Bloo

How many indicators are there on your dash, one or two? I gather (since I can't remember for sure) that a 42 still has the "arrow" indicators near the center in the back, and that is why you have single filaments in the back. If that is true, your system is simpler than most. Both left indicator filaments (front and rear) are connected together, and also to the left dash indicator (if there are two dash indicators). Similarly, both right indicator filaments are connected together and also to the right dash indicator. The "P" terminal is not used on a system with 2 dash indicators. It exists to power a single dash indicator that blinks for either side. If you do have only a single dash indicator, then you must power it with the "P" terminal, and ground the shell of the socket. The signal wiring goes like this: +6v source >> flasher 6v input terminal >> (through the flasher) >> flasher output terminal >> signal switch. Then.... right contact on signal switch >> all right indicators, and.... left contact on signal switch >> all left indicators. All bulbs have the shell grounded. One possible exception exists. It has turned up repeatedly on 1953-54 Chevrolets and Pontiacs. I doubt you have anything like this, but read on just in case. They connected the two dash indicators to the signals as normal, but instead of grounding the shells, they connected the bulb shells to the "P" terminal. If rewiring, do not do this. It does not work properly with any currently available new flasher. This does not sound like your problem, but I am including it here just in case. Wiring as outlined in the paragraphs above this one will work. And finally, it kind of sounds like your flasher might be bad. If you have 6v connected to the 6v terminal, and a bulb connected to the load terminal (not "P"), and the bulb shell grounded, the bulb should at least come on. The flasher may need all the bulbs in order to flash, or in order to flash at the correct speed, but the bulb should at least come on.

I saw a few brass era cars today on the highway through Leavenworth, Cashmere, and Wenatchee, WA this morning. Possibly a first for this area. Anyone know what club or whose tour that was?

Sounds like a good way forward.

That float is sunk, there's literally gas on top of it in the picture. Try Oldtech's advice and afterward if you are still unsure for any reason, sink it in piping hot water and look for bubbles.

Same car.

Well.... err... Bench bleeding helps you get the air out of the system much faster. If the cylinder is full of air that is mostly going to go in and you will have to bleed it out. I think on a 1940 anything with the master cylinder under the floor it would probably be full of air anyway by the time you got it stuffed up in there and the fitting hooked up, and most of the brake fluid would be in your eyes and all over the paint.

Get it off of there and to a good machine shop. probably not an automotive machine shop. Any problem with the surface or holes on those is best done out of the car/truck. If the holes are too big for Heli-Coils, there is another style of thread insert called a "Time-Sert" that is bigger. If you don't have enough cast iron for that, as is often the case on an ear, then I agree it is time for another casting and at that point you are rebuilding the heads. That is also true if you have it welded. There is too much heat in that location for brazing in my opinion. Loctite wont work either, as it releases with heat. You can't really tolerate anything more than the most minor wear or boogering of the threads in that location. Once repaired, check the surfaces of both the head carefully for wear and erosion. If there is any issue at all with the surfaces on the head or manifold, have them cut or ground while it is all apart. You need both surfaces dead flat. Use factory-type sheetmetal gaskets. Don't use those fiber/metal composition ones with all the holes stamped in them, or kid yourself thinking you will accomodate a little warpage with the gasket. You'll be screwing with it again next week if you do. Either use the factory hardware, or good bolts. If the factory stuff is shot (sounds like it) I would get grade 8. In any event, don't get less than grade 5. Whatever you do, never use any cheap soft washers that will squeeze down into the holes, or any lockwashers right on the cast iron. The manifold expands with heat more than the head does, and nothing can stop it. It gets longer. It slides a tiny bit on the gaskets. If motion is blocked something is going to bend or break, and sooner than later. Put the manifold on the head surface and with the bolts started in the holes look where the bolts are located. If the manifold holes are touching the bolts on the outside (toward the front or back of the engine) that's OK. If any are touching on the inside (toward the center of the engine) you will need to open up the holes a little. Done right, the gaskets will stay in over 100k miles easily. Good luck, and let us know how it turns out.

I don't think that's a normal "rope seal". My only advice would be ask a bearing store. If anyone would know it would be them. As far as I know the only rope seals auto parts stores deal with are for crankshafts, and they come precut from gasket companies. Even those are obsolete enough I'll bet they don't sell many.

He will be sorely missed.

I think I see a pin.

I agree. That's a common way to make a throttle shaft, just rivet the shaft over. When that loosens it causes all sorts of havoc because the linkage can no longer completely control the shaft and butterfly. A common and permanent fix for a loose one is to silver braze it, and the same if you have to take the arm completely off. It would not be an invisible repair though. I imagine if there is a spring under there, then they meant you to remove the butterflies and take the shaft out, and that is probably going to involve some new special screws, etc. Let's see what @carbkinghas to say.

The two issues are clearance for the spring assembly, and also for that "boss". As I recall the direction is the same on nearly all more modern cars, but I couldn't tell you which way it is without the parts in front of me. I think any rule of thumb falls apart on these older cars. On one hand, some flywheels may not have enough clearance for the springs over the bolts leading to interference and non-release. On the other hand, the "boss" could be bottoming out either in the splines, or against the throwout bearing support on the transmission, preventing the disc from sliding back when the pressure plate releases. Glad you found it. I think you will be on the road soon.

My best guess is the only way to clean it is chemically. I doubt 110lb air is a good idea, because it is probably that same fine brass screen that a fuel pickup "sock" is sometimes made from. It would not be able to support air flow like that even when good and might pop. I am a believer in the screen idea. I add socks to cars than never had them. It takes a lot more crud to block one than it does to block the tip of the fuel pickup, and if the crud is heavy (iron, rocks) it may never even make it back up to the screen once it falls. I have also seen beads of water bouncing off of a sock in a bench test while the gas was flowing through it just fine. I doubt there were ever one way "foot valves" in tanks, but I don't know for sure. Maybe @c49er would know something.

That doesn't look bad at all. Is it brass or steel? I believe it is supposed to squirt at the underside of the exhaust valve seats, so maybe that is a clue to the orientation.

Yes. They had merged with Packard by that time. 1956 performance models got Packard engines. The Packard V8 was larger, and had much larger dimensions. It never approached it's displacement limit. The Packard V8 engine was discontinued for 1957, possibly a bad decision on their part. The Studebaker V8 eventually reached 304ci, which must have been the limit or close to it. Very few were made.

I agree with 100% of that. Check and measure EVERYTHING.

I though of that but I don't really see how you would get it accurate enough on the turnaround, and I think you would be shimming it from the opposite side. also the angles would have to match perfectly. Maybe. A real woodworker would have a better shot at it than me. I might try it on some scrap.

Backfiring? What backfiring?

I am no expert by any means, but the AC numbering apparently changed in the mid 30s. My 1936 Pontiac shop manual lists a K-7 as the correct plug. By 1937, Pontiacs were using an AC fortysomething retroactively. I believe 1936 was the last year for the old letter-number system, and anything with a number like "44" or "46" would have to be from 1937 or later no matter what the insulator looked like.

But keep in mind that since this particular solenoid has a relay on it, with a floating coil, there are TWO terminals. You not only need the 6v to one terminal, you need the ground to the other or it won't trip. Both the 6v and the ground are interrupted while the engine is running. The 6 volts is interrupted by vacuum, and the ground is interrupted by the charging system. It's sort of a "double safety" to keep the starter from engaging with the engine running.

I need to make TWO joints. Maybe 3 or 4 if I screw up. These custom-made options are indeed impressive, but far too expensive to use only twice. One extremely talented individual told me he freehands them on a bandsaw. I have seen his work and the joints are tight. I have a bandsaw, but I am just not capable of that. I'll keep watching this thread and hoping a low buck (if inefficient) method shows up. That was the conclusion I came to, assuming straight fingers. Do you see a way to duplicate the factory tapered joint? I have a tablesaw here as well as a radial arm and a bunch of other woodworking tools.

Somewhere, but not in your pictures, are 2 small terminals for small wires. They go to the relay coil that pulls those small contacts together. One wire comes from the vacuum switch and supplies 6 volts. The other one comes from the charging system and provides a ground. To get any deeper than that I need a 1942 wiring diagram (and I don't have one). Do you have one?

Ok, mystery solved. Here is the whole thing, and it is from a 1938-1947 Motor Age (Chilton). Unfortunately it shows a Buick with a simple generator cutout, and the last Buicks made that way were 1936s. That explains why I cut off the rest, it was wrong for 1937. Anyhow, here it is: And here is a similar one from the 1937 Buick shop manual. This should be real close, except the relay has to ground through the regulator in a different way for 1941. It is also possible they moved the vacuum/throttle switch to the carburetor by 1941. I can't remember when that happened. Hopefully someone else has the right diagram.

I doubt I have exactly what you are looking for, but I will try when I get home later if someone doesn't beat me to it (hint). If I took that picture myself (and I am not 100% sure I did), then it is either from the 1937 Buick shop manual, or some old Motor or Chilton. It probably wasn't a whole 1941 diagram. Although, the internal starter wiring shown is probably the same for any 6 volt straight eight Buick with Autostart. I know at least part of the 1937 wiring is different, because a 1937 uses a 5-terminal voltage regulator, and those were long out of production by 1941. Off the top of my head though, you can see that the positive battery cable in that diagram goes to the big copper bolt, and the small wire on the same terminal is the one feeding 6v to the rest of the car. The starter gets it's ground from the bellhousing. Now the two little wires: That is a floating relay winding, meaning neither side is grounded. To kick the starter in you must provide 6 volts to one of those little terminals, and ground to the other. On a 1937 (and probably a 1941) the 6 volts to one terminal is provided by the throttle/vacuum switch. On the 1937 the other terminal gets it's ground from a dedicated contact in the voltage regulator. The 41 doesn't have that contact in the regulator, but I still think the ground was provided by the regulator circuitry somehow. I'll try to look it up later tonight.

Sadly, the way people use these terms is also vague and arbitrary. Always look closely.