Why the Difference in Spring Pads??

[BLB27]

The catalogs from two suppliers lists leather pads for Ts from 1909 to 1920 and rubber pads for Ts 1921 to 1927. I was curious why the difference, so I purchased both. Photos attached.

Any thought on why the difference?

I am leaning toward using the rubber pads for my 27 coupe. Look at the pads for the rear spring. It seems to me that the rubber pad has the best chance of engaging the spring. I placed the leather pad into the cross member and then fitted the top leaf on to it, and it looked like leaf did not fully contact the leather pads. Of course, this may change once I assemble the entire spring fit it into the member.

[TXGOAT2]

In my opinion, a pad cut from good leather would be best. The changes over the years were probably related to availability and cost of materials. A pad that was oversize (within reason) would be better than an undersized one. The clamps will pull the spring into the crossmember and take some of the arch out of it. I'd want the car sitting on a level surface and fully assembled before final tightening of the spring clamps.

[jiminbartow]

Henry Ford and his engineers were constantly experimenting to find the best product for the intended purpose. Looking at the construction of the 1909-1920 pads consisting of two pieces of leather riveted to a piece of vinyl with fabric backing does not appear to be an accurate reproduction of the original leather pad. I believe that the leather pads would have been two pieces of leather riveted to a longer piece of leather in order to provide some cushioning between the top of the spring and the cross piece. Unlike the original all leather three piece pad, the thin piece of vinyl does not seem equipped to provide any cushioning or noise reduction qualities and would probably wear through in short order.

I assume that Ford’s experiments led to the realization that rubber exceeded leather in resilience, endurance, noise reduction and cushioning qualities. There may have also been the fact the rubber became more accessible and easier to get than leather and required less time to produce since rubber did not require three pieces and multiple rivets and Ford was always looking for ways to cut labor and increase production. The fact that rubber pads being the proper material for the 1926-‘27 T makes the choice pretty easy. Jim Patrick

[TXGOAT2]

I believe the quality of rubber also improved during the early 20th century.

[Erik Johnson]

Years ago, the late Gary Hoonsbeen wrote an article for Vintage Ford years ago about the pads and how to go about reproducing them yourself.

If I recall correctly the leather on the factory issued pads was tapered.

My dad made a set himself a while back after he re-built the front end and rear end on his '17 touring - I think he had originals from his car that he used for examples. He was originally going to go with the rubber pads but felt that the frame rested better on the springs on original style pads with leather.

Also, if you read the Ford Service manual, there is advice on shimming the rear pads with additional leather to correct leaning.

[Original Smith]

Ford really did use top material in later years. I have some NOS pads like that. I wouldn't consider rubber period. Use the leather pads. They will last a long time. I have them in all of my T's.

[TXGOAT2]

I'd use leather. It won't squeeze out or crumble away, and if it soaks up some oil, so much the better.

[BLB27]

I want to try to clarify why I prefer the rubber pad by using three photos. The first photo shows the two pads side by side. The second photo shows the rubber pad on the spring, and the third shows the leather pad on the spring.

My concern with the leather pad is the distance the two square leather pieces are from the center of the spring. I think it is likely, that due to the curvature of the top of the spring, the spring will not fully engage the leather pieces. I put the pad in the cross member and placed just the top leaf onto, and it appear that it did not fully engage the piece.

As I said in the earlier post, this could change when I put the entire assembled spring in place. You might ask "Why not try it". Removing the spring from the cross member was difficult because of a very "tight" fit. I envision having to use two large clamps to assist in getting the assembled spring into the member. I don't want to have to remove it if it does not engage the leather.

I know the spring will engage the rubber pad somewhere along its length. As far as a material, I would prefer leather.

Comments would be appreciated.

[jiminbartow]

Even though the rubber pads are the correct spring pads for the 1926-‘27 Model T, it sounds like you want to use the leather ones. If that is the case, check out the below all leather pads from Snyder’s. They appear to be made of three thick leather pieces like the originals. Two smaller pieces riveted to a longer piece of leather. The shorter pad is for the front and the longer leather pad is for the rear. This would be much better than the two short pieces of leather riveted to a longer piece of cloth backed vinyl like you purchased before to try. Jim Patrick

Perhaps you should order a set of leather pads from Snyder’s as well as a long rear square headed bolt and nut for tightening the leafs together. The all leather pads might be more satisfactory than the vinyl/leather pads you bought before. You may be able to return the vinyl/leather ones to the vendor for a refund.

20E92632-9EDB-4061-BB6A-92DA3724C930.jpeg (33.13 KiB) Viewed 1340 times

B0CB21AF-3FFE-4810-9A0E-EAC55D5B42E7.jpeg (20.03 KiB) Viewed 1340 times

A5A868B7-D020-4A8F-8656-F18CCC86EDDD.jpeg (12.76 KiB) Viewed 1340 times