• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About Batwing-eight

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 12/21/1943

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Could the ATDC numbers represent a static timing value (motor not running)? If a motor is static timed BTDC, you're likely to get a nasty kickback when attempting to start.............
  2. Looks to me like a later model Chrysler with Fluid Drive governor and solenoid on the side, plus parking brake on the tailshaft.
  3. I'd recommend a soft lead or copper flat washer. Rubber compresses and may embrittle. Then you have no washer.
  4. Do you have a strong spark at the plugs? Gas squirting down the carb throat when you floor the accelerator pedal? Check these and report back.
  5. The car is a '36 Studebaker President-8 with a joined intake and exhaust manifold and thermostatically controlled heat riser valve in the exhaust stream below. Unfortunately, years of improper tightening of the bolts between the two manifolds allowed exhaust gasses to pass the separating gasket and "eat" away some of the cast iron manifold's mating surfaces. Fixing this required making an .080" thick steel plate fitting between the two manifolds to make-up for the original metal that was lost, plus the machining necessary to obtain new, parallel manifold surfaces. (The plate also restored the correct alignment of manifold ports along the block). This new plate offered two opportunities: 1) make no cutout in the plate for heat riser directed gasses, then lock the heat riser butterfly in the "open" position. Now the intake manifold above the plate has NO exhaust gas coming near it. 2) Cut a pathway in the plate for exhaust passage and leave the original butterfly untouched. Unit would now operate as original. My question dealt with the wisdom of eliminating the heat riser "system," by "'no exhaust passing through the .080" plate" and securing the heat riser butterfly so it's always "open." Another benefit of this approach is that only one asbestos gasket is required (below the plate). No gasket is required above the plate because this area is now "dead air." I'm in Washington, where temps are usually somewhat mild, so I thought this approach might be workable. Bill.
  6. I had a motor rebuilder apologetically install cheap, imported cotter pins who's tails were excessively long on castellated connecting rod nuts. The long, bent-over tails vibrated as the motor ran and started breaking off. Fortunately, I caught the problem before damage occured, but many of the nuts had lost both tails. Several also lost the cotter pin heads as well as the tails!
  7. Has anyone had experience, good or bad, with removing the thermostat-controlled exhaust manifold "butterfly" used in vintage cars to redirect exhaust gas to warm the intake manifold upon start-up? Obviously, there's benefit in warming the incoming fuel/air mix when the motor's cold, but it's also likely impossible to completely close-off the heating after the motor reaches operating temperature, thus increasing the chance of vapor lock and hard starting. That butterfly also places some restriction in the exhaust flow. Leave it in or remove it? Bill.
  8. Thanks to all who responded! Re-routing the oil pump line to the outside of the motor to attach a full-flow filter and returning it to the inside will require two new holes in the block as well as creating some challenges in the plumbing and routing of those lines inside the block...... so for now I've decided to stick with the original bypass system.
  9. Has anyone attempted to modify a mid-'30s engine originally equipped with a bypass oil filter, to become full-flow by modifying the block to support either a period-correct canister with replaceable cartridge or possibly even a modern spin-on? Another possibility might be the combination full-flow/bypass system utilizing a "dual-range" spin-on filter. For either option, how was the block modified? Obviously, the oil path within the block would have to be altered, at least slightly. Vintage bypass oil is highly filtered, but doesn't go directly to the moving parts. A full-flow system would seem to suggest all moving parts receive oil having at least some filtration. Encouragements and caveats welcomed. Thanks, Bill.
  10. Thanks to those who have responded. However, my question dealt with the issue of, if the bowl is upside down, the "bottom" can't collect settled sediment as did the "standard" configuration. Secondly, if the upside down bowl is to be removed, isn't it full of fuel which would drain over the motor as soon as the bail is released? Obviously the configuration must "work" but it sure appears "funny!"
  11. Members: I've recently noticed a '37 Cadillac and a '50 Chevrolet which both have the glass fuel sediment bowl mounted in an upside down position. On non-GM cars, I've seen these bowls mounted open-side up, such that sediment would accumulate in the BOTTOM of the bowl, thus allowing the fuel-filled cup to be removed and cleaned when the bail is loosened. How can that process work as I envision, if the bowl is mounted upside down? Or.......... am I missing something here?
  12. Remember too, a seller can sell a hundred $5.00 items to generate a positive sales rating, then list an expensive item that represents a bogus offering...........
  13. First, thanks to those who responded! Perhaps I need to clarify: I'm attempting to make a new cylinder head for a vintage auto. Serviceable replacement heads just not available, so this is the only option. The old head is off the car and has been milled, perhaps several times over its life, but I don't know how much material has been removed, so don't know the original combustion chamber volume to assign to the new head. (Manufacturer's technical drawings also no longer exist). My plan was to calculate current cylinder volume and using the published compression ratio, work backwards to determine what the volume of the combustion chamber would have been. The compressed gasket is .080", but, as you might guess, the numbers don't "jibe." If I include the combustion chamber volume (wet measure) plus the gasket volume, the C/R is too low; without the gasket, it's too high. Judging by the responses, published data on vintage compression ratios is of questionable accuracy. In addition, a slightly-open intake valve during 25% of the compression stroke likely also plays havoc on the "numbers." The static mathematical compression ratio probably varies from the actual C/R within some running motors. So I'll make a "best guess," erring on the side of caution. It's relatively easy to remove more metal if needed; a lot harder to add it on. c
  14. Does anyone know........... When auto manufacturers during the '30s through the '50s calculated gas engine compression ratios (you know, the 5.5/1 or 6.0/1 values printed in owner's manuals and shop manuals) did they include head gasket volume in the calculation; or was the value taken only from combustion chamber and cylinder volumes? I ask because some of the earlier motors used fairly thick asbestos gaskets that if included, or left out of the compression ratio calculation, could make a meaningful difference in the compression ratio number. I also ask because in a stock motor on which I'm working, including the head gasket volume along with the cylinder and combustion chamber volumes, calculates to a half-point below the compression ratio noted in printed text. Thanks in advance for any wisdom here! Bill.
  15. Tom: Regrettably, I don't have this part to offer you, but am wondering if there is a story attached to what we're seeing........