Bloo

I agree go easy. A modern grease gun can break a casting easily. less is more. Restorationstuff.com has water pump grease in 2 brands, Penrite and Lubriplate.

It probably won't fit on the 383. I don't recall factory 6 packs on low-deck B engines like the 383. Maybe an aftermarket manifold exists? My guess is it is a factory setup and it fits high-deck engines like the 440 it probably came on, or the 426 (wedge) that could have been ordered in this car but probably wasn't. 69-71 I think, plus some LA340 engines in 1970.

When it works, it's open when hot so it shouldn't make any difference. Some guys take the plate out and I think that's a bad idea, because more heat will get up in the chamber around the carburetor without the plate. In my opinion it will run better overall once the heat riser works. My 36 Master SIx sure did. Every carbureted (or TBI) car even remotely modern, like from the 1920s onward, has a hotspot under the carburetor. It isn't always exhaust heat, sometimes coolant, but it's always there. Some 1920s versions need modification because there is way too much heat due to the poor quality of 1920s gas. From the mid 30s on, most of them work fine as designed. That can be a problem. The outfit I ordered my kit from (Then n Now) wouldn't even send anything until he had the stamped numbers off of the pump. I'm really happy with how it turned out. Since we are discussing vapor lock, and you have your fuel pump apart, you have an opportunity to check some things. Vapor lock is poorly defined, as there are a whole raft of reasons a carbureted car might not work in hot weather. One of the most common is fuel boiling in the fuel line under the car due to radiated heat from the pavement. In the old days it was an unwritten rule that you NEVER change a working check valve in a fuel pump because the new ones might not seal well. Well, today you probably have to change them if they have any rubber-like parts due to the ethanol. Check them. Rig up some stack of part of the parts, or a rubber boot, or whatever you have to do to suck on them with a vacuum pump (like a mityvac). Make damn sure those valves both seal, and if they don't, do whatever is necessary to get them to seal. They might not hold vacuum forever, but they should hold for a little bit. How effective the pump is at priming itself matters a lot in hot weather. If the pump needs to be wet with fuel to work, you're gonna have a bad time. Pinholes in the gas line going to the back of the car can cause all sorts of headaches for the same reasons. If you can plug one end of the line and suck on it with a mityvac to make sure it doesn't bleed down, that would be a good thing. If there are any rubber hoses, replace them, preferably with 30r9 fuel injection hose. It's expensive but it is highly ethanol-resistant, and since it has a liner, it is not prone to getting pinholes as it ages like the old hose for carbureted cars was. If you have the gas tank out, check the fuel pickup tube for cracks/holes too. I'd put on a sock filter too if it doesn't have one. Another thing I checked when I had my fuel pump apart was fuel pump stroke, because I wanted to know. Some cars will wear the fuel pump lobe off of the camshaft and then have mysterious fuel delivery problems. I partly assembled the lower body, pump arm, diaphragm, etc and bolted it to the engine. Then I cranked the engine to see how much diaphragm movement I had. Sometimes you can find a spec for this, sometimes not, but I had about 1/4" which looks fine for my little pump, so no problem. If you check this while the pump is apart, then you know it is ok if you have fuel delivery problems later. IMHO that is the way to set up an electric pump if you are going to have one. I haven't had to, as my 36 has been working fine even in 106F. Admittedly it does run a little flaky when it gets that hot, probably due to the accelerator pump in the carburetor boiling dry. It never stops running. I drove carbureted cars for most of my life, and there may be little things I do without even recognizing it to stay out of trouble. For instance, I probably wouldn't shut it off for 2-5 minutes in weather like that and try to restart it. It might be fine, but that is really pushing your luck. When starting in really hot weather I would rev the engine up a little to make sure the pump is primed and has filled the fuel bowl. I have quite a bit of confidence in the pump, but better safe than sorry. I admit it would be nice to have a button to push at the beginning of the season to fill the carburetor. I drive it pretty much daily except in winter, so I don't usually have an empty carburetor when starting the car. If you do it, put the pump as far back as you can toward the tank. It is way easier for the electric pump to get a prime when it doesn't have to deal with gas is boiling in the line under the car.

Well outside of completely rebuilding it or finding another one, you'll just have to get it freed up. Get some MoPar heat riser solvent, MOPAR #4318039AD, best penetrating oil ever. Chrysler calls it "Rust Penetrant" now that they haven't made heat risers for a few decades. Amazon probably has it. Spray some on the bushings, inside and outside, every day for about a week. Then try tapping on the end of the shaft with a small brass hammer. Just a couple of taps on each side, don't hurry it and don't overdo it. If there are bushings in there, you don't want to separate them from the housing, because then the heat riser will be sticky and unreliable. Don't use a steel hammer because it might mushroom the shaft, and if my method doesn't work you will need to get the shaft out. You DO want to shock the rust. It is brittle. That's why brass is better than plastic or something. So, just a couple of taps on each end, then put more heat riser solvent on and the next day a couple more taps on each end, and more solvent. Do this every day until you see it move to the side a little. Don't force it. Once the rust is broken up the solvent will get in real good. Spray more on and wait another day. On the next day, try to work it a little. Maybe it just comes loose. If it turns a little but isn't really free, spray more solvent and wait another day. It can be done. This usually works. Patience is everything. It goes a lot faster if the car is running, and you can heat cycle the parts by driving it every day, but obviously that is not an option here. If for some reason it doesn't work I have more ideas but none near this easy or cheap. Do you have an acetylene torch?

HAHA @carbking you posted while I was typing. As usual, you were right on target. I know it is a bit irrational that I wont use Nitrophyl, considering the dearth of really good solutions, but I classify it like duct tape, automatic transmission sealer, and engine overhaul pellets.

Nitrophyl floats are complete rubbish, and caused a rash of completely preventable carburetor failures in the 80s and 90s. As @joe_padavano said, if the buoyancy is wrong they have absorbed fuel. If it's not too bad maybe you could bias it, but it will continue to absorb fuel and change. Some automakers, GM for sure, wanted you to weigh the float on a scale to see if it was bad. That was pretty much a waste of time, because the nitrophyl floats had a useful life of about 80k miles, but if the carburetor was apart, it had probably already done most or all of 80k. In practice you NEVER put an old one back in unless you wanted to see it come back with a sunk float in a couple of weeks. You can buy blocks of nitrophyl and carve your own if you want, It has been done to replace cork in much older carburetors. Cork must be sealed, and the original sealer (shellac) does not survive in modern fuel. I have heard recommendations lately to seal hand carved Nitrophyl, too, and yes that will probably make it slightly heavier than pure Nitrophyl. Another thing I have heard suggested lately is Balsa. It must be sealed too, but supposedly it starts out more buoyant than Nitrophyl, so maybe you could hit the buoyancy sort of close after you seal it. Of course there is always cork. It must be natural cork though, not the kind that is ground up and bonded together with rubber. That kind of cork is too heavy. Airplane dope and gas tank sealer are a couple of things that might do for sealer for any of those three materials. If it were me, I would find a brass float of about the right shape and solder your arm on. Any replacement you make is probably going to have the wrong buoyancy and need to be set by trial and error.

Short answer: A tire dealer who deals with over-the-road trucks and buses. Long answer: There are three distinct types of rim that people refer to as "split rims" 1) True split rims. These split down the middle and have no visible external split. No one will work on these, really no one. 2) Locking ring rims. These have a ring that comes off on the outside to get the tire off. This is the one you need a truck shop for. They will know how to work on these and have the appropriate equipment, like a safety cage. 3) Rims that are split across the rim perpendicular from inside to outside. This is the easiest of the bunch. It is seen on a lot of teens and 20s cars. No tire shop will have seen one in 60 or 70 years. It might be better for the rims if you read up and learn to do this one yourself, because they can get bent during mounting. It is quite a bit of work though. It would help to know what you are working on.

The adjustabole main jet leads me to believe this is probably an aftermarket carburetor. I'll bet @carbking can tell us what it is.

It just about has to be those you highlighted. I see more wires. Back up lights probably?

I agree, that is a totally screwball contact setup for a cutout. I am very familiar with the Chrysler Alternator setup though, and it has only one relay inside the box, the voltage regulator. Alternators don't need a cutout because all the diodes that are already there to rectify the Alternating Current prevent reverse current flow. Alternators do need a way to shut the field off so it doesn't drain the battery. Chrysler just did it with the ignition switch. That means an extra 2 amps or so through the ignition switch. Chrysler just made a beefier ignition switch. GM and Ford added a second relay to turn the field on, and then bled enough current through the idiot light to bootstrap the system. This doesn't look like a GM or Ford regulator to me though. They have spade lugs and some sort of plastic connector on the wires. Chrysler did use an Autolite 2-relay regulator that sat on top of the generator in the mid 30s, and one, or rather the lack of one, turned up in @Professor's thread about his 1936 Chrysler. The generator had 2 wires hanging out the top like this too, instead of the usual terminals. I don't quite believe the parts we are seeing here are really for a 1929 Graham, as just about every car in those days had a simple cutout. It is possible for earlier cars to have a voltage regulator, Heck, Hupmobile had one in 1915, and then dropped it, so it is possible. You just don't see it much before about 1935. Hey @Graham Man, do you happen to know what model of generator and cutout (or regulator) belongs on this 1929? As for the weird relays, the quality of new replacement regulators made in faraway lands is definitely in question. I have not heard a single positive review of one yet. Delco and others back in the day used different precious metals on the contacts depending on whether it was a positive ground or negative ground application, intending to maximize life. Today no distinction between positive ground and negative ground is made in mechanical regulators. The units were made of copper and steel, yet somehow the new ones weigh much less. Much of the original engineering must be left out, I can't think of any other explanation. My guess is that they are just using the same relay frame for any purpose and hoping for the best.

Nothing from the 20s stops like now, but 4 wheel brakes stopped so much better than two that some of the earliest ones had a sign on the back to warn other drivers.

It only matters if it matters to you! In the prewar era, SMOOTH was a big deal. Yes, people loved their bucking snorting model T's, sometimes more than anything else. If you were going to step up a bit, and learn shift a crashbox, you probably wanted smooth. Since the musclecar era, we tend to think of a faster car as being lighter. Not before the war. A fast car was a BIG car. The roads were terrible. If the wheelbase was long, and if the car was heavy in relation to the wheels, that was smoother. Maybe you could go a little faster while being smooth. If you were on a concrete highway (lucky you!) and your wheelbase was long enough, maybe you would feel the expansion joints only once instead of twice. A four cylinder engine is not naturally in balance. It is close because as one piston goes up, another is coming down, but the distance from the crank is different. The vibration does not completely cancel, at least not without balance shafts, and no automaker I am aware of did that in the 20s. People also used to drive around in high gear all they could. The best car was the one that could pull a given hill without downshifting. Six cylinders are in almost perfect balance naturally. Remember that the engine is probably mounted to the frame solidly with no rubber. It's smoother. There are also more impulses per RPM when it is lugging down pulling some hill. Some automakers dug in with their fours insisting that bigger cylinders pull hills better, total engine size and all else being equal. That's probably true, but the six might also be a bigger engine, and its smoooooooth. An eight isn't as perfectly balanced as a six, but it's not bad, and it has more impulses per RPM than the six. It's really smooth. It's probably bigger and has a bit more power than the six. You're doing pretty good in the stock market, right? It's not 1929 yet. Go ahead, splurge...

@m-mman is on point. You can't set the voltage because there is no voltage regulation. You will find the current in the book is a bench test value, and the generator would probably overheat and throw solder if asked to run that high. 8 amps is about right for most cars. It's too much in the daytime, and not enough at night. A good setting requires some experimenting as driving habits make a huge difference. Ideally you want the battery getting just full as you park it for the evening. A third brush generator can't be run without a battery (or some substitute load) because the voltage will run away with no regulation and burn up the field coil. I can't help but wonder if that happened some time in this cars past. Maybe that little resistor gave it's life to save the field coil. If you can figure out what the resistance value was, maybe you can get some nichrome wire and rewind the resistor.

There is no voltage regulator in that setup. Chevrolet used that in the mid 30s. In my opinion it is brilliant. On a 3rd brush alternator of the "normal" type with only a cutout, it will keep charging as hard as it can when the battery is full because there is no voltage regulation. Driving at night there was never enough current, and driving in the daytime with a fully charged battery there was too much. This system you describe sets a lower charge rate with the headlights off, and matches the car (or tractor)'s needs far better, while still allowing the driver to turn the charging system on high if he knows his battery is low. It was a huge improvement over what was typical at the time, and all it took was one extra switch contact and a resistor to accomplish.

I disagree that it is for an alternator. That is the tractor version. The cutout is the relay on the left and the voltage regulator is on the right. You can also see the current winding on the regulator (the exposed heavy piece of magnet wire) that runs from the vehicle side of the cutout, which is also the "L" terminal, to the "BAT' terminal. This is all documented (badly) in that PDF I linked earlier in the last page or two. The text doesn't make much sense, but the illustrations match this. The L terminal powers the lights on a tractor. I agree that is is the wrong unit, but I still think it might work. I am unclear on what behavior is supposed to be "new" in the tractor unit with the "L" terminal vs. the automotive versions (going back to the mid 30s) that have no current winding and no "L" terminal (and work fine). If it makes any difference at all, it probably is not an improvement when not being used on a tractor. One thing I am unclear on from the PDF is whether they eliminated any other windings on the relays when they added the current winding in that "L" terminal version. If the windings are all there, you could just connect to the "L" terminal instead of the "BAT" terminal and you would be back to the automotive version. http://www.navioneer.org/riprelay/The Navion Files/Delco_Remy_Generator_Regulators.pdf I would still like to know what make and model of generator we are working on. Are there any tags? Any numbers?

Yes, GEN and ARM or A are all the same thing. That terminal connects to one of the main brushes inside the generator. I also suspect this is the correct regulator for a system like yours. I am never 100% sure without complete information, but this one looks right.

Who made the generator? is there a tag on it or anything? How about the original regulator? What are the numbers? I think if it were mine I would try to get the old (original?) regulator going, but I would probably start by using the one the rebuilder put on it. New production mechanical regulators don't have a great track record, and I certainly wouldn't be buying any more of them for now. Maybe it's fine. Have you used it and was it not working? What was the original issue? As for replacements, one that was linked way back early in the thread mentioned a "b circuit". "A circuit" and "b circuit" refer whether one end of the field is grounded, or if one end is connected to power. That is a common distinction in 2-brush systems, but I would expect a 3rd-brush-plus-regulator system like this with 2 relays inside the box to always be an "a circuit", so that one probably wasn't right.

@GrahamPaige29, if you do have a look at the brushes, please take note about which main brush the third brush is closest to. I would expect it to be closest to the main brush that connects to the armature terminal. If by some chance it is closer to the main brush that grounds to the case, we will need to know it in order to make any decent guesses about how things should work. I found the document that describes a third brush with regulator system with an L terminal for a tractor. While most of the it is spot on, the section we are interested in, the one that describes the "combined voltage current" regulator, seems deliberately obtuse and misleading. http://www.navioneer.org/riprelay/The Navion Files/Delco_Remy_Generator_Regulators.pdf And here is Delco document 1R-116 that @Peter R. posted in a Pontiac thread that describes normal 2-relay third brush setups without the "combined voltage current" feature and without an L terminal. https://forums.aaca.org/topic/371632-generator-for-1936-deluxe-8/#comment-2302632 I'm not sure these documents help at all, as how to proceed will probably have more to do with what @GrahamPaige29 finds out when he has a closer look, but I thought you guys might want to see them.

Quite a few other cars had the tank up in the cowl by the mid teens, Hupmobile and Studebaker by 1914-15 for sure.

It really shouldn't have fluid out that far. I don't think a new one will help with a leak. Have a look at this: https://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/threads/speedometer-cable-leakage.438724/

This thread is drifting Furthur and Furthur..... 🤪 The firewall will narrow it down because it will match other trucks. It sure is looking like Ford. The trouble is trucks kept a lot of the same body and chassis structure for years in those days. Without the front sheet metal, or even with it sometimes, it is very difficult to determine a year unless you can find an ID plate, as @joe_padavano already mentioned. I would expect there is one from the chassis manufacturer, which might be most useful for determining a year and truck model, and also there is probably one from the body manufacturer. Look all around the firewall outside and inside, around the kick panels inside, and around the door.

Oh yeah. Those. 1965 and back I think. I gather it's too far gone to just put a new core in?

I wouldn't be in a big rush to order that regulator. I am not sure it will work, and am trying at this moment to figure it out, but I don't think there is enough information there. Also it looks like there might be camera distortion making it look narrow, and it might be a 3 relay regulator for a 2 brush generator. In any event, it doesn't look like it is meant to mount on a generator. Is there something wrong with the regulator you have?

Yes, the case must be grounded. The only difference on a positive ground car is all the current flows in the opposite direction. Everything else is the same. The charging current flows in a circle, from the Armature brush, through the cutout, then it branches 1) to power stuff in the car and 2) through the ammeter to charge the battery. Then, the two branches come back together where they ground. Then the current goes back all the way to the generator case, which is connected to the other armature brush, completing the circle. Or, maybe it flows backwards, it doesn't matter. No part of the circle is more important than another, so bad connections anywhere will cause you grief.

99% the big one is the Armature (provides charging current), and the little one is the Field (used for control). I too would want to know for sure, in case someone modified it badly. Is there a band you can take off to inspect the brushes? Here is what I would expect to see. The biggest wire should go to a main brush. The other main brush should be grounded. These 2 brushes are directly across from each other, and might be larger. The smaller wire should go to the field, which are the windings in the outer housing of the generator. The other end of those windings goes to the third brush. It's the one at an odd angle compared to the others, and it might be smaller.