weld nuts differ.
The M38A1 frames are different. _________________ Wes K
45 MB, 51 M38, 54 M37, 66 M101A1, 60 CJ5, 76 DJ5D, 47Bantam T3-C & 5? M100
Joined: Aug 31, 2010 Posts: 1741 Location: SO IDAHO
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 10:13 am Post subject:
thanks wes. stuart i have some dimensions for you.
A 3-1/8" ht of the front plate.
B 3-11/16" ttl ht of unit from front.
C 3-1/16" from ctr of rear lift shackle bolt hole to front
of top as measures straight across (per your diagram).
D 1-3/4" across the top plate at the nose.
the lift shackle mount holes ard spaced 2-1/2" apart
center to center if youre interested.
see the last items in my photo album pg 8 for more photos.
_________________ keep 'em rollin'
RICKG MC 51986 DOD 01-52, '50 CJ3a
Joined: Jan 07, 2011 Posts: 63 Location: Idaho Falls, ID
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:50 am Post subject:
Thanks, Rick. Based on your photos, it looks like you have the same frame style as I do. _________________ 1952 M38 - restoration in process, 1000 miles away...
Joined: Feb 28, 2011 Posts: 148 Location: Escondido, CA
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 4:25 pm Post subject:
Rick,
Thanks for the dimensions, but we're having trouble correlating your value for "D" with the pictures. Our main frame measures just under 1-3/4" in the area rear of the lift shackle rear hole, and there is a slight remnant of an inward flare on the top flange as it also starts to curve upward. In your pictures it is pretty clear that the top flange ("plate") is wider at the the lift shackle front hole than the main frame (the "flare"). We scaled your picture from other known dimensions and it looks like the area in question must be more like 2-1/8" wide. (Note how the rear hole is centered in the top flange but the front hole is not.) Could you re-check "D"?
Thanks,
Jim
P.S. If it helps, I'm a southern Idaho native - grew up near Burley _________________ Jim M.
1952 M38 son-father project
Discovering more worn out parts, one assembly at a time
Joined: Aug 31, 2010 Posts: 1741 Location: SO IDAHO
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 4:48 pm Post subject:
ME THINKS THE 1ST PICTURES INCLUDED SOME ILLUSION-I CAN SEE THAT TOO NOW- BUT THESE PROVE DIFFERENT. IF YOU NEED MORE FOTOS/INFO JUST HOLLER.
OH-RIMFIRE, IF YOURE A BURLEY NATIVE YOU KNOW THAT NOW
ALL IVE GOT TO CONTEND WITH IS WIND-WIND-WIND AND MORE
SNOW- THERES NOT A BIG ENUF WOODSTOVE OR ENUF WOOD
ON THE PLANET TO HEAT MY SHOP I REALLY NEED TO GET
BACK ON MY PROJECT!! _________________ keep 'em rollin'
RICKG MC 51986 DOD 01-52, '50 CJ3a
Joined: Feb 28, 2011 Posts: 148 Location: Escondido, CA
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:19 pm Post subject:
Rick,
Thanks for the new photos. Yeah, we too thought there might have been some wide-angle lens perspective issues. Your main frame appears to be about 3/32" narrower than ours. Could just be Willys manufacturing tolerances. I noticed the front frame flange on both sides of ours varies in width quite a bit from top to bottom. I'm still trying to picture the forming operations that they used to create these shapes!
I think we'll make our top tabs 3/32" wider than our frame per the difference shown in your photos, and call it "close is good enough". Can't get too obsessive over something that is going to be hidden by the bumper anyway. I found some square weld-nuts in McMaster that look like they are the right size, now just need to come up with some flat stock of the right thickness. I measured ours at ~0.150, 9 gauge steel. Might have to mill some 3/16" down.
Yup, I know all about wind-wind-wind. Didn't mind the snow, but hated the wind - one reason I don't have any desire to move back to that part of the state. Just to rub it in, we're working on our project here all outside _________________ Jim M.
1952 M38 son-father project
Discovering more worn out parts, one assembly at a time
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
ME THINKS THE 1ST PICTURES INCLUDED SOME ILLUSION-I CAN SEE THAT TOO NOW- BUT THESE PROVE DIFFERENT. IF YOU NEED MORE FOTOS/INFO JUST HOLLER.
I REALLY NEED TO GET
