Bloo

I don't see how they would be able to find the email address that easily. In fact, If I have been reading the threads correctly, that is the whole point. Lets say my forum handle is "bloo", because it is, and lets say my password to log into the forum is "s0mepassword". It isn't, but bear with me. Additionally, lets say my email address is "whatever@gmail.com". That isn't correct either, but will do for an example. Right now, to log into the forum, I type bloo as the username and s0mepassword as the password. The forum software has my email address, but does not publish it. The software just uses it to alert me if someone mentioned me, or responded to a thread, or whatever. It does so by sending me email. After the change, I will type whatever@gmail.com as the username and s0mepassword as the password in order to log into the forum Nothing else changes. My forum handle once I am logged in will still be bloo, and whatever@gmail.com will still be unpublished by the software. Why is this better? Because everyone in the world who has ever read this forum, logged in or not, knows the username "bloo" because it is my forum handle. They only have to guess the password "s0mepassword" to log into my account. After the change, they will have to guess both the email address whatever@gmail.com and the password s0mepassword at the same time to log into my account. Since whatever@gmail.com is not published by the software, someone trying to illicitly log into my account probably doesn't have it. Anyone who has ever had a PM from me has my real email address and other contact info, unless I forgot once somewhere along the line. Generally speaking, a bunch of regular posters here have it, but the whole world does not. I don't quite understand how any of this would help somebody guess your email address. If your email address, unlike mine, is already published all over the Internet, then this isn't much of a security improvement, but I don't see how it could be worse either. I don't know about the Facebook login. As someone who worked in IT for a while, I consider a common login over multiple sites, no matter who it is with, to be an extremely bad idea, and I will probably never do it. Lots of people do it though, and I am sure Peter will have the answer. My best guess is that if you are using Facebook rather than logging into the forum directly, you are not typing the username anyway, and you probably won't see the change at all.

I believe most if not all of those systems were aftermarket. I doubt Buick ever implemented it as original equipment, but someone in here will know for sure.

Always use the manufacturers specs from their table rather than the theoretical size if you can. Since the original aspect ratio was 90% or 100% in many cases, and virtually no modern tires are made like that, you want 80% (or 85% in the rare cases it exists) in modern tires. Even then it wont be perfect. If you get the same O.D., the tire will be a little wider. It might drag on something. Still, this can be pretty close. If you cant get 80%, and unfortunately in the US you usually cant anymore, then you are stuck with 75% and that is why substitution charts don't work. The tires are not even remotely close. They are too short and too fat. If you pick the same O.D. the tire is probably going to be INCHES too wide to go on the rim. If you pick the correct width, it probably isn't even made. The size or two larger you pick (because it is the narrowest they make) is going to have a way shorter sidewall, making the "too low" gearing many of us are stuck with even worse. The tire will also be fatter. Its simple math to get the theoretical size of a metric tire for an inch-sized rim. See my post above from December 14. If there is no aspect ratio listed, as on some older European sizes e.g. 155-15, use 80% or 82%. Compare the results to an original size tire, and you will see the problem right away. It works out OK on some cars, and on others it won't work at all.

Which pattern is the running board pattern?

Look into "Pilot Ray".

I couldn't find a good picture of one from the right angle, but I can't rule out the Studebaker Special Six from around 1923 or 1924.

If by 17" ID, you mean that the bead seat is 17" for a 17" tire, then Chevrolet Master (or any model that may have existed EXCEPT the Standard), circa 1934 or slightly earlier, would be a very good guess. Pontiac from around the same time is another possibility. Definitely no later than 1934 if Pontiac. I would post on the VCCA Forums and ask. If the wheels are Chevrolet, the VCCA people will know all about them. https://vccachat.org

You had 2 61 Ambassadors in the same paint scheme?!

Since we are speculating, I keep looking at the "hummer" and I think it's a bus. Probably with a really wide body, but a hood, radiator, and fenders about like everything else on the street if there were enough detail in the picture to make it out.

There is a difference. Out here in snowy eastern WA, everyone switched to snow tires in the winter back in the bias ply days. These were often, but not always recaps and had "traction tread", which is probably not what you think, they were like the tread on the back tires of a pickup or big truck of that time. The most popular ones had walnut shells mixed in the rubber. Tires like this were available with or without studs. Those were for snow and ice. For rain, the situation just wasn't very good. Nobody changed tires for that. Rain is far more unpredicatble than snow, and turns from dangerous to not dangerous typically much faster and seemingly at random. In rainy Seattle there are a lot of people who never gain good rain driving skills. It's much tougher to do than learning to drive in snow. When all season radials came along, a lot of people stopped using snow tires altogether. It is that big of a difference. They aren't as good as dedicated snow tires, but are good enough to get by. They are also much better at channeling water to help keep you out of trouble in the rain. For what you describe, a modern all-season radial is probably what you want. No matter what you do, it won't be as sure footed as a more modern car. The suspension plays a big part. Still, tires make a big difference.

You buy optional hydraulic jacks with the lift, usually air powered, that slide back and forth in the gap. The blocks on them can be extended out under the suspension so you can jack the car up and get the wheels off. Brakes are one of the few jobs four-post lifts do pretty well.

There is a bypass valve near the thermostat that can bypass too easily and cause the engine to run hot. It can be replaced with a core plug with a hole drilled in it. That was Buick's own fix from a service bulletin. Someone in here should know the details.

Some have proposed ww2 style aircraft belts. They might even be available in reproduction.

GAH!!!!

What on earth makes you guys think this is a low stress area? Quite the opposite. There is another thread about this. This car had the transmission top but was missing the shift lever and all the associated parts. These parts are relatively common thanks to the Buick Special, but for some reason, Murphy possibly to blame, when you need them nobody seems to have them. Well, I say the parts are relatively common, and they are, with the caveat that the small parts in the tower that attach the lever to the top are always extremely worn out. Mine (36 Pontiac) were completely shot. The only source of new parts that I was able to find were some aftermarket ones on ebay that were specified to fit, but once I had them in my hand didn't quite work with my shift lever. Apparently either the parts are mis-made, or there is more than one possible pivot pin size in the lever itself depending on make/model/year or something. I suspect the latter. The parts are close, and with some modifications work rather nice, but if someone tried to cram them in there as-is, it might break the tower. I don't know if that is what happened, but even if not, I know @Dandy Dave had trouble finding the lever despite it (or at least a close Buick one) being a common thing, and If I were him I would be banging my head against the wall right now. But, never mind all that. Let's find him a transmission top. 36-37-38 Buick Special (40) should fit. Surely someone must have that.

They weren't by some chance trying to put one of those NORS small parts kits from ebay were they?

I agree. It sounds and looks like water.

Pontiacs use a top like this from late-production 1935's through 1937. Also some but not all 1938s. Buick Special (40) is like this through 1938, and I'm not sure how far back.

There are 2 options for the radio. the one pictured is the "master" (cheaper) one. The "deluxe" had a separate speaker, and probably more advanced electronics. My guess is your car would have most likely had the deluxe radio if it had a radio at all, because it is a top of the line car. Both radios are technically correct though.

That's a Studebaker. It is possibly a 1913, not an SA-25 like mine (those still had acetylene lights), but possibly a "35" or a "6". I can't see the steering wheel. In 1913, it was still on the right. I think I see a spare tire on the right side of the car, which argues for right hand drive. There was no door on the drive side, so it wasn't blocking anything. I believe 1914 had left hand drive for the US market. Here's a 1913 "35":

I don't think you can buy it. There are 2 things about your description. The #3 is the thickness. The "fibre" probably means "long fibre" grease, which was the stringy wheel bearing grease of the old days that felt like it had hair in it or something. It didn't, but no modern grease feels like that. Almost any grease you can buy off the shelf these days seems to be #2 no matter it's composition or purpose. I've not seen #3 in any sort of "normal" grease in my lifetime, though it must exist for industrial purposes. Penrite Graphite Grease is #3, but it in no way resembles the old fashioned wheel bearing grease your description makes me think of. It goes in between leaf springs and things like that. I remember helping my dad mix up some semi-fluid grease for a brass era transmission using a recipe from the HCCA Gazette, around 1978. One of the ingredients was "one tube of long fibre wheel bearing grease". We checked every auto parts store, oil dealer, hardware, boat supply, etc. Nobody had seen any in years. Eventually a family friend pulled an unused tube out of his basement. It must have been 20 years old. it's weird stuff. It stretches out like caramel or something. Hopefully someone will have more encouraging news. If the u-joints are made in a way that you can clean them out completely, I think I would do that and then use some modern #2 synthetic extreme pressure grease. I like Redline CV2.

I use Sil-Glyde.

Use left hand, dominant or not. Engage crank, down low at about 7 o clock. Put all fingers UNDER the handle, including thumb. Pull straight up.

On Chevrolet there is zero compatibility and interchangeability between 6v and 12v stuff. If you are using a 6v starter, you must have a 6v flywheel gear, and that probably means a 6v flywheel and bellhousing too, but I'm less sure of that part. Most conversions are just using a 6 volt starter on a 12v electrical system. Another less common fix is rewinding the starter, because the 12v parts do not fit it. Mechanically the whole mess has to be either 6v or 12v. No mixing. That is why the 6v starter is often used. Factory installed 12V setups appeared in 1955, so 1948 is 6 volt for sure. On Delco-Remy starters a black ID tag means 6v, a red id tag means 12v, and an orange one means 24v.

I've done a bunch of stuff like this but it was 20+ years ago. There are some gotchas and try as I may, I can't remember the details. To figure out a good place to start, we are going to need more info. For starters (no pun intended): 1) 6v or 12v? 2) Positive or Negative ground? 3) Can this have it's own oil pressure switch or will it have to piggyback on some existing switch for an idiot light (and not blow the switch up)? 4) Is there space available at the oil pressure port for a fancy switch like Joe Padavano posted or will it need to be one of the tiny single terminal ones? It's almost a given that you will need a relay. You might need two.