JV Puleo

It is a completely different engine. Although modified over the years it is essentially the engine introduced in 1908. It has jugs with blind bores, thus no detachable head and side valves which, except for the late LHD American cars, were not enclosed. The PI has overhead valves. This car has dual distributors, another feature of the late American cars where most Ghosts, including earlier American-made cars, have a distributor and a magneto. The rest of the chassis was changed very little between the Ghost and the PI which was, essentially, an "interim" model introduced because the market was resisting the "old fashioned" Ghost engine. The LHD American cars were made simultaneously with the earliest British New Phantoms as a stop-gap measure while RR of America tooled up to make the new model.

I like it...I wish I could afford it. That's exactly the condition I would like to find one in.

Those look really great Gary...thanks again. It's actually been an unusually productive day with Gary's news that the hub cap tops came in because I'm getting very close to being able to fit them. I tried the two crosses in the hubs. As you can see, one goes down a bit too far. Here is the better of the two crosses compared to the good original... I also tried the hub cap over the cross just to make sure it was right... To correct the long cross, I put it in the lathe and removed .100. This brings the thickness down to 1.250. Since some of the other measurements can be adjusted, the amount of material in contact with the axle may not change at all and, if it does, only a very small amount. Now the taper fit is very close to the original. Then I removed .100 from the other cross but this time on the large end. And ground them...the small end on one, the large end on the other so now they are identical. And tried the again. they may not be perfect but they are very close and I'm certain will work as intended. The last step today was to set the mill up to remove .400 from the big end. It was too close to the end of the day to start this and I'd forgotten to get a short 1/2-20 socket head screw so I'll get back to this on Monday. We are getting very close now. When these are done I can take the measurements for the hub caps and send the crosses out to have the square holes put in.

I finished the flutes today. Then dismantled the rotary table and set up the dividing head to put a bevel on the flat portion at the base of the taper. I have to do this because, as it is, the flat area is slightly too wide and prevents the cross from slipping in. I did one side, then turned the cross around and did the other. Aside from the tapers being in exactly right position, the other measurements aren't as perfect as I'd like. Fortunately, none of them effect the way the piece works. This is the second one I milled and, as you can see, it actually slips in a little too far. I have a solution for that you'll see tomorrow.

Likely done with an airbrush. This sort of illustration was very common. It was also very time consuming to do and, as such, expensive. Car makers...and all sorts of other industrial customers were very hesitant to re-do an illustration over minor detail changes which is why you have to be very careful, or perhaps skeptical, in placing too much emphasis on small details. The Mitchell catalog I have is completely illustrated like this and several of the illustrations do not agree with the finished product...also, it appears the catalog was printed before the cars were ready to be sold and several of the specifications listed do not agree with the car as it was eventually built.

Years ago I attended one of the Long Island Vanderbilt Cup meets. One of the cars that showed up was an unrestored Locomobile 48...if I remember correctly it was a town car. The gentleman who drove it had come down from upstate NY...and said his wife didn't come because she didn't like getting her hair mussed up by the wind. In any case, it was riding on old, cracked tires and he told me he'd just "re-grooved" them!

Today's project was cutting the flutes. This went very smoothly. The first one... Then all four cut. And I had enough time to set up the the second one and cut the first flute.

I wonder if you shouldn't have added a reference or a link to this thread. Anyone seriously interested in bidding should read it.

I have to say that you have posted the most complete and honest description of an antique car that I have ever seen on ebay. If I were in the market for a car like the Nash I'd be bidding and if anyone were to ask me about it I'd say they could not go wrong.

I finished the remaining three tapers today with the machine still squeaking but I decided to take a chance since taking it down at this point might well make it difficult to finish the part. These tapers actually came out exactly perfect in that the small end is what I was originally aiming for. But, I'd like them to be identical so I'll have to modify this piece eventually, but not until after I've put the flutes in and gotten them to the point where I can try then in the hubs. I dismantled the fixture and turned the vertical head on its side. I had intended to take the front part off but it's very heavy and I'm afraid of dripping it on the table. The only time this has been off was when I originally assembled it and for that I had a helper. If I take it off its probably prudent to ask one of my friends to give me a hand. With it turned on it's side I took the plate off that covers the retaining nut on the top of the spindle and noticed that it was scraping...exactly the sort of issue that would result in the noise I've been hearing. The plate itself also shows this sort of wear and there is a burr on the inside. So...I put it back together and tested it with the plate off...and the noise was still there, albeit not as pronounced. I then tested it at a lower PM (it had been running at 430) and there was no noise. When it was on it's side and I was able to turn the spindle by hand the bearing felt smooth with no indication of a problem and there appeared to be plenty of grease in there. So, whatever the problem is, it does not appear to be critical, at least at this point. Since all of the remaining procedures are done at the lower rpm I decided to press on and I'll take the head off later when I won't be needing the machine. With that in mind, I set up the rotary table to mill the flutes.

I spent most of today visiting with Ted Brito (i.e. Christech). I wanted to see the Olds DCR before it heads back to the owner. In my opinion, Ted's work looks better in person than it does in photos. It is really a remarkable job...solid as a rock with every joint firmly glued and screwed together. I suspect it's the proverbial "better than new." I got back in time to mill one of the 4 remaining tapers... I could have gone further but the vertical head is making a squeaking noise. I sounds like a bearing noise...though that is just a guess but it really bothers me. The problem here is that I need to finish the the tapers without removing the piece from the machine. If I make it through without anything going bad I'll take the vertical head off and look inside. It's very heavy...maybe 300 lbs so it isn't something easily done but even if I confirm it's not the bearings I'll feel a lot more confident. If it is a bearing this could be a major problem because I they are probably the super accurate ones and may not be available...and if they are, very expensive. As it is, there is no indication from the way the end mill is running that this is the problem...but we'll see. To finish up the day I put the piece I'd already done on the fixture... Three of the four cap screws that hold it went in easily. The fourth one was tight. I'm not sure of the reason but this isn't a major problem because all these do is hole the piece down and I did it with two screws the last time. I may even go back and take the tight one out. In this case, the salient feature is the hole in the center which I align with a piece of 1" ground bar and that worked as I'd hoped.

Saab Sonnet? It looks familiar and I had a friend who had one when they were new.

I won't bore you all with a step-by-step description of today's work since it's a repetition of what I did yesterday and the day before. I got all of the "lugs" milled on the second cross and set it up for the first taper by the end of the day.

Not to be a killjoy but my in limited acquaintance with youtube I've seen things attacked with the wrong tools in a ham-fisted manner by would-be "media" stars that shouldn't be allowed to own a screwdriver. I suppose there is some good advice in there somewhere but the viewer with no notion of how something works will have no notion of whether the person creating the video knows what they are talking about. I see no solution to this...it is what it is but I'd be very careful of following youtube directions in anything other than the most simple procedures. That said, I have found the answer to one or two problems with domestic appliances but those were videos made by professionals who were doing so as a form of advertising...not a bad idea at all.

Thanks guys...I have to remind myself that the measurements I'm using are all averages taken from a worn original part. If it fits, and works that is all we can expect. As it is, I'm reasonably sure my parts are more accurate than the originals were but "precision" gets to be an obsession. Terry is absolutely right...if it's within tolerance and works properly it is a "perfect" part. I arrived late today with only about an hour or two in the shop because I was having the rear brakes on my truck repaired. As I've said before, I hate working on modern cars (it's 32 years old) I don't have a lift or any place inside to work and I'm too old to be sitting on the ground. I cleaned up the mill to start on the second (and hopefully the last) axle cross. I indicated the fixture to get it parallel and offset it .903 using my 3" indicator. That measurement is half the width of the lug + half the width of the end mill. The actual measurement is .9032 but I've no way to measure .0002 very accurately and I doubt it makes any difference. Then put an end mill in and set everything up for tomorrow morning. I am getting better at this...it's too bad I'll never have to do it again (or maybe not!)

Yesterday I milled the remaining arms of the crosses rectangular, first one side... Then offset the table using this big dial indicator to mill the other side. Today I set the fixture to cut the tapers using this piece of 5/8" bar to find the exact edge. The bar is the same diameter as the end mill so, when I replace it with the end mill it should come very close to the target size. I milled one side all around... Then reset the fixture to mill the other side. This came out better than the last one...it's still not "perfect" but its so close that I have no problem using it. It's likely more accurate than the original. In any case...I like Ed's comment about "aiming for perfection"/ I probably don't have the skill to be absolutely perfect but if you aim for that you can get very close. Now I'll do the other one since everything is set up for it..though I may not be in tomorrow or Friday. It looks as if I have another week of work on these but it will be worth it if they come out right.

After spending the morning bagging up the shop trash and cleaning up an oil spill I set the taper milling fixture on the mill. The first step was to align it so that it is absolutely parallel with the table. For this I used an indicator. It runs out about .001 in 4" and that may be due to the fact that it's made of conventional aluminum bar. If I'd felt more precision was necessary I'd have had to make it out of ground bar but that's getting in deeper than even I would go. Then I centered it under the spindle and offset it, again using an indicator, .9032" I'd prepared a sheet of calculations based on the size of the end mill I'd be using and, as I often do, I'd written the number down wrong. (I wrote .0932) Luckily, it was so far off that it was obvious so I rechecked the numbers, reset the center and did it over. This time I'm holding the end mill in a collet. One of our members here pointed out that the tool holder contributes a little runout. It's not much but it all adds up and here I'm trying to get within .001 of the desired width since that controls the width of the taper at the bottom. Since it was getting close to the end of the day I was going to leave this for tomorrow but I had to make at least the first cut...

Another thought. Car collecting, at least early car collecting, differs from most other collecting interests in that the artifacts require constant maintenance and we EXPECT them to work. This isn't the case with art or coins or stamps. My major interest, which I have been collecting actively since I was about 12, is 18th and early 19th century swords and firearms, especially British although I have a small collection of New England Rifles made between about 1800 and 1830. All of them work...in that they could be fired but I don't care to shoot of them. I have one I have shot but the last time must be nearly 20 years ago. In those 20 years it hasn't deteriorated and hasn't needed any more attention than an occasional wipe down. I also collect 17th and 18th century books...those require no maintenance at all other than blowing the dust off them when it's been years since I looked at them. You cannot treat cars that way. I don't think interest in brass, teens and 20's cars will go away but prices MAY eventually reflect the increased cost of maintenance and the small number of enthusiasts who are interested in doing it themselves. I suspect this is already happening...in slow motion. And I don't think today's repair rates are crazy...or at least I don't think the person who can and will repair your 1910 whatever deserves to make less than the local plumber or electrician.

I think I can claim first-had experience with this one. Mechanician is quite correct. If you can't do the work yourself, replacing the many parts you may need can be virtually impossible or so expensive that it makes those cars unaffordable. Even if you can do it, it really doesn't take any more time to rebuild a relatively expensive car than it does to rebuild a lesser marque. In fact, the lesser car may take more time if only because the lesser cars simply weren't built as well and often enough have far more parts that will wear out or break. If I could have afforded something like a Locomobile or a Pierce Arrow in the condition my Mitchell was in I'd have been a ready customer. But, even in dismantled and abused condition, the bigger high quality cars fetch (or at least generate) much higher asking prices. I understand the attraction of something like a Ford where virtually everything is readily available although to me, there is no attraction where there is no challenge. That isn't a common attitude. I'll bet that 1914(?) Loco in the Nebraska auction, despite all it's problems, goes for much more than I could pay although making it right would be a monumental task. Also, I suspect that many potential buyers really don't know very much about early cars or what the do "know" is mostly anecdotal. You really can't put too much faith in the maker's advertising...especially with mid-priced or smaller cars. They were all trying to build something to a price often in the design and likely in the quality of the work. alsarms 1909 Locomobile is essentially the same size and has the same number of parts as my Mitchell but it sold for at least twice as much. There has to be a reason for that.

That's simple. You forge it. I spent something like 40 years in the check printing business and dare say I could, if I was larcenous, forge any check. I suspect that the forgeries that scammers are passing would not stand close examination by anyone with my background but that is such a small number of people that it's relatively easy to get away with. Years ago I had a call from the Louisiana State Police regarding a check forgery outfit. Oddly enough, the forger had copied a business check that I had printed, right down to having my toll-free number on the stub, so the in investigating officer called me. He knew I had nothing to do with it but wanted advice on how to tell if the check was a forgery and what to look for when they raided the place where these were originating.

Today I started by counterboring the remaining two holes in the fixture. I'd only done two because I only had two cap screws but the proper ones have now arrived so I'll be able to bolt the work piece down with four rather than two. Then I put the center holes in the crosses for the cap screws. I did this very carefully because I worry about breaking a center drill off in one of the holes...which can be a real problem since they are high speed steel and you can't just drill them out. That went smoothly...the rest is tedious but not a challenge. To locate the drill I used a tapered center in the drill press that matches the taper on the center drill. Pushed in with a little pressure this should center the hole perfectly. Then it was just a matter of drilling each hole and threading it. These are now ready to be milled but it's the end of the day and I want to be fresh when I set up the milling fixture. The holes are located so that the key way points directly at the corner of the square hole that will be the last step. That way it's useful for holding the piece solid in the mill and will be completely eliminated when the square holes go in.

Wow...Yes... I'll send you a PM

Today's progress...the keyways broached. Then turned to 4.425, the OD needed for this to fit inside the threads of the hub cap. Then into the surface grinder. The red Dychem tells me which was the first side faced off and that the hole should be perfectly perpendicular to it. On the surface grinder that side goes face down... I ground one side until I'd removed all the machining marks...then the other side. This is actually a critical measurement because all of the figures for offsetting the fixture to get a 3-degree taper are based on a triangle that is .1350 deep. In the end, I was .001 over but I very much doubt that will make a difference. Last, I started to set it up to mark the 4 holes that will be drilled and threaded to attach it to the milling fixture.

My understanding is that New Departure made specialized bearings in fairly small quantities, many for the auto industry. If the original bearing was a ND and you can't find a NOS example about the only alternative is to modify the housing in some way to take another bearing.

I was out of the shop most of the day waiting to get my truck back. I thought I'd burst a brake line but it turns out to have been a leaking rear wheel cylinder. This is all stuff I could do myself but the fact is I'm feeling my age when I try to crawl around under a car and I don't have a lift. Also, if I take it apart at home or at the shop, and don't have everything I need, I'm really stuck because both places are a long way from any sort of decent auto parts store. It just isn't worth the risk that I'd find myself sleeping in the shop for two days. I did this work yesterday...the two new blanks for the cross pieces. They are 3-3/4" 4041PH. I ordered 1-1/2" thick and was sent 1-5/8"...very good of the supplier but more work for me as they have to come down to 1.350 thick. With a 1" hole reamed in the center I turned down the thickness to about .020 more than the finished size. I don't use carbide tooling very often, and have a very limited supply of it but I tried it here and it seemed to work well. This steel is hard enough so that it dulls high speed steel when you have a lot of light cuts to make. I finished the thickness on both blanks. Now I have to broach the keyway, reduce the OD and surface grind them to the finished size. Then I can set up the fixtures on the mill and start machining them. I learned a lot making the previous pieces so I'm guardedly hopeful that these will come out nearly perfect.