1928 Ford model A ergonomics

[expat]

I was lucky enough to take a fully restored Ford model A pick up for a spin today.

Only once before have I driven any car of this vintage (a 28 Austin Seven) and that was some years ago.

I was quite surprised just how well the Ford went down the road and around town (Once I had got used to the non syncro 3 speed transmission)

However, I am 6'2" and 180 lbs, not huge, but I was JUST able to get through the door and behind the wheel! and the guy in the passenger seat and I were rubbing knees.

OK, I know guys were smaller back then, but not all of them (my great grandfather was 6'4")

After squeezing out, I thought I'd look around the truck to try and make sense of the layout.

First off, I imagine roads back in the day were narrow and very rough and possibly rutted. This ment the truck needed to be narrow and have a high ground clearance.

The high step up makes a step or running board desirable (but lifted trucks seem to manage without them these days?)
Having a generous side step forces the seats toward the center of the cab and limits elbow room, and also ensures your legspace is behind the engine, therefor limiting leg room.
I still could not figure out why they could not have made the door opening wider though?

Perhaps my reasoning for the trucks layout is all wrong. But I'm sure they could have done a better job than what they did.

Any insight please.

 

[BRZED]

Hey John-Boy, Paw wants his truck back!

 

[Silk]

Old cars were narrow...but also longer in the passenger compartment. At a family gathering on the weekend we were talking about getting 10 people in a Morris Minor (2 adults, 8 kids), you could pack a lot of people in the smaller cars. Now we can only get 5 people in our much bigger car.

 

[BRZED]

Yup, just pile em in!

 

[eljefino]

Looking at John boy's truck there the frame seems to be two I-beams. Maybe they couldn't bend them like they do today, to arch for the axles and have a lower cab. I also don't imagine any sort of rubber isolation donuts and fancy mounts.

Though the firewall isn't dented into the engine compartment for feet and pedals, the proportions look good on that truck. Kinda like an 80's Japanese truck before they started going oversize. "Uh, yeah, I need an extended cab because sometimes I recline my seat."

 

[Traction]

I had a stock 30 Model A tudor sedan for a few years. It was actually quite comfy, and roomy, though narrow. Easily haul 5 people, since it didn't even have a trunk. Exterior, it was about the size of a Pinto.
It was a fun car to cruise in, but safety was not it's highlight. Did not like having a gas tank for a dash is one of many reasons. It would have been great to drive back in the day when everyone was driving something similar. The Model A is a pretty scary car to drive in modern traffic!!! It would be a lot better going across a corn field though.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: Traction

It was a fun car to cruise in, but safety was not it's highlight. Did not like having a gas tank for a dash is one of many reasons.


I know what you mean. My '72 GMC has its 20 gallon gas tank behind the seat in the cab. It really keeps your driving on the conservative side when you hear the fuel sloshing around 6 inches behind you!

 

[expat]

Originally Posted By: BRZED
Hey John-Boy, Paw wants his truck back!

Thank you for the picture. The truck I was driving had a convertable top.

The picture shows the width of the steps (Running boards) they must be about 12" wide!
Ford could have made the cab (and the box) wider, but they did not??

Mechanical brakes were......exciting!

 

[440Magnum]

I think its mostly the narrow width of that vintage (and price class) vehicle that makes it feel so cramped.

I used to have a '49 Plymouth Coupe, and it was absolutely cavernous inside despite being a "small" car (and 2-door, no less) for its era. I won't say the ergonomics were "good" by any stretch, but it was roomy. K.T.Keller insisted he be able to wear a hat while driving Chrysler products, so the roof was high until 1955. The seats were high off the floor, and the coupe version of that car had far more rear legroom than an 80s fullsize Cadillac or Lincoln (though not quite as much as a '75-sized Cadilliac, Lincoln, or New Yorker).

I think people tried to make cars feel like a comfy living room in the 40s, and the ergonomics of actually driving, accelerating, braking, and cornering didn't start coming into play until the 50s.

 

[JHZR2]

The narrow design is interesting. My grandfather used to speak of parking two vehicles side by side in what I'd consider to be a wide single car garage, ie wider than normal but in no way a two car garage by today's standards.

 

[hattaresguy]

Most old cars were pretty narrow, I was looking at a Horch which was a coupe and very long but narrow.

 

[Oldmoparguy1]

I owned a 1931 Model A coupe back in the day. Drove it back and forth to college for 1 1/2 years. Would do 65 mph, got 20 miles/gallon, used 30 weight oil, changed every 1000 miles. This was 1956-57

 

[DBMaster]

Is it possible that they were narrower to cope with the fact that there were still a lot of dirt roads that had most recently been used by horses and buggies?

 

[GMBoy]

I've got a 1932 Ford streetrod. It is chopped and channeled - a real steel body with VIN not a fiberglass kit car.

IT IS TINY and I can hardly drive it far and shifting gears is difficult. I am not even 6' but it is fun.

 

[expat]

Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Is it possible that they were narrower to cope with the fact that there were still a lot of dirt roads that had most recently been used by horses and buggies?


Yes, I imagine that is the case. But the cab is much narrower than the wheel track. the cab could easily have been made wider, even as much as 12" wider and still have left room for running boards.

The steering wheel is large, by necessity, but the space between the wheel rim and the door jamb is real tight even for my 34" waist.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Is it possible that they were narrower to cope with the fact that there were still a lot of dirt roads that had most recently been used by horses and buggies?


That's spot on, were far more muddy/rutty roads than paved, most modern vehicles with std ground clearance would be useless... Research "seedling mile" to get a idea of just how our modern highways progressed...

I remember writer and test driver Tom Cahill complaining about the lower models in '57 that had switched to 14" vs prev 15" wheels... Cited with the reduced ground clearance, there were still xx percentage (forget exact number) of unimproved country roads that they'd have problems negotiating...

 

[DBMaster]

Originally Posted By: TFB1
Research "seedling mile" to get a idea of just how our modern highways progressed..


That is very interesting. People had to have "samples" to get behind the concept of paved roads. It's amazing what has been built over the past 100 years.

 

[TFB1]

All goes back to the old saying you don't miss what you've never had...

Probably 18-20 years ago TBS or one of those channels aired a documentary about Americas love of automobiles, that was my first introduction to the seedling mile... Was a very good show, included lots of info about early cars and roads, with interviews of different folks about their first ride in a automobile, etc...

Here's link to review...

http://variety.com/1995/tv/reviews/driving-passion-america-s-love-affair-with-the-car-1200441547/

First clip on youtube...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsktHCvvM1A

 

[Garak]

As for highway and roadway evolution, agriculture is the reason this province has more road miles than any other jurisdiction in North America. It's crazy, and then people wonder why there's never enough money for roads in a province with only a million people.

 

[cjcride]

Keeping the center of gravity inboard in a left to right sense would reduce the chance of it tipping onto it's side. The so called roads/horse paths must have been awfully rutted.