Jon, you're right Jim did and I have not yet responded to his kind offer but I think he is saying that he has a bunch of the "short" handles, and I'm looking for one in the length you show in your photos. EASY is closed tomorrow or I would drive over there and see what he's got.
I too am hoping that others with original A and early B handles will post here.
Barry
Jon Bunin wrote:I thought Jim just offered to give you one?
It's hard to say exactly where the bends begin, but they poke out the other end of my T5 jack .5" and 1". I'm still curious to hear what others have, from both A and early B cars.
Listers,
Neil Goldberg has just published a book documenting an original, unmolested, one owner 58A coupe. In it he has 9 toolkit photos in great detail. Now that I've plugged his book and acknowledged credit, I don't think he will mind if I show a 'photo of his photo' of an original jack with handle. As you can see the handle for this jack is silver, and long enough to peek out each end of the jack. I would consider this to be a pretty good reference, even though handles may have changed over the years of production. Thanks, Neil.
Gary
Gary, thanks for reminding me of that photo in Neil's book, which I purchased recently at the WCH. It is a terrific resource for authenticity questions concerning the T2 cars. That photo supports what many people have told me: that T2 jack handles were longer than the jack shaft and they were not painted, they were plated.
The challenge is finding one. The "short" style handles, painted black, are plentiful, probably because they were used in VWs. The longer plated handles are scarce.
thanks,
Barry Brisco
1959 356A Coupe 105553, Ivory / Brown
2009 987 Cayman, Carrera White / Beige (daily driver)
The danger I see in this "authenticity" stuff is assuming that the whole fleet of cars came with a certain part based on a very small sampling. I would not go so far as to say that all T2 cars came with a "long" jack handle. There, certainly, are many cars with the "long" handle but no proof that all of them came with the same handle.
Regards
Jim Breazeale
www.easypor.com
www.facebook.com/pages/European-Auto-Salvage-Yard-EASY/120458108029410
Jim, I completely agree. We can't know if "all" T2 cars came with the same style jack handle. But I would prefer to have the style that it seems likely most of them had when they left the factory.
Barry Brisco wrote:Jim, I completely agree. We can't know if "all" T2 cars came with the same style jack handle. But I would prefer to have the style that it seems likely most of them had when they left the factory.
Best regards,
Barry
That make sense to me.
Regards
Jim Breazeale
www.easypor.com
www.facebook.com/pages/European-Auto-Salvage-Yard-EASY/120458108029410
Barry Brisco wrote:Jim, I completely agree. We can't know if "all" T2 cars came with the same style jack handle. But I would prefer to have the style that it seems likely most of them had when they left the factory.
Best regards,
Barry
Yes, this is something many overlook with my tool website and VIN database - tool kit photos and descriptions (and engine number ranges) are representative of a given year or VIN, but not to the exclusion of everything else. Lots of variations exist, and at the end of the day, Porsche probably didn't spend a lot of time agonizing over changes in the appearance of tools as long as they were functionally similar. They were in the business of making and selling cars, not tool kits!
Jim Breazeale wrote:The danger I see in this "authenticity" stuff is assuming that the whole fleet of cars came with a certain part based on a very small sampling.
Hi Jim,
You are correct. You will notice in Neil's book that it states that the details are of this particular car (#103526). We were quite careful not to "assume" anything across the board.
What makes it a great story is that it is fully documented a one owner 40,242 mile car. The owner never let anyone ever touch his car. Chuck knew the owner from the beginning in '58 and provided all of the car's maintenance parts over the gentleman's 51 years of ownership.
If this car had not been documented, then the "authenticity" stuff for this particular car would just be lost and therefore no good to anybody.
I'm glad to see that there is a discussion about a very small sampling vs the larger group and we recognize there still might be differences across that larger group.
I just want to add that this also goes for the larger "T-2" model group and most likely the other models.
Neil & I have spent some time talking about the similarities & the differences between his documentation of the Reutter T-2 and my Drauz T-2 Convertible D.....and although mostly similar, there are many differences!
In some cases the factories used different suppliers. Example: My D has all "Rasche" bolts fastening the bumper brackets, hood & engine lid hinges, door hinges and other areas. I haven't seen one "NSF" or "Karro" bolt yet. (I haven't had the time to thoroughly go over every bolt on the car)
I'm beginning to note some of these on the Conv. D Registry website and I've been trying to be careful to raise questions and gather more information, than form rigid opinions.
Thanks for listening,
John
ps...note the two different sizes of "RASCHE" fonts
Attachments
John Chatley #6578
Convertible D Registry
www.convertibledregistry.com
Thanks to Jim for coming up with an original jack handle to go with my A jack. This photo shows that handle (the lower one in the picture) compared to another handle that came with a 59 coupe owned by a friend of mine. Interesting to see how they differ.
His handle appears to be plated, not sure what type of plating. I bead blasted mine because it had been powdercoated silver, which I doubt was the "original" coating. I think I will just leave it as bare metal, lightly oiled to keep it from rusting.
Barry Brisco
1959 356A Coupe 105553, Ivory / Brown
2009 987 Cayman, Carrera White / Beige (daily driver)
[quote=" Most of them are bent, as well. They provide a bit too much leverage.[/quote]
The length of the handle has no bearing on why the handles are bent. The maximum bending moment produced in the handle in lifting mode is a function of the load to be lifted and the strength of the bar. The correct diameter of the jack handle is 13 mm. I am not certain of the metalurgy used in original handles, but the handle was plated, and for it to have lasted so long--even in a "protected" environment [under the hood], it was likely hot dipped Zn. It is bent because the elastic limit of the material has been exceeded.
I restore jacks and have made many handles due to absence or reclamation/restoration economies. Finding a material that sastifies the strength requirement [without permanent deformation] and formability [end configuration of bent section with permanent deformation] is a compromise since the end condition geometry contributes to retention in the jack column [perhaps a reason for why the early short handles may have been carried in the tool kit roll]--another part which often has to be custom fabricated due to economies of salvage. Having a handle that is a little bent may be an advantage since it with bind slightly inside the jack cloumn and will not rattle when the jack is in the stowed position in the clips .
Ab said: "The length of the handle has no bearing on why the handles are bent. The maximum bending moment produced in the handle in lifting mode is a function of the load to be lifted and the strength of the bar. The correct diameter of the jack handle is 13 mm. I am not certain of the metalurgy used in original handles, but the handle was plated, and for it to have lasted so long--even in a "protected" environment [under the hood], it was likely hot dipped Zn. It is bent because the elastic limit of the material has been exceeded."
Ab
Didn't I say the same thing? My statement came out of the mouth of an Auto Wrecker, not an engineer, though.
Regards
Jim Breazeale
www.easypor.com
www.facebook.com/pages/European-Auto-Salvage-Yard-EASY/120458108029410
You made a very nice job on your jack, the handle on my 59T2 is exactly the same as the one shown in the top version on your photo. You will notice the transition from the the straight length to the angled portion is made up of another angle and a form of radius.
The one below has only a radius from the straight length to the angle.
It would seem your friends one and mine are exactly the same. The one with just the radius transition looks a much neater job of the bending though.
I reckon that the handle is a form of zink dipping, it has never been that bright but rather dull in fact.
