VCCA Home Forums TECHNICAL - 1945 AND NEWER 1946-1948 47/48 jacks part 2

I did answer, a few post after you ask. Anyway, yes, that is how I got the patent number I posted for the base. Pictures tonight.

Wow, I am anxious now!!!

Bruce, for your eyes only, TOP SECREAT.

First, the picture in the '48 accessory manual and the picture on Dave's site appear to me to be the same. Understand though, both are artist rendering and not actual photos. Anyway here is what I have arrived at.

1. The base that is pictured has a patent number that, after checking the patent office shows it was manufactured by Walker along with the jack. Notice, the picture shows the base on the left is the base that came with the '49-'54 standard jack. Notice the hole the jack shaft fits in is the same size and shape. GOOD!!

2. The jack on the left is in fact a '49-'54 standard jack. See how well it fits the base. Perfect, in fact!
Now look at the "rendering" of the jack on the right. Pretty close, but with slight differences. Noted by the red reference lines. The part the handle fits in and the ratcheting side looks the same. Also GOOD. Where the difference appears to be is their is no roller under the "horn" part. Just plain boxed in. Next is the placement of the "horn" itself. I is much lower. Very close to flush with the bottom of the ratchet part. On the '49-'54 the "horn" top is up closer to the top of the ratchet side.

3. To my way of thinking, if I eliminate the roller and box that in, that would look correct. Next would require me to drill out the four rectangle spot welds and lower the "horn". To me, sure would fit the bill.

I called the place that has done my zinc plating and ask about plating the shaft. Was told I would have to remove the jacking part to plate. Figured I could heat the dimple on top of the shaft and flatten enough to remove. Get back and re-dimple. Maybe!

Since I do not have a torch or welder I am stalled for now.

Anyway, unless a judge had one on his keychain to compare it to, might pass.

Thoughts? Remember, not a word to anyone!!!!!

Russell,I love it!!!What can I say...I had my eye on that base and with out all the technical stuff I was going to do the same thing..Would still like to see a pic of the original accessory jack?No one out there ?Russell think about this,those in the know are on this site and if one has a jack like yours it is the example of correct..Can you find me another base?

Ok Russell your example you are using is an artist rendering and measurements could be off?And of course you can only see one side of the jack..No torch,how did you bend that metal?

This has to be one of the longest running topics. Keep it up and we will have a record. Regardless, all watching will know the ins and outs on jacks from the 40's.

dick

I would't worry about the judges. After all the research you guys did and still arn't 100% sure the there is no way ANY judge will know what is 100% correct..... or even 50% correct.

Man talk about a crazy topic! I found that accessory literature was not always correct with there rendered pictures. To modify a REAL (physical part) to match a rendering is crazy to me! I would bet that when GM rendered a concept of the jack and then build and tested it they discovered miner changes were needed. I'm a mechanical designer by trade and the roller makes perfect design sense, it takes away the friction of the upright and jack body. without the roller the two pieces will start to gouge into each other due to the weight of the car. I would not modify an almost perfect match, that is my take.

Well, maybe. If this had been cleared-up back in 2003, or, 2007, when the same was discussed, we wouldn't be having this discussion now. Just simply trying to get a correct answer to a simple question. WHY was the '48 jack different from the '47. I think it has been established that it is?

I agree completely. That is why I made the statement in the third sentence.

Again, I completely agree. However, that feature did not appear until the '49 jack. The lifting body part of the '48 acc. jack is identical in all respects, to the '47-'48? shown in the above threads except, for the style and placement of the bumper lifting portion. No roller on those.

Johnny, if you could provide Bruce with a source to a certifiable '48 jack, I for one would be grateful.

But cosmetically, since the jack will never be used trying to copy the drawing would be perfect documentation. The have an extra 49-54 with out a base, I may try to remove the roller and bend the 2 remaining tabs in as a visual fix???I do have the luxury of having a 46-48 original jack though, so this will only be another piece of wall art

Deep down in my gut only I know the difference in the measurement of my jack and the 48 jack...The look is identical and there will be no challenge by any judge that it is not correct...I would like to find the 48 accessory base though???

Bruce, e-mail me where you want it sent. A gift to you as my heart is no longer in this. I do not show my car and the jack in of no consequence to me. I simply wanted to clear this matter up once and for all!!

Oh, by the way, I bent the metal the old fashion way. A vice, a block of wood, and a hammer. Pretty good at using hand tools.

Lets talk

Russell did you get my last 2 PMs?

Sent USPS. If you should decide not to use, send it back. Otherwise, good luck.

Thank you,

So I hear Jacks 101 is over, so be it.

Now, here comes Advanced Jacks. May have exhibit "A" by early next week.

Note 986141 hydraulic bumper jack is new accessory for 1948. 986177 is friction type as an accessory also.
There were two types of accessory jacks in 1948.

Gene, and others, backup a page or two and study the two pictures just below the picture of Gene's jack with the arrow pointing to the roller. One is on Dave's site listed as a 1950 acc. jack. The other is from the 1948 acc. cat. as a universal acc. jack. Can or do you agree the two are the same? If not, what do you see as the difference????

Bruce, will you take a picture of the acc. jack in the '48 acc. cat and e-mail to me. I need a larger cope for my file. I do not have the cat..

On its way

"Exhibit A"...I can hardly wait!!!

Thats on page 8. I don't trust Chevrolets "not actual pictures" but it looks like the same jack.

Could this have been the model for the rendering??

Russell,you did it!!!No question that is correct 100%.I hope you Are the owner!! BTW thank you again!

Me too, money sent, just waiting now.

Here's another possible candidate??? No roller but different than yours