early/late bonnets

[cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

in AD v7#75
<<<jack@domain.elided (Jack Hagerty)
Before everyone gets caught up in motivations, I belive the answer is much 
simpler. The "inset hood" (or bonnet for our Imperial cousins) is quite
expensive to manufacture. It requires you to completely surround the, uh,
engine hatch with a frame of unbroken sheetmetal. In this case, the only
seams showing are the two at the windshield end that allow the cowl (scuttle)
to be removed. At the nose end, there is a fiendish amount of leading 
and finishing required to blend the crosspiece into the fenders (wings)...>

Jack, assuming you are implying that the 'step nose' bonnet arrangement is
easier to manufacture than the later flush arrangement, I fail to see how the
two bonnets, be they step nose or later, are different other than the earlier
has a slight projection above and overhang of the upper valance. They both are
required to fit in a perimeter ('frame of unbroken sheet metal), ie the aperture
of the engine bay, equally well. 

<<<. The "inset hood" (or bonnet for our Imperial cousins) is quite
expensive to manufacture.It requires you to completely surround the, uh,
engine hatch with a frame of unbroken sheetmetal>>>

The implication that later cars were ' a more finished job" is quite erroneous.
As those of us whose own hands  have done major panel work, and releaded that
'step nose" know, there is considerable refinishing involved in sculpting those
corners, and matching the curve of the leading edge of the bonnet to the curve
of the valance, the later 1750/2000 flush surfaces are extremely
straightforward, in execution  and in comparison.


chris

------------------------------