last positive ground car?
Joe Mama
> What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
> ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
> production cars?
I'm not sure. Kaiser ran a positive ground through 1955, but I believe
that Dodge may have gone a few years later..
-jm
---
To reply no-spam e-mail, change the "nut" to "net"..
ma...@mec.edu
ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
production cars?
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Steve Hoskins
Joe Mama <joe...@rarebird.net> wrote:
>ma...@MEC.Edu wrote:
>
>> What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
>> ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
>> production cars?
>
>I'm not sure. Kaiser ran a positive ground through 1955, but I believe
>that Dodge may have gone a few years later..
A little off the track, but GM's buses were positive ground until they
introduced the "fishbowl" types in late 1959.
John Kunkel
>
> What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
> ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
> production cars?
The positive ground was abandoned with the introduction of 12 volt sys-
tems. 1955 was pretty much the last use of 6 volts in all American cars.
John
n.p.
I'm not positive (no pun intended) but I think that the last (+) ground
american cars were the 56 Fords.
Bob Coon
>
> >ma...@MEC.Edu wrote:
> >
> >> What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
> >> ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
> >> production cars?
> >
> >that Dodge may have gone a few years later..
>
> A little off the track, but GM's buses were positive ground until they
> introduced the "fishbowl" types in late 1959.
Not a car, but Mack Trucks used positive ground systems into the mid
70's.
--
To reply by mail, remove the "X" from my name, and the *NOSPAM* from the
address
John Kunkel
>
> John Kunkel wrote:
> >
> > ma...@MEC.Edu wrote:
> > >
> > > What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
> > > ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
> > > production cars?
> >
> > tems. 1955 was pretty much the last use of 6 volts in all American cars.
> > John
>
> I'm not positive (no pun intended) but I think that the last (+) ground
> american cars were the 56 Fords.
It's possible. Some references show the Ford 12 volt changeover in mid
year '56 and some show it as the beginning of the model year.
John
Lone Wolf
ma...@MEC.Edu wrote in message <6rlp15$lbc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
>ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
>production cars?
>
Ford and Chrysler both changed to negative ground in '56 to accomodate
transistorized radios. The independants Mostly used Delco electrics so they
were negative ground. Probably the last holdout was Powel, a very nice
looking
pickup built on pre '55 Plymouth chassis. As best I can remember, Powel was
in production untill sometime around mid '57.
Ed Campbell
Someguy
were built on a reconditioned chassis.
I've personally had contact with two of these interesting trucks. They
were built in Compton California, and were among the first truck that rode
and handled like a car (by virtue of the fact that they were built on
Plymouth passenger car chassis).
Curt.
Lone Wolf <pigg...@pacbell.net> wrote in article
<6rpuo5$mfg$1...@nnrp4.snfc21.pbi.net>...
Stephen
>
> What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
> ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
> production cars?
>
> http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Doug Linden
ma...@MEC.Edu wrote in article <6rlp15$lbc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
Firestarter
>What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
>ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
>production cars?
Concerning this issue. I heard the reason car makers went to a
negative ground system was because with the positive ground systems,
car's would NOT rust. Something to do with a positive ground system
repels or something. Is there any truth to this?
In other words, the makers wanted people to buy new cars rather than
driving their old ones til the wheel fell off.
------------------------------------------------------------
1980 Fiat 2000 Spider (Fuel injected) Summertime daily driver
1981 Fiat 2000 Spider (Dual 40 webbers) Growl!
1981 Fiat X 1/9 (Fuel injected) Slot car like handling
1994 Jeep Wrangler (2.5 liter) Wintertime daily driver
Get your own Forwarding address : http://www.netforward.com/
------------------------------------------------------------
John Tabor
have positive earth in case the navy wanted to use the motor in a boat. The
British Navy was powerful at home them. I don't know if reduces rust on
cars but owned several MGs and none of them were rust free.
Firestarter <Fires...@DigiCron.com> wrote in article
<35ea8c5d...@news.preferred.com>...
Whole Lotta Tom
ground. Both had rust.
--
Remove nospam to reply.
.
alanno...@blahblahblahmindspring.com wrote in message
<6sc381$gu5$1...@camel19.mindspring.com>...
>Near the end of the millennium, on Sat, 29 Aug 1998 05:06:40 GMT,
>Fires...@DigiCron.com (Firestarter) gave this insight:
>
>:On Sat, 22 Aug 1998 06:38:29 GMT, ma...@MEC.Edu wrote:
>:
>:>What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
>:>ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
>:>production cars?
>:
>:Concerning this issue. I heard the reason car makers went to a
>:negative ground system was because with the positive ground systems,
>:car's would NOT rust. Something to do with a positive ground system
>:repels or something. Is there any truth to this?
>
>It's the other way around, from what I've read.
>There is less likelihood of rust with a negative ground system.
>Whether the difference in rust between the two is enough to
>matter to an owner, I don't really know.
>
>I have some old car books, and I remember that one of the key
>reasons to switch from positive to negative ground systems was
>that it reduced the sort of electrolysis that could help cause
>one kind of rust.
>
>Later,
> Alan
ma
Whole Lotta Tom skrev i meddelandet
<6sc9fk$a...@chronicle.concentric.net>...
>I have owned a 1950 Plymouth and a Series 1 Sunbeam Alpine. Both
positive
>ground. Both had rust.
>
>--
>Remove nospam to reply.
I think positive ground systems were used on British cars well into
the sixties. Lucas systems, of course..... Since some car
manufacturing countries in Asia, like India for example, are building
slightly developed versions of old British models they may still have
positive ground systems, with or without included rust.
/ma
Gary
wrote:
>ma...@MEC.Edu wrote:
>>
>> What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
>> ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
>> production cars?
>>
>> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>> http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
>Studebaker
I think it has to do wither or not the electrical engineer was taught
conventional or electron current flow.
Conventional uses a negative to positive current flow.
Electron uses positive to negative current flow.
Regardless of what theory you profess the current gets from point A to
point B just fine.
Gary
Flatheads Forever
29 model Pickup with Full Race 1948 Flathead
(59AB Block)
Marshall Schuon
>Near the end of the millennium, on Sat, 29 Aug 1998 05:06:40 GMT,
>Fires...@DigiCron.com (Firestarter) gave this insight:
>:On Sat, 22 Aug 1998 06:38:29 GMT, ma...@MEC.Edu wrote:
>:
>:>What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
>:>ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
>:>production cars?
>:
>:Concerning this issue. I heard the reason car makers went to a
>:negative ground system was because with the positive ground systems,
>:car's would NOT rust. Something to do with a positive ground system
>:repels or something. Is there any truth to this?
Gee, I don't think the sheetmetal much cares which way the electricity
goes. As for positive ground staving off rust, ummm? There sure were
a lot of rusty old cars around when I was a kid in the 50's.
Marshall
ratter1 (John Schmidt)
None of them rusted apart. If positive ground rusts automobiles, positive ground
should rust trucks. I believe the rust problem has a lot to do with the quality and
preparation of the metal before the priming and painting. I drove over beaucoups of
snow covered roads that had beaucoups of salt added. When I got home, the truck was
washed from bottom to top, still no rust. As I mentioned in a prior post, I was
told the reason for switching from positive to negative was because some engineers
thought better ignition was possible if the spark jumped the plug gap in a certain
direction. EOR
On Sat, 29 Aug 1998 05:06:40 GMT, Fires...@DigiCron.com (Firestarter) wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Aug 1998 06:38:29 GMT, ma...@MEC.Edu wrote:
>
>>What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
>>ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
>>production cars?
>
>Concerning this issue. I heard the reason car makers went to a
>negative ground system was because with the positive ground systems,
>car's would NOT rust. Something to do with a positive ground system
>repels or something. Is there any truth to this?
>
Ethel Jean Saltz
between conventional and military was. It seems that Ben Franklin had
two choices. Now I'm rusty about all this so please help me out.
He could have chosen positive ground or negative ground. Is the
military which is the Ben Franklin's wrong choice, positive ground?
And thus conventional is negative ground? Or is it the other way
around?
Doesn't all this matter as we become more computerized. It's simply
using the same language; that bilingualism doesn't work in DCC?
be-Ahavah ve-Shalom, Ethel Jean of Creekbend,
MAC-NIET-SPIN-GAL,Khai Y'all, C-O-H-N, ADTR, 0389A.G.,
Trinity=Torah(Ethics)+Ne'eveem(Sociology)
+Ketuveem(Multimedia)
Trinity=Periodic Table of Elements
+Direct Current Circuits+Electromagnetic Spectrum
Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan/Miami Platform
mailto:nie...@airmail.net
Roy G. Bragg
uncle owned one.
Roy
Doug Linden wrote:
> How about the 1955 Ford
>
> ma...@MEC.Edu wrote in article <6rlp15$lbc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> > What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
> > ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
> > production cars?
> >
Robert D
Roy G. Bragg wrote in message <35F0A452...@flash.net>...
>The 1955 Chrysler with 6 volt electrical systems were positive ground, my
>uncle owned one.
>Roy
>
>Doug Linden wrote:
>
Somewhere in another thread, I read someone's statement about the early 60's
Datsun/Nissan pickups being positive ground...
Robert D.
Bill Sohl
wrote:
>Roy G. Bragg wrote in message <35F0A452...@flash.net>...
>>The 1955 Chrysler with 6 volt electrical systems were positive ground, my
>>uncle owned one.
>>Roy
>
>Somewhere in another thread, I read someone's statement about the early 60's
>Datsun/Nissan pickups being positive ground...
>Robert D.
Triumph sports cars (TR-4, Spitfire) were positive ground until about
1965/66.
Cheers,
Bill Sohl
Editor Vintage Triumph Register (VTR) magazine
visit the VTR web site: www.vtr.org
gee...@inreach.com
> Triumph sports cars (TR-4, Spitfire) were positive ground until about
> 1965/66.
>
> Cheers,
> Bill Sohl
> Editor Vintage Triumph Register (VTR) magazine
>
> visit the VTR web site: www.vtr.org
Ah, but Bill, don't you really mean positive "Earth"? :-)
Gerard
65 Sunbeam Tiger, with a few Lucas components...and a manual I need to
have translated to American...
--
BOB Oil Recovery System: http://www.bob2000.com
-----------------------------------------------------------
Geewhiz Homepage: http://home.inreach.com/geewhiz/4277.htm :
Fast Ford cars, ATV's, Rockets, & A Tribute to My Late Father
ma
motor engineers and enthusiasts use american english, if any.
/ma
alanno...@blahblahblahmindspring.com skrev i meddelandet
<6tbb0j$pc5$2...@camel18.mindspring.com>...
>Near the end of the millennium, on Tue, 08 Sep 1998 04:34:09 GMT,
>gee...@inreach.com gave this insight:
>
>:>
>:> Triumph sports cars (TR-4, Spitfire) were positive ground until
about
>:> 1965/66.
>:>
>:
>:Ah, but Bill, don't you really mean positive "Earth"? :-)
>:
>:Gerard
>And.....
>....on the East side of the Atlantic, yes.
>On the West side of the Atlantic, it's "ground".
>
>...but you knew that! :-)
>
>Later,
> Alan
danieldo...@gmail.com
NOTE
POSITIVE GROUND CAN TURN METAL SURFACES INTO _ ELECTRON SINKS,
this makes fuels and gases more explosive and can result in better fuel economy
We study water fuels and by have positive earth we can make the gases have more forces and be explosive instead of implosive
If I had to bet money I would say this is the reason also doing that can strengthen metal or protect from degradation by gases or air etc
If you want to learn more about this
www.securesupplyusa.com
www.stanleyameyer.com
www.hot-rod-usa.com
On Friday, 21 August 1998 14:00:00 UTC+7, Joe Mama wrote:
>
> > What was the last US production car to use a positive chassis
> > ground, instead of a negative chassis ground like seen on modern
> > production cars?
>
> that Dodge may have gone a few years later..
>