Tom400CFI

Members
  • Content Count

    128
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About Tom400CFI

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 05/28/1971

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I can attest to this....I was the one who put the straight sided tire onto that rim and it was a true M-F'er. No tire machine; I used one tire iron, a spoon and way too many F-bombs to get that thing on. Once on, it was such a tight fit on the rim that inflating it didn't move the bead out to the bead of the rim. Stuffing rope into the rim's clincher bead was fun too. No, putting a straight tire on a clincher rim is do-able (I only say that b/c I DID it)...but not a "solution", in my opinion. Another solution needs to be found. I would be talking to Coker tire too, but if a run of tires is needed now might be a good time for a group purchase.
  2. Looking for the measurements of the throttle bore size and flange bolt hole dimensions, if anyone knows. I have the dimensions listed in the Breeze manual, but it all seems to depend on the throttle bore size? I'm not sure. The Chart isn't all that clear.
  3. Same thing happened to our Hupp on a Brass and Gas tour.....about 40 years ago. I was a kid at the time. Car ran hard all day, the resin in the mag got hit and melted. It was fine as long as it was running....I guess. Shut it down that night. Next morning, my Dad flooded the carb, gave it his usual 'hit' on the crank, and boom...broke three teeth off that fiber gear. Tour over? HELL NO! My dad drilled three tiny drill bits into the gear, in place of each broken tooth, then broke the bits off at the right "height" of the teeth peaks. Using the bits as a frame, he mixed up epoxy and laid it in, building it up around the bits. After it cured (a few minutes) he hand filed the mass into the shape of gear teeth. Put the mag back on and off we went. I had forgotten all about that repair....but that repair is still in place, working today.
  4. Boy. I hear this! THe forum that I spend the most time on, the Corvette Forum, has a healthy does of this too. Sea Foam, Marvel Mystery Oil, If they sell a fix-it-in-a-can, someone on there has used it....and hasn't had any problems! That's not to say that certain items don't have their place...but most of the time the real problem isn't diagnosed, and the elixir was believed to have been the cure. I had a guy bring his '50 Ford. "It's always had vapor lock". "Always"...huh? "Proof" that it was vapor locking was that any time he'd climb a steep hill, it would get hot, and "Vapor lock". I see the correlation, but the "diagnosis" blinded the owner from ever finding the root problem (or even looking for it). I fixed the "vapor lock" problem by replacing the fuel line from the tank to the pump, to the carb, which had about 14 suspect joints in it that would allow the introduction of air into the fuel on the suction side of the pump. Car hasn't "vapor locked" (starved for fuel under load) since. You were right that the fuel line diameter isn't the only determining factor in fuel flow to the carb.
  5. O.K. So hot engine/air under hood...whatever, "causes vaporlock", right? How does adding heat transfer capacity to a pipe help cool the pipe, when in the same, too hot environment? Seems to me that cloth pins, tin foil and other alien deterrent devices would actually heat the pipe (and the gas inside) more quickly, rather than adding "cooling" fins.
  6. This stuff is voo-doo. Lore. Black "Magic". Stick to science. If the pins actually had the ability to "dissipate heat" (which they don't, being wood), then wouldn't they also then absorb the very same heat that is supposedly causing the "vapor lock" in the first place?? Yes, they would.
  7. Tom, Thanks for the compliments, and the fantastic history...I love that stuff. Good luck with the Buick!
  8. Cool! Great memory! I think you're right....this is the Hupp:
  9. Thanks for the positive comments! Wow, awesome write up! It was interesting to see some of the same interesting things pointed out (history of Concord area, for example). I didn't mention anything about potential new blood in the hobby, but you're right; more of it is needed. Good to see more people get involved. I think it would be beneficial to have evening seminars/sessions, much like the "how to drive a T Ford" this year...that was brilliant, but have sessions for all, not just women or a particular group. Why? I see a some folks interested but struggling in various ways; an owner who can't shift his car w/o grinding gears....and has to come to a complete stop on a up hill down shift. That can't be fun. An owner who has a hard time starting their car and it's a simple tuning issue. Owners who aren't mechanically savvy and spend a LOT of $$$ for repairs, restoration bits, etc. Yes, it's expensive, but if you have to take your brass era car somewhere to get anything (or everything) done, the hobby could become unrealistic quickly. One of the greatest things about this era car, IMO is that the car practically forces you to become intimate w/the mechanism. If you don't, you are fighting it endlessly, not understanding. It would be a boon to the hobby, IMO to make it easier for new/newer members to have sessions available where they could learn fundamental, intermediate, and even some more advanced skills and knowledge that would smooth ownership. Anyway, LOVED your write up. Thanks for sharing!
  10. Well that sucks. I've posted more pics than I'm allowed to (even though they're hosted elsewhere). (?) I guess if anyone is interested, they can view the thread on a forum that doesn't care how many pics you link to. Hope you enjoy.... http://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c4-general-discussion/3679143-back-from-a-car-guy-vacation.html http://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c4-general-discussion/3679143-back-from-a-car-guy-vacation.html
  11. Crazy. My '83 Trans Am got driven all over New England in all typed of conditions, out to Colorado for ski trips, never seen it happen. I'd like to witness that once.
  12. I've heard of carb Icing...never seen in in my life on cars ranging from 1910 to the mid 80's, bikes, even snowmobiles. I was taught about it in auto school...but never have seen it happen. Have you looked in the carb and seen ice build up?
  13. Well, ^that question could be asked of a plethora of systems on any vehicle, and if that was our method for determining the importance of OE equipment on a car, we'd never modify anything! Here is the answer; The OEM's need to meed criteria that we don't (always) care about. Emissions -and I'm not talking about the same emissions that our cars have to "pass"...OEM emission criteria are much more stringent. COLD weather drivability. HOT weather drivability. CAFE (depending on year). Engine/vehicle life expectations. And so on. Using just the temps criteria as an example, the OEM's have to produce cars that will start and run (for even the "lowest common denominator") in the arctic.....and also not over head, boil fuel etc, climbing Davis Dam in Arizona, in July. That is quite a spectrum. Using a catalytic converter as another example, "why did the auto makers put it there? They aren't going to spend money on something they don't need."....right? So is that "proof" that a car needs a catalytic converter in order to run well? Of course not and in many cases, that converter makes the car run/perform WORSE. So why did the automakers spend money on something that in many cases, makes the car run/perform worse? THey had to meet emission criteria. So the fact that (some) cars came w/converters isn't proof that cars need converters to run right. That cars came w/heat stoves isn't proof that they NEED a functioning heat stove to run right. When we understand the function of a part or system, how we use our car, and our own expectations....we can then make our own decisions, as to what's important, and what is not. How do WE operate our cars? I'd guess that most on this forum operate their cars in mild, temperate to hot conditions, so we aren't exposing our cars to the conditions that the OEM's had to consider. That is why in the context of this thread, "The heat riser valve. Really important, or really NOT important?" I say it's not REALLY important. It may help drivability for the first 30 seconds....maybe, and I'd submit that in temperate conditions, if it IS helping, it's "covering" another problem or system that isn't functioning properly. Rusty OToole made a good point that in many old cars, the exhaust crossover in the intake gets plugged up and isn't as effective. In this case, the heat stove/hot air intake could help for the first several minutes, until the coolant and oil temps warm the intake. And there are plenty of older cars that don't have properly tuned/adjusted carbs, chokes, timing, etc. I've owned plenty of carb'ed cars that have no hot air intake and start and run absolutely fine -my boat is a prime example; '92 Mastercraft w/a 351w and a Holley 4160 carb. Electric choke, open element air cleaner (flame arrestor). Fires instantly (cold) w/one pump, and idles fine. The heat stove is primarily there for subfreezing conditions, and to meet criteria that we generally don't care about.
  14. Thanks for the post Max. Car is done. Drove it under it's own power...FINALLY. I used T ford hubs (which were identical to the hubs that broke...so someone switched to Ford hubs previously??) and Lang's Tapered roller bearings...the outer races pressed into the hubs nicely. Getting the inner race of the outer bearing threaded on to the spindle proved to be a major PITA. Also, the total bearing "package" was narrower than the original Hupp ball bearings so I had to fab spacers to space the inner race of the inner bearing, out. Got it together though...they're tight and smooth, so it should work.