1912Staver

Unfortunately I don't. It was sold to me as a good used engine out of a 4 WD F150. I may end up pulling apart the other one I have and see if a light refresh will return it to service. The other one was also a decent running engine , and out of about a 1974 Ford 3/4 ton. But it has been sitting close to 20 years. Between the two I can probably get one good gasoline 300. The days of propane pickups seems to have passed from what I am hearing so far. It came from a friend who drove the truck for several months before deciding it had too much rust and junked it. He gave me the engine as even back then I knew the 360 in my 1966 was going to be a problem. I have owned the 1966 since the mid 1980's and really like it. A pretty decent, Victoria M 100 . Very little rust, but the years are taking their toll. And keep my eyes open for a cheap EFI truck . I saw a few for very reasonable prices 3 or 4 years ago. But they all seem to have at least doubled in price lately. I can always build it as a carburetor vehicle for the time being and switch to EFI if the right parts truck shows up.

That seems like a very high serial number for 1913.

My 1918 Packard truck has a very similar plate. Not sure where it is at the moment to confirm the lettering is the same . Cole Hersey pull / push switches inside. I am sure other vehicles used the same setup, but possibly with different functions for the switches. Actually when I think about it mine does not have the Mag . control on this panel. It has a seperate switch for the Mag. functions. But still a good chance it is from a better quality Commercial vehicle from the later teens. Other than the lettering for the switch functions my switch face is identical.

There is a propane station very close by. And not a fly by night operation, I expect auto propane will be available close to me for the forseeable future. But the power loss could be a problem. It's a more complicated swap but perhaps a later model 300 with EFI would be the best choice.

That's very interesting. I wasn't aware of that version. But I bet they are very hard to come by today. I see several { or more } Holly carbs at every swap meet. Can a standard Q Jet be modified to that configuration ?

Like I mentioned on another thread , my 1966 Mercury { Canadian } 1/2 ton is currently under re - construction. A 1975 frame is the main change , but I am also strongly considering swithing the FE 360 to a 300 -6. The 360 is tired and a real gas hog. The good 300 I have at the moment is mid 1970's and a propane conversion engine. I also have a second one , but it has been sitting for at least 20 years and may no longer be usable. Is anyone up to speed about potential fuel cost savings for Propane vs Gasoline these days ? I have everything but the tank. The only other concideration is the compression ratio. I am going to have to pull the head and see what sort of pistons are in it. The better propane conversions usually bumped up compression so I might have to swap back to a lower C.R. Is it worth it to go to the trouble of keeping the propane ? Or should I keep the truck gasoline powered ? Light hauling , sometimes with my car trailer , but usually reasonably light cars. And not a huge mileage each year. Thanks !

My re - born 1/2 ton might end up with a Ford 300 6. It has a 1970's 360 in it now , 352 originally. .Anyone know if there is much of a saving with Propane these days over swapping back to gasoline ? The only 300 I have at the moment came from a truck with a propane conversion. I have everything but the tank . But if there is no fuel saving it wouldn't be worth the trouble. I know, I should start a new thread.

Model A what ? If it is Ford they were made from 1928 - 1931. Most 1913 cars will be at least some demand, many in quite a bit of demand and possibly even in the high value catagory. Ford Model A's are always in demand but relatively low value. Touring is one of the pricer ones.

There is a valid reason for trading a Q -Jet with a Holley. If you are running a reasonably hot cam. This is why all the higher HP Ford and GM engines came from the factory with a Holley. Low vacum at idle alows the metering rods to raise resulting in a very rich mixture. There are ways of reducing the effect, Jon and a few others probably know for sure, but for most of us just doing what the factories did was the simplest solution. Holley power valves are available in many settings to cope with low idle vacum and are very easy to change. Q jets need the metering rod springs changed and a much more involved process to get it right.

Just my 2 cents, but I would be inclined to look for a Reo cab and front sheet metal , radiator. Just saw a very decent, all steel, early truck cab at a swap meet { Fagel }. Price was very reasonable. Keeping the Cleveland body would result in a interesting truck, but it's going to be a very large undertaking. Reo trucks may not be common, but I have seen a few over the years. The Cleveland might be a better propisition if returned to a Cleveland car chassis. Do you have all the metal parts for the Cleveland ? Except the cut off rear section of course. At least it is a 3 window coupe, but still a lot of wood work. It's rarely about potential profit on 90 % of pre war vehicles, but at some point the amount of time you have to invest becomes a concern.

I agree about the attraction of the Canadian only Fords / Mercs . Thinking back to the days of my youth in the later 1960's , early 1970's they seemed reasonably common. Out here on the West Coast they are quite rare these days. The only one I own is a 1966 Mercury M 100 Custom Cab. Currently doing a frame swap to a 1975 F 150. I use it as a truck so the dual circuit disk brakes and Saginaw steering will be a big improvement. Almost a bolt on swap , so it can be reversed should a future owner want to go back to dead stock. Biggest modification is moving the rear springs a bit. And that takes place on the newer frame . I am keeping the 1966 chassis should it ever be wanted down the road.

Some did have a air pump on the engine, and the hand pump was just for starting. But others just used the hand pump and the driver had to add more pressure from time to time. I think the ones that used exhaust gas were the least common. My Packard truck has a small air pump driven off the camshaft, but very few other engine I have seen have this feature.

Quality is one thing. But a Million $ + price tag is just a bit out of reach I am afraid. Love Mercers , but they are truly for the fortunate few. Never going to be in that club.

I liked them a lot untill about 10 years ago. Then the price of gas plus some pretty harsh changes to our local { British Columbia } Motor Vehicle Act made them hard to justify. Had a few in my younger years. But unfortunately my father wasn't paying any of my bills, every cent came out of my pocket . He wasn't too concerned about what I chose to drive, as long as things didn't end in tragedy like was the case with a few I knew. He wasn't much of a fan of my motorcycles however, thought that was pushing my luck a bit too far. Mostly fast Fords , with a GS 400 Buick thrown in for good measure. Great memories ! If you ever get the chance JV you should try driving a real Muscle Car. Big block , 4 speed, preferably ram air. You will probably be happily surprised. They are quite a unique experience. Let the clutch out slowley , give it a bit of gas, get to 5 or 6 MPH and hammer it ! Instantly things start to happen, and I mean fast ! Pure adrenaline.

Only problem with a Mercer T head or a Simplex Speed Car is they make this Mustang look dirt cheap.

Must have a really big Nitrous bottle.

It was really cool back in High School. Eventually you learn it's way more important to learn how to use HP without loosing traction. Like many things in life , experience brings wisdom.

This is Holman and Moody's shop, where the magic happened back in 1969. Car above is reported to be the middle one in this photo.

This is what it takes to harness a Boss9 at its full potential, a H & M Nascar frame. Not some flimsy Mustang unit body. If you really have 1100 HP you better have one of these under the sheet metal.

N case ,nine inches are plenty strong. But Mustangs have always suffered from near terminal, leaf spring wind up. Ford posi cases break, they need a Detroit locker for high HP use. All solvable problems , but not in pure stock form. Ford knew the Boss 9 would work better in a Torino / Cyclone body , but chose to shoe horn them into Mustangs for some strange reason. The ultimate Boss9 car is a 1969 Nascar , 1/2 chassis, Cyclone or Torino. Thats what the engine was built for in the first place. 1/2 chassis mod is essential if you want to be able to use all that " Shotgun Hemi " power.

Any factory ones I have seen are connected to the top of the tank. In theory I guess you could T into the liquid filled fuel line, but I think that would tend to introduce air into engine side of the fuel line, possibly starving the engine for fuel. Probably safer to solder a female threadrd boss to the top of the tank like factorys did.

Just look at any of the English or European old car sites or magazines. Thousands of non - North American old cars that many on this Forum probably have not even heard of. But they regularly sell at prices that would astonish many on here. And in many cases , simply knock your socks off . Plus loads of small outfits turning out parts to keep them running / in use . Do you really think that level of interest is going to evaporate in a decade ? No offense Paul, but your list barely scratches the surface if looked at on a World Wide , hobby wide basis.

I think Paul had a Corvette in the early episodes.

It just connects to the top of the gas tank, above fuel level. It is a good idea to place a T fitting in the line and install a pressure gauge on the dash . A few pounds pressure is good, but you don't want to over pressure the system. Some of the better ones have a built in pressure limiter, but most just rely on the driver keeping an eye on the gauge. Yours looks like it already has a T, one branch to the tank, the other to the gauge.

Thomas ?