Re: 1928 Phaeton Windshield Frame

Re: 1928 Phaeton Windshield Frame - Drilling of Holes

Posted by Marco on April 15, 1998 at 15:03:38

In Reply to: 1928 Phaeton Windshield Frame - Drilling of Holes
posted by Bob McDonald on April 15, 1998 at 01:13:07

: Has anyone out there details/drawings of the correct location and sizes of holes in the 1928/29 windshield frame for electric wiper motor,pulls, rearview mirror, windshield snaps? My originalframe has to be replaced as it is in very poor shape, however over the years there seem to have been many extra holes drilled, and I am not sure which are correct. The replacement frame (ex USA) is tubular in section, whereas the original has a flatter sectionwhich would be easier to drill. I am located in Australia, and original components would therefore have been sourced from Canada. (because we are right hand drive the wiper motor is on the other side of the frame, but could use mirror image of USA location) Thanks in advance for any help.
: Bob McDonald
------------------------
Bob,
I haven't seen a frame that was flattened or oval in shape. I believe even the "AF" models had a round or tubular cross section. The American models had three versions of the snap hole pattern across the top. The earliest had only four holes but I believe was VERY early only. The Second was used until early '29 with the hand wiper and first version electric wiper. The hole pattern ia as follows
- O -10"- O -10"- C -8.5"- O -1.5"- W -3.5"- O -6.5"- O -
O=fastener
C=fastener @ centerline
W=wiper hole
The version introduced in early '29 had no hole for the wiper as the shaft passed over the frame instead of through. The snap locations were also changed. I would guess that most if not all the "AF" models used the hand wiper and think this would get you the closest. Be sure what type of wiper and mounting you are using before drilling a hole for the shaft.
I don't have other dimensions handy so maybe someone else can help with the fi-nger pulls. (not a typo, the message board software thinks the correct spelling is unacceptable language!!!)
Good luck,
Marco

E-Mail Comment to Webmaster