Batwing-8

Apologies for the delay in responding...... Thanks to ASC member John Kircher, I obtained a replacement O/D. Took it apart, cleaned and adjusted to lower the cut-in speed. Installed in car; and it's working well. Next job is to disassemble and determine what is wrong with the original unit. (There's a lot of fancy machinery packed inside these compact centrifugal O/Ds; a testament to engineering of the day!

WANTED: Overdrive has failed, so seeking a replacement unit for my 1936 President. (A ‘37 President unit may also work). O/D bolts to rear of transmission and is cable-operated between conventional and free-wheeling (O/D) modes.. Thanks, Bill Allard. 253-565-2545. bill.allard@comcast.net.

Hellow all: Can I remove the rear cover on a '36 President 2C overdrive unit (to facilitate bearing replacement) without having internal parts shift position or fall out of alignment? I've never worked on one of these units. Thanks, Bill.

MY '36 Studebaker, (and apparently others from the same general period) features a spring-loaded reach rod (tie rod) on the driver's side. The shop manual states this is "to absorb road shock." The passsenger side linkage has a solid tie rod with no spring action and is connected directly to the pitman arm so "road shock" is transfered to the steering gear from that side. Does anyone have an answer as to why the driver's linkage was designed to "absorb road shock" while the passenger linkage has none? Seems unbalanced to me. Bill.

This may be comparing apples and oranges, but my 1936 Studebaker manual says ".016" COLD for all '36 models, both intake and exhaust. At ".008" COLD, are you running a risk of burning exhaust valves? Just wondering......

No, neither the fitting base nor the receiving dogbone hole is threaded. The fitting is just a "push-in," with a snug compression fit and can be removed or repositioned easily by grabbing the fitting with pliers and twisting it back and forth. The benefit of this design is that the nipple can be rotated to allow the greasing/oiling gun to avoid interference with nearby parts, without then having a loose thread.

Thanks to those who responded! My original plan was to tap the holes and thread for zerk fittings. But, at the last moment I was detered by the thought of altering original parts. The protruding pintel does not have locking pins extentding from the sides, so any lubing will involve hand-forcing and holding the selected "gun" tight against the sides and end of the pintel. I might try to make a special rubber tipped grease gun end for this job, or I may just grab a 1/8" pipe tap........... Bill.

Hi all: Does anyone recognize the pictured grease/oil lube fitting from the front shock "dogbone" on my '36 President? More to the point, what does the correct gun or oiler look like, from the side view and from the fitting end? Brand and model? Thanks, Bill.

Thanks, Gary: I started with a 3.75" diameter round of 6061 aluminum, about 2.75" in length. You can get a feel for the cuts involved by comparing the new and old hubs in the first photo; basically matching most measurements from the original hub. My eight mounting screws are 12-32! Don't know where the "32" came from, as "28" is UNF for a #12 screw. Doubt metric, as 5MM and 6MM are too far away from my screw diameter of .214". These measurements are as I got the fan; I didn't modify any fasteners. The bearing is an NSK water pump water pump bearing #885820. You're welcome to call or email if anything doesn't make sense. Cheers, Bill. (It's nice not having to clean-up fan oil constantly thrown around under the hood)!

Gary: Several years ago, I dealt with this same issue on my '36 President Coupe: a steel shaft running in a steel bore; some wear on both, and no front oil seal (or way to incorporate one). My solution was to make a sealed bearing unit and eliminate the entire old oil slinger and shaft. A local bearing supply house a had double-shaft sealed bearing that allowed me to do the machine work on the front of the "keeper" shaft before cutting-off the unwanted shaft. The sealed bearing is a press-fit into the new aluminum hub; shaped so it will fit into the existing pulley housing. Fan blade mounting holes drilled into the flange match the original. (The old oil filler plug must be removed to allow the new hub to fit inside the pulley housing). Once installed, the unit appears from the outside as the original (except for the eliminated oil filler ). Four photos show several views of the "upgrade." Bill in Tacoma.

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.............

Looks to me like a later model Chrysler with Fluid Drive governor and solenoid on the side, plus parking brake on the tailshaft.

I'd recommend a soft lead or copper flat washer. Rubber compresses and may embrittle. Then you have no washer.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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!"

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?

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...........

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

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.

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........