Bloo

If they are new there could be anything inside there. On this one below, there is right at the center a threaded shaft that apparently goes to the diaphragm. There are 2 nuts there in the center, presumably an adjuster and a jam nut. It might be important to hold the second wrench solid so you aren't twisting things up too much. The tension on the mechanism and the diaphragm probably all gets changed together. On something more modern I would expect them to move the adjuster off to the side somehow.

Is there a number and brand on the coil and can you look it up and see what cars it was intended for? On a majority of US cars with 12v systems, a ballast resistor, sometimes a wire you can't see, was used. The coil would run on a lesser voltage during normal operation, probably 7 or 8 volts, and then get sent everything the battery had only during cranking. A lot of US 12v coils should work fine because the 7 or 8 volts they expect is about the same as the 7.2-7.6v a 6v car probably has when it is running and charging. If the coil turns out to be applicable for stock replacement on any 1960s or later major brand US cars, there is a good chance you don't need to change it. During one of the periods when you can't get it to start, see if you have a nice hot spark or not.

Replica tires with the Ford script were produced until fairly recent times in 16 inch, but I have not seen them lately. They were probably 650-16, but might have been 600-16.

On any of them you are adjusting the tension on the mechanism or diaphragm. If you don't see an adjuster sticking out of the flat bottom toward the ground, then it's probably hidden under those domed covers. My guess is the domed covers have a screw in the middle holding them on. Someone else will have to come up with the interval.

I SHOULD have taken it apart that way. It would have been easier. As near as I can tell 2 bolts in front and probably more like 24 (for a guess) back at the running boards and cowl. I might still have to. I dread making that part with a drill press. If it comes to that I guess I will do it. I'd really like 3 of them.

Let's talk about water pumps. 1936 Pontiac water pumps. This thread wasn't supposed to be about water pumps, it was supposed to be about water distribution tubes. Some time ago after a conversation in a thread with @Rusty_OToole, and a little testing with a thermal gun, I became convinced my water distribution tube is bad. My car likes to run at 190F, with a thermostat or without. It seems happy enough there, and yes these cars do have a reputation for running a bit hot. Still, it seems high. That might be because the temp sensor is in the top of the head in the back. That has to be the hottest part of the engine, and may not be representative. On the other hand, the symptom of a bad water distribution tube is the inability to cool the back of the engine properly. If anyone is wondering what a water distribution tube is, and what has to happen, have a look at this: This isn't my picture or my car. It is @1964carlito's picture of a water tube job on his 1939 coupe. It shows you exactly what has to happen. His thread from back in 2017 is here: https://forums.aaca.org/topic/290634-1939-pontiac-flathead-six-cooling/ I have spent the last few days trying to get my radiator out without disassembling the whole car, and it is not going swimmingly. It's about 105F outside, every single day. I can't even see my water tube yet. Let's talk about water pumps. My car has 2 zerk fittings on the water pump. It shouldn't, or at least it probably shouldn't have any zerk fittings because Pontiac supposedly never did that, except in 1937 and then only one for a needle bearing at the front of the pump. What Pontiac did use were oil cups, and sintered bronze bushings. The oil soaked through the sintered bronze bushings to get to the shaft. In 1938 they went directly from packing pumps with oil cups and sintered bronze to modern cartridge bearings and modern seals, with only that one exception for a front needle bearing in 1937. Later on, Pontiac offered modern sealed cartridge bearing water pumps for earlier cars that never had them originally. Maybe the aftermarket made some from scratch as well. That brings us to this pump that was in the trunk when I bought the car. Apparently it had been on the car at one time. It was all rusted and stuck. I think this might be a real GM part. It can't possibly be original. It is a more modern casting made to use a modern bearing and seal. I have seen others like it on Ebay. The remaining paint on it looks to be early 1950s Pontiac dark green. I never took this one too seriously, thinking I might rebuild it for a spare when I get around to it. Yes that is a bolt. Yes it is in a pipe thread hole. Yes it is glued in that pipe thread hole with black silicone. Unfortunately that was a harbinger of things to come. A few years back there were a bunch of 1933-1936 Pontiac water pumps on ebay, all NORS from the same rebuilder. One of them had two oil cups on it and matched the picture in the 1936 shop manual. I bought it. I figured If I ever took the water pump off for any reason, I would just swap this out. Taking a closer look though, I decided to take it apart. The packing nut was loose and it seemed to turn harder partway around. Bent shaft? Maybe not, it was subtle. The back plate was no good, and I have a another thread going about possibly making some of those. Most of these 1933-36 remanufactured pumps are sold without a back plate at all so I probably would have had to make one anyway. The front impeller clearance was REALLY loose, about .080 or so If i remember correctly. I don't know what "normal" is but that sounds way too loose to me. I also noticed the oil cups were in backwards making them more difficult to reach, so I took this pump all apart. And that brings us to the pump that was on the car. It works fine as far as I know. It had to come off anyway. Seriously? Is that enough silicone? Excuse me while I bang my head on the table. The bolts holding the fan on were three short and one long. That can't be good for balance. They were mangled. I think they might have been 1/4-28 bolts in 1/4-20 holes, but that is still unconfirmed. In any event they weren't what was holding the fan on. It wouldn't come off. Apparently someone pounded on the fan hub and mushroomed it. It wouldn't even move. Excuse me while I go bang my head on the table some more. A little work with a dremel sanding drum and some whacks with a brass hammer got it off. This pump did have a better back plate. Not good by any means, but usable in a pinch. More silicone, and a gasket too. They must have bought the big tube. The measurements? Impeller face clearance: ~.013" Tip clearance: ~.020" Back clearance (forward, no gasket): ~.022" End play: .011" The shop manual does not give complete specifications or really any good clues, but there is no doubt in my mind that this pump that came off of the car is way better than the other two. I will find a way to use it, but what about those zerks? More to come....

I was just wondering if the cutter could countersink like that. I didn't think so, but I had to ask. I have access to a Bridgeport mill, and I have a drill press. It would be no big deal at all for 2 or 3 plates. If I had to make a whole pile of them in order to get the job done, and then try to resell them, I can see it being a bit of drudgery doing a whole bunch of them manually. That doesn't necessarily mean I wouldn't do it.....

Thank you all for your responses! I must admit I have not followed up on any of these leads yet, as I have been distracted trying to get the radiator out of the Pontiac without removing the nose. The shop manual says it's possible but I have my doubts. It shouldn't take this long. It has been over 100F here for a couple of weeks and that isn't helping. Hopefully I can bring this thread back to life with some kind of update in a week or so.

Stainless would be nice. Unlikely I think, but nice.

The one I am familiar with looks exactly like a motor driven horn, but under the cover it had a vibrating mechanism and points and a diaphragm inside not unlike what you might find in a 1976 Cadillac. They were bragging in the ads about low current draw compared to conventional horns of the time. I guess this is a different horn.

Tuto (2 tone) and Rexo (about half the cost) were horns from the same maker. The original horn on my 1913 Studebaker may have been a Rexo or a Rexo II. I have documentation saved somewhere, old ads I saved that might help sort it out, but I can't find them so I'll have to sit on the sidelines and wait and see what everybody else says. Just googling now seems to date the Rexo II later than 1913 though. How sure are you it is ahoooga? The horns I speak of are not, despite their looks.

USPS has special no-hassle "international" money orders for sending to money from the US to Canada. They are pink. Ask for them.

I have a 1936 Pontiac Master 6 that should take the same headlight gaskets. The gasket is cork with a rectangular cross section. As I understand it the cork should not be the type that is cork dust bound in rubber because the gassing of the rubber will cause tarnish of the silver plated reflectors. I got it at https://www.stevesautorestorations.com/ about 5 years ago. I don't believe it was the cheapest but they did specify that it is pure cork and some of the others either are not or do not specify. You cut them to fit. I would try to stuff a wee bit extra if possible because cork shrinks. Put the split at the bottom. Good sources for parts include @Kornkurt here on the forum (especially for NOS, but he is always my first call). California Pontiac Restoration is also good. https://www.pontiacparts.net/ . Their website has been less useful than I would like for some time recently, so I would call to see what they really have. Master cylinder rebuild kits are still available. I believe wheel cylinder kits are too. The wheel cylinder cups are standard items available by bore size, so even if you can't find kits a wheel cylinder rebuild is often not a big deal. If the bores in any cylinders are too pitted up to seal after honing, you can get them sleeved in stainless steel or brass. I have used Brake And Equipment of Minneapolis, MN for sleeving. They use stainless and do a beautiful job. https://brakeandequipment.com/ . They can reline brake shoes too, if those turn out to be unavailable. The 35-36 shoes are a little weird as I recall. Another source for brake related stuff and relining is Brake And Clutch of Seattle, WA. https://brakeandclutchsupply.com/ . If you replace shoes, I highly recommend getting them arc ground to match your drums. That can still be done in MN. I'm not sure if you would have to ship them your drums. Probably. The brakes will look decidedly modern. They are sliding anchor type Bendix, almost like some brakes that were still on new cars in the early 70s. One crucial difference is that your brakes have centering adjustments that newer Bendix brakes do not. Get a shop manual and learn how to set those properly when you reline the brakes. Welcome to the forum!

Probably because the thermostat wouldn't have much control over temperature. @Brian_Heil outlined how they approached it on the 3.8. They figured out what the minimum radiator bypass size was that would get the job done, and then adjusted the size of the radiator to make up the difference. If you bypassed just the thermostat, people in Florida, SoCal, and Saudi Arabia might not notice, but they design these cars to work everywhere.

I looked at those when I was needing something for my truck, but in my location I don't think I could trust that not to plug with dirt. It would work fine in some climates. Is that a problem? What threads do you want? I think most of the freestanding factory installed rattle cap types on older cars are 1/8" NPT. I believe those 37 Chevy ones I mentioned are 1/8" NPT but I don't have one here to look at. I get all sorts of odd things there but never thought of them for an axle vent. Thanks.

My condolences.

I have no idea. They could have fixed one rust hole with that money, and the car would be better for it.

Assuming a modern type thermostat with a copper and wax pellet to move the valve, you would drill the hole in the flange somewhere around the outside.

One thing that seems to be getting lost in this conversation is what we are bypassing. Drilling a hole in the thermostat is also a solution that comes up often in forum threads about newer cars. An example would be using small block Chevrolet "Vortec" heads on an earlier non-Vortec block, leaving you with no bypass. Similar situations exist on other engines. A bypass hole (or holes), or the Buick bypass valve, or a bypass hose all bypass the radiator. Drilling a hole in the thermostat bypasses the thermostat. That doesn't necessarily mean one is bad and one is good, but they are different. The bypass valve we have been discussing, as well as the 1/4" hole it gets replaced with always let hot coolant bypass the radiator. It ALWAYS does this. Since there is flow the thermostat gets hot water and opens before some other part of the engine gets boiling hot, as outlined in @Brian_Heil's post. That 1/4 inch hole is always open however. It shouldn't flow as much coolant once the thermostat is open, but always reduces cooling efficiency because some hot coolant can bypass the radiator. The thermostat, however, works as intended. Speaking of the thermostat, you have probably seen factory holes in them. Tiny ones. In fact, the original Harrison bellows-type thermostats used in 1930s Buicks, Pontiacs, and others have a hole so small it is almost invisible. I have never seen a hole so tiny in a modern thermostat. This is for a different purpose. It is so you can fill an empty cooling system and get coolant all the way up to the thermostat before it ever opens. Otherwise the engine would have to overheat a little before you could get the rest of the coolant in. There is a downside though, a lot of water gets through the hole, more than you would think, and on modern stats the hole is bigger too. This prevents the thermostat from doing it's job as well as it could. Some modern thermostats have a "dingle ball", it is a little valve that opens to let the coolant in when you fill the system. Once the system is full and the coolant hits it, the valve closes and the thermostat works as normal. This is all completely unrelated to bypassing. If you have no bypass at all and drill an 1/8" hole in the thermostat, that lets a lot of water through. I have heard drilling as many as three 1/8" holes recommended. That will solve the problem of getting hot water to the thermostat when the engine is cold, just like a bypass would. The trouble is the thermostat really won't have much control over engine temperature... at all. On the good side, you do not have any coolant bypassing the radiator, so you don't lose that portion of cooling capability. Pick a side.

That was the deal. 600 miles on a tank. 30MPG I believe you had to have overdrive (optional). Definitely a Mobilgas economy run contender, probably a winner. In 1950 they increased the displacement slightly and the 600 name went away in favor of "Statesman". It probably didn't quite make 30MPG anymore. I doubt you would get 30MPG on today's gas anyhow, due to the lower energy content of the alcohol and other additives.

The first one screams Ford by it's looks. It has 3 bolt mounting similar to the later Ford sliding pole starters, but uses a Bendix. Ford was using a setup like that in the early 60s for sure, and probably the late 50s.

Maybe they folded them on top of each other? I am not sure. You would still need to be able to get the bolt in. They used a bolt at the top, but off to one side, away from the ring gear as far as possible. Frankly I wonder if it would leak. This came up in 1937 when Chevrolet went to real seals. They put a vent with a rattly top, not far off from what a modern one is, about halfway up the torque tube up on top, threaded in. Apparently they threw oil. There was a service bulletin about it. I would really like to know how badly the rattly top vent on the torque tube leaked. There shouldn't have been much oil there. Chevrolet wanted you to remove the vent, and plug the hole. Then you were to either drill and tap the axle housing about halfway out and screw the vent in there, or do the drilled bolt with cotter pin trick on a cover bolt, up high. away from the ring.

If you put in modern seals everywhere in it you will have to do something. Chevrolet's cure, or one of them anyway, was exactly what @Grimy suggests, except they had you put a cotter pin through the hole in the bolt. They didn't say why, but I assume it was to have something loose and rattly in there to discourage insects from plugging the hole with mud.

Isn't there a central pipe sticking down the middle of the upper piece, locating the gasket on the flare? It looks like it in the pictures. Wasn't that what the Waldron rep was potentially going to lengthen?

I have used a lot of Wurth products when working in European car shops, but have never seen that particular exhaust paste and I am not sure what it is or what it is like. If someone said "exhaust paste" to me, the first thing I would think of is Walker Acousti-Seal. It might or not be similar to stove cement. Acousti-Seal is a black tarry substance that you don't want on your hands because it will never come off until it wears off. It cures with heat and becomes fireproof but brittle. It is most useful for slip joints in exhaust, because it seals them, but what is rarely mentioned is that the joint will seal up with less clamping force, and also that it acts as an INSULATOR. This is a big deal because when it is time to take the slip joint apart, it won't be as warped, and the brittle Acousti-Seal will break up and turn to powder when you twist on it. Better yet, if the slip joint still won't come apart, when you put a torch on the outer pipe it will expand a lot and come off, because the Acousti-Seal acts as an insulator. If the joint were instead allowed to rust together, the torch would heat up both the inner and the outer pipes and both would expand and the joint still wouldn't come apart. Acousti-Seal can be good on flat gaskets on exhaust pipes as well when the flatness of the flanges is questionable. It wouldn't have occurred to me to use it on a donut gasket because they are meant to move a little, but I wouldn't be opposed to trying it. Maybe extending the pipe would help. Some flanges like that do have a little more pipe that extends through the donut. The thing that stands out to me is that the plates were clamped together tightly. Normally I don't think that would be true with that type of donut gasket. Maybe the donut is a little too small and the flanges are bottoming too soon?