Choices: 1942 F15 vs 1942 C15

[Mike K]

hi Doug

I've owned both, refurbished them and driven them around a bit ..the Ford wasn't a CMP, but a 11D ex army 3/4 ton .

Something nobody has mentioned yet is: The Fords are far less forgiving in terms of the cooling system .. your radiator and water pumps have to be in top condition .. the Ford motor has little leeway or forgiveness..the design of the block is such that it's a 'warm motor' always running on the edge .. ask anyone from tropical Queensland who drove one as a everyday vehicle ...days above 90 F will test things. Why did the LRDG throw away their Fords I wonder - all chevies for them, Hmm....

The recirculating ball steering box used by GM is so much better than Fords crude offering... the Chev S/box has a very good stable affect on the road..you feel more relaxed with it ..driving is a pleasure , not an ordeal. Nothing worse than wandering around on the road . Poorly designed steering boxes are more the norm with older vehicles ... My Holden HR ute steering box was massive compared to a car from the 1930's or 40's ...

The Ford gearbox ..not really an issue .... just practice .

[cletrac (RIP)]

Here's a little history on the Ford heating problems. Henry Ford was disappointed at how the heaters worked in any of the earlier cars so he had his engineers run the exhaust ports through the block to heat the engine up more and make the heater work better. The only thing was it worked too good. If Henry had of lived in California we wouldn't have those heating problems today.

[m606paz]

Sorry to relive this post, but I found the opinions of all of you interesting.
I have been repairing and driving an F15A.
Accessing all engine parts is hard work compared to chevrolet easy access.
But once you get used to working with a Ford, we start to grow fond of it.
And the sound of its 8 cylinders is very nice.
What else can be added about the differences between these two engines?

[rob love]

When I saw this resurrected thread, I though "How did I miss this, and not reply to it back in 2008? Then I realized I was in a tent in Afghanistan and likely did not have internet at that point.

Ford, and only Ford. The engines are a work of art, and the trucks can attain highway speed. As part of my job I do work on chevs as well.

You may not find flathead parts in the outlying parts of the world, but the internet will find you anything you need for those motors.

There was a reason why in 2008, in the midst of the financial crisis, Dodge and GM both had to take government bailouts, while
Ford continued it's production with it's long term slogan "quality is job 1".

[Tony Smith]

And as far as the Chev Engine, I would say that all the ease of rebuilding comments would apply to the post-war 235 (aka Blue Flame) engines with full oiling and insert bearings. The wartime 216 as fitted to CMPs with babbit bearings and dipper oiling takes someone with Old-School knowledge to rebuild and set up for reliable long life.

Wartime Ford and Chev engines both have more than their fair share of quirks that can confuse the modern mechanic, but they can be equally reliable with knowledgeable maintenance and support.

I would suggest that these days there is far more specialist Ford Flathead aftermarket support than there is for the Chev Stovebolt, but only because I have been looking in the right places.

[m606paz]

Hi Boys
Here in Argentina, it is still easy to get spare parts from Flathead, the problem is finding rectification workshops that want to take an old flathead to repair and old school mechanics.

[m606paz]

Originally Posted by Mike Kelly

Why did the LRDG throw away their Fords I wonder - all chevies for them, Hmm....

Hi Mike
The LRDG used the F30s for general cargo and not for short sorties. As I have read, the temperature problem was more for the driver who was next to the engine and not so much for the engine itself. The complaint of the Fords was the fuel consumption compared to the Chevrolet 1533

What is the fuel consumption between the CMP Stovebolt and Flatheads?

Regards