Jump to content

rustyjazz1938

Members
  • Posts

    82
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

rustyjazz1938's Achievements

500+ Points

500+ Points (2/7)

  • Reacting Well
  • Dedicated
  • Collaborator

Recent Badges

72

Reputation

  1. @Steve Moskowitz for half of the year in 1923, they made both the Model 43 four cylinder and Model 47 Light Eight models before switching to 6 cylinder production. My friend Aaron has one of the few (if not only) extent Model 43AB Brougham bodied cars (black enclosed car in the photos, my Model 47 is the maroon touring) and it has the features of a 1923 car (mainly the drum headlights). As to motor numbers I'd have to follow up with Aaron as I am more familiar with the 8 cylinder cars. @OLDMAN if your car has drum shaped headlights, then it is a 1923 (earlier cars like mine had teardrop shaped headlights). Another tell tale sign is the parking brake is a hand grip release as opposed to a button release. I have some more photos of my friends car, but I don't have access to them right now.
  2. That is a 1914 chassis. It has the chain drive on front for a starter which the 1913 did not have, but still has the integral cast exhaust manifold. It also has the improved transaxle design which was used on the Model 35 and 6 cylinder cars in 1913. The transaxle on the 1913 Model 25 was a different design similar to the Flanders 20 design.
  3. Kevin, I've used this company in Michigan with good luck in sealing tanks (both gas and water), I have no experience with the California location, and I don't quite know if this fits your bill with regards to distance, but it might be worth a shot? https://www.gastankrenu.com/gas-tank-renu-california/ Good luck and happy motoring! Rusty Berg
  4. @Rusty_OToole, I'd like to offer a counter to your statement. In discussions with @Stude Light, we both came to the realization that his 1923 Studebaker Light Six and my 1927 Buick Standard 27-27 have the same displacement engine. Both have 3.125in bore by 4.5in stroke for a displacement of 207 cubic inches. The Studebaker is a flathead engine whereas of course, the Buick is OHV. Factory ratings (always taken with grain of salt) were 63 HP for the Buick, and I believe 35 HP for the Studebaker (Scott please feel free to correct me). I believe the compression ratio for the Buick was in the 6:1 or slightly higher range which was high for the era, I don't know the number for the Studebaker. It really isn't an apples to apples comparison of course as age/price point differences come into play, but I felt it would be a valid observation to share that given the same displacement, one engine makes 28 horsepower more than the other with one major difference being OHV configuration versus flatheads. I won't get into the fact that the Buick being a significantly heavier car, the overall vehicle performance is about the same... 🤪. Just my two cents in the discussion. Happy Motoring, Rusty
  5. Larry, With all due respect, I think you've missed the 1910/1911 Model 14 Buggyabout which had a two cylinder valve in block motor: The car that was found is definitely interesting, and shows that there are still cars in hiding waiting to be found. Happy Motoring, Rusty Berg
  6. @Stude Light Scott, it was indeed an excellent day and a great show! Always glad to share the oddity of the early Oldsmobile V8s! I think your statement about power ratings might be a bit off, I've dug in the GM archives and found proof that the Model 47 engine tested at the rated 63.5 Horsepower on a dynamometer. No further information on test conditions or what the setup was (fan? Water pump?), so perhaps the rating could be a bit optimistic. Based on your acceleration statement, and I politely question your baseline for the statement, I think the only course of action is of course to do a couple of drag races to make a data driven decision in true engineering fashion. Happy Motoring, Rusty Berg
  7. The drum headlights, pistol grip style of parking brake, and the later style of ignition switch indicate this is a 1923 Oldsmobile. In the ad on Craigslist when I zoom in on the oil pressure gauge it looks to only go to 12 PSI which would indicate a 4 cylinder engine (hybrid splash and pressure). The V8s with full pressure oiling have a gauge that maxes out at 30PSI. I recall seeing this posted on Facebook as well where the marque expert Mark Santos also identified the car as a 4 cylinder (Model 43-AR). @dibarlaw That 1922 Oldsmobile looks familiar! 🙂 Thank you for the compliment! For reference, that is a V8 car (1922 Model 47-T) Cheers, Rusty Berg
  8. I usually hate to drag a post up from this far in the past, but I think it is valid for anyone who might want to have Russ do work on their speedometer. I just spoke with him regarding a speedo for one of my vehicles, and there is a critical address change since @Terry Wiegand made his post. Perhaps this has been updated elsewhere, but I found this post using Google, so who knows who might also see it. Russ' mailing address has changed to: Russ Furstnow 3545 West Kiltie Loop Flagstaff, AZ 86005 If you try to send something to the 86001 ZIP code, he will not receive it! Happy Motoring, Rusty Berg
  9. Get my 1914 Studebaker back on the road again. I had a spindle snap and I have been on the hunt for a replacement ever since. I have just located a decent candidate for replacement, plus I need to fix the damage to the car that happened when the wheel exited unexpectedly. The featured marque at the Celebration of Brass III (July 2023) at the Gilmore Museum this year is EMF (and the family of cars including Studebaker) so I have a solid goal to achieve.
  10. @pkhammer One last piece of information as I finally found the book I was looking for, I believe that car is a Series 17 (does not imply model year) SF-4, production of which would have started on Jan. 1916. This is based on the tank in the rear, and the fixed front passenger seat. Serial numbers were in the range of 474181 to 500369, and also 100000 to 109500. It's a bit tricky to keep straight as there was also build up for the war effort, and Studebaker wasn't necessarily following a model year convention. Series 18 cars were introduced in September of 1916, and had many similarities to the Series 17 cars (one notable difference is that the Series 18 front passenger seat can pivot).
  11. After looking at the pictures more, I think the car is a 1916 SF-4. This is based on the presence of a vacuum tank, and the intake being on the drivers side. In 1914/1915, the intake was on the passenger side of the car and was gravity fed from a cowl mounted gas tank.
  12. @pkhammer Like you said it's not a 1913, you are correct that all 1913 cars were right hand drive. Based on the photos, I think it's a 1915 (would need some more details to be certain). The headlights look like they are not the originals for the car.
  13. Spreading awareness of a post I made in the Studebaker forum: From a technical perspective, the key mistake I made when I redid the bushings and pins on the front axle was not getting the spindles Magnafluxed! I won't be making that mistake again, especially when working on parts of these axles where I need to remove the spindle. A simple check at a decent machine shop can make things a whole lot safer. Thanks for reading, Rusty Berg
  14. Spreading awareness of my posting: I am on the hunt for a pair of spindles for a 1915/1915 Studebaker SC-4 four cylinder. I could also make the heavier duty Bus/Delivery chassis parts work, although I'll need hubs and perhaps an axle to match. If you have something available please contact me through the forum direct messaging system. Thanks for reading, Rusty Berg
  15. I'll apologize upfront for the longish post, and for the fact that things have been very busy for me with the day job and other projects so I dropped off for a bit I'll also add to the start of this post with a statement that although I'm a bit bruised, I'm fine. The fine Studebaker design prevented this from being much worse! On with the show! I was out for an evening shakedown run with my 1914 SC-4. I've put hundreds of miles on this car, and I have always been impressed with how it runs and drives. I needed to make some minor adjustments to timing before I was to take it to a local cars and coffee event here in SE Michigan the next day. I was on relatively quiet roads near my house about to turn around and head home when the tragedy occured. My recollection is hazy, but I was turning on a side road with the intent to turn around to make a 3 point turn and head home and the next I recall was I was furiously trying to steer the car out of the ditch. My next recollection is finding the wheel on the other side of the road. In a daze I figured out something catastrophic had happened... The spindle had snapped. Looking back, I'm certain I had someone watching over me as this could have been so very much worse than it was. ☹️ I was able to get assistance from my folks, get the car drug onto a flat bed trailer with a winch and get the car home. Visual inspection of the remains of the spindle show that there was an unseen crack that finally propagated. I'd had the spindles off and cleaned them when I redid the bushings and king pins, a year ago but I do not recall seeing a crack. My key mistake was not having them Magnafluxed, but these are SO MUCH more substantial than spindles I've had experience with on Model Ts (I have never heard of a failure like this before with Model T parts) so I never gave it a thought. In the end, there is no telling when the crack started but the spindle held up for a very long time before failing. The next day, I would have been on much busier paved roads with traffic, so in some aspects a failure on a quiet dirt road was a benefit. I'm posting to share the news and make a request: I'm on the hunt for replacement spindles. Ideally a pair I can check (I need to Magnaflux the other one regardless), and hopefully use. My parts book shows for 1914 and 1915 the passenger cars used part numbers 16103 and 16104 for the passenger cars. With some help from @Stude Light, we found that parts 16101 and 16102 were used through 1918, on Bus/Delivery chassis in '14 and '15, and on all chassis '16-'18. I'd think that parts 16101/2 might be a bit more plentiful, but I'd need to find a set of hubs, and perhaps a complete front axle to match. I can make new bushings and pins (the new ones I made survived quiet well) but the spindles are a bit of a challenge. Thanks for reading, Rusty Berg
×
×
  • Create New...