John McFarlane Posted March 10, 2002 Share Posted March 10, 2002 Any ideas on how to remove the play from the steering arm (pittman??) on a 28. From observation, I somehow need to move the gear deeper into the worm. Bush is not worn and is central in casing and new bearings fitted. Thanks........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 10, 2002 Share Posted March 10, 2002 John...regarding your question about service adjustments for your '28 Chevrolet.<P>Perhaps you directed your "post" to the Classic Car Club Of America "site" by error. Hopefully, someone in here can help you in a "spirit of cooperation" between car buffs. I can't...I dont have service manuals for the "economy cars". There are "sites" with the "Collectable" forum that might be a better choice.<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ<p>[ 03-15-2002: Message edited by: Chuck Conrad ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 11, 2002 Share Posted March 11, 2002 John<BR> <BR>To answer your question- most cars of that era had some provision for steering adjustment. Look on the steering box for a slotted screw sticking out of a nut. The nut is a locknut, loosen and then tighten the screw slightly. Be sure to tighten lock nut.<p>[ 03-15-2002: Message edited by: Chuck Conrad ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chuck Conrad Posted March 12, 2002 Share Posted March 12, 2002 My '32 Chevy has a screw at the top of the steering gear box to adjust the slack. You simply turn it to tighten things up a bit, and secure it with a lock nut which is part of the assembly. I would guess they used a similar scheme in 1928.<P>While my Chevy does not drive as nicely as my '36 Bentley or '36 Cord, it is a pretty good car for the amazing low price they were able to sell it for. Mine is a Deluxe Roadster which had a retail price of $625.00 It looks very similar to a '31 Cadillac.<P>When you take it apart (I've restored mine twice now) you realize how inexpensively it was made. None-the-less, it is a fun car which I certainly enjoy. It is not, and never will be a CCCA Classic, but that doesn't bother me. I still like it. I hope you enjoy your cars too, whatever they may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 14, 2002 Share Posted March 14, 2002 To Terry and Peter: First of all Terry very few CCCA members are like Peter. I am not a member of the CCCA but next week I will be flying to Florida to attend an CCCA meet in Naples. The reason I am going to this show is because of an invite from a CCCA member to attend this show as his guest. He knows my love for the Classic car and is willing to share and let me enjoy his two Classic cars.<p>[ 03-15-2002: Message edited by: Chuck Conrad ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 15, 2002 Share Posted March 15, 2002 Chuck Conrad: From one of your prior postings I believe you stated you owned a 1936 Bentley. What model the 3 1/2 liter or the 4 1/2 liter. Who made the body? There where three custom body companies in England that did most of the custom body for RR, can't recall the names right now. One of them might have been a firm named Park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chuck Conrad Posted March 15, 2002 Share Posted March 15, 2002 My 1936 Bentley is a 4 1/4 liter drophead coupe. (two door convertible). The body was built by Park Ward, which is probably the most common. After World War II, Park Ward became part of Rolls-Royce. There were quite a few other coachbuildes who outfitted these cars. A few that come to mind were Gurney-Nutting, Thrupp & Maberly, Barker, Cockshoot, Vanden Plas, James Young and Freestone & Webb. In pre-war England, it seems there were custom coachbuilders everywhere. <P>My car is a driver, not a show car. It would never score well in any form of CCCA primary judging. I like it that way, and don't feel like making the considerable cash investment that it would take to make it otherwise. If you'd like to see a picture of the car, it can be found on the CCCA web site's Photo Gallery on the Rolls-Royce & Bentley pages. It is gray with black fenders and red wheels.<p>[ 03-15-2002: Message edited by: Chuck Conrad ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Huston Posted March 16, 2002 Share Posted March 16, 2002 Chuck,<BR>As a member of the CCCA I would like to thank you for sane response to an insane out of control discussion. I am very happy to be a member of the CCCA, No I don't own a V12 Packard, never will, but that does not mean that I don't like them, and enjoy to see them at showes and once in awhile lust after a real nice example. That is true of many makes and models that I will never own. Every car and owner has a nich and a place in this club. If we all had the same opinions, and even the same cars, this would be very boring hobby. Lets all get on with the enjoyment of this great hobby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2002 Share Posted March 16, 2002 The entire problem seems to come down to one thing as I see it,<P>"Since CCCA trademarked the term "Full Classic" I think they have the right to tell us what that trademark means."<P>How much did that legal tomfoolery cost the club? What kind of club spends it's members dues to trademark a name? There can be only one reason for such an action, to artificially increase the value of the trademark owners investment. <P>I would like to have been a fly on the wall during the meeting when this course of action was decided. Smells like a business venture if you ask me. I don't think any more needs to be said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chuck Conrad Posted March 16, 2002 Share Posted March 16, 2002 Trademarking the name was done before my time on the Board, so I can't tell you specifics about how it was done.<P>I beleive you are wrong about the motive behind the trademark. 50 years ago when the club was founded, the use of the term "Classic Car" was pretty much exclusively CCCA's. The founders of the Club coined the name to define the cars they were interested in. It's ironic, but the whole reason CCCA was founded was to have a place for cars that were "unacceptable" to AACA. They were too new!<P>I grew up in the old car hobby, going on my first car tour about age four. As far as I can remember, at least through the 1960's, nobody ever used the term "Classic" when it came to cars, except in the context of CCCA. After all, a '57 Chevy was just a worn out old car in 1969. Some had been made into street rods, but most were no longer used. Even as kids in school during the late 60's, very few people really wanted to drive a car that old, even if it did beat walking.<P>By the late 1970's, all that began to change, as many of the mid 50's cars reached the magic 25 year mark and became recognized as "antiques" in most states. Lots of people called these cars classics. Perhaps they are, but they simply weren't what the CCCA is all about. By the mid 1980's, the situation had grown completely out of hand. <B>Everything</B> was called "classic." It still is. If you need verification, just look in your phone book under "Classic." Even out in the country where I live, my rural phone book (which is very thin) shows 12 listings that call themselves "Classic" something or other.<P>The Club felt that it had to take steps to define what they are, so tradmarking the names "Full Classic" and "Modified Classic" seemed to a reasonable idea to the people who were empowered at that time to make such a decision.<P>From my knowledge of the inner workings of the Club there wasn't any profit motive here. The cars are what they are. Regardless of whatever you call them, a Duesenberg is still a Duesenberg, a Bentley is still a Bentley, and a Packard is still a Packard. <P>Trademarking the name was simply a question of identity.<p>[ 03-16-2002: Message edited by: Chuck Conrad ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2002 Share Posted March 16, 2002 I guess Chuck the problem is Mr Hartman, I have rarely seen anyone get such glee from denigrating every single person who posts on this forum. Perhaps this is some sort of enjoyment? The thinly veiled hatred he shows everyone in his print is quite offensive as I think everyone has seen. Everyone has the right to an opinion but we don't give the white supremists the option of spreading their doctrine in the local newspaper do we? <P>The web has become a fantastic vehicle for everyone to learn and share and yes, there is much to be done as far as making it safe for everyone to use. Why not start with this forum by making verbally offensive posts disappear so everyone can enjoy. Paying member or not. I am not a saint I have made the occasional faux pas too, I think it's time to take some responsibility for ones actions and words. I have. <P>Mr Hartman you could start by toning it down a bit. How about proofreading your posts a little before hitting that "add reply" button, read what you have written from the third person perspective and think twice about what you say. The world is watching and you are representing your club and your clubmates. I know you have a lot to share and a lifetime of experience that could only make this forum a better place. What do you say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2002 Share Posted March 17, 2002 Hi.. Chuck...!<P>I don't understand your above "post". I think you are directing your irritation at the wrong guy ! I was NOT a "founding member". I didn't even JOIN until late '55, and by then, most of ourp policies were already established !<P>If you will notice, I rarely "post" unless someone ELSE has made an "entry" that interests me. If you are unhappy with my suggestion that the fellows with the old Chevrolets or Oldsmobiles go to sites where they can get better assistance, I am sorry, but you should take that up with the CCCA, and with the people who run this "site".<P>Personally, I AGREE with the policy of having separate "chat areas" for people with different interests - I think that is a more efficient way of focusing communication. But it's a free country...if that angers you...then talk to people who can DO something about it - I can't help you there.<P>If you are angry about my discussions about the technical aspects of classic cars, or the companies that built them, or the advertising that promoting them, I really dont know what to say. I have tried to be accurate, and if I failed, I apologize.<P>The FACT is, classic cars are not for everyone. When new, they were specifically designed, engineered, and promoted to the elite..."the best of the best"....FOR the "best of the best". That isn't my fault either ! <P>Hostility towards the classic car is hardly new. That is natural. I have always felt we made a serious error back in our early years, when we permitted people into the CCCA who did not actually own a classic car. The fact is, by opening up membership, and having an ever increasing frenzy to broaden our membership numbers, we have brought in large numbers of people who want very badly to have the "status" of using the word "classic", but either do not know, or do not WANT to know what it is all about. As a result, you can be confident that you have an ever increasing number of CCCA members who agree with you, and you can BET they will eventually change CCCA policies and direction.<P>Again, my influence down thru the years has been minimal. I was rather pleased when my draft proposal on how we should handle "joint events" was adopted literally word for word by the National Board some 20 years ago, and remains unchanged in our National Handbook And Directory. <P>If you feel that any particular portion of a comment or "post" I have made here is offensive or disagreeable to you, let's discuss it in detail, and see if we and the other chatters can learn something from the exchange of information. <P>To take your irritation out on me personally, is to waste the tremendous opportunities this wonderful new formatb has for education. Let's work on the educational aspects..and leave the "personality" remarks out.<P>Now...can I have some DETAIL on what is bothering you..?<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2002 Share Posted March 17, 2002 Peter, this was exactly what I was talking about. You might as well have written that entire post in CAPS. I am not angry with you, but many are because of this kind of inflamatory exchange of information. We are all interested in piles of metal, wood, and plastic, but that is all they are. There is no magic, no mystical quality built into these pieces of engineering. They are simply convyences meant to get from one place to another, some more expensive than the other-that is all there is to it.<P>I am not mad at you, I was trying to offer you some honest truthful advice that I thought might help in your communications here. I have no interest in "classic" cars other than the simple mechanics of them and the various assembly techniques involved in their construction, that is why I come here. But these discussions inevitably end up in some sort of egotistical tirade by everyone, usually perpetrated by you and your callous responses to honest people trying to learn something. I am tired of the whole thing to be honest and so is everyone else. Your responses are obviously meant to inflame the readers into a back and forth flame mail session. <P>Just stop, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2002 Share Posted March 17, 2002 For 4 Jaw Chuck !<P>Well...NOW we are getting somewhere....what you really want...is for ME to stop...but stop doing WHAT....<P>I think the "key" is in your sentence....<P> " NO MYSTICAL QUALITY....SIMPLY <BR> CONVEYANCES...SOME MORE <BR> EXPENSIVE..THAT IS ALL THERE IS<BR> TO IT....."<P>Excellent...you want very badly to believe there is nothing that "special" about the classic car, and it follows I am annoying you by disagreeing with you, and many others who feel the same way.<P>GOOD ! This is a free country. Who would question your right to have your opinion ! The problem you have is..you are coming into a PRIVATE Club, and trying to tell US what we know is NONSENCE, and then demand we LIKE it and not respond !<P>I suggest, Chuck, that you best be patient. As I noted before, it wont be THAT much longer before those of us who have actually worked with the technical aspects of the cars of the classic era will be gone. Then you can repeat nonsence like that, and there will be no-one remind you of the truth.<P>It is, of course, none of my business what private motivations require you to continually repeat such foolishness (essentially, unless I mis-read YOUR "post" which I qouted above) you are saying all old cars are pretty much alike except being more expensive....<P>I have personally owned and worked on the Packard "120" series automobiles. I know how good they were, what great "buys" they were for the money, and how they did for Packard, what the less expensive Mercedes and Toyotas do for their respective companies. But to try and compare the design, engineering, performance, comfort, etc. of a nice ordinary Packard "120" series car, to a Packard Twelve of the same year....c'mon !<P>To try and tell us the "best of the best" were designed, promoted, and used as "simply conveyances", tells us more about you then it does about the products you are describing.<P>I fear we have an "ireconcilable difference" here, and I am sorry, but this is MY Club to, and just as I respect YOUR right to try and influence it in a directino YOU would like it to take, I will have to continue MY right to influence it in the direction I feel it should take.<P>To that end, let's continue our discussion, and see what we can learn from each other. <P>It would not occur to ME to tell YOU to be quiet...personal diatribes simply waste the other "chatters" time - most of whom probably come in here, whether or not they are actually owners of REAL classics, to learn. <P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ<P>Which reminds me - if any of you happen to find yourselves in northern Arizona, do stop by - I'll buy lunch. To GET to lunch, you are going to have to drive my Packard Twelve over some pretty rotten roads to get out to the paved highway that leads to town. Actually DRIVING a properly serviced "big engined" super car of the 1930's...(again...the classics really WERE "engineering exaggerations..magnificantly over-done") (and that is what our Club was all about...preserving the "best of the best") .....then hopefully you will get a better "feel" for what many of us feel this Club IS and SHOULD REMAIN...about ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2002 Share Posted March 17, 2002 You are absolutely right Peter, I am sorry if I have offended you. Please accept my deepest apologies. Maybe we can meet in person to have lunch one day I would love to see and ride in your classic, perhaps I would learn something. Being the fabricator of countless high tech innovative devices in the past has made me view from a different perspective than most would see and that has probably clouded my judgement.<P>I have made many friends from this website mostly south of our border and the last thing I want is you not to be one of them. Lets just agree to disagree and it is likely that this humble apprentice is wrong on many counts, it had happened countless times before. <P>A product designer friend of mine is not too far from you, when I visit you buy the lunch and I will buy the booze. As long as we are not going flying in your amphib right after! I intend to close the saloon, you and me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2002 Share Posted March 17, 2002 Chuck !<P>Relax...this is supposed to be fun...no..you did NOT offend me...and I DO hope you ( and anyone else seriously interested in things mechanical ) will take me up on my offer to come visit and "shoot the breeze" about my hobbies. Looking foward to it.<P>Just dont EVER say I am "absolutely" right. I have serious reservations about the judgment of anyone who thinks I know what I am talking about !<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, Arizona Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2002 Share Posted March 17, 2002 Mr. Hartman,<BR>I think you are too hard on us younger members who do not (yet) own Classics. You should remember the need to pass the appreciation of these fine cars to the next generation. I would bet that you saw these cars in use as a youth and they made an impression on you. How would you propose future generations be exposed to these cars? Static displays in far away museums aren't going to do it. People need to see, hear, and ride in them! I love the fact that my 6 and 9 year olds are going for rides as I feel they are the future of our club. Many years ago Classics were more affordable and thus easier to obtain. Now it takes a little longer to afford one. I would not consider changing the current roster of Full Classics and voted against the most recent change. I would join another club first. My time will come when I can purchase my own Classic. I find your tone offensive but am grateful that it does not exist in our region of CCCA. I have met many fine people in our club and have seen wonderful things that I would never see otherwise. I make as much of a contribution to our club as I can. Isn't that what a "club" is all about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18, 2002 Share Posted March 18, 2002 For "Unregist Keth Sonet"<P>Agree with your post 210% ! Did you see my "invitation"...that goes for you too. Any time you find yourself in norther Ariz., give me a call..I am in all the major club's directories...certainly would enjoy sharing my love for all manner of mechanical devices with you.<P>Have faith - the value of classics is DROPPING as they pass further backward in time. "Hot" cars now, are cars from the 1950's... Bet you could buy a decent heavy classic..if you would be content with a closed sedan, for about the same as a sharp '57 Chevie....!<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ<P>P.S...will ONE of you guys PLEASE tell me precisely WHERE you think I have mis-led you or told you something that is inaccurate..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18, 2002 Share Posted March 18, 2002 a p o l o g y !<P>Hey....Seth Kohut...sorry about screwing your name up in my "post" above...I have the flu...sick as a dog and higher than a kite on cold pills....!<P>Pete Hartmann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chuck Conrad Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>Why not start with this forum by making verbally offensive posts disappear so everyone can enjoy. Paying member or not. I am not a saint I have made the occasional faux pas too, I think it's time to take some responsibility for ones actions and words. I have. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Actually, I do remove the really offensive posts as well as move the ones that are really off topic to a more appropriate forum. You'd be amazed at some of the stuff that people spam here.<P>In fact, I would have moved the original post in this string to the AACA forums, but I was out of the country when it appeared. By the time I returned home, it was a little late, unless I wanted to just delete the whole thing. Maybe I should have done that, but it didn't seem right. I compromised by<BR>severely editing the string. I don't usually do that. I deleted quite a few of my own posts and edited some of yours. Since the conversation was doing nothing positive for anyone, I thought I'd experiment with censorship. <P>Now that I've tried it, I don't think censorship is such a good idea. It seems to me the people who use this forum should be adult enough to refrain from name calling. (Other than calling somebody's post "offensive," I haven't really seen much of that.) They also should be willing to accept the fact that not eveyone agrees on every topic. It would be pretty boring if they did.<P>The Inernet is not a good place to be thin skinned. Without the personal contact we're used to in normal conversation, it is quite easy to mis-communicate. Body language, facial expression and several other human nuances can't be expressed in a chat room, but they can make a big difference in how people interpret your words. Add to the fact that replies are almost always written on the fly, so it's easy to see how misunderstandings can take place. <P>Keep this in mind the next time you read something that "rubs you the wrong way." I really don't want to be in the censorship business. That's probably just as well. Since I'm just an unpaid volunteer, I really don't have the time for it either.<P>Have fun, play nice.<BR> <p>[ 03-20-2002: Message edited by: Chuck Conrad ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 18, 2002 Share Posted May 18, 2002 I know that this message will probably be lost and not read by most but gentlemen I must commend you all for a most enlightening technical discussion-Ireally learned a lot- ...tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 18, 2002 Share Posted May 18, 2002 Hi Thos....don't worry...your message did get thru !<P>Pete Hartmann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now