Is this historically correct?

G503 General Discussion and Chat Board where users can discuss any topic about their jeeps. Jeep Use both On and Off Road, Handy & Safety Tips. Topics that don't belong on the Technical Boards, such as personal restoration progress etc. It functions as a Clubhouse.
JeepdaddyRC
G-Staff Sergeant
G-Staff Sergeant
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:32 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by JeepdaddyRC » Wed Aug 29, 2018 3:10 pm

Ray,
You have really inspired me to continue uncovering the history of this Jeep. I will put the paint away. Are you using a razor blade scraper or flat pull scraper? A photo or description of your preferred paint removal tool will be very helpful.

I'll take some photos of the blue drab numbers over the weekend. Finding those original factory numbers made me feel like I had uncovered the legacy and history of this wonderful vehicle.

I have seen a lot of beautiful restorations. I have not seen many orginals. This has the original wiring, tire chains, jack, starting crank, zippered seats. They may even be the original combat wheels. It belonged to a 94 year old veteran that had it for over 60 years.

70th Division
G-Captain
G-Captain
Posts: 744
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by 70th Division » Thu Aug 30, 2018 4:28 pm

Hello,

Great decision !!!
I am using a simple push button flat razor blade scraper tool about 3 inches long, from Ace hardware.

I try to dull the blade a little first by just scraping it across some painted surface without scraping off the paint.
Just to soften the blade a little, so it doesn't scratch the underlying paint when I start with light pressure to chip away the paint.
I sort of use the weight of the scraper blade to chip away at the paint, at a slight angle, as I don't want to damage the original layer.
Once I get an area uncovered, I spray a little wd or similar lube on the area, and wipe it down.

It takes time, so go slow and easy, as you have been doing, and the results will be great !!

For some reason now, my I-phone won't let me email pictures to my computer so I can post a pic here.
Have to figure that issue out.

Keep us posted !!!


Best Regards,

Ray

JeepdaddyRC
G-Staff Sergeant
G-Staff Sergeant
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:32 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by JeepdaddyRC » Fri Aug 31, 2018 7:46 am

Would you recommend repainting front bumper (know that we know the history), or leave as is?

70th Division
G-Captain
G-Captain
Posts: 744
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by 70th Division » Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:26 am

Hello,

I would personally recommend leaving it as is, clean up the 104 a little bit more, by carefully chipping any covering paint.
Oil it up a little.
Once you have recovered the hood numbers and such, then you can sit back and see what you have as a whole before any touch ups.

You happen to have a great original jeep, and it is very hard to find jeeps like yours.

Others may have best ideas on how to preserve what you have found as far as any artistic touch up
for the numbers that may be missing paint.
But I would find some one that knows art work painting,
that may be able to blend up a matching patina for any minor touch ups.

Please post more pictures of you fine jeep !!!

Best Regards,

Ray

User avatar
Wingnutt
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 4307
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by Wingnutt » Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:31 am

JeepdaddyRC wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 7:46 am
Would you recommend repainting front bumper (know that we know the history), or leave as is?
???!!!!

That's probably directed at Ray, but I will interject my $.02.

With only 6 posts I am going to assume you're new to this hobby and this is your first jeep. If I am wrong about that, I apologize. But it's not possible to overemphasize how unique and special your jeep is. It is not an exaggeration to say that there are a only a HANDFUL (in numerical terms, certainly on the order of less than 10 out of ~40,000 or so recovered jeeps) of jeeps in "original" and good condition out there in G503land. By "original" I mean never restored. By "good" I mean physically sound, with no cancer making the steel mechanically unusable/unsafe. (There are plenty of jeeps pulled out of fields and junk yards that were never restored, but they are beyond preserving. So rusty the original markings are not legible, the physical integrity of the vehicle is threatened, and the ONLY recourse is to take apart, strip, braze/weld, do a full frame-off resto, and repaint.) And most of those do NOT have original markings this intact.

If I had your jeep, I would painstakingly and carefully reveal and then preserve ALL the finish (bumper, bumperettes, tub, hood, etc) "as is", de-rust and carefully paint-match spot-paint or just seal de-rusted spots only where physically necessary, and concentrate on only a mechanical- and electrical- restoration (drivetrain, brakes, etc).

It's going to be hard for you resist the urge to do a full restoration. Especially when it's so common. You will see "perfect" looking jeeps paraded in photo after photo here and on the streets or MV shows near you and think they make yours pale in comparison. But your jeep has something those jeeps will never have again: originality. It is beyond special. And I can tell you that "barn finds" ALWAYS draw the biggest crowds (and some HUGE values, just google "Frank Buck jeep"), and the concept of preserved class jeeps is gaining esteem in the hobby just as it is gaining steam in national car shows.

Make no mistake - if you don't yet realize it, you have a jeep that many of us only DREAM of!
TEMPORARY DUTY


User avatar
YLG80
G-Lieutenant Colonel
G-Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 10:45 am
Location: near Namur, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by YLG80 » Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:05 am

What is strange is the way they have painted the 4 in 415 :oops: .
It's not the American way to write a 4.
I don't know where that nice jeep comes from, but we should be sure that it was not restored somewhere in Europe.
The jeep could also have been maintained by Europeans in a European workshop which could explain the graphic.
Yves
Image9.jpg
Image9.jpg (18.46 KiB) Viewed 1429 times
Ford GPW 164794 1/4T 12-7-43 - Frame# GPW*239762*
ACM I body#198443
Restored as 1st Army 759th LT B21
ON6YD(ex YB1AUH)

JeepdaddyRC
G-Staff Sergeant
G-Staff Sergeant
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:32 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by JeepdaddyRC » Mon Sep 03, 2018 11:17 am

Ray,
The WD-40 worked like magic on the dash.
Here are some additional photos of recent discoveries as promised.
I removed the bumper and studied it carefully using your suggestion. I think you are correct about it's Timberwovles heritage.
Attachments
IMG_4747 (640x307).jpg
IMG_4747 (640x307).jpg (105.17 KiB) Viewed 1400 times
IMG_4748 (640x364).jpg
IMG_4748 (640x364).jpg (118.46 KiB) Viewed 1400 times
IMG_4750 (640x480).jpg
IMG_4750 (640x480).jpg (145.32 KiB) Viewed 1400 times
IMG_4722 (595x640).jpg
IMG_4722 (595x640).jpg (234.38 KiB) Viewed 1400 times
IMG_4745 (640x297).jpg
IMG_4745 (640x297).jpg (136.57 KiB) Viewed 1400 times
IMG_4751 (640x480).jpg
IMG_4751 (640x480).jpg (138.27 KiB) Viewed 1400 times

70th Division
G-Captain
G-Captain
Posts: 744
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by 70th Division » Mon Sep 03, 2018 2:21 pm

Hello,

Looks great !! Beautiful !!!

You are uncovering its wonderful history ! No doubt it served with the great Timberwolf Division !!!
You can now look for pictures of the 104th and see if you can spot the hood number in any pics :D
Your jeep was used stateside by the division, and it could easily have been brought back early after the war as surplus.
It is a great discovery !! Could you find out more about the original owner, maybe he drove it home :D :D
I knew 2 WW2 Veterans who did, and still had their jeeps, all original, but have passed away in the last few years.
But I should follow up on the jeeps with their families.

Please post more pics, and of your lubed up dash !

Take your time, and it will all be revealed.
I am doing the same tedious but satisfying work on my slat grill, that has good paint under 4 layers.


I am also doing it on my 1942 Ford GPW, but that original paint was well exposed to the sun and elements before 1 repaint.
The blue hood numbers were painted over with ....the exact same shade of blue grab, then a coat of olive drab.
Then baked for 50 years in the southern sun, so it is a very slow to be careful process on that one.
I have uncovered the jeep's name, and stars on the rear sides, and one on the rear panel so far. None were visible when I started.
There are some very faint pieces of markings on my bumperettes, I hope to discover its history !
photo(173).JPG
photo(173).JPG (131.29 KiB) Viewed 1389 times
photo(170).JPG
photo(170).JPG (107.68 KiB) Viewed 1389 times
photo(169).JPG
photo(169).JPG (113.99 KiB) Viewed 1389 times
photo(172).JPG
photo(172).JPG (90.75 KiB) Viewed 1389 times




Keep up your great work !!!

Best Regards,

Ray

User avatar
YLG80
G-Lieutenant Colonel
G-Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1081
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 10:45 am
Location: near Namur, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by YLG80 » Fri Sep 14, 2018 3:48 am

That jeep is a piece of history !
Could you give us more information on the data plates, engine serial, military registration discovered in blue drab.
Thanks
Yves
Ford GPW 164794 1/4T 12-7-43 - Frame# GPW*239762*
ACM I body#198443
Restored as 1st Army 759th LT B21
ON6YD(ex YB1AUH)

JeepdaddyRC
G-Staff Sergeant
G-Staff Sergeant
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:32 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by JeepdaddyRC » Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:45 am

Original data plates
Date of delivery Jan 6, 1943
Original blue drab hood number 20200841
Ford body 91633
Frame # 91633
Engine # GPW 91633

Will keep you updated. Working on uncovering original bumperette military markings.

The original 1942 Ford paint is a lighter OD, appears to be very close to 33070.

The Jeep has been meticulously cared for by a WWII veteran. Since it was out of service for awhile, carefully worked on the fuel delivery system and rebuilt the WO carb, hand cranked with oil in cylinders to ensure full lubrication and confirmed oil pressure before starting after its rest.

The Jeep starts, idles, runs, stops and drives beautifully. Now we are uncovering its rich history with the Timberwolves 104 division, 415 infantry.

More pics to come.

User avatar
ajlang
G-Second Lieutenant
G-Second Lieutenant
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:09 am
Location: Newnan, GA

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by ajlang » Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:05 am

Nice Jeep. I agree with others who have chimed in. There are a lot of restored jeeps out there but very, very few who have their original livery like yours. There are collectors out there who pay a premium for an original like yours. You have something very unique there. Good luck with your project.
Andy

JeepdaddyRC
G-Staff Sergeant
G-Staff Sergeant
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:32 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by JeepdaddyRC » Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:18 am

As promised here are more photos. The bumberettes were fascinating. Slowly sanding and scraping thru layers of paint, I uncoverd 2 sets of markings over slightly different shades of OD paint. The bottom most layer appears to support the HQ-21 in a basic block font on right bumberette.

The top layer is a slightly different OD with fancier font, maybe you guys can make it out.

On the left bumberette, you can almost visualize 415-I at the bottom, knowing 104 would be at the top. These are covered with TNS (something) EN.

It's a challenge not to be too aggressive, or the original unit markings are gone forever. The different fonts proved helpful. Wanted to show you before removing more of the top layer.

What do you think?
Attachments
IMG_4819 (640x419).jpg
right bumberette
IMG_4819 (640x419).jpg (147.36 KiB) Viewed 1237 times
IMG_4822 (640x371).jpg
right bumberette
IMG_4822 (640x371).jpg (151.44 KiB) Viewed 1237 times
IMG_4812 (640x480).jpg
left bumberette
IMG_4812 (640x480).jpg (209.83 KiB) Viewed 1237 times
IMG_4817 (640x382).jpg
left bumberette
IMG_4817 (640x382).jpg (137.29 KiB) Viewed 1237 times

User avatar
Radmonster
G-Corporal
G-Corporal
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:31 pm
Location: Sacramento

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by Radmonster » Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:31 pm

:shock: beautiful jeep wish mine still had numbers and original paint like that. I started standing down mine when I first got it but no luck just a few different colors it got in the years after the war

JeepdaddyRC
G-Staff Sergeant
G-Staff Sergeant
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:32 pm

Re: Is this historically correct?

Post by JeepdaddyRC » Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:26 am

Thank you. More to come. It's a slow and methodical process. I'll post a photo of the original field-painted star.

It's great to see this Jeep's history slowly re-appear. The 104 Division has requested some photos of their Jeep.

Here is some history of the 104 and the distinctive unit insignia and shoulder sleeve insignia for the Timberwolves.
Attachments
timberwolves plaque.jpg
timberwolves plaque.jpg (78.11 KiB) Viewed 889 times
timberwolves drawing.jpg
timberwolves drawing.jpg (136.66 KiB) Viewed 889 times
100px-104TrngDivLdrTrngDUILeft.jpg
100px-104TrngDivLdrTrngDUILeft.jpg (4.8 KiB) Viewed 889 times
150px-104TrngDivLdrTrngSSI.svg (1).png
150px-104TrngDivLdrTrngSSI.svg (1).png (14.51 KiB) Viewed 889 times

Post Reply

Return to “G503 General Discussion Board”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: M1009A1 and 20 guests