Bill,
I have another one of those "missing link" cars. Even though it's
titled 1967, I knew it was somewhat earlier by it's smaller bilge
plug, 4" tunnels, round speaker hole and early stle heater. It has
the black dash, chrome and raised lips and, since the original tunnels
had rust problems, it now has 6" tunnels. It also has the remnants of
the braces for those prop shields still welded to the underside of the
trunk floor and you can clearly see that the shields had been chopped
off of the car at some time. I can't say for sure who did the
chopping, though, or when.
John Friese
--- In amphicar-lovers@y..., "Bill Connelly" <billiam@e...> wrote:
> Regarding the prop shields matter brought up by Ed below, for the
benefit of
> those owners who may never seen them (If that's the case, then you
really
> SHOULD get to Celina one of these years, you know...So, how 'bout
THIS
> year?), prop shields are a pair of metal "fins", also sometimes
called
> "vanes," that hang down just "outboard" of the props, fixed between
the
> props and the quarterpanels along the sloping flange of the hull,
and
> typically found only on "early model" Amphicars, ones that were
typically
> sold and titled between 1961 and 1964 (Though one should note that
the title
> date and even the year stamped into the VIN plate is more often a
reflection
> of when it moved off the lot than any actual date of
manufacture...Witness
> Gord Souter's "1964" with a VIN of 100062 that ostensibly was a 1964
model,
> when in fact it was probably the 62nd Amphicar ever produced...about
four
> years earlier!). As a rule of thumb, one can spot early model
Amphicars
> from the lack of a lip along the bottom of the quarterpanels (except
when
> there have been subsequent lip-less panel replacements on later
model Amphis
> owing to a lack of "lipped" patch panels having been available), but
one can
> ALWAYS spot an early model Amphicar if they have those inner prop
shields.
>
> From what I've heard at past Swim-Ins, these shields may have been
> originally designed to help keep debris away from the props, when in
fact
> they were found in practice to have exactly the opposite effect,
since they
> afforded every piece of flotsam and jetsam in the river an excellent
place
> to get jammed onto and into. Nobody I have talked with about them
has ever
> mentioned the prop shields having been intended for or resulting in
better
> handling in the water, and I certainly noticed no difference
whatsoever the
> one afternoon I was "at the helm" of a borrowed Amphi that did have
prop
> shields (though it should be admitted that it wasn't like I set up
buoys for
> a controlled manueverability test, or anything). Suffice it to say
that
> these shields soon disappeared from the breed, even in some later
"early
> model" Amphicars.
>
> One reason I believe that their disappearance was not merely some
sort of a
> "cost saving measure," an otherwise likely case of just shaving a
few bucks
> from the production costs, was something I spotted when I went last
year on
> Dave the Wave's behalf to inspect an Amphicar not far from where I
live,
> which he subsequently bought and revived. It was definitely an
> "intermediate" model Amphi--a true unrestored fjord green "missing
> link"--with a whole mix of early and later model features. Just for
the
> record, its VIN tag's "Year of production" area was blank, but it
was
> stamped "Chassis-No 106 521 982". It had a smaller brass screw-in
type
> bilge plug and the heater under the gas tank like an early model
Amphi, but
> had raised lips on the quarterpanels and a black mottled dash like a
later
> model. And it was clear, compared with my own definite later
model's smooth
> flange on the hull near the props, that the factory had actually
REMOVED
> those prop shields with a sawz-all or something right at the factory
on this
> "missing link". Otherwise, the car showed absolutely NO signs of
even the
> least repair or restoration....I mean, the factory chalk marks were
still on
> the fiberboard rear passenger seat support, and it even had an
original
> mushroomy factory oil filter! What this all indicates is that not
only did
> they stop putting on the prop shields at the factory, but here they
even
> went so far as to remove ones they'd already mounted, so they must
have been
> a known source of problems.
>
> For more info on the various features found in the Amphicar during
its
> production life, one should certainly refer to Marc Schlemmer's
chart at
>
http://www.amphicar.net/amphi/vin.html , and folks should certainly
make a
> point of submitting their own Amphi's details there if only for the
sake of
> having an even broader sampling. There's also lots more info on
propeller
> shields and other production run features and changes to be found in
this
> List's Archive at
http://www.escribe.com/automotive/amphicar/search.html
>
> As for that fjord green "missing link" that Dave revived and sold,
if the
> new owner, whoever he or she may be, would care to have a few dozen
nicely
> detailed digital pix of that Amphi exactly as it was found in a barn
in
> Virginia, including the barn, I would be very happy to email you the
whole
> series (about 10 Megabytes). Just drop me a line "off-list."
>
> ~Bilgey~
>
> ====================
>
> Would anyone like to comment about the value of the propeller
"shields" that
> were designed into the earlier cars? My Amphi is a 67, but it has
the
> shields. I am getting ready to start on extensive quarter-panel rust
repair,
> but I was surprised to see that the propeller shields are in nearly
perfect
> shape. I wonder, if you are already doing extensive work next to the
> shields, would it be a good idea to delete the shields?
>
> Yes, the shields do provide some extra protection for the props.
Maybe the
> shields prevent cavitation by lessening the amount of air sucked
into the
> propwash from under the wheel well. And maybe the shields form a
partial
> "ducted fan" shroud around the propellers, increasing prop
efficiency. Does
> anyone know if shield-equipped cars have less torque effect on
steering?
> And, do the shields help you reverse more straightly?
>
> OTOH, I haven't seen anyone complain about damages due to lack of
prop
> shields. Maybe the shields are just one more heavy chunk of metal
waiting to
> vibrate and/or rust! Should I schedule a bilateral shieldectomy?
>
> Ed
