Beemon

omg... my luck/timing is always off

Thanks for the heads up, I'll look into those and see if I can come up with something interesting. The cap can be changed because it's going under another face, it just needs the cap for a uniform seal on the filter. This specific filter is also 3" tall. Funny you mention 2" of clearance, the stock air cleaner left an imprint in the hood insulation and I think it's no more than an inch thick so I would say the stock filter is within a half inch of the hood. I got the call on my way to work the car was ready so I picked it up and it's sitting out in the parking lot now. Before I do anything I have to pull the power steering pump, but I'll at least be able to see if it all fits. The rear end isn't so noisy any more but I had to reuse the carrier bearings, I guess they're now obsolete and I could only find one... doesn't do me any good lol. Makes me wonder what these guys are selling on ebay for a fully repaired third member if the bearings and gears arent in production anymore... Also thinking about whether or not to keep the intake aluminum or engine green... Edit: You know, speaking of hood clearance and air filters, I'm really glad the insulation touches the top of the air cleaner. I've accidentally left wrenches, screw drivers and other things up there only to open the hood and say "Oh that's where I left that!" After I dropped the Buick off, I couldn't find my Jeep keys, so I had to use the spares. I was more than certain I just left them in the Buick. Popped the hood today at work just because I wanted to look at the engine I've been missing for nearly a month now and there were the keys, like I had just opened a present, sitting right in the middle of the air cleaner where the wing nut is. I'm going to miss that. In regards to the plug that fits over the Holley carburetors, I'm assuming you're talking about this? If so, I don't see any issue making something similar. Would be interesting to become a supplier of custom, vintage carburetor speed parts.

A little bit of an update: I probably spent hours trying to find an air filter base for the small carb air horn, with little to no success. Well I went into the lab and whipped up some models. The carb adapter I purchased was garbage, the holes don't even match up so I sent them back and also made my own. These will be printed with ABS plastic, so they should withstand the intake ambient temperatures. The cost for printing is about ~$2.00 per cubic inch, so everything should run me about $50-60, which I'm okay with considering they are of my own design. The carb base is countersunk on the inside holes on the bottom side. The air cleaner assembly was made using dimensions to fit NAPA part #2110 (I might have to re-check that one). I haven't printed anything yet because I don't have dimensions for under the hood from the top of the intake to the top of the hood. All dimensions are saved in the program to be easily modified based on heigh, filter, etc., so I could really print anything for any application so long as it fits within a 12x12" square. The machines at school are good up to 3-5 decimal places (two different machines) so I'll be honing the bores, too. The carb spacer/adapter is .5" thick, the bottom of the air cleaner is 1" tall and the top is .375" tall. If it doesn't fit due to height clearances, I'm thinking of either halving the bottom height or converting it to a drop style filter. Anyways, just wanted to post an update. When I get them printed and have $ values, I'll post those up as well just in case anyone wants some custom elements.

I would imagine it would be the equivalent of cutting the steering shaft and welding on the bracket for a rag joint.

Glad you found some, best of luck with the flapper valve!

If you're having the whole system redone anyways, get a driver dual manifold and a driver single manifold and use the single manifold on the passenger side to eliminate the flapper. If you buy a used passenger side manifold, the flapper week most likely be seized. If I recall from your thread, you have an electric choke. If you're going back to stock, you'll have to break loose the flapper and then keep it well lubricated. Mine was frozen solid and all I could do was rip the butterfly out. I'm getting my exhaust done here soon and I picked up a driver side single exhaust just to do away with the flapper system.

My 56 Century has cam o matic wipers, so it must have been an option for the other cars.

Sorry I should have clarified but the shop manual says the steering column is attached to the manual gear box like a 55. There is no rag joint so I would assume you would have to swap the entire steering column out. Sorry

You are correct, the shop manual requires the removal of the entire steering column to repair a manual steering gear box. I have power steering and it's a rag joint.

Thanks for the measurements, yes that is much worse. That's not a 2:1 ratio, that is a 1:2 ratio. I did some numbers up for you. As shown, F1 is the force applied by the foot while F2 is the force applied by the master cylinder. In a 1:1 ratio, F2=2F1, or double the foot force being applied to the Mc. In a 2:1, F2=3F1, which is larger than a 1:1. But in a 1:2 ratio, F2=1.5F1, which is worse than a 1:1 ratio. To put into perspective, a 4:1 ratio nets F2=5F1. (Not 6:1, Typo ) In case a, using the F2 ratios attained and assuming F1 is about 10 foot pounds (in your case, Newtons... don't remember the conversion off the top of my head), a 1 1/8" bore master is equivalent to a .3375" master in the stock location, so the stock mc is more than adequate. Furthermore, in case d, the equivalent to the stock mc is a 1.77" bore mc with a 4:1 pedal. In case b, the amount of force applied to a 1 1/8" bore mc mounted in the stock position is equivalent to more than two times the stock master cylinder. Likewise, in case c, (just noticed I messed up the calculation, it should be 1/5F2=F1) the stock mc with a 4:1 pedal would require roughly half as much force. I hope this kind of helps. This does not take into consideration wheel cylinders vs calipers, but shows a relationship with operational capacity. Master cylinders generate pressure by fluid displacement of the bore, so the only thing that is relevant is the bore size and not volume of fluid. I want to bring up case b because the force is determined by the lever arm. For double the effort, you need to put more force on the pedal than 10ft lbs. The lever can only throw so much before you bottom out, so you will never achieve the top end of the stock throw arm, it will always be approximately half as effective. If you're at half of the throw at 10ft lbs to coast to a stop, not even an emergency stop with the stock mc, then the full throw off the pedal arm will be required for a 1 1/8" bore mc in the stock location. That's why any other mc in the stock location is nothing but trouble.

I'm check again with the local shop but last time I spoke to them, they didn't seem confident they could do it.

Thanks! The yard near me has no glass and the two big yards both 5 hours one way dont have glass either. I just don't want old windows with one new window that is thinner and lighter. Wouldn't be an issue if I was replacing all the glass.

I don't want to run the trouble of thickness and tint

1956 Buick Century 2 Door Hard Top Looking for a decent condition passenger side window so it matches all my others. I'm not in a place right now to replace all windows and summer is fast approaching. Light sweat is okay but not looking for fog. My original window was broken by hanging a ladder next to the car some years ago when it was the garage storage unit. It's still solid, but broken into more than five pieces and doesn't sit in the track anymore (can't roll it down).

Thank you NTX5467, I always admire and respect your write-ups. My understanding of the brake system, as you said, is all about the bore sizes. However, since the front wheel cylinders are 1 1/8" and the rears are 1" in diameter, I was able to look up what type of vehicles would have similar specs with MC bore size and 1" to 1 1/8" was pretty common through the 60s with a 4:1 or similar pedal ratio, MC mounted on the firewall. This leads me to believe if calipers engineered for 1" to 1 1/8" MC setup were used on these cars with pedals, then it should work here. Again it's all fluid dynamics and what sets the brakes in all system is the pressure applied to the fluid in the MC bore. The Buick MC has a 17/32" bore, but a 1:1 pedal ratio. The smaller bore applies more pressure to the fluid for a much smaller pedal ratio, but it doesn't do much in the way of displacing fluid. That's why the proportioning block on the frame rail was both a prop block and a residual valve, to keep fluid from seeping back to the master cylinder and leaving the lines primed. On the mid 60s with the 1 inch masters, such as the Corvette, they were all firewall mounted so they could displace fluid better and also apply pressure with the larger pedal ratio. This is what Thomas and I have been hunting for, a small bore master cylinder. Unfortunately no one makes them in a 1/2" bore unless it's a compact manual brake system, which doesn't take advantage of a power system. As far as under the car master cylinders go, I can't recall what it looks like down there because I still don't have my car back, but the dual exhaust makes room pretty scarce. Plus the frame rail is not 5" tall, so any type of power assisted system will hang below the frame rail. Filling and maintaining the system will also be a hassle if one does not buy a remote fill master cylinder. This is my driving factor for believing it should either be on the firewall or in the stock location, and as I've come to find out and obviously stated, only the stock MC will fit in the stock location. Funny you mention shoe lining, and a huge factor in going to discs for me, when I was buying shoes to get the car rolling before I did the front disc conversion, and later the rear disc, was that I could not get the car to stop well. I later looked it up and I guess it had to do with shelf wear on the pads themselves making them extremely brittle and re-lining them is out of the question unless they're riveted to the shoe. Even after the front disc brakes, not too long ago my rear discs wouldn't lock up when applying the parking brake on steep inclines. When I pulled the shoes for the rear disc setup, the shoes were worn in but they we're almost smooth to the touch like the lining was just wearing in such a way it was more of a lubricant than a friction material. Unfortunately, as it appears, the restoration hobby is becoming increasingly expensive and increasingly sparse. Many things like brake shoes aren't being made new unless special ordered. In the late 80s, when my uncle took the Buick on in his high school autoshop class (the guy who's responsible for tearing down my 322 and not putting it back together when he found the rocker arms chipped beyond repair), all the parts to get the Buick well maintained and back on the road were readily available. In comparison, some 20-30 years later, the best I can find are wheel cylinders and bearings, and the occasional regulators, brushes and condensers. TPart demand is already heavily dependent on private owners who manufacture their own parts, pretty soon it will be the only outlet for vintage parts. Another reason why I went to disc, these parts are used heavily by restomod guys and are readily available over the counter. In 10-20 years, that will also change and so on and so forth. I can't really speak for the braking performance of drum brakes because I was born into an era that did away with them, so I guess I don't know any better, but the drums are as good as the tuning done to them. Some people like them tighter than others for braking, and I think that's where most of the appeal comes from, because you can make them tighter for stiffer brakes or back them off for a more relaxed brake pedal feel. My father never liked him. He said he ruined a fishing trip one year jumping in his father's 1968 Plymouth Satellite and dropping it in reverse, locking up the auto adjuster and having to call a tow truck. His bi-annual adjustment didn't go over very well either, stating he spent quite a bit of time on each wheel to the point of frustration. Ever since I started working on this car, the pressure has been put on for disc brakes from my parents, my grandfather and every shop I've dropped into. I would love to keep the dual MC setup, but that also means some timely and expensive fabrications and parts are also included with what I have already invested into the car. It would require removing or modifying the fresh air plenum and relocating or removing the washer jar, which I'm not too fond of doing because it all works on my car. It's a nasty trade off, but if the original MC is rebuilt correctly by the right people who give you a lifetime warranty, then it should be as good, if not better than a modern MC. As you also stated, parking brakes then vs now are also much different. And if a line happens to blow, it would most likely be a rubber one and not a steal line, which are readily available and should be replaced when doing a restoration regardless. Anyways, thanks for the write up again. When I end up putting the original MC back in the car, I'll post the setup with a modern prop block for disc/disc. Would mount in the same location as the stock block, just Tee off the original master cylinder line so it splits and goes into both inlets. I'm still not sold on the dual master ideology as I've posted above with my mishap, all brakes were gone in the system and relied only on the parking brake to stop. While it may be true that it keeps one line from going out vs the whole system, my system popped on the front and the rear brakes either were unresponsive or didn't have enough pressure because there was no fluid in the front half of the MC bore to keep the back half piston from creating pressure. I'm a firm believe that it wouldn't have mattered how many ports the master cylinder had, there were no brakes period, and it was scary all the same.

You might want to pick up a new fuel filter, too. I'm surprised the car even started with it being that dirty.

Thomas, I had a discussion with the engineering division chair (pretty nice guy, retiring next year, lead me through Statics, Dynamics, Mechanics of Materials and Thermodynamics) and we got to talking about old cars, particularly my Buick. Since this is an issue we're both trying to resolve, I brought it up. First of all, the position angle of the master cylinder is set up to fail every single time. Take a look at the reservoir on the original master cylinder, it feeds through the top and at the back of the master cylinder so air bubbles cannot become trapped in the bore. Unless you bleed a new master completely level or near level to allow the air to escape to the reservoir, it will collect at the high points.This creates a spongey feel and even if bled correctly, the piston can suck air back in thru turbulence, especially on steep downhill roads. The OEM cylinder gets around this by having fluid feed into it at it's highest point, where it bolts to the booster. Second, using the stock pedal ratio will always be weak. Due to fluid dynamics, larger bore delivers more fluid but less pressure, hence larger pedal ratios, but we already knew this part. Since no one makes a master cylinder remotely close to our original bore in a power setup, this setup will always be inadequate and require more effort to stop the cars. The only way to circumvent this is to increase pedal ratio, either by relocating to the firewall or under the car (not at the toe board). This requires extensive fabrication in the body/frame and guess work to achieve the proper pedal. Basically what he told me is that single or dual master cylinder, the car isn't going to stop if the line blows, whichever setup you go with. As soon as a line blows in a dual MC, the spongey factor multiplies and you're really going to be using the emergency brake the entire time. I have first hand experience with this also. My daily driver is a 2002 Jeep Liberty. I live in the suburbs, but it's rural enough for game such as deer and elk. One day on my way to visit my girlfriend, a deer popped out in front of me and I had enough reaction to hit the brakes, at the expense of blowing the front rubber brake line to the driver side caliper. I want to take the time to point out that when I removed my original MC from my Buick, it was before this had happened and every shop I had ever talked to said dual MC is the way to go for safety and insurance. It's a gimmick, all it does is proportion the fluid and apply even pressure. I know first hand because when my line blew in my Jeep, which has ABS and a dual port MC, I had no brakes and had to limp home with the E-brake. This was last fall, too, a few months after I got my Buick back on the road. Basically what it comes down to is how stock do you want it? Going disc or drum is irrelevant because fluid pressure is generated by the MC to lock them up. In the kits provided, the vehicles used a 1.1" bore (front caliper kit) and a 1" bore (rear caliper kit) master cylinder, so we can assume the calipers are within reason that they should work within our parameters and pedal ratio is the key to proper brakes. If you want a new style, you can't mount it in the stock location and expect results - it needs to be relocated up or down. I've also seen remote MC setup where they're in the trunk, and I've also seen electronic assist boosters, but you will always run into the 1:1 pedal ratio error not giving enough pressure. If you're fine with the original setup, save up to have it rebuilt and sleeved so it's rust proof and get the lifetime warranty. My engineering teacher basically called me an idiot in a much more, professionally worded manner that basically spelled out KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid). I was adamant, hearing it from everyone on every forum I ever visited, and I concede now that doing any type of stock mounted MC that's not the stock MC is begging for disaster. Now don't get me wrong, I still feel discs are FAR superior to drums (self adjusting, quicker heat dissipation, almost little to no travel time when engaging pads, no spring fatigue), and they can be adapted to the stock MC. Just tee off the single outlet to go front to back and run it through a proportioning block. You shouldn't use the original, but I have heard it works for disc/drum. Personally I'm on the fence myself, retaining the stock MC or mounting a firewall booster, but will most likely revert back to the stock MC as you have done every single time. Less fabrication/expense. I'm personally done dumping money into magic fixes for my brakes...

Your reservoir will store the maximum vacuum from the engine, so on decel for me it's usually 25 inches of vacuum. At idle I get around 16-17 currently. My brake power is also somewhat inadequate, so I've been looking into trying this next: The picture is off of a 1958 Buick, but the same idea still applies. If you want a new style master cylinder, the only way to get the best brake power is with a larger pedal ratio of around 4/5:1 from the stock 1:1. The only issue I would have is relocating the washer jar, but 1957 has already done this setup and they put the jar front passenger side next to the radiator. I'm convinced it's either this way or an under the floor style master, and I'd rather not put one below the frame. Or stick with the original and hope it holds up with 20 cars around you in modern traffic.

Yeah that's the route I was planning on going for the time being. When money presents itself again, I had cross-referenced some springs from Moog, but with the car still in the shop for the differential, I just don't have it to measure the diameter of the springs, height, etc.

If I let the air out, the rear end drops almost an inch and a half lol

What coil overs did you use? I have adjustable air shocks right now but when the temp drops the car leans to one side and I just want to be done with anything "adjustable." I've done so much early on with this car already that I just want to keep it as simple as possible (KISS). Do you think a pair of HD shocks in the back would have solved your issue?

Last year when I got the car back on the road, I would have issues with the carb boiling or percolating due to the ethanol fuels. Every fill up I dumped a full can of Seafoam fuel additive into the tank and the issues ran away. I also run 92 Octane every fill up. Don't know if this will help, it seldom gets up to the 80s in Washington.

Same here, no emissions. My grandfather lost the title to my Buick, though, and man what a hassle that was! Ended up just being a VIN inspection with a 3 year hold on the title.

Congrats! Its funny how every state does things differently, in Washington, the inspection was for VIN only to get mine back on the road. Any reason why you need a safety inspection every so many years? Is it for all cars or just old cars?

Better pick up those roller rockers you posted, too!