Rust potential. Why are we so shy to talk about it?

[Barry Wolk]

I'm sure there are more people that have taken more Mark IIs apart, but I've worked extensively on five of them, giving me some degree of credibility. The engineering is real good for the era. The engineers wrote a 100+ page build guide. When Gordon Buehrig signed on he was tasked with making the car buildable. He had nothing to do with the design. He would have been responsible for the cross-section drawings, clearly laying out how it was to be built.

I've read all of Elmer Rohn's musings and official reports and he focused on the same things I have. Since Continental made no parts they were basically just an assembly plant, divorced form the Rouge concept of raw materials going in one end and a finished product out the other. They relied on their suppliers providing inspection of what they were shipping. Many of the parts were simply rejected and never ended up on a new car, but likely made their way to the replacement parts market.

The bodies were made in Owasso by Mitchell-Bentley, a maker of limited production bodies. It is told that many of the early production cars had to be reworked due to major repeat problems with fit and interchangeability. This is a well-document problem with the rear windows of the early batch. They were jigged wrong and the windows were too small for the rear opening. They found that weighing the parts revealed that many had way, way, too much lead, creating large production problems.

This was taken the first day of production. It reinforces Elmer's writings. That's a lot of extra work for a "body in white", which to me is a misnomer as a body in white has no paint on it. I always thought that they used white primer when all I've ever seen is red oxide. They should not have had to do this. Using plastic filler over lead is never a great compromise.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/barry2952/1%20Mark%20sequential%20photos/107210-81.JPG%205155_zpsuvn5xziy.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds

This work should have all been done at M-B, but fell on assembly workers.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/barry2952/1%20Mark%20sequential%20photos/107210-86.JPG%205155_zpsnrgepjhy.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds

The plant complained that they could never keep up with production with so much body work. I'm curious how they got the bodies from Owosso to Allen Park? Rail?

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/barry2952/1%20Mark%20sequential%20photos/.highres/106865-1.JPG%2041355_zpsscxpbfvc.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds

Seems like pretty sloppy work by the supplier. that's the way they are in reality. I've seen several examples. Note the access hatches for the parking brake and transmission adjustments. They are well-designed , but poorly installed at M-B. They had a rubber gasket that might have worked had they used all the screw holes and hadn't warped each hatch by over-tightening the screws and using no adhesive to attach the gasket to the body. Every single hatch I've had open shows signs of driving in the rain. The body portion of the lower section of the hatch opening becomes paper-thin because of rust. Most have evidence of floor board rust from this. On the subject of floorboard rust we should all consider drilling some holes in our floorboards at the lowest point. While the doors direct water that always infiltrate along the window it is directed through substantial drain holes to drip out of the car onto the door sill and then flows down the doorsill. The back window is easy to overload with water and have the excess end up in the floor pan that has no drainage. All have sealed jig holes, but they are not always in the lowest point. They are just there to align the panels for welding.

Many a front floorboard has been ruined from a leaking heater core. There is no drainage to divert antifreeze leakage out of the car.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/barry2952/1%20Mark%20sequential%20photos/.highres/107210-82.JPG%205155_zpsz6jlxxpd.jpg?width=450&height=278&crop=fill

Then we have the design of the "nostrils". In theory that have a high degree of "cool", but little cooling. Water is easily sucked in at speed and is shunted away through drains and they easily plug allowing rainwater to spill into the trunk, filling the tire well, like a well. While the well has a plug in a jig hole it is sealed from the top and covered with undecoat, sealing it from the bottom.

How many headlight surround have rotted away for the lack of a rubber shield just like the bumper has? How many of you with original cars have dog leg seals that were sealed to the top of the door? Kinda defeats the purpose if water rolls down the door ruining the leather and door card. The seal has to have an effective barrier to direct copious amounts of water down the door and into the footwell. The tubes that carry the water to the bottom of the door plug up or fall off. Most often they need to be replaced.

Some think to minimize the rust caused by rodents nesting in their pee-soaked condos inside your frame. There is nothing to stop them from using your frame as a safe harbor. There are many means of ingress and a mouse can fit its whole body through a hole the size of their head. The live there generationally, just bringing in more nesting material to keep them dry in bed. The nest becomes a sponge and eats the frame away from the inside. You don't know until its too late.

The design of the frame itself is problematic. There are no real drainage holes in the bottom. The frame is boxed meaning that the outer [ shape is fit all the way into ] shape "boxing" the frame with just slightly larger dimensions from the finished rectangle. "Boxing" simply means the closure of a normal frame that is [ shaped. When the frame was made it had to be done precisely. A "jig" was made to hold all of the pieces in alignment while they were seam or stitch welded. When the pieces were welded together they were clamped. There was no gap, originally. I'm not going to post a picture of this because I want you to look at your frame. It's actually best if you "look" at it with a welder's hammer. Tap on the metal. A double thickness of frame steel is welded on the top on one side and bottom on the other. The top is sandwiched with metal pieces and welded on one side, as it the bottom. They look like watertight visual gaps, but water seeps into the bottom layer as water can get into everywhere.

When the oxygen in water feeds rust blooms enormous forces go to work spreading the metal apart. On the low mileage cars I've worked on all of them have large gaps between the layers and narrowing down to nothing at each length of stitch welds. By the time you see external rust on the bottom of the frame the inner piece is likely gone. It's the weak link in the structural make up of the frame. While an enormously strong frame, one should inspect for rust, not that the car will fall apart, but you'd likely have lessened strength in a side impact as there nothing in that big shell of a door.

I am going to start drilling selective holes in the frames that pass my way, one, for the drainage of the rust-blocked areas, and a realistic examination made available by drilling a 1/4" drainage hole. If you don't see it, you'll certainly hear the difference between healthy or rotten steel.

Some people think that I am somehow degrading these myth-inducing cars by explaining how simple they are to work on, relative to other period cars. We can put these cars on a pedestal or we can explain what to look for when buying one. No one likes surprises. Several of my professional mechanic friends that worked on these with me see little difference in the mechanical of this, or other cars of the period. Other than some heat resistant steel in the floorpan, that I just learned about, what's actually unconventional about the Mark II? While a cowbelly frame was new to Ford others had them for years. Is it not just being honest when we tell of the above-average parts supply chain? Am I not being honest that you can work on one with a modest tool collection? Am I telling the truth when I say that the Mark II was built by Ford designers working with Ford engineers and assembled by Ford Union workers? Was there not a Ford playbook of over 100 pages?

I believe that this page has more of an influence on pricing than any of my musings. You guys always comment on what you think the cars are worth. People read that and make offers accordingly. I just try and convince them to do it themselves or educate them as to what to expect from a competent mechanic. That's why I employ one and he's got last touch on everything I do.

[Knickoliss Iv]

Stamping technology at the time did not allow the panels to line up and flow the way they do on a finished car. Close, with piles of shims. Hence the need for so much lead. I have original solid body cars of the period, Ford and GM, that show this. Ford knew they would put the bodies together on the jig at the plant and designate each set together to craft the Mark II finish. In my "fantasy world" (your words) I'm sure the division intended for some handcrafting at the plant rather than just slapping them together like you theorize. Yes they made mistakes. Many. They weren't robots. I have no doubt it ended up being more than they anticipated and they were overwhelmed as you said. But that seems to be the common failure of the Mark II. Same with the engine dyno theory. They originally intended on doing every one, but the same fate likely fell on those plans so you are probably correct there. You do the math now and see it couldn't be possible. Maybe they did the math back then with different numbers and thought they could. But none of us were there and all of those people who were are most likely dead so we will never know for sure.
Bodies shipped in white came up on the Edsel Forum I'm on and the same was said that it was a term meaning bare metal, not necessarily white primer. My thought was flash rust but I guess that would not be an issue since they were reworking and polishing all of the panels anyway.
You are very correct in saying Mark II's are not mechanically complex. They didn't need to be. I don't need to have been under five of them to know that. But I have been under MANY 40s, 50s and 60s cars and while a modest tool set is all you need to work on them, the one thing many don't have is patience and craftsmanship or to a big extent, experience. Many a time have I cringed on the topic of the common stuck Ford door latch when the old "squirt some W-D in the window cracks" advice is given. Same goes for jamming windows. You have custom rollers machined. Not everyone knows how to work like that Barry. That's how you end up with hacks and shortcuts. Like grease on my choke mechanism when the problem was a leaking heat pipe. What a joke. But I bet whomever hack that was probably thought it would need a new carburetor. And don't even get me started on the spark advance. How many won't even consider finding and correcting the source of the problem before wanting to bolt on some "updated" carburetor. You really think a Mark II is a good introductory car for someone who has never had any experience with classic cars? If they are willing to learn and do the work right, by all means get one. If not, then they can squirt penetrating oil in their keyholes. That's my only argument about the complexity topic.
As for the supplier inspections on parts, that just seems like smart business. They already knew they had a higher workload and the ultimate finish goal of the vehicle so why not add the extra step and reject parts for production. Makes perfect sense to me.
One thing I hate about online communication is so much is misinterpreted and misunderstood. So you may not like what I say because you read it a different way the same way I may be misreading your musings. As close in history as this was we just have to agree that we will never have all of the answers.

[Barry Wolk]

"You really think a Mark II is a good introductory car for someone who has never had any experience with classic cars?"

I greatly dislike when people attribute quotes to me that I never said. I was talking about rust in this post. Why not try and stay on topic?

[Barry Wolk]

To address the subject I drilled a drainage hole to inspect for rust in the outer frame rails. The rust bulge apparent for the outside, between two stitch welds, was 1/8"of hard pack rust. This is a true representation of the actual damage. Call me Chicken Little if you must, but in a side crash two thin pieces of steel covering a quarter inch thick layer of ever expanding rust blooms forests leaves me with no great confidence.

From the photographic evidence of operations at the plant there was a spray booth that had a system to flip the built up chassis for a complete paint job after it had been accessorized with suspension, rear axle and brakes. If it was made by a Ford contractor they were given a light coat of rust preventive, but were not painted or rustproofed on the inside. In my 40 years experience in the lighting service business we replaced about 1,000 light poles that suffer from similar corrosion problems. In a light pole, much the same as a car, they are subjected to humidity and temperature changes forming dew, daily. Condensation rusts the untreated steel of a pole or chassis and rust perpetually flakes off and falls to the bottom and stays wet, like a sponge. Over time, added to a bunch or acidic mouse urine and biological nesting material and poop, you eventually have the structure eaten away to nothing.

Upon examination of your car you will see very flat seams wherever the chassis structure is at an angle above horizontal. The rising angle of the chassis above the rear axle is a good example. Water never stayed long in these areas, so there's no appreciable rust. Now look at the gap between thick sheet metal between welds. That's just the rust you see. This is what's really left of our Mark II chassis, even mine.

I started with an 1/8" bit that was worn out before it burned through the other side. Rust dust was falling the whole time. I opened up the hole to 1/4", but the hole looked like pure rust. I opened it up to the size of factory drain holes. I sprayed away the rust dust and was greeted with two tiny strips of steel. The body on this car is rust-free, yet it would appear that in a side collision the oft-lauded side rails would buckle and tear. The picture doesn't lie. That's a shit sandwich if I ever saw one.

What do you see?

https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/gg18/barry2952/IMG_3765.JPG.jpeg

[Knickoliss Iv]

Your post goes over various topics, not just rust.

[Roger Zimmermann]

Barry, I like your description abut the frames. Most probably, the expected life from those cars was maybe about 10 years; the cheap construction method was appropriate at that time.
When water cannot escape, the mess is unavoidable. Maybe with some rust treatment inside the frame, its life would be greater. With a different design (the seams turned 90?), most of the problems with the frames would not occur. Plus the thickness of metal for the frame is thin compared to other frames. However, due to its shape, the strength was sufficient, but not for a long time...

[Barry Wolk]

Roger, I appreciate your response. If anyone understood my concerns I knew it would be you. I believe that they could have prevented all of this by simply giving water some place to go. If you were an owner, or potential buyer, wouldn’t you want this kind of information? A number of people here have been crushed to find out they bought a parts car. You can understand why I tell people to use a welder’s hammer when shopping, and when looking at the unit body cars, do the bumper jack test. I’m now going to recommend the same test on full frame cars.

In inspecting this car yesterday I found huge passageways into the frame. Each bumper perch, the rear spring perch access and numerous smaller holes allow easy access for mice to set up generational homes and wet, nasty, swamp like environments.

[Roger Zimmermann]

Well, Barry, I would say that the frame has design flaws. Depending where the new car was used, a frame can be destroyed in less than 10 years. However, due to the price of the car when new, people at Ford/Continental new that the cars would be cared, at least the first few years.
I'm sure you saw or new about cars which were good looking outside, but with a rusted frame (the parts cars). On the other side, the '56 Biarritz I bought many years ago was not even a parts car because all panels were rusted through (even the hood), the trim was desolate but the frame was in an excellent condition!

[Mark Norris]

Here in northern Europe we are unfortunately very familiar with the dreaded rust and the old adage of there being 10 times more rust than you can see certainly applies. The roads here are salted from the first sign of a frost to about mid March then it takes a couple of months to properly wash away.

I HATE RUST ...I'm sure everyone has their own favourite rust prevention cocktail, here is what I did for the frame of 3186 which actually was in very good with shape no sign of "rust blisters" having spent most of its life in LA.

1. Poked out all the drain and ventilation holes in the frame

2. Blew out all the loose debris twice using an air line inserted as far as it would go (sometimes you'll find the cross member tubes stop you) from both directions. You wouldn't believe how much dried out Montana mud can out of each end of the frame, no mouse nests though.

3. Sprayed 1 gallon of Duck Oil into every frame member using a spray head on a long tube - twice with 2 days in between. This is a very thin creeping oil that gets into all the seams etc. (a bit like WD40 but less volatile). After doing this you could see the oil creeping through between the stitch welds on the frame.

4. Mixed/heated up a 2 gallon cocktail of white spirit, 90 weight oil and wax and repeated step 3 using it instead. After a few weeks the white spirit evaporates leaving a soft wax/oil mix that does not dry out and flake allowing water to creep below.

5. I then taped over and sealed off the vent holes that were obvious candidates for splash water entry (ie. those in the wheel wells). I judged there was plenty of open access for ventilation at each frame end and the other better hidden vent holes.

I did the same thing for the rockers even though they are supposed to be made of high copper content corrosion resistant steel. Fours years later all still looks fine and the coating is intact. Frankly 3186 never goes in the rain anyway but I HATE RUST.

In my personal opinion - Never ever use the hobby cavity waxes on offer ...they dry out allowing water to creep long distance underneath it (its a capillary forces thing). On top it looks great, underneath is a horror story. Ask me how I know.

[Graham Rollo]

I did much the same as Mark, and also post from Barry a few years ago, I also drilled water holes in lowest point on cross members back in 2018 when I brought the car, in fact I do this to any old car I have brought with a frame.

[Barry Wolk]

I had to inform the owner.

As you both know I only have your best interest at heart. I need to tell you about a flaw in the design of the “boxed” frame of every Mark II ever made. I only suspected this from 40 years of experience in the light pole maintenance business. Light pole are falling all over the world from rust eating the steel out from the inside. The very thing is happening on all Mark IIs.

Most steel light poles were never painted on the inside and started rusting the day they’re made. The outsides were cleaned and painted, but, like the Mark II chassis, wasn’t dipped, so rust flakes kept falling to the bottom of the rectangular frame rail that runs the length of the car between the tires. The bumpers attach directly to the frame rails, front and rear.

The frame rails are put together with two pieces of sheetmetal that are [-shaped and ]-shaped and fit inside each other creating a “boxed” frame that’s rectangular, about 2.5” wide and 5” tall, one on each side. A design flaw I’ve found only affects the horizontal sections between both wheels on both sides.

By welding [ and ] together that created an overlap of 1/8” stamped steel. They used stitch-welding, 1" of weld for 3 “ of frame rail length. If you used continuous welds the frame would warp from heat. They never thought these would be around more than 10 years and gave no thought to drainage or longevity. Rain splash, and dew, kept the inside of the steel wet, especially if the car was parked after driving in the rain. The frame has plenty of holes to let it dry out at speed, but has no drain holes to let water out. The frame is held in position at jig holes for welding that let water and mice in, but no drainage to let water or mouse pee out so the rust blooms start pushing apart the frame layers, feeding the building of iron oxide (rust) in the process.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/barry2952/1%20Mark%20sequential%20photos/105862.00.JPG%2011254_zpslabwj2uf.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds

This is looking up through the bottom of the frame where I pointed out to you what might be surface rust, but it’s not. It’s rust that’s eaten through from the topside. I drilled a drainage hole near that exposed rust I burned up 2 drill bits as rust (Iron Oxide) is much harder than steel. You should be able to discern a shiny ring of steel at the top and one at the bottom of the hole. The original steel has been reduced by 75% from 1/8” to maybe 1/32”. The top of the frame rails and the sides are largely unaffected, just where water sat in the bottom of the frame.

Is the car drivable, yes. Is it crashable, no, but it wasn’t very crash-friendly to begin with. Is there anything that can be done about the damage? There is a treatment that seeps into the rust and stabilizes it, but nothing will restore the original integrity. In a way, it could be a godsend in a crash as the tearing metal would absorb some energy before it getting to you. The problem is that it’s not an engineered solution. Anything can go wrong. I would be of no hope in a side-impact, There is nothing inside the door but air and window glass. In a front impact the frame could buckle, forcing the doors closed.

I would start driving the car with great awareness of your surroundings. Better to be stuck at a light than go through an intersection too late. The way it is it will likely outlive us, but had I not made you aware of my findings, I would be remiss, both as your friend and mechanic.

Barry

https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/gg18/barry2952/IMG_3765.JPG.jpeg

[Mark Norris]

The frame rails are put together with two pieces of sheetmetal that are [-shaped and ]-shaped and fit inside each other creating a ?boxed? frame that?s rectangular, about 2.5? wide and 5? tall, one on each side. A design flaw I?ve found only affects the horizontal sections between both wheels on both sides.

By welding [ and ] together that created an overlap of 1/8? stamped steel. They used stitch-welding, 1" of weld for 3 ? of frame rail length. If you used continuous welds the frame would warp from heat.

Its quite difficult to find detailed manufacturing drawings for the frame but here is an illustration of the cross section of the outer frame rails and body panels between the wheels taken from an engineering paper the Continental engineers wrote at the time;

26647

Its shows what Barry was describing in the previous post. The channels are fully overlapped top and bottom to make a box section with a high "moment of area" which means, like an I-beam, it has a lot of metal on the top and bottom attached by less metal in the middle. This makes it very stiff in vertical bending. Its also got to be remembered that the side rails can get quite hot from the exhaust pipes so the combination of water, perhaps a little mouse urine, not great ventilation and heat makes a nicely corrosive environment, especially on the low side.

[Barry Wolk]

Here-in lies the problem. With a stitch-welded top seam any water that hit that area would be wicked into the space by capillary action between the layers of steel. Water would have dripped-down from the top and would have drained out the same way, except the rust blocked the way, almost immediately. When water did back up there was no place for it to go. It evaporated, or soaked the rust flakes and they built up in the bottom. After a short period the exits between the stitch welds would seal. There are numerous welding jig holes in the frame about half-way up. Just going through a flooded intersection trapped water at least 2" deep inside the frame. Going through a car wash on a regular basis or just living in Seattle would reduce a frame to buckets of rust.

The center core frame is built the same way, but would seems less susceptible.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/barry2952/1%20Mark%20II%20docs/Binder1_Page_11_zpst2hrpz7s.jpg

[Barry Wolk]

The '56 I'm putting seat belts and front shoulder harnesses on has the best frame I've seen on a Mark II. There is no bulge between welds. All the metal is laying flat between the welds, unlike the '57 I'm just finishing. The owner of that car wasn't happy with what I found, but he appreciates knowing the truth.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/gg18/barry2952/IMG_3878.JPG

Here's an example of rust pressure at work. On Al's '57 this seam is welded shut, trapping water behind it. You can see how even a tiny bit of rust between the frame halves have pushed the unwelded ends apart and reduced the thickness of the metal. Rust is a physical force to be reckoned with.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/gg18/barry2952/IMG_3881.JPG

I found the spare tire well filled with rust flakes. Someone had erroneously replaced the welding jig plug on the bottom with a rubber expanding freeze plug. It's pretty amazing what people do to keep water out, but won't let it out when it needs to be. Just another Mark II rust trap.

However, the one part I've not seen ay rust on is the inside of the 5th gas tank I've drained.

[Roger Zimmermann]

I found the spare tire well filled with rust flakes. Someone had erroneously replaced the welding jig plug on the bottom with a rubber expanding freeze plug. Just another Mark II rust trap.


All vehicles which have the spare wheel in an almost vertical position have the same issue. When I got my '56 Biarritz, the wheel well was gone, eaten by the rust...

[Don Henschel]

One thing I cannot understand is all of the major rust issues with the frame and how many have to deal with it or find another hopefully good frame. I have a 59 Ford sedan that I purchased 40 years ago and rust started and was never dealt with and rust is like cancer that keeps spreading. There is not a salvageable panel anywhere on this car and even the hood has holes in the front. The floor boards are rotted out to the point of feral cats being able to seek shelter within and a while ago during preparing this car for scrapping involving removal of anything of any value, I looked at the frame. The frame looks great as I suspected and the rest of the car is a disaster.
I have dragged home vintage cars laying in deep grass or sitting in a bush for years and the frames always look great.
I find it a total surprise how so many of these Marks have frame rust in comparison. As for mine, I wouldn't know about rust because mine is a southern car and was sold new in Albuquerque New Mexico and there is not one piece of pot metal that has any pits either. The car was searched extensively for rust and none was ever found.