MTFCA Forum

I was discussing transverse spring suspension with a Model A guy, and it got me wondering who developed three point suspension for the Model T? Did they innovate it themselves, or did they copy someone else?

Rather sure Henry done it



Then Henry improved on the patent with this issue, has the transverse rear spring.

Thanks! Henry took out the patent at least for both the Models NRS and Model T suspension. That explains a lot.

Breaking the original question into two questions"
1 "..who developed three point suspension for the Model T?" for the Model T was Henry Ford. Note the picture a

2 "who developed the three point suspension" Unknown but this 1905 ad predates Henry's adaptation.

Henry designed most of the first Cadillac and looking at a 04 model I can see a lot of Ford in it.

Henry did not invent the 3 point suspension. He has his name on a patent dated 1913. And it has to be stressed that Henry did not invent the automobile.

Automobile for 23 January 1906, "1906 Frame and Spring Construction," page 232. " The three point suspension, an old desideratum in automobile construction has found more general application in 1906 cars........(an) example of the 3 point suspension can be found in the Stevens-Duryea..."

I believe the Marmon is one of the first automobile companies to be given credit for the three point system.

Ford was probably the first to apply the 3 point system in a mass-produced "modern" layout vehicle with front mounted en bloc engine/transmission, enclosed rear shaft drive, and transverse leaf springs.

While it is given that 3-point suspension probably existed as a load distributing concept long before Henry came along, and today such a patent like 1075557 wouldn't get past first base with an examiner as written, it also probably didn't get past the examiner at the time!

Henry filed in July of 1909 and the patent issued in October of 1913. During that era, patents typically went through the system in a matter of months...so why did this one take 4 years?

One reads stories about patents that say that applicants used vague statements hoping to delay the actual patent issuance by using the examiner challenges as a delaying tactic and a bit of that may be true by intent...but the reality is that there was NO requirement at the time to disclose similar patents or even reference patents as there is today. Once submitted, the words 'patent pending' are allowed to be used supposedly not in marketing, but hey...so it goes. As to the final ruling? The same rule applies then as now, the examiner has the right to determine 'unique and novel' based upon the examiner own knowledge and the so-called preamble to the patent application that 'explains' things. (This one does happen to be very windy even though it is an improvement in the prior patent!)

My guess would be that Henry and his attorney did not use delaying tactics as some of Henry other patents did fly through the system, however, on initial rejection Henry and his attorney 'eventually' convinced the examiner that things were 'unique and novel' after much back and forth. There is something called a 'wrapper' in the patent office files that follows the chronological back and forth history on a patent application through issuance, but that is not an online thing.

In my (humble) view, the use of 'In an automobile...' as the opening words to most of the claims followed then by what Henry thought was 'new', strongly suggest that therein lies what Henry sought to prove 'unique' or equally, why the original examiner kept sending it back! Finally, Henry won...or better said Ford Motor Company 'won' as also in the era...an inventor got a salary and wages...the company owner had the right to claim any ensuing patent from 'the paid for work'.

Three point suspension? Oh, you youngsters.

Cugnot's machine had 3 wheels....

but Cugnot's boiler . . .

Three legged milking stools were around long before automobiles.

Art Mirtes