F&J

You said that the engine had a knock since you first got it to run. I said in a post that if it knocked when you bought it, it is likely that it was run out of oil by a prior owner and he stopped using it after adding oil and it was then still knocking (because he ruined the babbit). Look at the earlier pics in the crankcase...there is a heavy drip of oil hanging on each cam lobe. That means the pump was still supplying "some" oil to the crankshaft during your test drive. The crank throws oil up to the lobes and cylinders by design. The babbit was badly damaged before you bought the car because you said it knocked when you first ran it. Yes, due to loose fitting babbit bearings on at least two rods, the oil pressure would definitely be lower due to major oil pressure/oil flow losses leaking past those sloppy bearings, but the pump was still making flow to the crankshaft by looking at all the pics. as far as using modern rod bearings on those rods,....you cannot. Modern rod bearings don't have thrust surfaces. The babbit bearings had thrust surfaces on each side of the rod which makes the rod wider, and with those thrust surfaces missing, you now have a rod that is far too narrow for the crank journal. Like 3/16" of slop. Look at the number 2 cylinder rod that has missing babbit thrust surfaces, you can easily see the big gap between rod and crank thrust surfaces. Don't forget to mark each piston top with an arrow to know what side of piston faces front. If you ever take a piston off of the rod, then mark the front of the rod as well as the piston. Mark the front of each rod cap as well as numbering each one of them. Looking forward to seeing this engine and car get saved. The hobby is aging out and there are fewer people around that are willing to save a broken engine on an obscure brand of early car, knowing that rebuilt parts are not being reproduced. .

You have more issues besides the Number 1 babbit failure. I was looking closely at a lot of things in the two crankcase pics. PIC 1.... Look at the Number 2 rod where the rod bearing babbit should be.....The thrust surfaces are totally gone, so I would think the babbit is all gone on that rod too. Number 3, you can see the thrust surfaces still there. ok, next pic number 2 of crankcase pics: The big diameter oil feed pipe U bend...at the left side of the U, looks like the tube is crushed, or kinked or perhaps split? I can't tell, but that's not looking right. Also look at the rod bearing thrust on the rod on the left. Look up top of thrust surface on the right side of that rod. The thrust looks deformed up at very top, like it's squeezed out? Or it could be an optical illusion. Before anyone can help you plan any path of repairs, you must measure any of the rod journals on the crank where the babbit is now gone. Measure all the way around to tell if the journal are out of round. We, and you, need to figure out why this babbit went bad so quickly on your test run. Did this engine always have some knocks down low since the first time you ever ran it? I ask, because if it did, then maybe a prior owner ran it out of oil but then shut it off before the babbit fell out, then added oil only to hear knocks, and then parked it for good? If it was not knocking at all before this last run, that will take more ideas on what could have happened to have lost oil pressure...like a bad pump drive or whatever. one odd thing i see is that the undersides of pistons look way cleaner than they should be by looking at sludge build-up on the crank, etc. Maybe it had new pistons a long time ago?

Some older engines, the piston ass'y must come out the bottom, (because the bottom of the rod won't fit up through a small bore) but those have a 45? degree chamfer on the bottom edge of the cylinder bore to act as a ring compressor. Your cylinder seems to have a 90 degree sharp edge, so you need to remove the head and pull it out from the top. I hope it's not too late but when you take a rod cap off, you must mark which side faces front, AND mark it as to what number piston it goes to. AND before removing a piston from the block, make a mark on it's top to know what side of the piston faces to the front, Also..when removing piston from a rod, you must make a mark on the rod to know which side of rod faces front. When you send out the rod, the shop needs the measurements of the rod journal on the crankshaft as to diameter and width. And then they can calculate how thick the thrust surfaces need to be on the new babbit.

If that is sitting on 1/4" graph paper grids, it looks too thick to be from a bearing separator. More like a piece of snap ring? In the other thread, Ed suspected a free wheeling issue and I lean that way too. (trans still shifts fine, but also Matt said the freewheel controls feel wonky)....so...is the noise coming from a free wheel part that is "moving around/hitting something" because a snap ring broke? I have no idea what the oil drain passages are in size from the free wheel case back into the main transmission case. (for that chunk to be able to end up where it did. ) That "trough" where Matt found the chunk is the oil inlet well for the Free Wheel unit. The cluster gear turbulence would have easily lifted up that chunk and it ended up there. Any web search gurus able to find a exploded view of the free wheeling unit? I am assuming from common sense only, that that unit can be serviced/disassembled with the transmission still in the car? Then just facing the chit job of moving back the torque tube rear end to be able to know exactly what let go? Only scary part is which pieces need to be sourced to fix it, and how to find them. (maybe all it needs is a snap ring if that is what broke?) ADDING before I posted...I just now looked at my Dads old repair books from his 1950s shop. One book shows a trans cutaway view for Lincoln K but says "1935-1940". It is a conventional trans that never had free wheel, so it must be later 30s to 40 diagram. But, I also found a Flat Rate Labor Chart and under 1935 K, it says 5.1 Hours to remove and reinstall the free wheel unit. Then it says 5.1 hours to overhaul the FW unit after it was removed. So, it sounds to me like the FW unit can be unbolted from the trans without removing the trans. This does not sound too difficult including sliding the rear end back to pull the FW unit....if we believe the trans can stay in the car... Right??? .

Find a friend who has a micrometer to measure the crank journal all the way around it to see if it's badly out-of-round. If it's within tolerances, then the engine might survive with a rebabbiting of the rod, along with cleaning out all oil passages in the crank, and checking all rods for babbit condition. Most engine shops will want to rebuild the entire engine and that will cost way more than the car is worth. I still think it was total lack of oil at that bearing, so that needs to be figured out at the same time as repairs.

Most likely babbit from a connecting rod because you say it was knocking under load of a hill. Grab the lower end of each rod located right above that pile of metal. Bad main bearings are more like a rumble, not a knocking noise at each rotation of the crankshaft. Pics sometimes are deceptive but the pile of chips and top of that steel baffle should be swimming in oil and it looks so dry. Loss of oil pressure at one part of the copper piping system that feeds the crank main bearings? Normally, if there is zero oil on a rod babbit bearing, it will survive a while until the temp reaches high enough from friction, and then the entire babbit melts instantly and flows out of the connecting rod. But this looks all hammered and chewed up. Maybe some babbit stuck to the crank journal, and that acted like a grinder on what babbit was still left in the rod? If you were a gold prospector out West and saw that many flakes in the gold pan, you'd say "MONEY!!!". Same is true by looking in that oil pan.

Thanks for posting the sale prices...i'm shocked at the conv price...how many owners lost money since the car sold at Dragones...good grief, it's like the crypto market. The estate that had that conv years ago, also had a 34 LaS coupe, silver color, kinda beat up more than the conv. Dragone ran it through a later auction but failed to make reserve. The widow later found a buyer for the coupe possibly through Hemmings? ... (she also found a buyer for the 34 LaS sedan in similar condition as the other 2 LaSalles, definitely she sold it through Hemmings .....and she told me that the sedan buyer was using it for parts for a 34 conv, somewhere in upstate NY?) I just can't recall the pricing due to my bout with Lyme, but I think the sedan was listed for at least 30k in Hemmings...yikes...for using it for parts??? (All 3 cars ran great when sold way back then.)

When I looked at all the pre-auction pics a week ago, I was sure it was not, because it looks like the windshield is all milky from delamination? (or is that barn dirt?) Anyways I just looked at my old pics, and yes it is the same car down to matching dings on fenders, the single fog light and cowl mount antenna. We are supposed to be about history of cars...... A very close friend of the deceased prior CT owner of this car told me this following story....who knows what is true or embellished? >> The car was owned for many years/decades by another guy in CT and it was used in WW2 by some Civil Defense? member, to "patrol the Connecticut river from Hartford Ct to the Mass border, looking for suspicious river travelers". This friend said that the huge hole drilled in the top center of the upper windshield frame was for a 2 way military type radio antenna . Who knows if it's all made up. Pic below was taken by me a long time ago and you can see that drilled hole: Correct, it was that same car. It was an estate sale and from what I heard back then, Manny Dragone was a long time friend of that deceased owner. Anyways, I "think" the car brought $68,200 at that sale not including tax and buyer premiums. Much later after that sale, I ran into a "friend of the guy who bought it there" and he said his friend resold it, because the restoration estimates far outweighed it's finished value. ....That car really ran sweet and the ride and handling was great. IMO .

Well my suspicion about the car being customized as far as windshield design have now been verified by the entry 3/19/38 which proves it was modified.... This car's records makes it a very unique and extremely interesting slice of history on owners that had some sort of serious attachment to their aging cars and were adding personal styling changes. I'm not up on high end factory body builders styles of 1929, but i knew the windshield design, the angle, the style/shape of the chromed w/s frame, were dated to no earlier than mid 30s. (looks like a 35-36 Ford or other US conv style of those years) ...there is a UK member here with a 28? Chrysler conv with a very modified W/S angle, and at first he did not believe it was "modified later in life" until more members kept saying it was not done when new. He now has been searching for it's history since realizing it was not a factory body. I have wondered what it was like to be a body guy doing these customs back then. I think I would have been applying for a job there. In 1974 or 75 while working at a small Dodge dealer, the owner came out in the shop to talk to me... if he put his arm around you, you knew he was up to something. Well, he was all kissing my butt with ability compliments then finally asks me to cut the tops of the doors off on a brand new Ramcharger Dodge! (Blazer type vehicle). Dodge made all dealers buy certain Accessories and Spare Parts when a new model came out, and he hated having slow moving inventory.. One thing he was stuck with was a black soft top kit for the new Ramchargers. He then ordered a new Ramcharger without the hardtop as a way to get rid of that soft top. However, a few months into production, Dodge stopped making the modified Ramcharger doors that had no door tops (like a convertible door), and then used the standard pickup doors. He was shocked when the roofless Ramcharger showed up with the later doors and knew the early soft top would not fit it. I did find a way to cut the door tops off and we ordered the plastic cover pieces that Dodge used on the factory modified early doors, and I was able to do it without needing to paint anything like he insisted. He was an old hot rodder and ordered the bright Hemi orange body color/black interior. to offset the black soft top and then ordered very wide Keystone Classic wheels with wide tires. He put it in the "New Car Dealers indoor auto show" in Hartford Ct and it was a show stopper by all accounts, and it sold instantly there.

i am glad somebody mentioned air trapped under t-stat....before chasing all sorts of things. start there first, which should cure the "instant" overheat, but then see if it still runs hotter than it did before the belt incident. If it does still run hot but not boiling, i would not yet condemn the head gasket. Do what was said in post2 about visual check for water flow with cap off, and perhaps back flush radiator, or first feel for cold vs hot spots on face of rad core.

that is an Oakes lock. the link below shows pics of what you need to know, mainly 2 dogs get retracted when you turn the key and feel spring-loaded tension. Once the dogs retract, that entire lock pulls out to reveal a nut or bolt that holds the big cover on . https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vintage+oakes+lock&t=brave&iax=images&ia=images Oldford just posted before I finished typing, about the dogs, but pics will help

100% positive ID as cheapie aftermarket VW bug, they fit every year made . I am VW factory trained going back to Jan 1970. Might get $10 pr local sale / Cost too much for shipping for online sale.

Length? They sure look like aftermarket VW bug running boards

If a larger bore in the master cyl is used, then you are not applying more pressure to the wheel cylinders with the same force pushing on the pedal . You will need to push the pedal a lot harder to even get close to what the smaller master had applied for pressure at the wheels. Think of a hydraulic bottle jack; it has a tiny bore piston feeding the much larger bore of the lifting piston. If a larger bore was used on the feed piston, it would then require lots more force on the jack handle to lift the same weight. Going to a smaller bore master will increase pressure to the wheel cyls, but by going just a bit too small will lead to the pedal being very close to the floor during braking. That' s due to far less volume of fluid output, meaning "not enough"

Have you ever had, or driven a 4 cylinder car of this age before? Some new owners never had one and are used to modern cars running like silk at 80MPH with no vibrations. These engines are archaic technology as far as total lack of any internal balancing and engineers not even thinking about piston weight, etc, while using a non-counterweighted crankshaft. But bear in mind that in 1927, most roads, even here in the USA were potholed dirt roads and people drove 35 to 40 MPH. Today we are forced to run these cars much faster to try to stay away from getting rear-ended by modern drivers, and then the engine vibrates to high heaven with the nearly 5 to 1 rear axle ratios. Within 3 or 4 years later, most car makers had scrapped the 4 cylinders for 6 and 8's to run smoother as the roads improved. Chrysler even used the sales gimmick of the Floating Power mounting system, and that should tell you that they knew they did have awful vibrations compared to later car engines. You don't see many of the 4 cyl cars on the roads anymore, they sit in garages or get trailered to shows unless you are lucky enough to have lightly used roads to drive them at the speeds they were once driven, and designed for.

Vague info on reversibility from web: " Reversibility Of Steering Gears To prevent road shocks from being transmitted to the operator's arms, it is considered best to have the steering gear back-locking, or irreversible to some extent at least. With a perfectly reversible system it is evident road shocks, which are transmitted to the operator's bands, depend on their magnitude and the lever arm through which they act. This system is best adapted to show moving vehicles running over smooth pavements, such as the light electric vehicles in common use. Between the limits of reversible and irreversible steering gears, is the semi-reversible type, which allows the vehicle wheels to be turned independently of any effort exerted on the steering wheel, yet exerting an even resistance to movement. This feature allows the road wheels to follow the path of least resistance and at the same time indicates to the operator the extent and direction of the movement by more or less swerving of the steering wheel depending upon the gear ratio. The semi-reversible system also relieves the parts of considerable strain which would be present if the vehicle wheels were rigidly held to their position. A disadvantage of the semi-reversible feature is in steering through sandy or muddy roads and in crossing obstructions such as car tracks obliquely." Some early boxes won't reverse when jacking the front wheels off the ground,. He said he tried this and it won't steer from trying to move the tires. My concern with disconnecting the steering link is that the car might go into a "death wobble" This can start at extremely low speeds and it is a very violent chain reaction of the front wheels slamming from one side to the other. This possibly could then cause the back of the tow vehicle to sway from side to side even at very low speeds. if you do try to flat tow it, drive as slow as possible and have a second modern car following behind with warning lights on

I verified it by looking at my 1932 Nash Second Series 6cyl model 1060, same cast number as yours. It likely is the same cap used on 1933 Nash 6. NOTE: It won't fit First Series 1932 model 960 Six Cyl. Put that info in your selling ads. It may also be correct for the 1932 Second Series smallest 8 model 1070. It won't fit the biggest 32 Nash 1080 and 1090 NOTE: some online 1932 Nash pics will show the optional flying lady cap/ornament

Dave gave the more accurate answer Yes, as I said "the lens is Jeep " but Jeep bought the compete "bullet shaped" light assembly from an aftermarket company when they rushed the civilian Jeep into production in 1945. Jeep used a painted bucket with a chromed rim on the earliest CJ2A's. The aftermarket ones that Dave mentioned also were available with chromed buckets and some had red lenses for the rear. I've seen those on old original Harleys and Indian full dressers where an original owner added them to the rear. So, Dave did a better job with the ID, but you may have better luck selling it as Jeep rather than saying it "fits only aftermarket".

It is definitely a parking lens for 1946 Jeep CJ2A as well as the very low production late 1945 Civilian-only CJ2A . Make sure not to compare it with 1947 and newer because those are totally different

My post is only to prompt some thoughts on this, Back nearly 50 years ago in one if the antique car subscriptions I had, there was an ad from some vintage watch company selling antique pocket watches having many brands of car logos on the faces in the same place up top. I was quite naïve back then and ordered one with a DeSoto logo. I rec'd it no problem but it just looked fake. The watch case was very much older than the later 30s logo design so i contacted them with my suspicions. They quickly refunded me after i sent it back. I should have known there would be no way that a vendor could ever find that many brands of logos on so many pocket watches and should have known that during the depression, what watch company would have done that. Just thinking on how many pocket watches were sold by that vendor nearly 50 years ago to elderly car guys and now the grandkids are selling (or keeping) "my late Grandpa's genuine advertising watch" because he had it since "forever". So I'm just saying some of those fakes, AKA fantasy watches, still get sold as genuine ones today by unknowing people. -I question why an alarm clock (used in bedrooms) would have an advertising logo in a bedroom where very few people would ever see it? -also the color of some of the logo is not as "jet black" as the rest of the face printing, so it seems it was added after the face was made? .

The lenses and bezels fit 34-36 LaSalle and Cadillac. The LaS uses a mounting bracket with a round red jewel reflector. I can't really see what type of mounts you have in these pics, but it should not take long to match up on internet pics of Cads. I'm not sure if the bucket shape is a perfect match between 33-34 Cad and LaS, but there would be a different bolt hole pattern I would assume. The LaS uses a clear marker light lens in the top of just one bucket. BTW, if there are no tiny chips on the glass, they are supposedly selling for crazy money if a person could find any for sale.

correct, it is/was called a passing mirror.

Somewhat a strange coincidence that this old thread was just bumped back up, which then prompted me to check in on Youtube to see if "Cliffs Old Cars" had posted any new videos on a barn weathered 32 Nash 1080 sedan that he worked on last year. Well, it seems Cliff has been bitten hard by the "32 Nash Second Series bug'' because he just posted 6 days ago about buying "Another 32 Nash"....it's the one in this thread. wow...this car was sold twice over the years on AACA ads or at least "also posted here for sale". This time I'll bet it will get put back together finally. I'm not signed up on Youtube to be able contact him, but I'd bet Cliff would like to see the AACA threads on his new car and also the old picture here that shows the car when it was in nice condition. If you care to see his first 32 1080 sedan, click on his past videos. That one has wood wheel and rear spare.

No, the carbon is fixed, meaning it does not spin in the housing. The grease fitting should only lubricate where the housing slides on the guide tube on the transmission.

It's for setting the caster and camber on full size rear wheel drive Mopars and Fords, circa 60s 70s. The pointed end fits into one of 2 holes in the top of frame at the upper A arm. The hook grabs onto the upper A arm shaft to pull it after loosening the 2 nuts that secure the A arm shaft to the frame. This is only used on cars that don't have eccentric adjusters or adjustment shims on upper A arms. Just like different bend angles on distributor wrenches, these came in different bends for different makes of cars to fit in there without hitting things like the inner fender. That type of setting caster/camber is such a pain compared to shim style or eccentric style adjusters....until you have plenty of experience.