#1
|
|||
|
|||
coach building timber
Hello all, joined the forum quite some time ago and only now I have a question which I can't find an answer to. Couple years ago I bought my self a project which as my brother said I may need three lifetimes to complete.
The car is a damaged and without some parts a 1949 Healey Duncan which I bought of an elderly gentleman from Sydney (Australia). I have done most of the mechanical work and now I am looking at redoing the woodwork which is all but rotted away. Since I live in Melbourne Australia I would like to know which local wood type is best to use. The original wood was European ash which was very good at rotting away and get eaten by the borers. Gratefully Ivan
__________________
Ivan Vidak |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Ivan! What do they make pallets out of down there? Here in the States they usually use a very hard wood called Rock Maple. I have used it to rebuild a few pieces for Model A.s and some early Chevrolets. Other then that I would think anything close to an oak, hickory or white ash would do the job very well.
Anything that is going to rot probably won't don't in our life time so you don't need to worry about that. Mark
__________________
Name: Mark What I am building: BadAst. A Pro Touring style 1988 Astro with a full custom chassis, 509 BBC, TH400 w/ a gear vendors and a 9" w/ 3.75's. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ash is what was used. Ash is getting harder to purchase in the US due to the ash borer beetle. Some cities are cutting down ALL of the ash trees whether diseased or not in an effort to stop the spread of the beetle. I purchase it from a local production furniture maker. An alternative to ash would be white oak. I use maple for convertible top headers and such pieces where a tighter grain is needed. It is harder than the ash and in this area, very expensive. I think it would do well for pieces but a challenge to do a full rebody.
The rot is usually a function of design (drainage) and surface coating of the wood. Keep in mind that the coachbuilders were no different than automakers today. They were trying to make money using readily available materials and technology while never intending that their product should last 100 years. In many respects, they held up better than a lot of steel structured vehicles that are a mere 20 years old.
__________________
Rick |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|