Bloo

I would try to keep the pickup in the sender if possible. The bracket riveted to the top of your old sender might prove useful. The old pickup tube is probably cracked (look closely). It is just copper tubing, and I duplicated it in copper tubing, but would use CuNiFer brake tubing if I were doing it again, as it does not work harden and crack. If your sender is the same as mine (US Pontiac), the fitting is "Threaded Sleeve" and the one on the sender is impossible to get. You would need to recycle that or dremel the other half of it (the sleeve nut) off of the gas line on the car and use hose. Either way be sure to add a ground wire or strap from the sender over to the frame. I see the Drake unit has one pre-attached. Chevrolet tanks probably have the pickup in the tank rather than the sender.

I think its a 1941 or 42 Chevrolet <snip> EDIT: I stand corrected, see below.

Not repairable? I imagine a majority of them are seized and rusted. Mine was all of that, and bent too, not to mention the electrical problems. After all it had a lot of time to rust. If any of these survived into the modern era mostly intact then ethanol probably got them. Ethanol holds water and causes rust. Worse, the dreaded previous owner took the tank out had it boiled out, painted it, and then put this back in LOL. Gee, I wonder why the gas gauge didn't work? I imagine if it really is too far gone, you will have to buy another rusty shot one somewhere and send that out. There is a company that will make you a tank from scratch. Maybe someone in here knows the name. I don't. I have never had to resort to that yet. My tank has flat sides unlike a lot of GM tanks of the era. I might look into a 1935 or 1936 Chevrolet tank and see if you could modify it to fit. Bob's Automobilia has a universal Buick sending unit that you might be able to modify enough to work. I was overhauling a 37 Buick sender for a friend at the same time I did mine, and I know the 37 Buick stock sending unit is different than my 36 Pontiac even though it is made of a lot of the same parts. It is opposite direction (float and pickup go the other way) and the tank depth is radically different. I think the universal Buick thing might be an uphill battle to modify to get working in the 36 Pontiac tank, but it might be possible. It electrically matches. It lacks a brake as far as I know so I would expect the gauge to wave a lot.

Is this a water pump? If so, yes. In that case don't make it stop leaking completely, it should stay a little damp below there but not leak very much at all. If you seal it 100% the packing and shaft will burn up. The nut shouldn't be bottomed. It should adjust.

While I do believe you should rebuild the oil pump, I wouldn't get too wound up about oil pressure until you get the heating problem solved. As long as there is SOME oil pressure with the engine revved up you should be fine. The engine is unloaded. No oil pressure at idle is annoying, but might not necessarily indicate a problem. You mentioned 20w50 oil earlier. If you have not done that yet, do it. I doubt the cooler could improve anything, and if the gauge was between it and the oil pump it would just give you a false sense of security. I spent last night staring at your pictures trying to figure out the coolant flow. I think it goes something like this, so correct me if I am wrong. From heads, both sides, through individual upper hoses to the radiator top tank. From the bottom of the radiator through ONE lower hose to the pump. From the pump, flow splits and goes 1) to the passenger side cylinder block and 2) through a passage in the aluminum crankcase (really?!) through a little elbow and into the drivers side cylinder block. No bypass passages, no thermostats, no heaters. On some cars it is possible to get head gaskets in wrong, but these as you have noted are symmetrical and comparing the pictures of your gaskets to the picture of @AB-Buff 's car with the heads off, there is no difference in water passages or steam holes through the gaskets. I gather @AB-Buff 's car is cooling correctly, is that right? I was wondering as @AB-Buff did if there could be some restriction in that passage or elbow. The 300+ degrees coming out of the left upper water neck strikes me as more wrong than anything else I have seen here, but I am down to wild guesses at this point. Did the water neck on the other side also hit 300+ degrees that fast? I can't wait to find out what the news is about the radiator. You already had it recored didn't you? I have almost zero experience with those infrared temp guns, as they did not come along until about the same time I got out of the car business. but it looks like the radiator COOLS fine to me. I am less sure about flow. You mentioned that it will push water out with the radiator cap off. I am guessing that since this had a packing type water pump originally that it is a non-pressurized system. Is that right? In my opinion there is no way it could be normal on a non-pressurized system for the water pump to deliver more flow than the radiator core could deal with by gravity alone. I am assuming it was liquid coming out and not a bunch of foam. I would check that fuel pump pressure deadheaded into the gauge while you are waiting. If the fuel pump is delivering more pressure than @carbking says the carb can handle, the sooner you figure that out the better. I also can't help wondering if the carb could be super lean on one barrel. Does it feed one half of the engine with one barrel or is there an open plenum somewhere? Is there a balance passage between the two sides? I'm still wondering if the neck hit 300+ degrees right away on the passenger side like it did on the left. Good luck, and let us know what you find out.

I had to rebuild mine. It was a bit of work. Nice having a gas gauge though. Bob's Automobilia (Buick Parts) has sealed cork floats. You'll probably need a couple of those once the sending unit works. There must be someone who rebuilds these professionally but I don't know who it is.

I might be wrong, as my memory isn't what it used to be, but I don't think Chrysler's gear reduction starter with it's distinctive sound existed yet in 1957, and if it did we probably wouldn't be talking about dragging until a very high mileage. I would expect an Autolite starter, and a solenoid relay that looks much like a Ford one, but with different internal wiring. The most common reason for a dragging starter is worn out bushings allowing the armature to drag. You can usually see tell-tale marks on the armature and pole pieces inside. Since the mileage is low that seems unlikely. Another possibility is the bushings are too tight, but that too is unlikely. They are probably oilite and could use a drop or two of oil after all these years. I would bet on dirty or corroded connections somewhere rather than the starter itself. When it is straining to crank, pay attention to the cables, battery posts, solenoid relay etc., and see if something is getting hot.

Yes, its a Pontiac engine. I'll guess 1954 because it appears to have a 2 barrel carburetor (does it?), but that would only be conclusive for the manifolds.

Retarded timing will definitely cause hot running. There is more cylinder wall exposed while the fire is still burning, and it also puts more heat in the exhaust manifolds. If you think there is any possibility it is retarded, I would address that first. I doubt it's the oil pump.

Regarding fuel pressure: If your carb is running over, the float is not sealing or shutting off. That can make it close to impossible to get a reading. I am assuming this is an engine driven mechanical diaphragm pump like on a more modern car. Is it? Those only pump when fuel is flowing into the carb. With the float valve shut the pump is dead headed, the diaphragm stays up, full of gas and with the tension of the diaphragm return spring, that is the spring that is literally under the diaphragm, not the one on the arm, against it. The diaphragm spring sets the fuel pressure by it's tension. On a normal car the pressure is going to flop all over the place when the pump is pumping, and you can't tell what is happening. When the pump catches up and the float valve shuts, and the gas is sitting there idle in the pump (more or less) with the diaphragm and spring against it, you should intermittently get a usable reading. I don't think you will ever get to that spot where you get the reading because your float does not shut completely off. If it were me, I would deadhead the pump into that gauge (no carb connection) and crank the engine a little bit. You can probably get a useful reading.

Have you had a good look at the metal tube pressed into the manifold below the carb throat/flange? Those can rust out and let exhaust in the intake.

It's a second transmission for a truck, probably a Ford model TT. How many gears does it have?

Is the pushrod under the modulator present?

Adjust it if you can. Whatever bearings it has to locate the steering shaft up/down (not the mesh adjustment) are loose or bad. It translates directly to steering slop, just as an incorrect mesh adjustment would. On some cars the column tube itself is threaded into the steering box, but I'm not sure about a K45. If it won't adjust, I guess you will have to take it apart and see what happened.

That doesn't hurt, it helps. The important thing is for the pump to be able to create vacuum to prime. Vaseline is a good way to accomplish that.

Having done both, I have to agree. Only do that if you need to keep the fixtures for appearance. Don't get the cheapest fixtures though, Pay attention to lumens so you don't wind up with something dimmer. You can probably increase light output while still drastically reducing power cost.

This one is a Pontiac six, although newer. See the pictures in the OP link.

This is link spam. It is super common and probably automated. Now you know what it looks like. It is usually removed by the moderators before you see it unless you are on the forum late at night. This one is a new thread, but a really common tactic seems to be to post as a response to an old dead thread at 2 or 3 AM, and hope it gets buried before the moderators notice so the links stay up for future searches. There probably isn't even a human never mind a Jaguar. This is the first post of this particular type I have seen come through on these forums with a photo.

Expected oil consumption chart from the 1936 Pontiac shop manual. Look closely.

These are a weird setup. It is a crossflow radiator, and you cannot see the level when it is filled properly. There is a petcock on the side to check the minimum. It is possible to run it higher for a little more capacity in the summer (not clear full of course) but you would have to check the shop manual. I do not recall how much extra you can put in over the petcock level.

Do I see the biggest triangle in the middle? I don't remember for sure what order they go in, but that looks wrong to me.

Maybe, but regulators for those do exist for those particular alternators that do not require any connections. I thought the big ball of electrical tape on the charge wiring was a nice touch, as was the rear alternator bearing an inch from an exhaust runner. I also note the bolts of various lengths holding that pulley assembly together. That may be a clever attempt at balancing.... or not.

It is fairly common for a Multibeam system like this to drop one headlight due to a headlight switch problem. There are 3 triangular shaped contacts inside that look the same but are not. One is slightly bigger. People get them back in wrong. If you search for old threads about "Guide Multibeam" you may even find pictures. I do not remember for sure who posted them, but probably @Gary W .

Hey @MCHinson, can a 1937 beam both lights up and down in the third (not fourth) headlight switch position like a 1938 can? I'm pretty sure he changed sockets and it was covered in an earlier post. He mentioned 1154 bulbs.

OH! I think I need to edit that. Traditional double clutching, as you might imagine, involves pushing the clutch down twice. But, the clutch has to be engaged to spin the gears up. I may have COMPLETELY misinterpreted what Gary said. I think I am going to wait until he comments before I edit. I thought Gary just eliminated the first push, pulled the car out of gear without using the clutch, and went straight to spinning the gears up. Then he disengaged the clutch to make the shift. There's nothing wrong with that. Reading it now, I am not so sure that is what he meant. There is another similar technique called "floating a gear" that works well on pure crashboxes like a model A, and especially on big truck transmissions with real sliding gears. It does not work nearly so well on a worn out synchromesh transmission, or at least it is a lot tougher for me. It goes like this. You don't use the clutch at all. You pull the transmission out of gear, goose it, but shoot for a really close RPM match, don't go over significantly like you would to double clutch, then you lightly, with a finger or 2 on the lever "feel" the lower gear. If you matched the RPM right it goes "tha-tha-thunk!" and right in.