packick

Willie and Mike, thanks for the information. The more I read your information on possible causes the more I suspect the valley cover. I never tore it apart nor cleaned the inside of it when I rebuilt the engine; I only painted it. One question though, Willie. I read your re-servicing the valley cover on your web site and was wondering if brass Brillo pads would work for the new mesh I would install? Are they too fine or not fine enough? Good idea, bad idea. Just curious. Thanks again.

I recently rebuilt the engine in my 1955 Century. The car runs great. However after the drive to the National Meet in Portland (about 800 miles round trip), and a recent tour with our local Buick Club chapter (about 720 miles round trip) I have noticed, after each trip, a light film of oil on the rear bumper and the vertical portion of the trunk lid. It seems to be mostly on the passenger side but it does cover the entire bumper. One member in our local club has a ‘53 Special and says he gets the same thing after a trip and determined it is the oil breather tube that’s causing it. As a kid, I don’t ever remember my father complaining about oil spray on the rear bumper after a trip in our ‘55 Special. I will add that after each trip I used no oil as measured on the dip stick. I am running Valvoline VR1 Racing 10W-30 motor oil, and have put about 3,000 miles on the engine since the rebuild. I have also noticed a fair amount of oil on the undercarriage of the car. The spray is not red-colored so I have ruled out the transmission. So, what could be causing this oil spray? Is it the oil breather and that is normal? Is it the rear main seal which still dribbles a bit after I park the car? Am I running too light weight oil? I give up.

Thanks for the comments Steve. Apparently only you, Old-Tank, and I are the only ones who responded to this thread have driven the rutted Washington State roads. I guess, as the old saying goes, "You had to be there."

Rusty: This is from a previous post and may answer your question for the ignition switch: http://forums.aaca.org/f162/1955-buick-ignition-switch-removal-281994.html And here is another one which covers both: http://forums.aaca.org/f162/55-buick-special-how-remove-ignition-275207.html

Dick (Mr. Riviera), thanks for referencing that information. I am sticking to my original statement which started this thread. I feel radial tires are safer to drive on than bias ply tires. Yes I can probably drive thousands of miles with bias ply tires and have no problems (I actually have done that); but I would rather drive those thousands of miles on radials. Other safety items are allowed on cars that didn't originally come with them (i.e., turn signals, seat belts, stop lights) with no point deductions, so I hope some day radial tires will be in that group too. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

Thanks Willie. I am glad someone reaffirmed my assessment of the rutted Washington State highways. When I got my '55 Buick it already had radials on it so I don't know what it was like driving it with bias ply tires. But I DID drive my '51 Packard with bias ply tires for years and constantly fought the ruts. When I purchased a set of radials for it, driving was like night-and-day compared to the bias ply. No longer was I "slung" out of the ruts into the adjoining lanes. For me, it still is a safety issue.

OK. I now understand why points are deducted for having radial tires. But, after reading all of the discussions about ensuring the authenticity of our cars at National Meets, I have to ask. If authenticity is of prime importance, and having radial tires detracts from that, why are cars that have seat belts which originally did not come with them not deducted points? Here again is an authenticity issue. Again, I just want to understand the reasoning.

Sorry TG, I don't buy the Urban Myth theory. I have three other vintage cars without radials and I tell you they have the potential of being dangerous. Here in Washington State they allow studded snow tires. These tires just tear up the pavement. In addition, Washington State uses mostly asphalt to repave their highways. Over time, heavy trucks have worn ruts into the lanes which makes driving with bias ply tires like being in the luge at the Winter Olympics. It is especially dangerous when the rain water just sits in these ruts. Yes, I can make it to shows and meets with my bias ply tires, but I believe it is so much safer to drive with the radials. So does the BCA (and other clubs) want you to arrive at their meets safely, or is being authentic their only concern? I'm not professing that everyone convert to radial tires. I just am saying a car shouldn't be penalized for them. Sorry for the rant.

Mr. Riviera: I am glad I am not the only one who considers having radial tires a safety issue. Not that I care too much about judging, but I lost 10 points because of my radial tires in Portland, 5 for having radials and another 5 for not having the correct tire size. It would be interesting to see what other National clubs (marques) are doing with their judging of radial tires (e.g., Chrysler, Packard, Ford, etc.). Be that as it may, I will continue to take deductions for my radial tires in lieu of having a safety issue.

I am sure this discussion has come up before in the Forum but I couldn't find it. Does anyone know the reason why BCA judging rules specify deducting points for a car having radial tires when it was originally equipped with bias ply tires? If you have ever driven a car with bias ply tires on rutted Interstate highways, having radial tires makes all the difference in the world. Many times I have unintentionally drifted out of the ruts and had to recover. I guess my question is this: Why is having seat belts considered a safety accessory and points are not deducted for them, but having radial tires, which I deem also as a safety issue, points are deducted? Just curious.

Thanks for the heads-up, Mr. Earl. Since I didn't find much at the Buick National swap meet, I had money burning a hole in my pocket. I didn't have this book (Buick: The Post War Years) in my Buick library.

I had the same issue when I re-chromed my convertible top hardware. After thinking a long time about it, I simply had the chrome shop re-chrome the mechanisms in the fully extended position (i.e., as if the top was up). Think about it. When the top is up is when people see the chrome job on the hinges; when the top is down and the hinges are compressed, who sees them? They are buried under the boot. They came out beautifully. OK, so I cheated.

Unimog and I (packick) will be there too.

I don't think anyone mentioned this but make sure the eccentric is adjusted properly. This will center the shoes in the drum. The shop manual usually tells you how to adjust it.

I like the color of Old Tank's convertible too. I don't know why?

I will do that Owen_Dyneto. Thanks.

This topic may have been discussed before in the Forum but I could not find a discussion relating to it. I have a 1937 120 and need to replace the center steering linkage bearings and pin located under the radiator/engine pully. What is the best way to get at the bearings and pin to remove the old ones and insert the new ones? Does the whole front-end of the car have to come off? Can I just remove the hood, radiator and engine pully? I would appreciate any help from someone who's been there, done that. Thanks.

Here are some pictures of mine that may be of use in addition to Willie's website.

Buick840: Here is a picture of my 1955 2-Dr Riviera Century. I assume my colors are correct but what do I know? Hope this helps.

My choice of cars has nothing to do with the current market. I am a baby boomer and really enjoy the '30s cars, I have two of them. I think their styling is some of the best Detroit ever made. But I also own 2 '50s cars. The reason is that they are much more practical to tour with in today's modern traffic. They have better tail lights, brake lights, head lights, can keep pace with modern traffic, and have better visibility for the driver. I still drive my '30s cars on the back roads as they are really fun to drive. But if our club has a tour that involves driving on high-speed roads, I will take one of the '50s cars.

Marty, good find. Like finding a needle in a haystack.

Marty: About the only thing I can think of is how tight the steering wheel bolt is. I read in some of the literature I have that what you do is tighten the bolt down until the horn starts blowing, then back off 1/2 turn for the correct setting. If you have already done that, then we may have to look to the advice of the other experts on this forum for help.

The horn works great! Just to make sure I started the car and tested the horn at the full left turn position and the full right turn position. I am a bit achy but I am hopeful the xrays will be negative tomorrow.

TexasJohn and Willie: Thanks for your replies. We did not remove the steering box. As you suspected, we removed the steering tube by twisting and tilting. We had to remove the heater box and the rubber collar. For reinsertion, we had to remove the Neutral Safety Switch so we could rotate and lift the tube into place. Here are a couple of pictures. The first shows the steering tube out; the second shows the new horn contact in place.

The deed is done. Today we pulled out the steering column and put in the new brass horn contact. Not too bad of a job but we did have a little extra work making the final adjustments, especially to the Neutral Safety Switch. But that is because the switch itself was all crudded inside with old grease; we cleaned that up. But now I have a working horn on the column. The only difference we noticed is that the shift lever is a bit more stiff. Is there any kind of lubricant we can use to loosed it up a bit? And why would be a little stiffer after pulling the column?