Jump to content

Hubert_25-25

Members
  • Posts

    2,167
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Hubert_25-25

  1. These are what the steel pistons in my Buick looked like. I believe these are originals, but they could be .010 oversized, so not sure if someone did that from a rebuild or if the factory put any oversized pistons in?? Notice the lack of an oil control ring on the right piston. Someone slept through their engine basics class. Lots of reasons that I was glad that I pulled the engine apart. I see your babbitting had a porosity issue as well like mine did. So the reason I left mine alone and went with it is because I would have needed to have the babbit repoured, and I would also need to have the engine line pored again. Only my opinion, but it looks like you have cleaned the babbit surface well, and babbit is fairly soft. I would plastigauge it and use it. Whatever hard thing was in there, is no longer there. Clean the oil pan well. The crankshaft and flywheel are balanced separately. The difficulty with balancing the connecting rods and pistons is that unlike a modern connecting rod, there is no boss to grind on for balancing. Then you get into balancing the big end and the little end of the connecting rods. I believe all the aluminum pistons were already of equal weight. Attached is a write up on what I went thru to balance my connecting rods. My machinist was going to just leave it alone under the feeling that this motor would never see greater than 3,000 rpm. https://forums.aaca.org/topic/316231-balancing-connecting-rods/?tab=comments#comment-1796787 The last 2 photos are my oil pump drive. That is where the photo of the pin in my last posting came from. Hugh
  2. Geoff, Not unusual for a piston manufacturer to use 4 rings and I have even seen 5 rings. In my opinion, I would leave the rings alone. Regarding oil control rings I have always felt that they were lubricated from the oil entering from the ring internal side, and they held excess oil between the upper and lower faces of the oil ring. When I see them on the skirt, I always thought that was a way to hold lubrication near the piston skirt. When I rebuilt my 1925 Buick engine, I had been reading that it is not uncommon to go back in with 0 offset pistons. That is what I did. I have not noticed any problems. A picture would help for #4 but scoring on 20% of a main bearing cap does not seem like the end of the world. I noticed that one of my babbit castings had imperfections from the babbitting process. Attached is a picture. To send it back as a redo would have been a lot of effort so I just went with it. Oil pressure is great, so a non issue. I would plastigauge and shim as necessary. From the shop manual. "Piston and rod should be so assembled that the offset of the piston pin will be toward the camshaft when rod is replaced on crankshaft. There is a pointed projection on the cap of connecting rod and a pointed boss in the channel of rod. These must point to rear of engine." Consider replacing wrist pin bolts with drilled head bolts and wiring them. Replace lock washers with quality metallurgy. Observe in my first photo the accident waiting to happen. Good for you for pulling the engine down as you have done. While in there, inspect the oil pump screen quality and the integrity of oil pump drive pin. Hugh
  3. DJ, Most likely the problem is in the ignition switch. It probably needs to be rebuilt. Try using a jumper wire with alligator clips on each end. When you turn on the ignition switch, connect the wire between the ammeter post and the #2 post on the ignition switch. This should start the generator motoring. You could also check post #2 on the ignition switch with a volt meter. You should have 6 volts when the ignition switch is on. If the SG won't motor, the generator won't charge either. You could have worn out generator brushes also. As if electrical wiring isn't confusing enough, I also have it in Dutch . Everyone says it is a foreign language anyway. Hugh
  4. You can buy just the copper/non asbestos filled gaskets from www.restorationstuff.com
  5. Tom, I will e mail you some of this information as it will make it easier for you to get to your upholstery shop. Chuck Nixon (Texas) and Jeb Bailey (California) both have 1921 model 45 cars with side curtains. Chuck sent me the patterns to archive and I must admit that I have not opened them yet. I will do that soon as it sounds like there is a need for them. Both would be worth contacting for interior and top photos so that the upholstery person knows what you are wanting these to look like. Always start with factory or period photos if you can to know what is correct. One item to resolve is that there is a difference in the side curtains photos that I received. I am not sure which one is absolutely correct, and which is close. Here is my comment on that subject. Buick used 1 1/2" vinyl between the izenglass panels so that you could fold and stow the side curtains. This also prevented cracking if the panel was flexed for a door opening. It looks like the window was quite small on the early cars, and there was a large portion of canvas that brought less light in - but did allow the owner to fold the side curtain. You also have 4 rods that slide into the door pockets to make opening and closing the doors easier. One of the curtain sets I looked at only had snaps and you snapped yourself in. If you ever had to exit the car in a hurry, there would be a frantic attempt to undo snaps before you could get out the door. Not the best idea, but it may have been the reason for adding the rods on the doors to make the curtains integrate better with the door. Like many things there were improvements made each year. The other problem was that the curtains were not able to be folded and stowed in the car. You need to be able to keep these in the compartment in the back seat. If you have the 1920 Book of parts, that will show the details of what the side curtains look like. Attached are 1921 and then 1922 copies from the book of parts. Your side curtain rods are slightly different from mine. Easier to make. Also a couple links to get you started. If you do the convertible top, use tan on the inside as that is what was used, and it makes a world of difference to brighten the interior. Buick use tan inside on the side curtains as well. Hugh https://forums.aaca.org/topic/342011-1920s-buick-side-curtains/?tab=comments#comment-2016462
  6. From your description, your box is out more than an adjustment. An adjustment is if you have say 2" of play in the steering wheel. Pushing the steering wheel up - there is a major problem in the box. Pull it out, put it on a bench and rebuild it or send it off. They are not that complicated. You should be able to tell what is going on if you look inside. In the link is a rebuild procedure if you are going to do it yourself. I found enough wear inside, and very thick grease, that iI was glad I went thru it. I did replace one of the bushing. I replaced a felt seal with a lip seal. I have almost no play in my steering wheel. Hugh
  7. Terry, Congratulations out there in doo dah land. That is very exciting that you are now getting into those final stages and so many things are checked off and working well. Huge progress when you are down to the small stuff. Makes you wonder how it ever ran when there are so many things to fix. I am sure it will be a great video. Hugh
  8. Steve, I do not know if you have all these publications and if they will help your situation. Maybe one of these has some insight to the problem. Some if these are from different years with slight changes, but the concepts should get you there. Since it is occurring only on light load, start by pulling the clevis pin to the front or back brakes. Then you can do the same to the left or right side. That should help you isolate the wheel. Jack up that wheel. Pull the clevis pin on the brake lever arm. The part that looks like a big question mark (how appropriate). This will allow you to put light pressure on the brake while the wheel is rotated and you should be able to isolate the source. Hoping to resolve what ails your stopping and Larry's going. Hugh
  9. Hi Steve, Welcome and please post some pictures as there are very few 1925-25 cars and we are always looking to share information. My 1925-25 sounds exactly as you describe. I also have the advantage of using the larger 6.00-22 tires that came on the Master as those are the only ones available. They are good for a few extra MPH. In the sales catalog for the 1925-21 (Standard) it states " This wonderful car, built on a wheelbase of 114 3/8 inches, weighing 3,000 pounds, and with a Buick Valve in head engine that easily affords a speed of sixth miles an hour, is one of the outstanding values of the season. " Further for the 1925-44 (Master) " The seventy horsepower Buick Valve-in head engine, with which all Master Six models are equipped. permits a speed of sixty to seventy miles an hour....." Here is how two important specifications compare: Gear Ratio tires Standard 4.9 to 1 31 x 5 Master 4.54 to 1 32 x 5 3/4 So much for the sales hype. Maybe it is our trained ears, but my car does not sound "comfortable" above 50 MPH. Maybe it was "normal" to really have the motor singing, or maybe they sold more cars that way back in the 20's. I don't think even moving to a Master with 4.5 to 1 will be enough to instill that extra level of confidence for motoring at 60. Hugh
  10. They may be easier to make than to find, but perhaps someone has dimensions. They won't take a lot to fabricate. I thought they may have been tempered a little to make them stay in place with a little spring tension. That could be done with mild steel I believe if you quenched it, but you would have to look that one up. Thanks for changing the title. Hugh
  11. I do not think the head bolt tightening sequence is correct on that non GM worksheet. It goes against how I have been taught long ago about tightening cylinder heads. This is the correct head bolt sequence from GM for 1926 Buick. The Buick head is an odd bolt layout. It is treated with some bolts that are close together "as pairs" and works it's way in a circular pattern from the middle to the ends. Working evenly from the middle to the ends is how we do it today. That other one is very non conventional and I have never seen anyone tighten bolts down one side starting from the middle. That drawing has made it's rounds. This photo is from the 1926 GM export manual. Also made an update to the attached thread. This error is likely in many places where people have asked for Buick torque and head tightening sequence. Hugh
  12. I do not think the head bolt tightening sequence is correct on that non GM worksheet. It goes against how I have been taught long ago about tightening cylinder heads. This is the correct head bolt sequence from GM for 1926 Buick. The Buick head is an odd bolt layout. It is treated with some bolts that are close together "as pairs" and works it's way in a circular pattern from the middle to the ends. Working evenly from the middle to the ends is how we do it today. That other one is very non conventional and I have never seen anyone tighten bolts down one side starting from the middle. That drawing has made it's rounds. This photo is from the 1926 GM export manual. Hugh
  13. If you have an engraver, before and during disassembly, mark items with some nomenclature (arrows, numbers, front, left, etc.) to ensure that parts go back where they came off and how they came off. Take lots of photos. Make the assumption that if someone else pulled the parts out of a box, they could reassemble exactly as it was pulled apart. Many parts just need a cleaning and they can be reassembled in exactly the way they were removed. Pen or "marks a lot" marks can be washed off. If you are methodical, you can do well to give everything a deep cleaning and inspection and rebuild an engine for minimal costs. Hugh
  14. jrj2 Your Buick looks great. It just occurred to me after seeing Morgan's posting that you may be missing the manifold pilots. They are simply a ring of steel used to locate the intake manifold in the 3 places on the head. My standard has them. For your Master they are part number 166247. 1924 6 cylinder thru 1930 series 50 and 60. They are also shown in my intake manifold. Also, Please change the title of your thread from Standard to Master. It is confusing now that we are past that issue. Hugh
  15. Certain casting numbers do not show in the big book of parts. I added this one to casting number 198334 which may have been the one most used. I do know that for the transmissions, the casting numbers do not match what is in the book, so I have pencilled in numbers there as well. Since you have several Buicks, this would be a good start for understanding items that need to be sorted. Hugh
  16. I'll see what I can do Larry. I have your pattern. I have to finish my seats first. These have got to be easier than making rear window frames. Hugh
  17. Paul, I have been working on this item as well. Sorry that I have only been collecting ideas up to now. I did buy the materials, it is just not on the work list yet. Here are some of the options that you will need to consider. Covering - Vinyl or Stayfast. I decided to make a stayfast canvas cover so that it would match my top. The canvas is a little dressier, but it may take a little more effort to clean. Exhaust soot may also add to the problem. You should be able to throw it in the wash, or clean it though. Vinyl is very forgiving and has a little more stretch. Also a comment by someone about if you wanted to embroider a logo. The rubber internal to the stayfast may not make you the best of friends with an embroider person as it may have a tendency to get on the needle. I had no issues sewing my top, so I don't know why an embroider would have a problem. Piping - Some use piping, some do not. If you do use piping, the vinyl covered "cord welting" is a little more durable than the extruded embossed PVC. Attachment - I have seen string used and in a circle to make it tight. I have also seen lacing hooks or eyelets used for attachment. Lacing hooks would make it easier to remove and reinstall. You should compensate a little for a new spare vs a worn spare. I have seen durable Dot snaps used, as well as Velcro. You should determine what you want to use ahead of time. I think the smooth circle on the back side looks best, then all attachment can be made on the front side or underneath the carrier where it is not seen. Hugh
  18. The number on the head is on the top side of the head by the manifolds
  19. The engine metal tag says that it is 1926. These tags can be removed and reinstalled. Here is where it gets interesting. 189052 is the cylinder block assembly for 1926/27 Master. 1898040 is the cylinder block assembly for a 1926/27 Standard. You have 189052 (-5 is the casting run). I cannot find 191770. 191771 is the number for the 1926 Std 6 "upper crankcase assembly" It is difficult to see the numbers on the exhaust manifold, and I am not sure if you can find them on the intake manifold. What casting number is on the cylinder head? Hugh
  20. The U plate is easy to make. Use 1/8" by 3/4" steel. The hole spacing is based on using 2 pieces of all thread into the back of the switch. Regular nuts hold it in place.
  21. First of all, start a new thread if you are doing a different car. This is a Master Engine. Is there a Master engine in your Standard car? Almost nothing on a Standard fits a Master. I assume the 191770 is from the metal tag which is the engine number and not the casting number. This says a 1927 Master. That manifold is way out. I would get another one. Also if you are making exhaust gaskets, they either need to be the sandwiched type with metal on the outside and a bunch of perforations in the metal, or copper exterior like you get from Olsons. Anything else won't hold up. Hugh
  22. 189052 is a 1926-1927 Master Cylinder block assembly. 1926 Standard engine number starts with 143950 and ends with 1691750 1926 Master engine number starts with 1456915 and ends with 1691750 What is the block casting number, the cylinder head number, and the exhaust and intake casting numbers? Not sure what gaskets you made, but the manifold gasket is not normally a make at home gasket. That is one that I would get from Olsons Gaskets. Hugh
  23. Thanks to Brian Meek, I can provide drawings for the parts to install a proper Buick double tire carrier. In the process of making these drawings and looking in the Big parts book, I found one of the casting numbers. I originally thought (as did Brian) that this was for a Buick Standard, but now I find that this is a Buick Master tire carrier set. The difference is the rim is 1/2" wider on a Standard than a Master. My suggestion if you wanted to make these parts is casting in bronze, or fabricate from steel and have a welder attach the webbing. These parts would be much safer than leather straps. Hugh
  24. Larry, Glad that you had a successful trip. Points should not have given you any troubles. I got to thinking about matching condensors to the coil and went down this rabbit hole thinking about quality as well. Better quality or just paying for a warranty - but not a bad option if you just want to take the old one in and get a replacement. Consider the following choice. "Standard brand" is carried by many local auto part stores. They only go back to 1930 Buick, but that is still a Buick 6 cylinder. They sell 2 coils and 2 condensors. Blue Streak UC14 (6 volt, internal resistor ) limited lifetime $24 UC14T 1 year, 12,000 miles $17 https://www.standardbrand.com/en/ecatalog?year=1925 For the condensor, a similar thing. DR60 - limited lifetime $12 DR60T - 1 year, 12,000 miles $8 By the way, verify that your coil is negative terminal to the points? Hugh
  25. The uneven burning on the plugs is still bothersome and you say there is a miss. Consider getting some insulated pliers. Put a tachometer on the engine and remove and replace each wire and record the RPM for each removed wire. That would narrow down any cap or wire or plug issues. Hugh
×
×
  • Create New...