Bloo

I would expect it to be driven by pins and acted on by springs and weights, with no easy way to come completely undone. Are you sure the shaft is turning? I looked in my parts book, and the distributor is Delco 639-U, or at least that is what Pontiac was supplying as a replacement for a 1930 six when my parts book was published in 1937. Unfortunately the exploded view in my book is of a much newer model. Maybe @32Pontiac6 will know something.

Hi Maik, Transmissions of similar construction were used in Buick 40 series as recently as 1938. Larger cars have a completely different transmission. I don't know if a whole transmission from another year will fit. For the internal parts it takes a Buick parts manual to see what internal parts from other years might fit. What parts do you need? Similar transmissions were used in Pontiac from mid 1935 through 1937 or 1938, and also in some Oldsmobiles. These transmissions are not close enough to fit directly, but may use some of the same internal parts. Here is a thread where I overhauled one from a 1936 Pontiac. Welcome to the forum!

I like the Gremlin better too, but the Pacer is more of a fun drive. Pacers are one of those cars that are hated on by people who have never driven one. This one has the AMC engine and a 3 speed overdrive(!). As Pacers go, this is a winner. You are unlikely to see another equipped this way.

The solder will follow the heat, so once things are heated up and solder is flowing, the torch may need to go in what seems like an unlikely place. Good luck!

Honing is never desirable with the pistons in.

How was that attached originally? Are there cracks? I would be more inclined to use hard solder (sliver braze) or bronze, unless the existing joint is already soft soldered. If it is, the old soft solder would interfere. With that drain plug in the spot it is, I would guess this needs to be more mechanically solid than you would typically get with soft solder like 50-50, especially if there is damage like cracking. Good luck whatever you do.

I have a plain Marauder, a 1970 390 2-barrel car that was my dad's daily driver until 2002. A quick way to tell a 69 from a 70 is that a 69 has a Mercury emblem above the grille, and a 70 has "Marauder" in block lettering. Another way is the ignition lock location, which on a 70 goes sideways into the steering column, unlike the almost-in-the-dash setup you see here. Most X100 interiors I have seen have pleats in an "X" pattern, unlike this car. This interior looks more like the plain Marauder. As I understand it, the wheels seen here were standard on X-100 and optional on plain Marauders.

Nice car!

Now that's a great picture! Good to have you back.

Blockley have a 6.50/7.00-20 and also a 6.50-19 that is 33 inches tall, so nearly a 7.00. Perhaps not exactly what you were looking for, but high quality, and definitely better than bare rims with touring season upon us.

Hi David. Chevrolet 602477 is indeed the part number for the 3.82 ring and pinion set for late 1935-36 Chevrolet Master and late 1935-39 1/2 ton. 4.11 is Chevrolet 602476. 602477 are a bit hard to find, as they were an unusual Chevrolet gas mileage option and rare even when they were a current product. I heard of a set in the Netherlands from an old VCCA forum thread, where a member had opted not to buy it because the price was rather high, and the shipping would have been high as well. I contacted that poster asking for the information about the guy in the Netherlands. The poster told me he had acquired a 3.82 set on ebay, decided not to use them, and would sell them. I bought that set from him and never found out about the set in the Netherlands. My set is definitely not GM parts, they are aftermarket of some kind and have had the maker's mark ground off. Pontiac offered 4.89 (Mountain option), 4.55 (eights), 4.44 (sixes), and 4.11 (plains option). Chevrolet offered 4.11 (99+% of everything they made) and 3.82 (economy option). The difference between early and late 35 is the rear pinion bearing. Early 1935 use a ball bearing. Later versions use a Hyatt roller bearing. According to my parts manual the change was made at rear axle number 1452022 on eights and axle 1451985 on sixes. There is one more complication for 3.82, at least if you have a late 1935. Because Pontiac never offered the ratio, no speedometer gears ever existed for it. You can use an external speedometer gearbox for correction, but not if you want the conversion completely invisible. My speedometer gears are some custom modified Chevrolet gears for who knows what from the postwar era, and have not been tried yet. Both gears must change. Pontiac changed the transmission in late 35, and the speedometer gears are unique, not similar to any other GM cars. They fit through 1936 and then change again. If you have an early 1935 transmission, that one is based on a Chevrolet design and it is possible that some Chevrolet gears might fit it, I don't know about that. The transmission design changed to a more Buick-like one at engine number 8-27163 (eights) and number 6-46474 (sixes). Get the 35-36 Pontiac shop manual if you don't have it. There seem to be many of them out there on ebay, etc., both original and reprint. I suggest getting an original as I suspect the pictures will be more useful. A 36 (or maybe 35) Chevrolet manual would also be useful. On the oldcarmanualproject Chevrolet page, there is a 1934 manual and a 1938 manual. These are quite useful if you understand that the 1934 Master axle is the same as design as yours except for the weird 1934 pinion attachment, and in 1938 ONLY the 1/2 ton axle is like yours. There are parts books over there as well. http://chevy.oldcarmanualproject.com/ P.S. I have been fumbling around with this 3.82 project for nearly 4(!) years now and it isn't done. It probably will be this spring. I have spent at least as much as an overdrive costs. If I had looked for and found a Chevrolet 4.11 with the ring gear already riveted on, this could have been done and on the road a long time ago. P.P.S. You might find this thread interesting, it is about making a custom axle for a 1936 1/2 ton with 3.55. The idea is to take a 1937 Chevrolet Car rear axle, which is the new for 1937 axle design, move the hinge points where the axle meet the springs to the correct spacing, then use a 1953-54 center section from a Powerglide equipped Chevrolet, after cutting the torque tube and driveshaft to the correct length and splicing, using the 1937 spline up at the front so the u-joint will connect. Since it was done for a 1936 1/2 ton, it does not address how to get the much better Pontiac (Bendix) brakes mounted, but I assume it is possible. Later on the thread morphed into a thread about my 3.82 project. https://vccachat.org/ubbthreads.php/topics/395256/1.html

Yes, a 1935 Eight would normally be 4.55. 4.89 "mountain gears" and 4.11 "plains gears" were also offered by Pontiac. Your options are limited. This is not an economical change. I am in the midst of building a taller 1936 axle with a 3.82 ring and pinion. 1936 is either almost identical to yours, or identical if you happen to have a late 1935 car. The design of the axle is like Chevrolet Master and the same and ring and pinion interchange for late 1935-1936 Pontiac, late 1935-36 Chevrolet Master, and late 1935-39 Chevrolet 1/2 ton. Early 1935 is the same too, except for the pinion and rear pinion bearing. The pinion must stay with the ring gear it came with. This implies that the ring and pinion and some internal parts interchange between all of the above. The axle assemblies and torque tube length and drive shaft length and diameter vary so whole assemblies do not interchange. Also do not confuse Chevrolet Standard with the above list. Nothing from Chevrolet Standard fits. Always check the part numbers. Extant ratios are 4.89, 4.55. 4.44, 4.11, 3.82 (hard to find), 3.36 (aftermarket, only a handful made, expensive, and nearly impossible to find). I can go on about this at length if you like, I have explored this rabbit hole as deep as it goes, and will have more time later tonight when I get home. Here is some quick advice if you want to make a change as economically as possible. The default Chevrolet ratio is 4.11, and that is the same as a Pontiac "Plains" gear set. Buy up multiple used 1935-36 Master and 1935-39 1/2 ton rear axles that have been discarded by street rodders until you have a good ring and pinion set (it will be 4.11), and the pinion is still solidly riveted to a good usable differential case. You read that right, the ring gear is cold riveted on, and no one will rivet it for you. Make sure the rivets are not loose. If they are, keep looking. I think your housing and torque tube assembly will work no matter what, but I am unsure on that point. If your ring and pinion are late 35-39, and your car is early 35, you may need a late 1935-36 Pontiac housing and torque tube assembly. Use new bearings. All are discontinued except one, but can be found on Ebay and elsewhere as new old stock. Use tapered roller bearings on the carrier where it meets the case. Those are also discontinued, but easier to find and cheaper than the original balls, and they have a less catastrophic failure mode. Welcome to the forum!

I have to admit I don't follow this, although shutting the air off would have been part of my normal test procedure, and would have been done, so I guess I never thought about it in quite this way. The converter itself on this car I believe is a single-bed oxidation converter for HC and CO, and requires surplus oxygen to work properly. Air is supplied whenever it is practical to do so without melting the converter, typically idle and cruise. Highly recommended, although possibly a little impractical for MarkIV. I've done this to my own cars in the past as a way of checking mixture while underway (using an 02 sensor). Taking the exhaust analyzer on the road would have been highly impractical. If you have the 02 sensor bung on a car not needing it for an 02 sensor, it's easy to make a plug with a hose connection for the exhaust analyzer. Dropping the exhaust wasn't typically practical for me in a shop setting, but it does remove all doubt. I wish every carmaker gave you a factory test port under the hood like VW/Audi used to do.

Exactly. You can also temporarily disable it in the shop to get a better idea of what is going IN to the converter. It will eventually light off without the AIR system probably but you can get an idea. Exactly right. The exception would be if the leak is in the line to the vacuum sensor, which would cause the system to richen the mixture. I don't believe this has a dual bed converter. Can anyone confirm or deny? I believe it is too old. Cars of this vintage normally dump air in the manifold ports most of the time. I went through an unbelieveable amount of hose. So.... much..... hose.... I don't know if it was Goodyear or not but I was keeping some rubber company in business. I haven't really found the new stuff to be better, and vacuum caps are horrible. You don't get 6 months out of those sometimes. The old bolt in the end of a piece of hose trick, once a pet peeve of mine, doesn't look so crazy now (but I will still go out of my way to NOT do that). I doubt the injector thing for reasons others have pointed out. Injectors can be sent out for ultrasonic cleaning and bench testing, and it is a good thing to do on older cars, or anything over 90k miles in my opinion. Most on-the-car options are snake oil, and even when they are not snake oil, there is no way to verify the effect of such a treatment. That said, do NOT do any of this expecting it to fix the problem you are having now. There is about a 99.993% chance it is NOT the issue. One way an injector could raise CO is if it were leaking. That should show up in the leakdown time when you check FUEL PRESSURE, and then could be verified by pulling the fuel rail and eyeballing it, probably, depending on how the injectors are attached to the rail. There can be no vacuum leaks. Zero tolerance is appropriate here. This is the reason edinmass and I kept the American rubber industry in business. If there are leaks, you will be playing whack-a-mole with the emissions and also the driveability forever. Get one fixed and something else will pop up. This cannot be overstated. It doesn't go directly at your current problem though. If I am remembering it correctly this is speed density system with NO CLOSED LOOP. Speed density means it calculates how much fuel to inject based on RPM, and intake manifold pressure (or vacuum). Like all cars there is some sort of a cold enrichment system for starting and warmup. No closed loop means there is no oxygen sensor, and the system will inject what is programmed, period. There is no self-correction. So things to check, roughly in order of importance... 1) MAP, or vacuum sensor line. This cannot leak. Were these in the ECM? Check entire line with a vacuum pump. If it leaks down, find the leak and fix it. 2) Fuel regulator. Test fuel pressure. The service manual should have a value, Pull vacuum hose off regulator. Pressure should rise. Usually about 5psi, but whatever. There can be no gas in the vacuum hose, if there is gas, it is leaking through the regulator diaphragm and dumping gas directly in the intake manifold(!). It is a super common problem on EFI cars. Shut the car off. Most cars will drop pressure slightly, and then hold for a long time. Check the service manual to see what is appropriate here. Off the top of my head I would expect it to drop about 5 pounds when the engine shuts off and then hold for a long time. Leaks could be the fuel regulator, a leaky injector, or a worn out fuel pump. Mainly what you are looking for here is the simple part of pulling the vacuum hose and seeing the pressure rise and no gas in the vacuum hose, but since you have a gauge hooked up, check it all and write down what you find. 3) Coolant temperature sensor. You can probably find specifications for this in the service manual. Check ohms vs. ambient temperature, and check with a fully warm engine. This controls the cold enrichment. If you have the wrong resistance with the engine warmed up, either the sensor is bad or the coolant temperature is wrong. A bad thermostat or one of too low opening temperature could be to blame. I believe the system has an intake air temperature sensor, check it too. 4) Throttle position sensor. I imagine if it were bad you would have driveability issues, but make sure it is set correctly per the manual.

The closer you look the worse it gets. You would definitely need to crawl all over and under it and have a really good look. Cheap for brass era though. The trouble is you might need a second one in order to build a car. I don't think there is a lot of Hupmobile there.

Do you mean disc wheels? Chevrolet used a lot of disc wheels and that looks like one of them to me at the right. I think it is bolted on upside down. Chevrolet used split rear axle cases that looked about like that too.

This exactly.^^

High CO is just too much fuel. There is no other explanation. I would start by being sure the MAP or vacuum sensor is plumbed to the manifold via hoses that FIT TIGHT, do NOT LEAK, and show no signs of sucking flat. I would check fuel pressure. I would pull the rubber hose (which also must be tight and not leak) off the fuel regulator and make sure that the pressure gauge rises, and also that it is not leaking fuel into the rubber hose. Good luck and let us know how it goes.

Oh yeah, I've seen lots on carburetors. You have to plug the hole to test them. Some make it kind of hard to do.

Which is what we did, as a result of the egr functioning we have high CO That just isn't how that works. EGR is inert, more or less. It does take up space in the cylinder, so in theory it should get slightly richer, but in practice the difference is negligible. While I believe pfeils idea of cleaning the cat out might get it to pass, I don't believe it should be 2.0 going INTO the cat let alone coming out. 0.7 going into the cat is more like it, and less at the tailpipe. You have a fuel mixture problem to troubleshoot now. It is a little bit too rich. Is the NOx number OK now? Which test did it fail CO in? Both?

Historic plates or not, I think you will be able to solve this with the suggestions posted early in the thread, starting with EGR.

What have you seen that on? Anything with a single diaphragm? Offhand, I only recall seeing it on the secondary part of dual advance units.

How did you get the little softplug out of the oil wick hole? Is the wick just a straight round piece of felt? I was planning to attempt oiling that wick by capillary action, putting the tail (only) in hot oil for a few hours and not taking out the plug. On some 1960s speedos I have worked on years ago, it was pretty critical not to let any oil migrate up into the drum area.