lump

When I was a kid, my dad had an engine for a 1921 or 22 Gray under his workbench. No idea where he got it, but he kept it to preserve it. One day a fellow member of the Southern Ohio Chapter of the AACA came by and spotted the engine lying there. When Dad told him it was from a Gray automobile, he said, "Hey, there is a guy in Cincinnati who HAS a 1921 or 22 Gray. He will want that motor as a spare!" Dad replied that he had offered it to that same guy for $25, but he turned it down saying he didn't need any spare parts. The visitor went right home and called the guy, and asked him where he would find a spare crank, head, or manifold if something happened to his car. In a few days, the guy called and reluctantly said he would take the motor. Dad said fine, it was $50 (Dad was very generous and supportive of other car collectors, so I suspect that the guy must have said something before which he didn't like; hence the increased price tag). Before long the guy came and got it. This was about 1971.

Neat thread! I've got a 1923 Hupmobile 4 cylinder car, still running and driving. But I have always wondered about rebuilding my spare engine with modern techniques and materials. I wonder if tactics like reducing weight of the rotating internal mass, adding some kind of balance weights to the crankshaft, etc, etc, would be worth the cost and time. And then I wonder if you would need to reduce the weight of the flywheel as well? And would it be a mistake to boost compression at all? Would there be any value in larger valve sizes, smoother (slightly larger) intake and exhaust ports? But then my wiser friends from the old car club are quick to point out that my old touring car cruises easily at 55 mph now. And besides, it's only got 2 wheel mechanical drum brakes, which are external, with wood spoke wheels. They point out that I don't need it to go faster, and it runs fine like it is. Still, I do wonder sometimes...

Since your flex plate is currently out of your engine, you may be able to check the engagement of your starter drive gear. It's been several decades since I did much of this kind of work, but I think you can mount both the starter and the flexplate on the engine, connect only the wire which engages the solenoid to throw out the starter drive,(NOT the wire which spins the motor) and then energize the solenoid and see how deeply it engages the teeth on the ring gear. (keep hands and fingers out of the way, and wear safety goggles). The starter drive gear ought to pop out and engage the ring gear, and you can see how deeply it engages. Then at least you will know where you stand. Use a camera or video recorder if you prefer, so you can look at it afterwards at your leisure. A safer way would be to simply paint the ring gear (as I sometimes did when I was a kid), and engage the starter several times. The paint will show how and where the starter drive-gear engaged; especially if you do it while the paint is almost cured, but not completely.

Back when I was a young hot rodder I ran a lot of high compression big block Chevy engines, which had a reputation for starter engagement issues. I spent a lot of time with my teenage buddies solving starter-grinding problems back then. Anyway, in my opinion, it's always to start out with a new ring gear when you can. But even that didn't always solve the problem back in the day. I tried many tricks, but one thing I learned was that using those shims which came with rebuilt starters usually made the problem worse, not better. The problem is often that the starter drive gear is not engaging the ring gear deeply enough. Indeed, by experimenting with spray paint, I found that many drive gears barely engaged the ring gear at all. Since those shims would fit under both starter-mounting bolts and move the drive gear even further away from the ring gear teeth, I learned not to use them. Keep in mind that I was just a teenager, with teenage friends. Most of us were perpetually broke (like most young racers and hot rodders), so we had to improvise. One trick that worked quite often was to use a small flat washer as a shim only on the outboard bolt (farthest away from the center of the crankshaft). This would tilt the starter slightly, forcing the starter drive-gear deeper into the ring gear. (I can't begin to tell you how many times my friends thought I was a really smart mechanic over this trick; especially when I didn't tell them HOW I had solved their problem. LOL). Of course, that's not the right way to do things, but it usually worked. Those shims which came with rebuilt starters were intended for use only in situations where the starter drive gear was binding in the flywheel because the teeth were meshing too closely. With our worn flywheels and older starters, this was rarely ever the case.

There is an old junkyard about an hour from my home which has several cars of this vintage still in it. I will look to see if I can find an air cleaner for you next time I'm there. If anyone has a photo of the correct unit, it would be a big help.

Great photos, Paul. That really makes it clear to everyone.

Really cool spotlight. The drum shape is very similar to the headlights on my 1923 Hupmobile, so I agree with your age assessment. As for value; such very uncommon items like this are hard to fix a price on. When very few exist, then even fewer change hands. It takes that one guy who is really looking for something like this, to really boost its value (check that...make it TWO different guys that want it on eBay.) Very cool piece.

Just for the record, as I recall the 4 door sport hardtop was the highest production number of all Chevy passenger cars in 1957, out selling all 2 door body styles and 4 door sedan cars too. I would guess that the same would be true for 1956 model year. Certainly you are correct that many, many 4 door cars (including station wagons) were cannibalized to get parts for 2 door cars, and then scrapped. We collectors in the early years of shoebox Chevy collecting needed parts which were non existent as reproduction, and since 2 doors were worth 5 or 10 times what a 4 door was (given the same condition), this seemed appropriate at the time. Moreover, since 4 door cars were often bought by more mature folks, more of them tended to survive, while 2 doors were hot rodded, wrecked, and raced since they were new. So we collectors considered them to be more common in the decades when they first started being collected. It's just the way it was. Like the poet said, "Twas ever thus!"

In the 55, the wide piece of anodized aluminum trim which covered the front of the dash horizontally was stamped with little black bow tie emblems, if I recall correctly. In 56, those little black marks were just rectangles. There are other small differences too.

Thanks, guys. Well done, as per usual!

Hello again, gang. While searching through photos from our swap meet events for another thread, I came upon this one of an unidentified roadster pickup. It was on the back of a truck when I took the photo, before anyone might have put up a window card with info on the card. As often happens during a show, I'll see something really cool as I'm whizzing by on my way to deal with some issue or another, and plan to come back later to check it out. Then I get busier and busier, and quite often forget it until it's too late. So, help me with this one if you can. I should state for the record that I know NOTHING about this small vehicle. It might be European, it might be custom made from other vehicles, it might be Asian...I just don't know. Any ideas?

Once we got an original 1966 or 67 Shelby AC Cobra with its original 427 engine and drive train. I cannot find any photos of it to share, so far. But SURELY I would have taken some?

This first photo is another Ferrari that visited us. Gorgeous yellow beast. Next one is a very uncommon 1937 Studebaker "Coupe Express" pickup truck. This one belonged to the late Dick Hammond, and had belonged decades before to his father. Dick found it and bought it back and got it restored in time to drive it to a few shows before his untimely passing. Wish I had more photos, especially from the front, with the hood down. Neat truck, which was built on the Studebaker Dictator car chassis.

I realize that each of us might have a different definition of "regular factory production," per your original post. But I hope we'll all find these photos of uncommon cars interesting, at least. First photo is a 1960 Bianchi "Auto Bianchina Special," apparently one of 1,500 made. Next is a Checker Marathon station wagon. Third photo is some kind of exotic Jaguar. Then a Ferrari, red.

We've seen a lot of uncommon cars at our CARS & PARTS SWAP MEET & CAR SHOW in Springfield, Ohio. I found a few random photos of cool cars from past events, to share on this thread. First photo is a 1918 Holmes. 2nd pic is an AMC Rebel Machine, 3rd photo is 1969 Mercury Cyclone "Cale Yarborough Special," 4th, 5th, and 6th photos are a very rare Cadillac station wagon. That's enough photos for this one post. I'll add more in a minute.

Tinindian, I understand your "slant" on the point better now. Yes of course, you can say your car is a "matching numbers" vehicle, since the numbers "match" IN THE FASHION THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO when they are indeed original to your car. On the other hand, those debates and discussions which we hear constantly in our car hobby, such as car shows, auctions, etc, etc....are entirely focused on vehicles from the mid 1950's and up, I believe. And as I mentioned before, such issues are focused almost exclusively on vehicles whose value and collectibility is substantially affected by documentation which proves that they were indeed equipped from the factory with very special high performance engines and components. In nearly 60 years of my involvement in the old car hobby, I have never heard anyone ask if my Hupmobile or other cars of that vintage had "matching numbers."

Tin, First, orient us all a bit more. Exactly what make/model/year car are you referring to, please? Once we know that, it is way easier to give you accurate information.

Good point, Keiser. I was up late when I scanned those photos last night and posted them. I remember wondering if the Hupp in the photo was an 8 cylinder car, because the hood was clearly longer than the hood on our old Model S, which was a 6 cyl car. Plus, as I mentioned, the hubcaps are different.

I find it fascinating to look at the "modern" cars which were at the car meet featured in the middle photo (with rear view of the Hupp). Now THEY are antiques; rare in their own right. Some of them are about 63 years old now...just like me!

My parents owned a 1929 Hupmobile Model S sedan in the late 1950's. (That's me on the running board in the first photo, with cowboy hat, in 1959) Mom and Dad wanted an open car, and eventually sold this one to a man named Bob Heller, who owned the old Clifton Mill, which still operates as a very old grist and flour mill in Clifton, Ohio. Later, Don Roetman of Beavercreek, Ohio owned the car for many years. Don was an avid Hupmobile fan, and was editor of the Hupp newsletter called the PARTS LOCATOR. Note that this 1929 Model S does have disc wheels, fender lights, and no cowl lights. The hub caps look a little different than the ones in the photo from the original post.

Also, years ago I heard of folks using "spray welding" techniques to build up surface thickness on rare old flywheels, etc, and then machining them back to correct tolerances. I would imagine that this process would be a feasible option.

There are a number of companies which offer Disc Brake Conversion kits, intended to convert cars which came with front drum brakes over to disc brakes. Nearly all of these kits use aftermarket rotors, calipers, and spindles, I'm thinking of companies like THE RIGHT STUFF DETAILING, and the STAINLESS STEEL BRAKES CORP, etc. You might contact them and find out if they offer a kit for 1969 Buick full size cars. If they do, you may be able to "convert" from stock original disc brake system to an aftermarket system, for which replacement parts are readily available.

Your point is valid, F&J..and is not really "...the other way..." from what I was trying to explain. VIN numbers, etc, are important for making identification possible for the vast majority of vintage vehicles, for sure. But the concept of a car being declared as, "numbers matching" refers to all the bolt-on components bearing date codes and/or casting numbers or part numbers in the exact sequence which would be correct for that one individual car. In the 1960's and 70's GM muscle car examples I was describing, there are date codes and casting numbers or part numbers on the carburetor, distributor, water pump, fuel pump, block, cylinder heads, intake manifold, exhaust manifolds, pulleys, bellhousing, flywheel, transmission housing, power brake booster, master cylinder, steering gear box, alternator, coil, rear end housing, window glass, etc, etc, etc. So when an owner claims his or her car is a genuine, "Numbers-Matching" example, educated show judges and prospective buyers expect ALL of those components to have dates which slightly precede the date on the "trim tag" which indicates when the vehicle was on the assembly line. And of course, these components must also bear the widely-recognized "correct" part numbers or casting numbers. Those "matching numbers" concepts really don't apply to much older cars, and are not of great consequence to judges and/or potential buyers...at least in my experience.

The shorter version I could have said, I suppose, is, "Don't worry too much about achieving a "matching numbers" status on your 1935 Buick. Enjoy the car.

I don't know enough about 35 Buicks to help you with specific numbers and locations, but I've spent a lifetime teaching folks about "matching numbers" on certain muscle cars, through books I've written, magazines I've written and published, seminars, and one-on-one demonstrations. So I have a couple of insights for you... The "numbers-matching" craze is actually oriented more towards muscle cars with rare and special performance drive train components, and some ultra-high point single-marque car show judging events (Corvettes, etc). For example, most collectors looking at a 1969 Z 28 Camaro are interested to learn if it has its original engine block, transmission housing, and differential housing; PLUS they want to verify all the bolt-on components with casting numbers and date codes are "correct" for that car. Why? Because muscle cars were generally driven hard and abused. Component failures were common, and most owners of muscle cars were constantly adding aftermarket parts in pursuit of more horsepower and better launches from the stop light. Engines and transmissions were swapped often, with the old original units lost to posterity. Carburetors, alternators, distributors, and exhaust manifolds were replaced commonly. Weak factory components (IE: Muncie shifter assemblies) were trashed in favor of better quality aftermarket parts (IE: Hurst shifters). Therefore, those few muscle cars and Corvettes, etc, which survived those halcyon years while retaining their original engine, drive train, and multiple components are pretty uncommon today. Thus buyers place a powerful premium on documented muscle cars with their original "matching numbers" components. Consequently, restorers and owners of vintage muscle cars are in constant pursuit of the "correct" components for their individual cars, hoping to make their car achieve the hallowed status of "matching numbers." Because that's where the value is. Moreover, most muscle cars were simply enhanced versions of ordinary passenger cars which the muscle cars sat beside on the dealer's lot. For example, there were many more "Malibu's" made than "SS 454 Chevelles," and many of those original muscle cars were destroyed by street racing, drag racing, accidents, catastrophic engine failures, etc, etc. However, lots of ordinary Malibu Chevelles were 2 door hardtops or convertibles with V8 engines...perfect for use in "cloning" or even faking an SS Chevelle with bolt-on components. And since an authentic SS 454 Chevelle is easily worth 5 times what a Malibu is worth, there is tremendous incentive for criminal fraud. And even the original factory documentation has been forged, with much of it available with any names or production codes you wish to order. With all this in mind, experienced collectors of vintage muscle cars have learned to check casting numbers, stamped numbers, and production date codes for components found all over these cars. For example, if you find a for-sale "numbers-matching" muscle car with an engine block bearing a date code that proves the block was cast AFTER the car was completed on the assembly line, you know for a fact that it is not the engine the car was "born-with," and thus that car is not truly a "matching numbers" original. By checking codes on all the engine components, power brake booster, wiper motor, etc, etc, etc...you can begin to get a more complete picture of the history of a muscle car, and MIGHT even uncover a clone being offered as an original. However, all this doesn't mean much for cars with very ordinary drive trains (ordinary for their own model year, I mean). Casting numbers which prove that a 6 cylinder engine block is original to a 1953 Bel Air, for example, have very little to do with value. ALL 1953 Bel Air models had that same motor, with none of them being extra desirable or more valuable. The only thing a "matching number" can prove (assuming it is "matching"), is that the engine was the same ordinary motor for that car. When potential buyers look at a 1953 Chevy for sale and see a Chevy 6 cylinder motor...most or many of them are not too worried that the block may have been replaced under warranty back in the 1950's. Essentially...so what? In my experience, this lack-of-concern about matching numbers is even more prominent in older cars. Example: if you find a wonderful big old Locomobile touring car in great condition for a great price, would you reject it if the motor or engine block had been replaced, or if the distributor had been produced a month after the car was finally assembled? I doubt it. Indeed, I think most people wouldn't care at all.