Once I got past the hyperbolic title (at the very least, it should be: “The Man Who Saved The Ford V8”; better yet would be “The Man Who Saved The Ford V8, Temporarily”) and the first chapter, in which the author makes the very common Ford V8 of the 30s and 40s seem as if it were the mythical equivalent of the 60s Chrysler hemi engine, the story of Mr. Morsey’s involvement in some very important product decisions at Ford during the period 1949 to 1964 is engaging, and filled in a key historical blank spot for me. It’s quite a story, actually.
Mr. Morsey was hired by Ford in late 1948 by Jack Reith, one of the “Whiz Kids” team that had been hired by Henry Ford II to play a key role in turning Ford around after the war, when it was in very bad shape and running behind Chrysler in the number three spot. Morsey was only 29, and had never worked in the auto industry before, having worked at IBM in what was then “high tech”.
Shortly before he arrived at Ford, the decision had been made at the highest Executive level to drop the ancient flathead V8 for their all-new 1952 line, for which a new OHV six was designed to be the only powerplant. The goal was to catch Chevrolet, which only had OHV six engines, so the Whiz Kids figured it made sense to imitate the Chevy. The ’52 Ford was being engineered to only accept the new six. I was quite unaware of this, and just assumed that the new ohv V8 that appeared in 1954 was always in the pipeline.
Mr. Morsey, who had driven a series of Ford V8s since he was given a new coupe for his 16th birthday, and was passionate about Henry’s V8, was shocked to learn of this. In his mind, the V8 engine was the critical aspect that had allowed Ford to come back and challenge Chevrolet after being beaten in the the sales rankings in 1931 through 1933. Just how much the V8 engine played into Ford’s brief return to the number one spot in 1934- 1937, to then lose it again to Chevrolet is debatable. But no doubt, the V8 gave Ford something distinctive, even if it really wasn’t that much more powerful than the OHV Chevy six. And did become most popular with the early go-fast crowd.
But in the post-war era, the flathead V8 was quickly becoming obsolete. Ford finally broke Henry’s six cylinder taboo in 1941, with a new (but still flathead) six that actually had 5 more hp than the V8. And it’s not really surprising that Ford might consider dropping the V8, as a modern OHV six could easily equal its 100 hp rating at this time.
Back to the key element of the story: Mr. Morsey convinced his boss to get the Executive Comittee (including Ernie Breech and HFII) to reconsider, which alone was a bit shocking. Morsey is given six weeks to prepare a presentation, and in order to do so, he does something that had hardly been done in Detroit: he employed public researchers to get feedback from Ford customers and dealers, which came back with exactly the ammunition that he was hoping for: the V8 was key to their buying decision. Up to this point, Detroit was used to top-down decision making, being sure it knew best what the customer wanted.
Morsey’s presentation was successful, and the decision was reversed. The flathead V8 was given a reprieve for two years, and its rating upped to 110 hp. And according to him, this key decision also led to Ford designing the new Y-block V8, which replaced the flathead in 1954, based on research that showed it could be built for only $16 more than the six, and that customers were willing to pay $100 more for it.
Needless to say, Morsey’s success in winning a reprieve for the Ford V8 looked really good by 1953, when it become known that Chevrolet was developing a new ohv V8. One shudders to think how Ford would have fared without one. Of course, they would have had no choice to go the same route, later rather than sooner. Everyone was heading down the V8 road, and one can speculate that Ford might have ended up with a somewhat more modern V8 than the soon-to-be obsolete Y-Block. But a lot of sales might likely have been lost in the intervening years.
So there’s no doubt Mr. Morsey can rightfully claim to be “The Man Who Saved The V8” at Ford, and at least for a couple of years. And his telling of the story is engaging, and gives a lot of insight into the company at the time. Morsey goes on to also claim a major role in the creation of the 1955 Thunderbird, inasmuch as he (rightfully) lobbied strongly that Ford not chase the Corvette with a genuine sports car, but a boulevard cruiser, and created the expression “personal car” to describe it and its intended role.
Mr. Morsey’s relationship with Lee Iaccoca, and his indirect role in supporting the Mustang are also covered, as well as other assignments until he left Ford in 1964. Mr. Morsey presents himself as the first modern automotive product planner, using consumer feedback and pragmatic processes to augment the also-important emotional aspects to change the decision making processes in the automobile business. He deserves it.
Aaron Severson of ateupwithmotor was the principal historical researcher and fact checker of this book
Sounds like a very interesting book. Like you, I had never heard that the old flathead was to be axed after 1951. This is sort of interesting, as I had always understood that Harold Youngren (who had come to Ford from Oldsmobile after the war) had been instrumental in a fairly major updating of the V8 engine for 1949. It is odd that Ford would consider dumping the engine that quickly. However, I don’t think the Ford Motor Company of 1950 operated from the same rulebook as more modern organizations. Also, is it possible that the Youngren updates were done as a result of Morsey’s campaign?
I think that from the vantage point of 1949-50, it is understandable that the engine could be called “the V8”. Other than Cadillac, there really was no other, and like the SBC of more recent vintage, the Ford flathead V8 was truly everywhere, and the lingua franca of hot rodding.
I believe Chrysler Corporation was also caught short by the planned debut of the Chevrolet V-8 in 1955. If I recall correctly, the “true” Plymouth V-8 wasn’t scheduled to debut until 1956. Chrysler therefore had to source V-8s designed for Dodge trucks for the 1955 Plymouth in order for it to remain competitive. Even then, Plymouth couldn’t keep up with the demand for V-8 equipped cars during the 1955 model year, so the division told dealers to steer prospective customers to the six-cylinder models if possible.
Given that chaos that was Ford Motor Company after World War II, I can see how the company would consider abandoning an engine that had just been extensively updated. Ford was trying to update its car lines and institute modern accounting and management procedures. Henry Ford II and his management team were practically rebuilding the company from the ground up.
That was on top of the first signs of the power struggle between the faction led by Ernie Breech and the Whiz Kids faction, led by Robert McNamara. There was still a fair amount of internal turmoil and struggle at Ford during these years.
This book explains a mystery that I could never quite resolve until now: why Ford would design and build a new OHV six (for ’52), when they had a six (the flathead 226) that was more modern than the V8, and which was quite a good engine. It seemed that that logical thing would have been to keep that six in production, and design and build a new OHV V8 first. This book explains that fully.
FWIW, the new OHV six was probably a better choice for most buyers in ’52 and ’53, as it was more efficient and had a better torque curve.
Didn’t Ford deliberately underrate the horsepower of the new six, as it was either the same or higher than the old flathead V-8, which would have been embarrassing?
I don’t know that for a fact, but have always suspected/assumed that to be the case.It clearly could have made 110 hp easily enough. That six turned out to be an excellent engine; it had a very good rep, better than the Y-block, as a matter of fact.
While in college in the 80’s and 90’s I had a red ’53 Mainline 2dr with the last of the flathead V8’s and 3spd manual, and a seafoam green ’52 Customline 2dr with the first OHV 215 6cyl and 3spd manual. The stock OHV 6 car would outperform the stock V8 car in all respects but one. Power, torque, acceleration, fuel economy, ease of maintenance and repair were all easily in favor of the 215 6cyl. Where the V8 won hands down, and is the reason I so fondly remember that car, was the gorgeous flathead V8 rumble through the exhaust bypass. My God, that wonderful exhaust note. Like listening to Billie Holliday through a tube stereo, automotively speaking.
Oddly, I miss cranking my head around like Linda Blair in The Exorcist to Check4/8 while hand-signalling turns in the ’53, since the mainline was not factory equipped with turn signals or outside mirrors. You know you’re doing it old-school when you have to shake bugs off your hand after a turn.
I’ve never understood the logic of the having the exhaust crossover top and center on those early Y-Blocks. Yikes! “I’m just going to check the oil, hun…Yow!!!!!” 🙂
Heat issues aside, is it possible to design a more restrictive exhaust system?
Our ’54 Ford V8 had recurring vapor lock problems in the summer; I wonder why?
To be fair, many cars from that era, and later, were prone to vapor lock as well. Back in the day I remember my parents’ 1954 Plymouth and 1960 Ford both being susceptible to vapor lock in hot weather. Usually just waiting for a few minutes for everything to cool off a little would take care of the problem. Not really an issue today with vehicles being fuel injected and having a positive pressure fuel pump, typically located in the fuel tank where the fuel helps to cool the pump.
Perhaps if the ’52 was intended to be 6 cylinder only, and a v8 was a last minute decision, there may have been clearance issues with the steering box if the exhaust manifold extended down past the engine block on the driver’s side?
Routing the exhaust around the front of the head would have solved the clearance issue in that case.
I don’t think so. This decision was made in ’49, and there was still lots of time to engineer the ’52 for the V8. As it is, the Y-block didn’t come out until ’54. And the Y-block kept that cross-over until the end, almost ten years later. It would have been easy enough to change for the newer cars.
The biggest surprise about the ’52 being engineered for a six only (or not) is that I had always assumed it was a reskin of the ’49-51 so the chassis, steering and underhood sheetmetal carried over.
It was cheap and that was the overiding factor at Ford, a proper twin system improves old Henrys markedly but costs money.
This reminds me of a sidebar about the invention of leaded gasoline. The original purpose of the chemists and engineers who created leaded gasoline was to raise octane and allow higher compression ratios for smaller engines to have similar output to larger engines. Their theory was that a 6 cyl with V8 power would consume less fuel and conserve gasoline. However it was quickly seized upon by the manufacturers to engage in HP wars.
Psychologically however I can’t imagine after being one of the V8 pioneers (no mater how “farmyard engineered” the Henry’s old flathead was) Ford retreating from V8 power in the 50s.
Thankfully the Y-block was short lived. The small blocks that replaced it were pretty sweet.
If I recall correctly, Robert McNamara was one of the driving forces behind the initial decision to drop the V-8 from Ford cars and stick with sixes (although this book may say otherwise – it’s definitely on my “to buy” list).
He supposedly couldn’t see the point of building a V-8 to go up against the Chevrolet and Plymouth sixes.
I never thought I’d defend the quintessential Typhoid Mary executive himself, R. Strange McNamara, but when you think of Ford’s odd trajectory during the ’50’s, He might have been on to something: good 6cyl engines in Ford, small V8’s in Mercury, larger V8s in Lincoln, and the eventual Edsel (which RSM hated with a passion) positioned above Mercury and below Lincoln with max-bored/stroked Mercury small V8’s and minimum bored/stroked Lincoln V8s. Ford becomes the no-question entry level brand, Mercury a hotrodders brand, Edsel the midlevel executive brand, and Lincoln for the angel food cake at the Downtown Department Store tearoom set.
There would be several points of opposition to such a sensible arrangement. The first and most important being that no way would Hank the Deuce countenance having the family name on basically the Fiats of FoMoCo. So, right there, game over. But even if he’d bowed out and had no influence, markets don’t work like genius planners think they work. People won’t accept for long being stuck in stripped down rides that people sneer at. So the whole “This entire brand is for losers, while this brand is for folks with gumption, and THIS brand is for those actually worth knowing” is self-defeating in the end. Add to that the natural impulse of finance wizards to take the top brand and cheapen it by basically badge sort-of-up engineering the cheap brand (Lincoln Versailles, anybody?) and you have eventual loss of credibility for the whole multi-tier brand strategy corporate wide.
Wow. Just when you think you know something about a company! Ford without a V8 in the fifties is just unthinkable.
Hmm… It just occurred to me that I once read that the 1952 Mercury was originally slated to get a version of the Lincoln Y-block (something I’ve been totally unable to confirm otherwise); and instead retained the flathead due to Korean War materials shortages. This makes me wonder if the continued availability of the Ford V8 was another factor in that decision.
Lincoln is the reason it’s easy to understand why Ford wanted to discontinue the low-priced V8, at least for a while. I mean, c’mon, neither Chevy or Plymouth had a V8, and they were selling pretty damn well. With sixes putting out just as much horsepower (if not more) than the flathead, the logic was actually sound. And it’s not as if FMC wasn’t always going to have a V8 in production, if only for Lincoln cars.
Of course, what people want and need are two different things. Auto buyers might not have ‘needed’ a V8 in their low priced cars, but they sure wanted one (even if they didn’t put out any more power than a six, at least initially), and it was proven by Ed Cole in 1955 with the legendary SBC.
So, yeah, the guy didn’t really ‘save’ the V8 at Ford; he just kept it going without a break in production.
History always has different points of view, as you can find equally compelling arguments that the “Whiz Kids” were anything but “whizzes”. However, I would not question the merits of having Mr. Severson as an automotive source. His website is the best source of factual knowledge in our gearhead milieu. Excellent suggestion for a summer read, but try to get it from Michael Powell.
Here, here! http://www.powells.com/biblio/61-9781492357339-1
The only alternative to Amazon that’s in a former Nash dealership building.
Same location in 1939.
Nice. I wondered just what it had been.
Some traces still remain.
A must destination whenever I’m in Portland…but how did I miss the old traces of the previous car dealership? Maybe I don’t spend enough time in the Poetry or Women’s Lit shelves. 😉
Wow – I never noticed that during my visits there either! I will say that their engineering book section is rather lacking these days (as opposed to back in the 1990s), for whatever reason. Some of the best engineering books were originally written a century ago and stayed in print for decades.
Nash dealership to AMC\Rambler and finally to Chevrolet before becoming Powell’s Book Store. There is still one car dealer on W Burnside and most of the old buildings that were car dealerships are still there as W Burnside was the original “Auto Row” in Portland, Ore.
If Ford hadn’t made a OHV V8….would Ford had done the “price wars” against Chevy; who hitted instead Chrysler and the other independants like Nash, Hudson, Willys, Kaiser, Packard, Studebaker?
Would Pontiac could had developed its own V8 anyway?
Could Chrylser had released a more modern 6 instead of the L-head 6? imagine the slant six released five years earlier or even developping the Hemi 6 for Canada and the United States as they originally planned instead of being only available for Australia and New Zealand?
Inline 6’s are great choices: smooth running and easy to work on in the traditional rear-drive configuration. And Jaguar made them look sexy as hell.
Yes, the inline six is inherently very well balanced ..quite unlike the V6 and the V8 which induce notable ‘second order’ imbalance issues, right?
The inline triple two stroke is also an ‘as sweet as a nut’ engine, with a similar inherent balance factor as the inline six four stroke.. (ie: the Kawasaki 250, 350, 400, 500, and 750 two stroke triples were an amazing engine to operate ..like sitting atop a very smooth rocket-ship device bound for the moon in short order .. lol)
6 maniac here!Had a Mercury Comet,AMC Javelin and Vauxhall Cresta PC with inline 6s.
Snap!! 🙂 ..PA Velox ..VF Val ..Donkervoort 7 ..Cefiro RBDE ..Cefiro RBDET ..EA Coon ..AU Coon ..BF ute
all inline sixes
..ES300 ..Diamante Magna (cuckoos!) ~ V6’s
don’t ask how many V8’s!
…and if mounted well back into the firewall the centreline weight distribution is excellent for good handling.. (the inline sixes) 🙂
Had a Mk4 Zephyr 2.5 V6 which was a good car.I also had a 2.8 V6 Mk2 Granada which was a better car,still prefer in line 6s.
..absolutely, yes agreed.. V6’s feel ‘lumpy’ at lower revs due to the imbalance factor (although ‘on song’ at higher rpms they can feel and sound almost musical and delightful..the smaller Alfa V6’s come to mind here. The same is true with flat six aero engines..they have a marvellous ‘harmonic’ going for them under full throttle ..the Continental 0470 as in the Cessna 180 and upwards in capacity ..the ‘smaller’ aero flat sixes do not have this factor curiously)
it has something to do with our internal wiring (heart beat syncopation) and this is why people are drawn to the ‘uneven’ but repetitively syncopating sound of a crossplane crank V8 and of the Harley VTwin as well
the inline six is just smooth all the way through, and that is appealing too.. right from idle through to valve bounce the inline six should just be turbine smooth if it is a well constructed well balanced engine in excellent condition and tune
it IS possible to get a ‘near’ turbine smooth crossplane V8, but it is a LOT of work to get there.. i have built one in the past ..the secret was to keep the reciprocating mass as light as possible (using pistons weighing only 390grams each and finally balancing the rotating parts to less than 1 gram imbalance by drilling holes or adding weight. The engine was significantly well ‘oversquare’ and having valve timing with a lobe separation angle of 114 degrees was intentionally beneficial. In the end a glass of water could be sat on one of the flat surface rocker covers and it would sit there from idle through to 6,800rpm without falling off. Watching the water surface was an interesting reflection as it were of remaining imbalance. Yes, there was still a small amount of vibration in the water surface but it was quite minimal. This was on an engine test stand obviously enough… 🙂
Consumer Reports in that era was fond of pointing out that “…you will get faster heat in a Six”. Can’t say that’s not an important consideration for me…
Great book review Paul, this one’s going to be on my wish list for sure. I’ve never heard that story either about how the Ford Y-block came to be. I’d be interested to see if there are any other reputable sources out there that have the same story. It seems strange that Ford would want to abandon the V8 just as the V8 craze was starting up.
You think that exhaust system with it’s over-the-top crossover was restrictive? It was nothing compared to the Y-Block’s stacked intake ports with their 90 degree bends. No need to worry about the exhaust, nothing was getting into that engine in the first place.
Oh I don’t know, flow tests have been done on those old 50’s cylinder heads. The better Y block heads flowed at about the same levels as the Chevy 265/283 stuff.
In the UK Ford stopped making the flathead V8 when the Ford Pilot was replaced by the 6 cylinder Zephyr and Zodiac.
..was the wee Pilot pressure cooled?? ..the bigger bro yank flatheads (at least the ’39 Deluxe Coupe for one) were non-pressurised ..and frequent boil-overs were not hard to induce with piston ring life thereby dramatically reduced as they ‘bit-in’ hard with bore overheating, not helped with the way exhaust gases were routed through the block..
..recall the ’39 boiling over every time she was taken over the Tapu Hill to Whitianga with a load of timber under tow
good days they were though
we would stop and knock the tops off a few while she cooled (not very PC these days LOL)
I don’t know much about Pilots,I remember a young rocker lad having one down our street in the 60s who was always buying and selling bikes and cars.He kept it for about 3 years til he got an American Ford wagon which was often full of parts for the bikes and cars he was fixing up and selling.
I pulled out one of my books last night that covers the history or Ford V8 engine development (Ford 335 Series V8s). While it doesn’t get into specifics on how the decision came to be, it does state that “a decision was made” in 1950 to begin the development of the Ford “Y-block”. I am not sure how this timeline corresponds with this books.
Thank you for the book recommendation… I’m buying one now. Congratulations, Aaron Severson. You do good work.