Jump to content

Fleetwood Meadow

Members
  • Content Count

    356
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

92 Excellent

About Fleetwood Meadow

Recent Profile Visitors

1,352 profile views
  1. On my ‘52 Cadillac there is this loop of metal that can move back and forth about 15 degrees. What is it for? What is the purpose of it?
  2. On my ‘52 Cadillac there is this loop of metal that can move back and forth about 15 degrees. What is it for? What is the purpose of it?
  3. Aren’t they part of Laferriere’s collection? He has a collection of cars in a factory down the road from the police station.
  4. Being unable to make the lights any brighter than they were, which probably was right for that car, I converted them to led. I picked a bulb that was about the same brightness for both dim and bright filaments. The led is very distinct on the bright light. You can tell I’m hitting the brake and when the directional is on. And the bonus is that it barely draws on the battery. Since I bought the taillights I bought the front directionals and the flasher. They work beautifully now.
  5. It’s time for me to replace the tires on my cars and the old debate pops up. Which tire size should I get? My ‘51 Dodge Meadowbrook originally had 7.10-15 bias tires on it. The guy I bought it from out 225/75/15 on it. So when I changed them I put them on too. As I’m looking at different conversion charts they are saying 215/75/15 or 225/70/15. Being a little green on tires I’m not sure exactly what makes one tire better or worse than the other. I understand the fundamentals of the tire sizes but not necessarily the functional difference between them. Anyone willing to shed some light and thei
  6. I’ve been battling that honing tool all day. I tried using oil like it said to and I wore through a whole stone in 15 minutes. I couldn’t believe it. And it wasn’t even close to round. So I cleaned The cylinder and used another stone and I got it close to my end measurement. I am trying to get to 3.8330”. That puts it .020 over the 3.8125-3.8145” standard bore. I got the top to be within .001” and the bottom to be within .001” but every time I lower one of those spots the middle bores out. The middle is .005” oversized from the rest of the cylinder. That makes, roughly speaking, the top 3.833
  7. Well I took the engine apart and did my measurements again. Pretty big taper so I bought the Lisle 15000 cylinder hone. I read a lot of stuff about dry honing. This seemed contrary to common belief but I thought alright I’ll try it. Plus the instructions said I could. Got the #6 cylinder back in round and almost got rid of the concaved ridge at the top where it seems the piston rocked. Took the rest of the night off feeling proud of myself. Had my friend come over to see the progress. I was doing great on a new cylinder and then I hit the bottom of the cylinder where the crankshaft si
  8. Ben, what do you think would be the issue? What am I overlooking?
  9. Ben, I installed standard rings and my compression was at almost 40 and I had blue smoke coming out of the odd bank’s tailpipe.
  10. Using a dial bore gauge I got my measurements for the ‘52 Cadillac. I set it to be within factory standard specs and this is what I came up with. I can see out or round and I can see taper from the measurements. Is that all it was that caused my low compression and oil consumption? I’m assuming I need to bore these to .010 over now. Knowledge me up on this because this part is new to me. T - Top (about an inch down) M - Middle B - Bottom (about 1.5-2 inches from the bottom) H - Measuring rod was horizontal V - Measuring rod was Vertical
  11. Using a dial bore gauge I got my measurements. I set it to be within factory standard specs and this is what I came up with. I can see out or round and I can see taper from the measurements. Is that all it was that caused my low compression and oil consumption? I’m assuming I need to bore these to .010 over now. Knowledge me up on this because this part is new to me. T - Top (about an inch down) M - Middle B - Bottom (about 1.5-2 inches from the bottom) H - Measuring rod was horizontal V - Measuring rod was Vertical
  12. Found a gouge that I didn’t feel comfortable with on that crankshaft so out came the parts car engine. I haven’t taken it apart yet but I know I will need to smooth the metal where the harmonic balancer goes.
  13. I did. There is a hole there. There are 8 holes on the damaged one. I saw online that there are some crankshafts that only have 7. I feel like that would cause that bearing to not get enough oil. I’ll check the casting numbers and make sure this one is acceptable to be used.
  14. Looking at the area where the other oil hole should be doesn’t show an indication that there is a hole covered by anything. I feel like without a hole it will create friction and that will cause the bearing to bind and wear out. The crankshaft I have in the engine now shows holes where every bearing is. This one shows 7 holes for 8 bearings.
  15. I was planning to replace the crankshaft I have in my ‘52 Cadillac and as I started cleaning it I realized that the space for the #8 connecting rod did not have an oil hole. Is that normal since I have never seen a spot for a connecting rod that does not have an oil hole? Won’t that restrict the amount of oil that that bearing gets and therefore burn out that bearing? Or is that an acceptable crankshaft design?
×
×
  • Create New...