Bloo

This type of regulator is used with a third brush generator. The two relays inside are a cutout and a voltage regulator. There is no current regulator, so a third brush is still needed. The difference between this and a normal third brush and cutout setup is that there needs to be a field wire brought out. The other end of the field is still connected to the third brush. Some systems in the mid to late 30s had a setup like that from the factory. If it is a generator originally intended for a setup like that, the third brush is probably non-adjustable. If it is a conversion of the original generator, the third brush can be set higher than it could have reasonably been set with just a cutout, but must be still low enough that the generator won't overheat. That means substantially less than the rated current listed in the manual, usually.

Whats special about the speedo cable?

Chrome wants vats of cyanide in addition to the chromium itself. Contamination issues aside, I don't want any of that around. I'll tackle almost anything on a car, and I have done zinc, but zinc can be done with chemicals you already have in your kitchen. Chrome may be expensive, but it is worth letting someone else do in my opinion.

I am 6'3 and I can drive one. I don't remember how cramped it was or wasn't, probably pretty cramped, but I did it. I agree the lever is probably a Mitchell overdrive, a nice thing to have.

A typical C body battery cable has a big wire and a smaller wire at the battery post end. Both go along the trough in the inner fender, then the smaller one goes to the start relay and the big cable heads down to the starter. These were always a problem to make a really good one with no kludges because most of the aftermarket cables, which tend to be crap anyway, either had a bunch of extra wires at the terminal, or they had one extra but it was too small. Too small isn't really a big deal when it is only 5 or 6 inches long, but you had to solder and heatshrink it out in the middle of a wire. I tried to repair the original cables whenever possible, but they were usually too cut up. Some battery dealers can custom make cables, and put a second wire of a large enough gauge in before they crimp/solder/heatshrink the positive terminal on. This is probably the best option. I have also seen Chryslers with a cable that had only the large cable, and then a lug attached around the cable partway down. The big cable went to the relay and attached with the lug, and then went on down to the starter. I think your car is too new to have this, but I can't remember for sure. I guess it is obvious to make one of these you would have to cut the insulation back, make a lug, and solder it on. It might not be pretty. @JACK M nailed it about the hot spot. That is where the trouble is.

+1 for @nsbrassnut's comment about washers. I am trying to remember if I have ever seen lock washers on head bolts. I don't think I have. A thick, hard, flat washer is a common way to mount a head. No washers at all wouldn't surprise me either. Today traditional split lockwashers are largely discredited. You won't find many on an aircraft. In 1936, the automakers were still putting them on almost all the other fasteners.

Almost. The most logical guess here is that it originally had just a cutout and someone installed a regulator. To do that requires a second wire be brought out. The biggest wire would go to the Armature, as that is where the charging current comes from. It must go to the mystery terminal if you have no A or ARM. F should go to the Field (small wire). B or BAT goes to the ammeter, you can depend on that one. L would be unused. This is only a guess. Your mileage may vary.

It doesn't look like the one for the Chrysler alternator. It is too big and the wrong shape in my opinion. Some regulators intended for tractors have a lighting terminal. Offhand I don't recall why. Is there a fourth connection on the other side of the regulator?

Not just Model T. Probably not all Model T. It was about running out of gas, not the transmission. Factors that might limit your ability to get up a hill face first: 1) Gravity fed fuel. 2) Gas tank location. It is under the front seat in most Model T touring cars. 3) A hill steep enough to put the gas tank below the carburetor. 4) A hill long enough to run the car out of gas in the carburetor before it reaches the top. There are plenty other cars out there that could have the issue and probably did, my 1913 Studebaker 25 included. Cars with the tank up in the cowl would have far less trouble if they had trouble at all. You don't see too many hills that steep on roads still in use. Knapp's Hill in Washington State (replaced in 1936):

Ok, I'm confused.... Sometimes a moderator moves a thread that was in the wrong section and then it goes completely off the rails when there is no context, I get that, but based on @David Temple's comments I don't think that is what happened here. If this was not originally posted in the CCCA section why are we even talking about the CCCA? EDIT: @Matt Harwood posted while I was typing. Maybe that is what happened? Ads do pop up in the CCCA section pretty regularly that won't generate any interest there, partly because they are off topic, and partly because the group reading CCCA ads is much smaller. EDIT2: @David Temple, @Matt Harwood's original comment is a common sarcastic take on something that has been a highly contentious issue in CCCA circles for decades, for reasons far too lengthy to type here. It probably wasn't aimed at you in any way. @David Temple, I hope you find a good home for it. All the best.

They used to re-use head gaskets in those days.

South American Chevrolet Phaeton, circa 1934-35

I looked through my pictures and unfortunately don't have anything to help. There are a couple of 37 owners in here though. My 36 would likely be different. What is it about your oil pan that makes you think it may not be right?

People of a certain age always used "Emergency Brake". Taken in the context of prewar cars, it is more correct. Take a Model T Ford for instance. If it does not have accessory "Rocky Mountain" brakes, the service brake is on the driveshaft and if you break an axle, the nearly useless brakes (no lining) on the back wheels are all you have. I was reading an owners manual for some non-Ford brass or early nickel car a couple months ago that had 2 wheel drums with external contracting bands attached to the brake pedal and internal expanding shoes attached to the lever. In a panic stop or runaway situation, you were advised to use the pedal and the lever simultaneously to get maximum braking. if that isn't an emergency brake I don't know what is. When hydraulic brakes came along, it was well understood that you could lose them due to a hydraulic failure, and no doubt many people argued mechanical brakes were better because this couldn't happen. A driver with hydraulic brakes would have been well aware of his emergency brake. Hudson used to have a mechanical backup on their hydraulic brakes. If you lost the hydraulics and the pedal went too low, the mechanical brakes would engage. As I recall, it was advertised as a safety feature. And the mechanical brakes they used for that? I believe they were the same ones the ratcheting handle pulled. Common use of the term "Parking Brake" is definitely from a more recent era. Most emergency brakes are fairly useless if the car has any speed on, but it is better than nothing. Prewar drivers were a lot less concerned about brakes altogether. Speed limits were fairly low, and cars were low geared, resulting in a lot of engine braking. A good driver was expected to descend a hill in the same gear he would climb it in, resulting in even more engine braking. In the early 30s some makes offered "free wheeling" to save gas. This quickly turned into a fiasco because even the service brakes could not be expected to stop the car effectively in the mountains without the help of the engine, never mind the emergency brake. By the mid 30s free wheeling was considered very unsafe, and most on them were disabled. Parking was often done by leaving the car in gear, or by turning the wheels against the curb when there was one. Many cities required turning the wheel to the curb. Of course you would use the brake too if you were parked on a hill. I'm not sure anyone of my parents age would have trusted the ratchet mechanism enough to let the brake to hold the car all by itself. Although no doubt someone was using the term in the 30s or before, "Parking Brakes" mostly became necessary because some early automatic transmissions do not have a parking pawl, and require a parking brake to park. Automatics are mostly a postwar thing. That probably had something to do with the common use changing. That, and the fact that they aren't really worth much in an emergency, especially at today's speeds. If any automaker dared call one an emergency brake today the lawsuits would be never ending.

1932 DeVaux? 1933 Continental Ace? I don't have to google it. I'm surrounded. 🤪

It is possible, just complicated and expensive. Others have done it. Buick is a poor choice of a car for such a conversion, as the torque tube acts as most of the suspension links, and when you remove it, there is little suspension left. The only car I can think of that would be more complicated is a 1950s Nash. On Buick's with coil springs, most conversions I have seen involve using the long "Truck Arm" control arms from a 1963(?)-1972 Chevrolet 1/2 ton 2-wheel drive truck. These have geometry similar to the Buick torque tube, and like the Buick, only require a Panhard Rod to function. If the Buick has leaf springs, I don't recall if there is a Panhard Rod. The side-to-side location might be handled by the springs(?). No other suspension functions, such as torque reaction or front-rear axle location are handled by the springs. The suspension collapses to one side when the torque tube is disconnected, as the springs are shackled at both ends. in this case, you will need some springs intended to take axle torque, and you will need to mount the springs from a normal spring hanger in the front rather than the Buick shackle. You might look at Oldsmobiles of about the same year as they had open drivelines. The other issue is the T5 transmission itself. First of all there are two front bolt patterns, GM/Chevrolet and Ford, but after some specific year (1987?) GM/Chevrolet started using the Ford pattern. The GM/Chevrolet pattern is the one used on the Saginaw and Muncie passenger car transmissions of the 60s and 70s, and the Ford pattern is the one used on Ford passenger car Toploader 3 speeds and 4 speeds. You should find out which bolt pattern the adapter fits. The T5 input shafts can have various lengths, splines, and pilot bearing diameters depending on the original application. At the rear of the transmission, most T5s have an extremely rearward shifter that will be way under the front seat in most antiques, possibly behind the front seat. This includes the Mustang and Camaro/FIrebird transmissions. Additionally, the Camaro/Firebird has the transmission leaning at an extreme angle, leaving the transmission mount flange at an extreme angle when the transmission is mounted upright in a normal car. The fill and drain plugs are located for the original tilted application. The usual way around the shifter problem is to use a transmission from an S-10 pickup or Astro Van, as it has the shifter further forward. It is still much further back than your transmission, but might not hit the seat. Most of these are the "Non World Class" version of the T5, a fairly ordinary and weak transmission that happens to be in a similar case to the "World Class" T-5. The "World Class" version is the one that uses automatic transmission fluid, and has all the needle bearings and lined synchronizers. These have higher torque ratings and the "snick snick" shifting that made the T5 famous. World Class T5s do exist for the S-10/Astro application with the shifter forward, but they typically have Ford bolt patterns and no provision for a mechanical speedometer. Your original transmission (and mine) have a very low profile on top. Not only is the shift tower extremely short to not protrude through the floor, the shift rails are in the sides of the case and the whole top plate is quite low. At some point I compared my Pontiac transmission to the T5 from my truck, and as I recall the t-5 was roughly 2.5-3cm taller. The floor would probably have to move up. There is no clean way to bring the shifter up on top of the transmission, the S-10/Astro location is as good as it gets. I saw a posting on another site where a guy custom made a linkage to get the shifter up on top, but then it needs even more floor clearance. I estimated the floor would have to come up about 7.5-8cm. T5s for conversions like this are usually made up from more than one transmission, using an S-10 tail housing, probably an early one that can accept a speedometer gear, and internal parts from one of the stronger World Class Mustang transmissions. You may have to do some machine work on the output shaft to move the speedometer drive gear to a location that will work with the the older S-10 rear housing. My advice is if you are going to do this, measure everything carefully, and above all else, build the transmission first.

The second red circle is not the valve adjustment, it is for checking valve timing with a degree wheel or something similar. You might want to do this if you suspected the timing gears (or chain?) had jumped, or if you suspected a flat camshaft lobe and did not have the engine apart enough to see, or if you suspected an incorrectly ground camshaft, etc. Valve clearance can change the valve timing numbers a lot, so there is a specified clearance to make the check. Most likely you would want to do this if a car was running horrible and you suspected the cam timing had jumped. It will always be a little late due to wear, but it should not be more than a whole tooth late! You can mathematically derive how many degrees a tooth is. There is usually a picture of the gears or sprockets somewhere in the manual that can be used to count teeth. I checked this on my Pontiac by using a dial indicator on the tappets with the side covers off and temporary marks made on the balancer made by division. On some cars it might also be possible to use a dial indicator with a foot on it through a spark plug hole, depending on where the spark plug is located in relation to the valves. A 1930s mechanic would have just taken the head off. It is much easier on a car of this age than taking the balancer and timing cover off to look at the gears. So yeah, nothing to do with what @Professor is doing. What he needs is the first red circle. Like a lot of flatheads they want you to set it hot. Its usually impossible . Ok, someone is going to jump in now and say it isn't that bad but in my opinion it is an exercise in frustration. What I would do is set them all about .0015-.002 too loose cold and then CHECK them hot. Make notes on how much they need to change, change them when cold, and recheck hot. Flatheads usually are expected get tighter with heat, and more on the exhaust valve than the intake. But, if by some chance this one goes the other way, that would show up too. @Professor, Off topic a bit, but one thing I believe you should do is verify the accuracy of your top dead center mark while the head is off.

How does one recognize the 232 engine or head?

It is correct as far as the flasher goes. As for the rest of it... it depends. It depends on whether your car's turn signals are sharing bulbs with the brake lights or not. If it does NOT share the bulbs, the rest is very likely to be exactly like the diagram you posted. If it does share the bulbs, there will be separate switch contacts and separate wires going to each of the four corners of the car for signals.

The freeze plug is a Buick factory fix, and has a hole in it so there is still some bypass. Maybe it is for the 320 only(?), not sure about that.

I believe Graham and a few others had metallic paint in the late 30s. I have seen pictures of a couple cars I believe were original. The sparkly stuff was different and made of something no longer used (fish scales maybe?). The particles were extremely fine, and the paint was not as shiny as a solid color. It literally looked metallic, probably closer to anodized aluminum than anything else, but more dull and subdued. I don't believe it can be duplicated in modern paint. Hey @Graham Man, do you know anything about this?

Is this a factory system in your Lincoln? Does it share bulbs with the brake lights in the back? What is it doing wrong? Not coming on at all? Coming on but not flashing? To answer your question, power goes through one wire to a flasher terminal, and from another flasher terminal through another wire to the switch, just like on the diagram you posted. If there is a third pin on the flasher, it is normally used for the flash indicator located on the dash or signal switch housing. It needs to be there for cars that have only one dash indicator bulb that flashes for both directions.

I would try the VCCA forums, those guys know more details than you would think possible. https://vccachat.org

If the alternator has only one insulated brush, you need to run a mechanical regulator with it. Both brushes have to float for the electronic regulator. Chrysler says not to run the mechanical regulator on a car with electronic ignition, but I did it for years with an orange box ignition, and no issues. Still, it sounds like you have stuff that wont work together, so you might as well do it Chrysler's way and run an electronic regulator. Don't connect to any screws. The screws go into the alternator case aluminum, and are grounded whether the associated brush is or not. That may well be the problem. If there are 2 brush wires, one of them goes straight to the key. All of the old roundback alternators have a grounded brush and can only be used with a mechanical regulator EXCEPT the 1970 roundback alternator, which has both brushes insulated. The squarebacks (1971 up) have both brushes insulated. Wiring for the old mechanical regulator is real simple. power from key >> regulator power terminal. regulator field terminal >> insulated brush on alternator. Wiring for the electronic regulator goes like this: Power from key >> regulator power terminal (center terminal) AND ALSO to one alternator brush. Regulator field terminal (outer terminal) >> other alternator brush. It does not matter which brush is which. The difference is the old mechanical system sends 12v to the field to make it charge, but the electronic regulator grounds the field to charge. That is why the mechanical system can have a brush grounded and an electronic one absolutely cannot. Both types of regulator must have the regulator case grounded. They are usually bolted to steel, but if they weren't, there would need to be a ground wire to the regulator case. It is possible to use a squareback alternator, or a 1970 roundback with the old mechanical regulator, you just have to ground one brush. You can't go the other way because there is no way to un-ground a brush on a 1969 or earlier roundback. Mechanical regulators have two fuse wires inside. They can usually be repaired, though most people don't know. On the electronic ones, toast is toast. Electronic regulator looks like this: Mechanical one looks like this: A roundback alternator looks like this, note one brush is grounded: A squareback looks like this, note both brushes are insulated and have spade terminals:

Unlikely. Also, that picture is not what it appears. The rabbit hole runs deep though. Here's a start: https://telstarlogistics.typepad.com/telstarlogistics/2008/01/on-the-road-in.html