The Stovebolt Site Forums The Parking Lot Big Bolts Maple Leaf Help

I'm trying to figure out if my '36 Maple Leaf truck is a 11/2 or 2 ton. It has a stamped ID plate that has the load ratings and that it was manufactured at the GM plant in Oshawa, Ont. but no model # or Serial #. Does anyone know if there should be a second plate on it any where? I ran the 8 digit number from the last registration through VINBuster and came up with a '58 chevy 1/2 from Caifornia. :confused: Help please.

Bob,

Have you tried contacting GM of Canada?

Here is the telephone number for GM's Vintage Vehicle Service....

1-888-467-6853, between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. EASTERN Time.

They may have some info based on your stamped ID plate or can lead you to other individuals, Maple Leaf Truck historical groups and museums.

I have found the staff at GM very helpful.

Good luck with your information gathering.

Greg

Hi Bob!

Greg's got you on the right track. GM vintage dept. is a good resource. My belief has always been that Maple Leafs were a 'heavier duty' truck and usually came at 2 tons or over. I have some info for 1936 Chev's, Maple Leafs and GMC's. The Maple Leaf's show 2 and 21/2 tons but nothing smaller, even gong back to 1932 in the info I have.
cheers, George

Thanks for the info. I'll try GM tomorrow. The article in VintageTruck Magazine also talks about 2 ton but I guess I just Assumed...

Hey Bob,

If you get any information, please report back here.

The Maple Leaf Truck ID comes up once in awhile on this forum and any info you get will help others down the road.

Now, if you have any pictures of your rig... how about sharing, EH !


Greg

I've sent a picture to the gallery but I think it may take a while to show up. The guy at GM Canada was very friendly but said that they had no records prior to '42. Maybe GM Canada had a fire or some such. He did refer me to an outfit in Goderich Ontario-Ken Mcgee(888-275-2666) who might have manuals for that truck and while he had the '36 supplement, he didn't have the '35 manual that it went with so it was pretty much useless. The best info that I have is out of Vintage Truck Mag. for Dec. 2004 that shows an ad for my truck with it's goofy grill.

By the way...what's the difference between a 11/2 ton and a 2 ton...I mean aside from the obvious? Are there just frame differences or engine differences or wheelbase or??? :confused:

I have seen the term "Maple Leaf Trucks" but I do not know what it refers to. Any one help?
John Boy

Maple Leaf was a line of GM trucks manufactured in Oshawa Ontario using mostly GM parts with a few Chevy bits and the odd local widgit. They were marketed in Canada with the idea being that canadians might buy local. There may also have been a requirement under some form of the Autopact between the US and Canada to manufacture a percentage of vehicles as Canadian built. Kinda like the requirement for Honda etc now.

Hy guys, History, my reference material says Maple Leaf production started in 1930 and ended in 1950. Up until 1939 Maple Leafs used Chevrolet engines, after 1938 Maple Leafs were powered by the new full precision bearinged G.M.C. engine. The easiest way for me to describe the Maple Leaf after 1938 is to say it is a 2, 2 1/2, 3 ton G.M.C. with a Chevrolet front sheet metal installed, hope that clarifies. Now differences between models, heavier springs, heavier frames, larger brakes, as jarge has stated Maple Leafs started at 2 ton and went up to 3 ton. All the different sizes had their own wheelbase choices, I believe the model numbers were 16 and 17, hope that helps.

Hy guys, I left out the most important part, Maple Leafs were Canadian only production, hope that helps.

canuck I have an article and other information on 1935 & 1936 Maple leaf trucks you might be interested in. E-mail me with your postal address and I 'll send you a copy of what I have. Maple Leaf production started in 1930 it was a 2 ton heavy duty truck that used parts from Chev and GMC trucks and was called a HR series with or without a cab and rode on a 131 in wheel base, Wheels were a GMC bolt pattern design but only had five spokes. The HT in 1932 had both the 131 in. wb and added a 157 in. wb. 1933 was the HU, 34 was HW, 35 was HX and wheel base increased to 141 in. and 165 in. HY was the 36 and they added a heavier 2.5 ton chassis & a 2 speed rear end option. 1930 to 32 had an open drive line. 33 to 36 a torque tube.

The 35 Maple leaf HX series had model 16-42 with a 141 inch. wheelbase and model 16-43 on a 165 inch wheelbase. Both were 2 tons. Both had the first hydraulic brakes on a Chevrolet built truck. They had a dual range rear axle available with a shift lever in the cab a control rod to the rear axle. Both used the regular 35 truck Chevrolet engine 207 cu. in. inline 6 cylinder. All Maple Leaf trucks came with a 3 in. core radiator and a chrome plated radiator grille. Wheels were Firestone RH rims (continuous rim no rivets) with a one piece lock ring and only 5 stud mounting hole frt. and rear.

Wow thanks for the info. You guys are just full of good stuff. I will email you for that information. I really starting to lean towards a restoration on my rig. Hopefully my pic will be posted on the gallery soon.

35 Trucker, if I read your input correctly, '35 Chevy truck had juice brakes? Wow.

Only the 1935 Chevrolet 2 ton built in Canada under the Maple Leaf truck models. The first American built trucks with hydraulic brakes were the 1936 1/2 tons. The 1936 1.5 tons didn't get hydraulic brakes until after March of 36 when the low cab was introduced.

Heel low:

We own a “fleet” of 1936 Maple Leafs. Three so far and working on the fourth and fifth acquisition. The saying goes, or so one hears, in order to restore one truck, you need three…well what happens when two of the trucks are just too good to part out? Well you seek therapy cause you're already getting ready to go get the fourth & fifth one (these HAFTA be parts trucks!) and the only thing holding you back is the snow's gotta melt off just a bit more…

We are currently doing frame up restorations on two 1936 Chevrolet Maple Leaf trucks. Both 16-48 models, second HY series (post March), 165” wheelbases, 2-2.5 tons, same trim and paint colours…BTW anyone want to try enlightening us as to what Maple Leaf Paint code 681 and 582 / Trim code 184 and 100 are…paint chips would be fab!! US Chevrolet paint numbers do not work for the Canadian Maple Leaf and we have not found any references to Maple Leaf paint or trim codes at all. We also have a rare 1936 Chevrolet and Maple Leaf truck, 16-31 model, HZ series, 131” wheelbase, 2 ton.


MAPLE LEAFS – TRULY PROUD CANADIANNA
We Canucks owe much to carriage maker Colonel Sam McLaughlin and his desire to see Canadians have a luxury truck like the Maple Leaf (21 year existence beginning in 1930). According to the Reynolds-Alberta Museum, McLaughlin “believed in providing extra value for the customer's money” and this ensured Maple Leafs were equipped very much like luxury automobiles of the day. With her genuine leather seats, wood grain-painted dashboards, and nickel plated body parts, the ultimate treatment for the Maple Leaf truck was the nitrocellulose paint (requiring 3 weeks of drying between coats, with Darren Wiberg giving the museum's 1935 Maple Leaf seven coats in this extensive “gassing” process). I giggle when someone figures these bigger Chevs are mere “farm trucks!” What secrets the country folk don't keep from the city, eh??

Colonel Sam, who build high end McLaughlins that sported Buick engines, decided to sell his company to General Motors in 1918. He already had a kind of alliance going with General Motors and had been building Canada's Chevs under license since 1915. The Colonel stayed on with General Motors, running the Canadian company and served on the Board of Directors for General Motors in Detroit, USA. In 1923, the Buick was being built in Canada as the McLaughlin-Buick.

Technologically advanced features were tested on Canadian Chevs before being put into production in the States. There were certainly advantages for the Chev Maple Leaf in Canada as General Motors tried out innovative advances here first. Fewer trucks were manufactured here so it was not so difficult to interrupt production lines and make a change or two. The added feature of the extreme weather conditions also assisted in testing out new features under brutal climate conditions. These advances make sourcing vintage parts difficult if you forget that Canadian automobiles were the testing ground for many things like hydraulic brakes over mechanical ones. While finding manuals and engineering materials is not all that difficult, finding exact references to “Maple Leafs” can be rough. Even if you find Chev information, you always have to wonder if this actually applies to the Maple Leaf. Sometimes it is better to refer to the next year's model, say refer to 1937's when dealing with US Chev info for 1936 Maple Leafs. We have noted things like the US Chev fuel tanks were filled from the inside of the cab while the Maple Leaf trucks had a filler neck so one could fuel outside the vehicle. One interesting item is that in the "35 and "36 Maple Leafs, it seems Chev tried out a larger master cylinder and this version never seemed to go any where else.

Literature says that 1931 Maple Leaf was somewhat similar to the American Chevrolet Independence heavy-duty truck. Yes, the 1931 ML was a two ton, WB 131”, series HR, body codes 114-116, ML engine right thru to 1937 was the 206.8 and always was a six cylinder, no matter the year. 1932 came out with the first unique Chev & Maple Leaf version (see more below) and was the only 1.5 ton ML version we know of, WB 131”. From 1931, skipping 1932 (1.5 ton), to 1935, the Maple Leaf lists a single capacity of 2 tons. According to Reynold's, grilles were an optional after sale item until 1936 when they decide to dress them up “standard.”


I.D. PLATES ON MAPLE LEAFS
In 1935, General Motors in Canada introduced a code serial numbering system.

Maple Leaf I.D. plates we have seen are located on the firewall, passenger side of engine compartment stating:

“General Motors of Canada Limited,

Made in “GM” Canada,

Oshawa Walkerville Regina (1932 was the last year for Maple Leafs to be built in Windsor and Regina…maybe some of these plates were left over even tho they say “Regina?” & we've had people try and tell us "36's were made in Regina, Saskatchewan…all because of Regina appearing on the ID plate. It would not surprise one that resourcefulness would have come into play during these economically trying times with a reasonable expectation to recycle them years later. Rumour has it that in 1933, the Regina plant was used to park buses in),

193? Model (i.e. 16-48 or 16-31),

Serial (nine digits 1st being the year, 2nd and 3rd digits identify make and series, 4th and 5th are body style, and last four being the vehicle number),

Engine and Body Serial,

Trim (meaning colour & material of the upholstery) and Paint (paint combos).

Made by General Motors of Canada Ltd. Oshawa ON

There is a second plate, which reads,

“CAUTION Overloading will void your warranty, Axle rating (blank), Straight rating 11500, Tractor-trailer rating 20000, This vehicle guaranteed under manufacturers warranty providing total gross weight does not exceed rating shown above, Made by General Motors of Canada limited, Oshawa Ontario”

Straight rating on our all our 1936's are 11,500 with Tractor rating of 20,000 even though we are dealing with extreme ends of the wheelbases; 131” to 165”.


CHEV VS. MAPLE LEAFS - TONNAGES
Advertisements for the 1936 Maple Leaf stated they handled load ranges from 2 to 5 tons.

In regards to the Maple Leaf tonnage query, there is no easy solution to saying that if the truck was rated for over 1.5 tons, it was a Maple Leaf. Simply explained, in Canada the Maple Leaf was a bigger truck to the lighter duty Chevrolet. As advances were made, so too the overall capacity increased.

From 1929 to 1946, for example, Chevs ranged in tonnage from ½ to 2, whilst at the time, only Maple Leafs were rated for 3 tons (1940 & 1941-45 & 1946). A rather confusing year is say in 1946 where you see the Chev go from ½ ton to ¾, 1, 1.5, & 2 tons yet the Maple Leaf of that year are either 2.5 or 3 tons. Back in the early 30's, Chev trucks never breached the 1.5 until 1936 and this may have been because the 1936 ML had the major improvement of the full floating rear end and the hubs bore the weight, making the rims lighter. One would not recommend that you put Maple Leaf 1936 wheels on a 1935 Maple Leaf as the wheels were carrying the weight up until that time (heavier rim). Some parts you may switch with no repercussions, others make it unsafe and unwise if possible at all.

Maple Leaf rims are another unique item and were specifically made for Maple Leafs. Maple Leaf rims are five spoke (Chev-like), five hole and generally have a GMC five bolt pattern. Only the Chev&Maple Leafs (C&MLs) sported Chevrolet rims. Our 1936 Chev&Maple Leaf (131” WB Model 16-31) has five spoke rims but these have a ten-bolt pattern. They use a smaller bolt and nut than other Maple Leaf's we've seen which have a bell nut washer with no shims. The C&ML front and back rims are interchangeable. For the back, you need a shim plate that has ten holes punched in it. You put a wheel on, then a shim and then put the second wheel on. The front also requires a shim, but this one has every second hole capped out and is purely for aesthetic purposes.

If you have a copy of “Vintage Truck” December 2004 issue, you'll note the article on the Maple Leaf ("36) and it mentions the Maple Leaf Truxmore (third axle) 7-ton concrete block that was hauled 1,246 miles (Windsor to Moncton) on June 29, 1936. Quite an interesting promotional undertaking.


1936 MAPLE LEAFS
Ah, this is where it gets complicated….1936 was an interesting year for Chev Maple Leafs! It seems like General Motors of Canada got a bit behind in their calendar year but then made up for it as the year progressed, coming out with some pretty interesting models. Even seemingly going backwards at the later half of the year with models like the “Chevrolet and Maple Leaf.” Our two “older” 1936 ML's do not have torque tube drives while the “younger” (later end of 1936) Chev/ML has a torque tube drive. Emergency brakes are different; the straight Maple Leafs have rods, the Chev/ML has rods and emergency brake cables.

The 1935 Maple Leafs we've seen had a LOT of wood in the cab, given historically that McLaughlin was a fine carriage builder, this would not be surprising. We've talked with the Reynold's restoration people and that wooden cab sure was a project in itself. All that intricate woodwork only to cover it over with sheet metal! After March of 1936, the Maple Leaf cab's saw hardly any wood; mostly in the doorposts (this explains why the doors tended to sag prematurely), two wooden braces from the floor to the top of the cab were joined by a horizontal wooden brace that ran under the fold-out windshield (the dash bolts to this and conceals the wood), and some wooden blocks were used as cushions for the cab. Stove bolts (with square bolts and flat washers) were used to attached the hinges to the doorposts. Wood portions tended to rot since the seals usually gave out and water found its way inside.

March 1936 was when a dramatic change was made in truck designs. The “Turret Top coupe-type cabs” with coloured sheet metal made their debut. Some call this the “low roof” cab as opposed to the “high roof” cab. The roof dropped about 2 inches, so the three door hinges thus became two and the external sunvisor was removed. Instrument placement in the Maple Leaf was changed from center of the dash to directly in front of the driver (made better sense!) and a glovebox and interior dome light were added.

For simplicity's sake, 1936 Maple Leafs were either 2 tons or 2-2.5 tons. The only 1.5 ton Chev Maple Leaf is in 1931 (WB 131” series HS-LT body codes 112-114-119).

This was the last year for the original 206.8. Not sure why some refer to this as a 207 (other than mathematically rounding up), but Maple Leaf and Chev mechanical data information we have come across refers to this engine type as a 206, not a 207…may well be the Chev and Chevy thingy I suppose.


From our sources, the 1936 Chev Maple Leafs all had the following:

Crank case 4 ¼ quarts / rear axle capacity is 6 pints / 6 cylinders / 206.8 engine / 3 5/16 x 4 bore & stroke / SAE HP 26.30 / fuel tank capacity 11 gallons / original tires were 650-20's.

Here are some differences in the stats we have:

1936 Maple Leaf / HY series / body codes 42-47 / 2-2.5 ton capacity / 141” WB / Cooling capacity 14 quarts

1936 Maple Leaf / HY series / body codes 43-48 / 2-2.5 ton capacity / 165” WB / Cooling capacity 14 quarts

1936 Chevrolet and Maple Leaf / RJ-HZ series / body codes 30-31 / 2 ton capacity / 131” WB / Cooling capacity 13 quarts

1936 Chevrolet and Maple Leaf / RK-HZ series / body codes 32-33 / 2 ton capacity / 157” WB / Cooling capacity 13 quarts


OK, ready for some head scratching…'36 is an interesting year for Maple Leafs. From January to March, 1936, the Maple Leaf (HY series) was more or less a 1935 (new was the Heavy Duty hydraulic brakes; 15-45 had a complete cab, 15-40 with a cowl), then there was the huge revamp.

The 2nd HY series had three horizontal chrome louvers on the hood cowling, the V-ed grill was standard (no longer optional like the vertical '35 grilles), coloured sheet metal replaced most all of the interior wood, along with redesigned fender valances.

If you find an oil filter and/or a heater in your 36 ML, you may assume these were add ons…or at least that is what we suspect having seen a variety of oil filters and heaters in one's we have come across. When you own three (so far!), you do get to do some comparing between them. When all three have or don't have an item, or there are three different types of an item, you sorta suspect these are not all originals. Surprising for us is that with each new addition, there has been items that come to light that should have been there, but were not. Like the metal extension portion on the headliner…our third truck showed us what was under the existing headliner on our second truck (had not removed it completely to see what hid underneath), only to realize our first Maple Leaf was completely lacking this part. Some items are indeed contemplative, like pictures of the '36 engine showing the correct horn, leaves us wondering if the horn on our Chevrolet/Maple Leaf is original or not since it is a small curled affair.

Godsents have been the kindness of people like the restoration crew at the Reynolds-Alberta museum. Being allowed to photograph their 1935 Maple Leaf extensively (Wayne exclaimed that not even he had as many photos of their '35 as we have during our second visit!) has really assisted us in learning similarities and differences between the two years. The relationship has been mutually helpful because their restoration lacks a bumper and we were able to bring our original bumper up for them to measure. One good turn deserves another.


ADD-ONS
Does the Maple Leaf you have, have a dumping box? One of our 165”'s has a scissor lift, the other a straight dumping lift. Surprisingly, both are in fab condition and the scissor lift, we had the box up for several weeks to see if it would creep down, and she held steady Eddy!


SPEED
We have driven our 3rd Maple Leaf, she arrived here in driveable condition. Our first Maple Leaf turned over with a few tweaks here and there and Rick called me at work with her purring engine in the background to tell me the good news—Yeehaw! Have not messed with the Chev/Maple Leaf engine yet, but that will come. We expect top speed to run between 50 and 60 kilometers an hour. Gonna race Rick to town and back traffic up all the way to the BC &/or SK border! We have no urge to get anywhere quickly any more and like the thought of being able to drive with the windows down, smelling the clover in the fields as we go by.

1936 advertisement states, “Compare the power and torque of this 72 horsepower truck engine. Chevrolet's engine sets a new pace in truck power. It's ruggedly built to stand up under hard service, yet it will save money on every phase of operating and maintenance expense. Greater power at every speed range (72 horsepower is developed at 3200 r.p.m.). Greater torque at all usable speeds (155 at 900 to 1500 r.p.m.) . . . the real measure of truck power that insures the pull for steep grades as well as ability to start heavy loads with ease. Greater gasoline economy in both light and heavy haulage! Greater savings on oil, even, than in the thrifty Chevrolet and Maple Leaf trucks of the past! These are the startling new results from advancements made in the Chevrolet truck engine for 1936.”

From 1930 to 1936, we know that Chev Maple Leafs used ONLY General Motors made Chevrolet engines. After this, someone else is going to have to investigate.

She should hold a legal payload of around 75 square bales (just enough loading to put a mild sweat on) and we'll be using two of the trucks to restock our hay and straw supplies. We are a conservation farm and all of this is pure hobby for us. Sorta explains our mentality about why one would dump $ into restorations. Our livestock faces extinction daily, so restoring just comes naturally to our outlook on life. We don't need to justify what we are doing as the bigger picture of preserving our Canadian history needs no justification. Powder coating bills, plating and refurbishing costs, all part of the process and she's well worth it. If you need inspiration, visit Reynolds-Alberta Museum (Wetaskwin, Alberta) and see that gem of a truck, their 1935 Maple Leaf (model 16-48, HX series, 165” wheelbase) in all her pristine glory. Course we feel she's the best vehicle of any kind there. Six dedicated specialists spent between 3,500 and 4,000 hours over 3 ½ years and you bet she looks good from every bit of it.


MANY USES
Interestingly, Maple Leafs had many duties. In 1935, here in Alberta, 167 trucks were registered with Class A Freight licenses, and of those, 44 were Maple Leafs…that means over 25% of the big trucks were Maple Leafs, popular! Maple Leafs were used as logging trucks, carried asphalt, hauled grain, poop!, livestock, etc. We are indebted to James Mays' December 2004 article in “Vintage Trucks” and I quote, “An exhaustive list of satisfied companies who operated Maple Leaf trucks was published. It included Alcan, Associated Screen News, B.C. Telephone, Bell Canada, Canadian Canners, Canadian General Electric, Distillers Corporation, Dominion Stores, Exide, General Steel Wares, The Hudson's Bay Company, Massey-Harris, Nestle's, Swift Canadian, Stelco, United Grain Growers, Wrigley, Eaton's, Simpson's, the Canadian Pacific Railway, the Canadian National Railway, Lever Brothers, and Canada Packers.” Does anyone know James May or how to contact him? He'd be an exceptional person to discus Maple Leaf's with.

Information from Mr. May's article, we are told that General Motors of Canada did not break out the Chev and Maple Leafs in their yearly production reports, so we can only report that in 1936, of the 33,790 trucks built in Canada, Chev & Maple Leaf models totaled 9,471. 1935 Chevs and Maple Leafs totaled 10,293 (some ML units shipped to Australia-Great White North on over to Down Under), 1934 saw 8,181, 1933 - 3,146, 1932 – 2,563, 1931 – 5,529 and 1930 – 12,439.


CHEVROLET and MAPLE LEAFS
Be careful here…for there were year's (two we know of 1931-WB 131” and 1936-WB 131” & 157”) where both Chevrolet and Maple Leaf laid claim to the same truck. Our 1936 has rims that are Chev not Maple Leaf rims, a unique item for Maple Leafs as they had their own wheels. Subtle differences as this one appears similar to our other two but in some cases, there are drastic differences…so be careful if you figure all ML "36's are the same and you can swap parts amongst them.

1931 saw a Chevrolet and Maple Leaf truck (series HS-LT, the LT probably refers to the corresponding American Chevrolet LT) as did 1936 (series RJ-HZ/bodycodes 30-31and RK-HZ/bodycodes 32-33).

Cooling capacity differed from the straight Maple Leafs in 36, smaller at 13 quarts, the rest of the written data appears the same, but could be deemed more misleading than helpful. We've been led down the garden path before. If you have the actual truck at your disposal, you don't get tripped up so easily and it is way better to actually have the truck to refer to as a guide. Not foolproof, but still the best way.

We see that in 1933, torque-tube drive was first used, then we see references that torque-tube drive was used for the final time in 1936 but be careful here! Drive trains are not the same…what we found is that both our 165” wheelbases have split drive shafts with the Power Take Off (PTO) on the side of the transmission. On the Chev/Maple Leaf, 131” wheelbase, there is no PTO, but there is a plate on the side of the 4-speed transmission and universal joints, so this could have been an option.

Just because they are "36's, do not assume all parts are interchangeable between trucks from this year. The bumper on the Chev/Maple Leaf is a straight bumper, unlike the Gull Wing bumper on the other 1936 Maple Leafs. We have not dug too far into the 16-31 model Chev/Maple Leaf but rest assured there is certain to be other differences to the 16-48 Maple Leafs. Some things are nice about this "36 Chev/Maple Leaf as we may easily acquire Chev rims and now have a heap of rims and tires for this particular truck. Other more accessible Chev parts may also go into this restoration as we dismantle more of it. Maple Leaf parts, as our ad for parts here on Stovebolt still goes with no hits, are not that common.


CHALLENGES
Other disappointments have been the lack of info in general on the bigger Chev trucks (2 ton and up)…most books we have found refer only to the 1.5 ton, not at all useful to the Maple Leaf that only had one year as a 1.5 ton (1931). Many of the pursuits for parts have been quite comical. Consumable items like throw out bearings are almost non-existent!

Currently working on the master cylinder in our first Maple Leaf (16-48 with 165” WB) and finding while ours does not appear to require resleeving like Reynold's '35, we are in search for kits! Supposedly, no specific kit exists, but you are to steal random parts from other kits to make due. If you are missing things like water or fuel pumps, consider it real trouble. We have rebuilt a rad, water pump, starter, generator (Ah yes, the leave her 6 volt or change her to 12 volt debate!), heater core and fuel pumps, but you need cores or at least some of what use to be there for rebuilders to assist you. And it gets WAY expensive too with many not able to quote you a final price. You do get very nice items back, but she's a tad pricey at times. We consider theses trucks really straight forward and simple, not like new ones with all the mess and complications, but if you take to this like you are putting “engine jewelry” back on her, the prices on refurbishing will not sting so much.

In the restoration game, money can cure lots and if one outfit says, “No way!,” keep at it, the next may have a fix. Hemmings ran a picture of a note scrawled out saying, “God hates a coward.” It was attached to vintage parts in dire need of, ahem, work….(a.k.a. scrap metal?). If you happen to have a full head of hair when you start your Maple Leaf restoration, consider some falling out, some going white and the rest that's left may yet well find itself pulled out during times of utter frustration. Character building; what don't kill you, makes you strong!

Springs for the clutch and ball rollers are getable, but if you do not have a good disc and pressure plate, it gets worrisome.

Headlights in good enough condition worth re-plating are hard to find. The hood cowling usually put many dents in the headlights if you were not careful. Water gets in most of these bucket headlights and there goes the metal!

Our next biggie is having the flywheel on one truck redone. The first contact told us that if the four or five ring gear teeth were needing redoing, you were SOL…but now we've found a great guy (machinist that seeks adventure!) who is game and he'll be making us a tool ($500) so he will be able to build her back up and re-do the teeth. The flywheel (mother of all flywheels these, about sixty pounds each, lots of metal here) appears to be balanced specifically for each engine…you cannot turn these flywheels 360 degrees and get new use out of them like some of the new stuff.

Rear brake drums supposedly never wear out so no place to find reproductions of those. Emergency brakes are worth mentioning. On the two 16-48's, 165” WB, the emergency brake is ¼” round rod to the back with cams to the rear end. On the Chev/Maple Leaf (16-31, 131” WB), you have steel rods to just before the rear end and emerg brake cables…so you got different linkage in the mechanical emergency brake system. Cams seem to be a bugger right now for replacement in the one truck, but we'll get her done.

Even with specific measurements and long discussions of what we were looking for, shipping a bumper up from the States turned out to be for a pickup, not a 2-2.5 ton. The whole joy is in the challenge followed by the win. If it comes too easy, everyone would be doing it and what's the point in that?

One cause for rejoicing is that we have not only one but two men that routinely drive by our place that have both worked extensively on babbetted engines. It is very nice to see their eyes glisten as the sight of not one but three Maple Leaf's bring back fond recollections for them. Their guidance and assistance has been immeasurably helpful during our restores. To have people with living memories of these vintage trucks is by far the best one could hope for.

In closing, as the one fellow says, “If the engine started to knock, you pulled over on the side of the road and got the coffee can out. Pulled the plug and dumped what they called “oil” into the can, took the oilpan off, loosened off the crank bolts, and pulled a shim off each end. Tightened the crank, put the oil pan back on and dumped the oil back in and you were good to go. If you needed a shim, you used a piece of your leather belt.”

Rick is the best one to chat on the telephone with. He's got stories about these restorations that could be novel's all to themselves. Canucker Bob, e-mail us privately with your phone number and he'll help you out. Stories about Maple Leaf's that are “complete” (just missing the carb, eh!) that had parts of their bumpers welded as bracing to cover what's left of the rad…complete…sure, yup, OK!!!! About the only thing left that was usable was the two side ML insignias and some door knobs…

Doggone,

Tara - wife and tabulator for Too Old to Part Out (Rick)

PS Thanks Mike on the heads up about the Maple Leaf discussion!

Holey mackerel...Do I ever feel like a rookie. 3 Leafs and running and everything. I traded my '34 International up to the '36 Maple Leaf which is in much better shape but still not running. I will contact you as soon as it stops snowing and blowing and I can go out and find the serial number etc.

Your pictures of the 36 Maple Leaf trucks show, other than the bumpers on the ones that dip in the center, the sheel & grille and the hood side panels, that they used the same cab & sheet metal as the Chevrolets. The Chevrolet models in 34-36 also had a deluxe cab with the leather seats and wood grained window moulding and dash panels. The one truck with the straight front bumper is the same as the 36 Chevrolet.I have some service information on 1935 Maple Leaf trucks if you would like a copy and sales information on the 35 Chevrolet trucks in Canada. Email me with your postal address.

WOW !, Nice trucks TOTPO. You should write a book about Maple Leaf Trucks. I'd like to have a '47-'52? Maple Leaf. Better yet, a Maple Leaf COE (Cabover Engine). I've got several Maple Leaf Emblems, I've collected. There was a mid 30's Maple Leaf, here in N.C., several years ago, about 75 miles from me. I need to see if it's still there. Thanks for the pictures. Got any '47-'52 Maple Leaf info.

Bob,

We finally got it in the Gallery for ya.

Peg

Thanks Peg. It aways looks better on the web.
Bob

So Bob, have you figured out from the above post, what Tonnage it is.

Well, given that it's a Maple Leaf, I think that it can only be a 2 Ton or maybe 21/2. I still don't get how a truck manufacturer rates them though. Is it the sizing of the springs or something? THis truck has a 131" wb and yet it is rated heavier than a longer wheelbase truck with very similar appearance. Beats me.

Heel low 35 trucker:

> Your pictures of the 36 Maple Leaf trucks show, other than the bumpers on the ones that
> dip in the center, the sheel & grille and the hood side panels, that they used the same cab
> & sheet metal as the Chevrolets.

Many of our earlier vehicles (we pick up on the "34, "35 & "36's) all had that similar look to them…be they Chev, Ford, Dodge, etc., etc.…the big headlights were not in the fenders and there was always that similar shape to the bodies. For me, I usually have to do a double take to figure out what make they are…it would not be hard to collect more in these years as they certainly are eye appealing. The Maple Leaf seems cartoonish, with her big wheels, roundish cab, catchy headlights, and glistening chrome accents.

The Chev doorskins were identical and fit '36 to "38s, Windshield only fit the (Mar-Dec) '36 because of the low cab design, High cab windshields fit '34 to '36 (Jan to March) and in 1937, the windshield changed again. In the hood cowling, the Maple Leafs had three horizontal louvers with chrome strips…'36 Chevs appeared to have vertical hood cowlings with no chrome louvers. Other than the trim end of things, Maple Leafs appear to have the same window frames.

Curious about the US Chev Independence and the Chev LT…do you know anything about these trucks? Things like how long they were made, how similar they might be to the Maple Leaf? They were “big bolts” too! I'd like to see & hear about the American versions and admire their special place in history.

> The Chevrolet models in 34-36 also had a deluxe cab with the leather seats

The leather, cowhide? Was it a textured or smooth finish (Reynold's "35 is a smooth finish, nice light tan colour—was their other colours in the leather or just more a natural tan)? Was the seat pleated? In the Maple Leaf, the 1935 had a bench seat, as did the 1936, but I believe in 1937, the seat was a split seat? You may purchase vinyl reproductions of both bench and split seats, black or brown are the colour choices we've seen.

Supposedly leather was not such a fancy product as say the newer things like “Bakelite” and maybe even vinyl as these were new, futuristic items. Everyone had to make do with natural products (cork, solid woods) on a day to day basis and these things would be the “new rage.”

> and wood grained window moulding and dash panels.

Ah, here I am intrigued. I was not able to photograph Reynold's '35 woodgrain painted dash that well…lighting, being careful not to touch the paint, etc. Have you personally ever seen remnants of the actual woodgrain painted metal? All the dashboards I examine are slightly textured, but not yet have I gotten to peak at what remotely even looks like woodgrain paint. I am VERY curious about this technique…probably done by hand (Reynold's restoration crew said it was difficult and painstaking). I have heard this is an art unto itself, the woodgrain painting.

I know ages ago I took a ceramics course and you could get a paint that did a not too bad “woodgrain” affect. This paint was a tan coloured base with much darker, thicker pigmented “blobs” that you brushed out to give a grain like appearance. Is this what is done in the vehicles or is this a bunch of special brushes and layers of different colours and lots and lots of skilled craftmanship to do. I see there are CD's on the technique and kits to be bought, but have not pursued this yet.

The one dash on the Chev and Maple Leaf, appears to have a textured dashboard and appears to be what is left of that “crackle paint” that was so popular back then.

> The one truck with the straight front bumper is the same as the 36 Chevrolet.

Yes! This would be a “Chev” bumper used on the Chev and Maple Leaf truck. I guess one might assume the “gull wing” chrome bumper was a Maple Leaf bumper as I have seen line drawings showing both Chevs and Maple Leafs and the Chevs' bumpers were straight, the ML's had the dip (gull wing) in the bumper and also the grooves in the middle running the full length. The Chev bumper is smooth & straight horizontally. There is a back up steel bracing with bolt pattern in it. Runs frame to frame, behind this bumper and is substantial.
This one of ours has no breaks in it and appears to be in pretty nice shape considering her age and the abuse most bumpers see.

> I have some service information on 1935 Maple Leaf trucks if you would like a copy and
> sales information on the 35 Chevrolet trucks in Canada. Email me with your postal
> address.

Thank you…very kind of you.

When we bought the first Maple Leaf (the currently white one), we were give colour brochures. Of course in our excitement, we never quite noticed that the brochures were for 1935 Maple Leafs. It would have been perfect to have a copy of the 1936 sales brochure, but one never knows, one could turn one up at a Swap meet or such. We have framed these '35 brochures to keep them in good condition as they are somewhat relevant and indeed, better than no brochure at all.

Doggone,

Tara

Heel low spanky:

> WOW !, Nice trucks TOTPO.

We kinda like them. :-)

> You should write a book about Maple Leaf Trucks.

Thank you for the suggestion but as Rick says, “We're not done yet!” and by far, I'd rather be fetching wrenches or holding the dumb end over missing out cause I was tip typing instead of helping.

We have been trying to document everything precisely. Rick even got techno on us and went out and bought a digital camera (I've had a digital video camera since 2001, but now have gone back to the 35mm as I like referring back to printed photos and negatives better). He keeps a separate book on each truck and daily documents what was done.

We currently have a carb out for rebuilding and have asked the rebuilder to keep the old parts for us so we have them for future reference and learning purposes. We are trying very hard not to do anything to permanently alter these trucks…within reason as we still want them to run and be gently used. We are not a museum yet we are trying to be good about keeping original where possible.

> I'd like to have a '47-'52? Maple Leaf. Better yet, a Maple Leaf COE (Cabover Engine).

I see that is what you collect.

> I've got several Maple Leaf Emblems, I've collected.

They certainly are nice items. We have the reproduction of the chrome Seahorse for our rad caps…not certain how very original that is, but she is indeed purdy! I see that some restorers here in Alberta also put the Parks Bison (national parks pass) on their rad fronts. This was a metal (seems silver or goldish in colour) emblem of a Bison and was the yearly pass to parks like Banff Nation Park. In later years, they switched to a windshield decal that you had to try to scrape off each year.

> There was a mid 30's Maple Leaf, here in N.C., several years ago, about 75 miles from
> me. I need to see if it's still there.

I'd hate to have the shipping bill to get a Maple Leaf to North Carolina…gack! Certainly better if there is one locally…that would be really good.

> Thanks for the pictures. Got any '47-'52 Maple Leaf info.

Unfortunately, we kinda stop right at 1936 as far as actual information (past mechanical data and model info). We've inspected a 1938 Maple Leaf in person (many missing parts), but have not much as far as useable data on anything past '36.

The ads we have run are all for 1936 Maple Leafs or Maple Leaf parts…do not get many hits outside that year. On Feb 24, 2007, we did get a call from a fellow in Brooks, Alberta. He has a 1940 two-ton (our data says 2.5 or 3's were the capacities for that year) Maple Leaf that is running, also a 1948 2.5 ton and a 1950 3 ton in good running condition. If you are interested, e-mail privately and I will give you his telephone number.

Why the interest in ML's '47 to '52?

Doggone,

Tara - wife and tabulator for Too Old to Part Out

Heel low:

Want to apologize here as in my first post I listed “nine” digits for the Maple Leaf serial number and there should have been ten digits.

Peggy has asked to post the first post I made up on this forum (Tech tips area maybe?) so I have made a few changes to the post and added some new things we've uncovered.

Two days sure can make a difference in this restoration game. Found out that the flywheel is NOT balanced to each engine (thank heavens) and that the machinest will be making us three carbon throw-out bearings. Also that you need to take in your flywheel when you have your clutch reworked…making another trip to the big city to drop one off.

So have added the following to revamp to what I posted earlier:

“Our next biggie is having the flywheel on one truck redone. The first contact told us that if the four or five ring gear teeth were needing redoing, you were SOL…but now we've found a great guy (machinist that seeks adventure!) who is game and he'll be making us a tool ($500) so he will be able to build her back up and re-do the teeth. The flywheel is the mother of all flywheels (about sixty pounds each--lots of metal here). This machinest will also be making us throw-out bearings. He is going to order solid carbon blanks and will be machining us three of these bearings. When you take in your clutch for redoing, remember to also take along your flywheel, as they will need this to do the final finishing touches. We found out why the first Maple Leaf had shifting issues…the pressure plate had been put in backwards!

“It is so great to find people who are willing to go that extra mile to get these old girls back to their former glory. Shop around and once you find someone actually willing to ply their craft, realize that fortune is smiling upon you.

“Bumpers can be quite heart wrenching. Our first Maple Leaf had hers in pieces held together with some pretty lousy fish plating that took ages to get off. You need to be or find, a very delicate welder that is able to gently put them back together. Thankfully both the second and third bumpers are in much better condition, but then there is the cost of plating/chroming them. Chroming items brings up the dilemma of when is it better to get a reproduction (if possible!) or better to restore the actual original. Interior doorknobs can be gotten as reproductions and cost around a hundred dollars each or you can try to refurbish your originals and have them rechromed. How original do you want your restoration and how much money are you able to justify staying completely original or making minor allowances/changes. Your decision.”

Doggone,

Tara - wife and tabulator for Too Old to Part Out

Wow! TOTPO, thanks for sharing your wealth of info. I'll have to go back through it a few times. I figured you'd enjoy talkin' "Maple Leaf" with fellow restorers. :-)

toooldtopartout I was doing some more research on Maple Leaf trucks and noticed that the front bumper on the 36 with dip in the middle looked fimilar. I just remembered why; if you look at a 1934 Buick front bumber it is almost identical with the dip and the line across the middle length. I don't have dimensions on either the Buick or the Maple Leaf bumper but I think they are very close.

toooldtopartout just put your information requested in the mail yesterday hope it is informative.

Dear 35 trucker:

Can't provide you with measurements on a '34 Buick, but am able to provide some of the other half of the equation:

BUMPERS:

1936 Chev Maple Leaf - Straight bumper

Overall Length: 62 3/4"
Width: 4 3/16"
Thickness: 1/4"

Three evenly spaced holes in bumper, one in center and one each side, 8 3/4" from ends.
Ends on the bumper are a 1/2" overall rounded curve.

The Chev/Maple Leaf bumper is slightly curved and is attached to a solid piece of light channel (45 1/4" long). This channel is attached to the frame.


1936 Maple Leaf - Gull Wing bumper

Overall Length: 65 3/4”
Width: 4 3/4"
Thickness: 1/8"

Groove runs horizontally along the middle of the bumper, Center groove width: 1/4"

If you take a straight edge and lay it on top of the bumper from outside edge to outside edge, the measurement of the drop in the center is 2 1/4".

When you take a straight edge and put it on the back of the bumper, taking a measurement from the straight edge to the center of the bumper, the bow in the bumper is equal to 5 1/4".

On each end of the bumper, there is a mushroom headed bolt, approximately 1 1/2" wide by 4 3/4" long. There is a cone shaped bushing which helps align it in the curled end of the bumper backed by a nut and flat washer. This holds the bumper to the spring steel frame.

In the center of the bumper is a large oval decorative bolt. Stainless steel replicates of this bolt may be purchased along with the end bolts.

The spring steel frame is a three piece configuration on the Maple Leaf. You have a solid curved piece that goes from one end of the bumper to the other. Then you have another two brackets that bolt to that spring steel frame which in turn attaches it to the truck frame.

Thank you kindly for the information you have sent out. Look forward to receiving it!

PS Well on the way to dismantling the 1st Maple Leaf (white one) documenting by digital camera the process in great detail.

Thanks for the interest…hope this helps.

Too Old to Part Out

The straight bumper is the same as the 1936 USA Chevrolet built trucks. I'll send you the pictures I have of the 34 Buick so you can compare.

The bumper on my '36, which is straight like Too Old's, Also has the 3 holes but it has been welded onto a kind of T-rail kind of bracket which is then welded to the frame.. I'm pretty sure that this isn't the way that it's supposed to be since there are no bolts through the holes. Can someone describe the mounting bracket a little more?
Canuck

Canuck I have a picture that will show what the channel reinforcement looks like the mounts between the frame and face bar. I would have to mail it to you can you e-mail me your postal address?.

Photo's in the mail to you.

Thanks '35trucker.
Bob

Heel low:

Just wanted to send you fellows a "heads up."

Peggy has been kind and diligent enough to incite me to "finally" give her information to set up a gallery page on our Chev Maple Leafs. Here is a link and does she EVER do a nice job. Thank you Peggy for making our vintage truck collection look so fine!

http://www.stovebolt.com/gallery/higgins_mapleleaf.html

Back in February/March (when this thread originally began with Canuck’s request for “help” with his C&ML) we had just acquired our third Maple Leaf truck and the fleet has continued to grow, 4th and 5th additions now here and safely secured. Go to the Gallery for pics, descriptions and whatnots.

Since there are two seasons in Alberta; seven months of winter and the rest for construction, we have been a bit busy (and terribly rude, as we have not even thanked '35 trucker for the great information and pictures he mailed us, oh ages ago now. Thank you so very much and hope you forgive our complete lack of good manners!). We have totally been focusing on the construction end of things and have let the "inside" administrative typing go by the wayside (ignorant as that is!). But not for long. Frost has already arrived and a few apples have hit the dirt as windfalls, so won’t be long before our attentions once again turn towards messing with the Maple Leaf restorations since winter will be happily upon us.

Next project to come off my desk is information so Peggy may post it to the History portion of the Tech Tip Page. Just a matter of arranging our thoughts in a logical and presentable manner. I also want to type out the information on the 1935 Maple Leaf truck sales brochure so that others may be able to refer to it. Every little bit helps when trying to find restoration reference material on these big bolts.

Doggone,

Tara - wife and tabulator for Too Old to Part Out

Tara,

You did all the hard work!! And sorry I forgot to add the link to your signature line. Now, whenever you post, folks can go see all your cool stuff!

Excellent work on your part!

Peggy

On March 18, 2007, Canuck wrote:

> Well, given that it's a Maple Leaf, I think that it can only be a 2 Ton or maybe
> 21/2. I still don't get how a truck manufacturer rates them though. Is it the sizing
> of the springs or something? THis truck has a 131" wb and yet it is rated heavier
> than a longer wheelbase truck with very similar appearance. Beats me.

Heel low Canuck:

I think some of your question may be answered in the information I just transcribed out of the “Sales Brochure on 1935 Chevrolet Maple Leaf Trucks.” Yes, yes…too bad we do not have a copy of the 1936 sales brochure, but no matter! :-(

There is a table with information on dimensions and weights (pasted text below) that refers to the formula used to determine “payload,” which I presume (shrug!) is capacity/tonnage.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

- Sales Brochure on 1935 Chevrolet Maple Leaf Trucks -

{Table of information}

DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHTS
Model 16-42 Model 16-43
Wheelbase. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141” 165”
Overall Length of Chassis (including
Front Bumper) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 1/16” 234 1/16”
Back of Cab to centre line of Rear Axle 61 ¼” 85 ¼”
Back of Cab to end of Frame . . . . . . . . 108 1/8” 132 1/8”
Front of Dash to end of Frame . . . . . . . 161 1/8” 185 1/8”
Maximum Body Length Back of Cab. . 9 feet 12 feet
6.50x20” 6.50x20”
Standard Front Tire Equipment . . . . . (6-ply) (6-ply)
6.50x20” 6.50x20”
Standard Rear Tire Equipment . . . . . . (6-ply) (6-ply)
Duals Duals
Front Tread . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 55/64” 56 55/64”
Rear Tread—Dual Tires . . . . . . . . . . . 64 ¾” 64 ¾”
Recommended Gross Weight . . . . . . . 11,500 lbs. 11,500 lbs.
Approx. Shipping Weight with Cowl—
Front . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,650 lbs. 1,725 lbs.
Rear. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,670 lbs. 1,700 lbs.
Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,320 lbs. 3,425 lbs.
Nominal Body, Cab and Equipment
Weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,000 lbs. 1,200 lbs.
Payload—Approximately . . . . . . . . . . 7,180 lbs. 6,875 lbs.

Formula: Gross weight—chassis weight—body weight = Payload.
The gross allowable weight must not exceed 11,500 lbs. which includes chassis, cab, body, gas, oil, water, driver and payload.
Note:—The above table shows standard tire Equipment for each wheelbase. A wide range of tire options is available for either wheelbase. Accurate chassis weights with various types of tire equipment available upon request.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Worth noting is that in 1935, the shorter wheelbase (Model 16-42, 141” wheelbase) is rated for a payload of approximately for 7,180 lbs. while the longer wheelbase (Model 16-43, 165” wheelbase) is for LESS at 6,875 lbs. of approximate payload. Recommended gross weight for both wheelbases (and what you saw on the one plate on your firewall) is 11,500 lbs. How they come up with the recommended gross weight for a vehicle, well someone is going to have to answer that…probably something to do with the breaking point of some key component or a combination formula where you take stress measurements on a whole bunch of components.

1935 ML Model 16-42 / 141”wb
Total shipping weight with cowl (F 1,650 + R 1,670 = 3,320 lbs.) +
Nominal Body, Cab and Equipment (1,000 lbs.) +
Payload—Approximately (7,180 lbs.) =
Recommended Gross Weight 11,500 lbs.

1935 ML Model 16-43 / 165”wb
Total shipping weight with cowl ((F 1,725 + R 1,700 = 3,425 lbs.) +
Nominal Body, Cab and Equipment (1,200 lbs.) +
Payload—Approximately (6,875 lbs.) =
Recommended Gross Weight 11,500 lbs.


I guess if you use the same components on two models of trucks with different wheelbases, it goes without saying that more components would be required to make up a LONGER wheelbase and thereby, more components equals more WEIGHT. More weight given that the components were meant to handle the same stress factors (breaking under the tension of more and more weight/stress), it seems logical that unless the components used in the longer wheelbase had higher ratings to handle more weight, you don’t get more payload capacity by adding length which would have equaled more weight/stress to the unit with the same kind of components.

I get the feeling that Chev used identical components to make up both wheelbases, 141” and 165,” especially the wheels and tires as they do state they are interchangeable (front and rear) on the same truck, and the specs given above are identical for both models. Probably a safe conclusion.

Now do note, at the bottom of the table the mention of a “wide range of tire options is available for either wheelbase” so I would assume that if you changed to a different “tire” option you may then alter the payload capacity of your truck.

I do know that there were changes made to the wheels between 1935 and 1936 (we mention this in our first post, listed above in the Chev Vs. Maple Leafs – Tonnages section). In 1935, all the weight rode on the wheels which were of a heavier construction than the 1936 editions. In 1936, the way the weight was distributed was changed with the full floating rear end and the fact that the hubs bore the weight, allowing for them to make the rims lighter. Recall, Maple Leaf trucks rode on their own special wheels for the 21-years that they were made.

My first reaction to knowing that the longer wheelbases hauled less weight or payload was, “Why bother?” I have concluded that the benefits to a longer wheelbase would be like when someone says, “What weighs more; a pound of feathers or a pound of gold.” Both WEIGH the same, but the volume or area is different. Depends what you want your Maple Leaf Truck to be hauling. If you were a grain farmer, you would not need as much “volume” (grain is heavy and compact) as a freight liner that hauled light boxes of larger sized goods.

This brings to mind that I had been wondering why in 1931 does the Chevrolet and Maple Leaf truck (HS-LT, 112-114-119, 131” wb) go down to the 1½ ton capacity, when the year prior, 1930, the Maple Leaf truck (HR, 114-116, same sized wb @ 131”) was rated at higher 2 ton capacity. Then I recalled that the Chevrolet and Maple Leaf (C&ML) used Chev wheels, not the Maple Leaf wheels…ah, now this makes sense. Chevrolet wheels would have been meant more for the Chev pickup line, and the wheels would not have been expected to accommodate the loads for the bigger Maple Leafs.

So Bob, I suppose you can blame the ½ ton smaller capacity of the C&ML trucks in ’36 because of those Chev wheels they used. Certainly far easier to find Chev wheels over Maple Leafs tho! As we have mentioned, we have easily collected more than enough for our two C&ML’s. From our records, the C&ML’s were only made in 1931 and 1936…did they run out of Maple Leaf wheels, or gull wing bumpers or did they have too many Maple Leaf parts left over and mixed them up with Chev parts to get rid of the excess??? I just question why they would combine the two?

I wonder if they could have kept the heavier 1935 wheels and had an even larger payload capacity…but I am no engineer, so there was probably some item that inhibited this train of thought from seeing the light of day. If anyone is an “engineer” and has further insight to my conclusions in regards to payloads/tonnage, please post so I may learn further. Remember, I am only drawing these conclusions from what I read in the 1935 Maple Leaf Truck Sales brochure and the stats on differences between Maple Leafs in models/years. There is probably something wrong in what I have deducted from just referring to these and not sure I have gotten the whole picture right.


Curious, the difference between the two wheelbases 165” & 141” is 2 feet (24”) yet the table says, that the maximum body length back of cab is 12 feet and 9 feet, difference of three feet (36”). I guess if you make the wheelbase two feet longer, this allows you a longer deck of three feet, the extra foot does not compromise the vehicle’s stability/safety?


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- Sales Brochure on 1935 Chevrolet Maple Leaf Trucks -

REAR AXLE—General Motors Full Floating. Spiral bevel drive with 6.33 ratio (5.83 optional). Pinion shaft is straddle mounted. All gears and shafts are supported on large roller bearings. Dual Performance Axle providing 8 speeds Forward and 2 speeds Reverse—optional at extra cost.

FRONT AXLE—Drop-forged heat-treated I beam. Reverse Elliott type knuckles. New Departure ball bearings in wheels.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In the ’35 brochure, I see “new” is the departure ball bearings in the wheels. Not sure if those would also help increase capacity, maybe they were put there gearing up for the 2-2½ ton potential seen in 1936 Maple Leaf but maybe these were scrapped?

Worth noting too is that the dual performance axle (what we have in one of our ’36 Maple Leafs) was offered optional in 1935, at additional cost.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- Sales Brochure on 1935 Chevrolet Maple Leaf Trucks -

COMPARE POWER AND TORQUE
Torque is the measure of pulling ability. And the Chevrolet engine gives you higher torque throughout the normal speed range than any other truck engine in its field.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Another item I found interesting in the brochure, is the fact that at the time, so many items would have been new to the market. Explanations would have been a given in 1935 simply because you cannot “rah rah rah” a product when the public didn’t know what the heck you were flogging or going on about. Horse anatomy would have seemed more comfortable than the automobile, I guess “horse” power would not have been too hard to grasp. :-)

BTW Torque, isn’t that what one uses to drive screws? So following the above definition, you are “pulling” a screw? Sadly, Physics was never my forte, especially when the prof said, “The table was pushing back.” “HUH? The dudes in white coats are coming for you…”

Anyway, above is an excerpt with an explanation as to what “torque” means. I highly doubt one would see a definition of that in a vehicle sales brochure today. Yet another interesting thing about the older Stovebolts, the industry was brand spanking new and things we take for granted were in their infancy. Good thing for people like myself to cut their teeth on. If I learn the basics here, maybe I can come up to speed quicker on the new models and all their new fangled innovations.

More surprising is that so many technological advances where made back then (astronomical since they were limited even by the kinds of basic materials at their disposal). In reality, we have not greatly changed the basic way of doing things much since then. Course with the hybrids, yes, these are way out there compared but I suppose the gas combustion engine has not been that dissimilar over the decades. New materials to make lighter/stronger components and much better efficiency, say fuel wise.

Doggone,

Tara – wife and tabulator for Too Old to Part Out