Fords like this ’33 Tudor define early hot-rodding for many enthusiasts, and here’s one coming “straight out of the barn,” according to its seller. The missing front bumper gives this 1933 Ford Tudor Sedan a sporty look, and it comes with nicely re-upholstered seats and a never-installed flathead V8. Those parts hint at a second life never fulfilled, and while these sharp two-door sedans can be built as many ways as the colors of the rainbow, I’d address mechanical and safety items and enjoy this one as-is before going too crazy. Check out more details and pictures of this Lampe, Missouri classic here on Facebook Marketplace where the $20,000 asking price goes unanswered after about five weeks. Thanks to reader Zappenduster for spotting this barn-parked Ford.
A red dash and seats, blue floor, green door openings, and black exterior make this one colorful classic. After the “any color as long as it’s black” era, (1914 to 1925 according to CollectorsAutoSupply), Ford offered “Four Rich Colors” for 1933, none of which resemble the blue or green seen here. However, after over 80 years, the subset of people who care is dropping by the year. That said, even Ford’s own brochures shared at Lov2xlr8 show color options outside the four shown.
The four-cylinder sports what looks like a 12 volt alternator and a more modern starter solenoid, but I’ll let our Ford experts comment on the differences from this stock inline four shown at Hemmings.
The ’33 and ’34 Ford tops my list of ’30s rides, looking great from all angles. I wouldn’t chop, section, or channel this Henry Ford steel sedan, though hydraulic or “juice” brakes might make an appearance if I snagged this ’33. Henry famously rejected hydraulics in favor of his “reliable” mechanical “safety brakes” until 1939, as reported by MacsMotorCityGarage.
If that’s an “8BA,” this flathead V8 dates from the late 1940s to early ’50s, making around 100 HP, however this one comes in as-is condition. I couldn’t drop $20,000 on this package deal, but I love the car. Will you pull the trigger on this barn find ’33 Ford?
Love the car, price is nuts.
Just when you think all the unrestored 33 and 34 Fords have been scooped up. Another one surfaces. Some years back I was at a swap meet and a guy was selling just the body to a 34 and the same style as this one. No fenders, no frame, no motor, nothing. I looked inside and could see the sunshine coming in through almost every square inch of the thing. The metal was gone. He wanted $6000 cdn!. I know these cars have always been popular along with the 32’s. I’m not surprised by the asking price but unless I win a lottery, I’ll have to pass.
I owned a really nice ’33 Ford Standard. Decided to sell a few years back at the Fall RM auction at Hershey. The sales price was under $30,000. This one would need at least $30,000 in restoration costs to get close to equal to the one I sold. My recommendation unless you are desperate for a 1933 Ford, wait and a nicer car at a fair price will surface.
This appears to be a nice 33 2-door. I wouldn’t want the banger or the flathead that is available with it. If you want a flat motor there are still a lot to choose from. I have owned my 34 Coupe 62 years it has had 3 flatheads, 1 small Ford and 1 SBC. Unless you have some burning desire to have a stock 33 and want to drive it and enjoy it,, I would scratch that idea or at least until you got to drive an all original car. I have driven my car many miles in 62 years, but it is a late drive train, disk brakes, upgraded suspension, but full fendered and looks like a basically stock 34 Ford. I wouldn’t have owned it for so long if it drove like an original car. I think in today’s market 20 K is a little high. Depending on what you want to do with it you can find a finished car for less than you can build this one. A beautiful 34 Vicky just sold on BAT for 40 K. it would cost more that to build this one.
Most definitely a ’33 B. Saw a few of these over the years and if you’re not in a big hurry to get where you’re going, this one will do you well.
The B-engine is a good engine, a much-improved version of the Model A. Counterweighted, full pressure lube, automatic advance. It will handle sustained 50 mph; it still might be a challenge getting it up there.
The flathead V8 looks like a typical variation for the 8BA. The 8RT truck engine had slightly lower compression but the internals were the same as the 8BA. This version of flathead looks similar to the Model 40 V8 that would’ve been in the car if it was V8 equipped. Of course a purist is going to miss the gangly Detroit Lubricator carb that the ’33 models ran. I’ve still seen a lot of cars and trucks on the road with 8BA/8CM engines in them. Paint them dark green and at first glance, they look factory.
My ’35 pickup has had the frame broken at least 3 times. Welded very poorly. I’ve seriously considered installing a TCI or Fatman rolling chassis and using my ’53 Mercury engine to power it. To the layman who glances at it, he may never notice it except for a Mustang II front end and 4-Link rear. And NO ONE is going to pay a lot of attention to it when I park it on the front lawn and hang Christmas lights on it…
Geomechs, Somehow when I looked at this car I missed that it had a 4 cylinder. If you have read my posting you might know I have a lot of history with the Model 40’s. I have owned mine since I was 19, I am now approaching my mid eighties. I always knew a 4 cylinder was an option, but had never seen one in a passenger car. I am not saying your wrong, but we referred to the 4 cylinders in 33 and 34’s as Model C’s and the only ones I ever saw were in commercial vehicles. The 32’s with 4 cylinders were designated as model B’s and there were a lot of them. However, I don’t doubt that there was 4 cylinders 33 and 34’s. My thought would be this could be a very rare car if in fact it is a 33 Model C. I would also suspect more 33 4 bangers than 34’s. I will admit this car looks good ,but even loving these cars as I do, I think it is a little over priced for the market today.
Hi Joe. I heard people referring to the 4 cyl. engines as C models too. Then I heard them referred to as Bs because the B was the first 4-banger to feature full pressure lube and a mechanical fuel pump. People told me that it didn’t matter if the later engines had counterweights or not; they were still Bs. Myself, if I ended up with one, I would probably refer to it as a B, even though I might be wrong; it’s what I’ve always called it. I might add that a friend of mine repowered his ’30 Model A with a “B” engine. He referred to it as such but added that he had the newer counterweighted crankshaft.
‘33-‘34, had the best looking grills! Too bad the designers weren’t around when the Edsel, was developed.
That was a good one! Soooooo true …
People in Hell want ice water.
Geometrics, I am not sure there is a right or wrong answer to B’s or C’s. My guess would be that they are the same, but Ford used it as a marketing and advertising plan. They didn’t want people to think they were getting a 32 engine in their new 33 Ford. Change something small and rename it and call it new.
Yes, you sure get used to those little “subtle” changes. New/Improved quite often means that they altered the color shade a trifle. Of course they can get a little bit daring. I remember the saga of Oldsmobile and Pontiac owners getting pi$$ed over their new Cutlass/Bonneville being powered by a 350 Chevy.
A few years back we changed an engine in a Cadillac Stretch-Limo. On top of the air cleaner was a fancy decal in black, with a ring of diamonds. The label: “General Motors Engine, specially developed for your vehicle.” Well, it looked for all the world like a Chevy Small Block to me. The engine we installed? Straight out of the GM Fleet Parts catalog; a 350 CID, with 4-bolt mains, and exhaust valve rotators. Dropped it in and drove the car out…