Bloo

440s were available in the big cars (Fury) in 66, and its a fair bet it was on the option list for Belvedere/Sattelite as well. If I had any books handy I would look. It would be an unusual option in 1966 though. No matter. This is a 67. 66s have two headlights and rather different looking tail lights and trim on the trunk lid. Since the GTX existed in 67, and it is essentially a Sattelite with 440 or 426 and maybe some heavier duty chassis stuff, a 440 Sattelite would be an even weirder order. I am still thinking it was probably available if you asked for it. The fifth digit of the VIN will tell you what it was built with. I would bet an awful lot it wont prove to be a 440. P.S. the good heads and manifolds didn't come until 68.

Do you have your ignition timing curve and carb jetting all worked out yet? If you don't know yet what the initial (static) timing is going to be when that is all done, you are just chasing your tail trying to solve dieseling now. If you have worked that stuff out, consider this. One of the classic fixes is ignition timing. How can that be? The ignition is off while it is dieseling. To run an engine needs air, fuel, compression and ignition. If the engine is running with the ignition off, you have sufficient compression and ignition for the reasons already mentioned in a previous post. Why do you have enough air and fuel to keep it running with this lousy accidental ignition? I remember reading articles when I was a kid probably where people would intentionally create carbon hot spots to make jeeps run underwater. The ignition happens at the wrong time, is unreliable, etc, but was enough to keep the jeep moving. They had to drill holes in the head and let them fill with carbon to make it happen. In short, it works but runs terrible. If it worked well nobody would bother having an ignition system. As it is your car has enough "ignition" to keep running with ignition off. It must have more air and fuel than it really needs with the ignition on. That brings us back to ignition, and why timing is often given as a "cause" of dieseling. If the timing is such that the engine is idling less efficiently than it could be, it will need more air and fuel to keep running at idle. When you take the spark away, there is still enough air and fuel to keep it running. Fuel, already mixed with air comes from the idle jets in the carburetor. More air comes around the throttle and mixes with it, controlled by the throttle stop screw. More initial timing makes the idle more efficient, requiring less throttle angle and less air/fuel mixture from the idle jets. Malaise era pre-computer cars were terrible for this. Retarded initial timing was used to help control emissions, and that meant the throttle needed to be open further at idle. The hot carbon and poor octane served as ignition. The extra air/fuel kept it running. I have seen cases where you have to drill little holes in the throttle plates over the idle jets because enough throttle angle (air) to keep the engine idling uncovered a bit of the transfer slots, and the ported vacuum (distributor) port too. The idle jets won't adjust because the transfer slots are partly uncovered. **Don't do this preemptively**. It's an edge case, and when it does happen, it is usually on engines with really hot cams that barely idle at all. It shouldn't be necessary 99% of the time, and when it is necessary you figure that out after getting everything else right and finding you still have too much throttle angle to cover the ports properly in your particular carburetor.

Everybody has an opinion. For modern diesels, the factory requirements vary widely. That is one of many reasons there are about 30-ish different flavors of antifreeze these days. No phosphates, no silicates, silicates but no phosphates, phosphates but no silicates, Oat, Hoat, IAT, Renewable additive package, no renewable additive package, it goes on and on, and the number of different jugs in an auto parts store these days is staggering. You can't go by color. There is no standard. Someday there will be, but for now whatever satisfies your warranty requirements might be red in one brand , another purple, and yet another gold. One particular formula for Japanese imports is available dyed 3 different colors, take your pick to match what is already in the radiator. There never has been a standard either. In the 80s I started using a "modern" formula similar to what we now call "DexCool", but it was green. It was not the "old green" formula everyone seems to be in love with, but it was in fact green. If you bought antifreeze at Shell at that time it was blue, but it was the same formula everyone seems to know as "green". Another gas station (Conoco maybe?) had purple. I have been using DexCool in almost everything since the mid 90s, It was pink in the beginning and is orange now. Everyone tells me I am destroying all my radiators, but so far no problems. I'll keep an eye on it. I think I might die of old age first. I do change antifreeze regularly. I do not believe "extra long life" claims for any of them. I use Valvoline-Zerex G-05 in the 36 Pontiac because it foams less and the Pontiac has an open cooling system. Thread here: https://forums.aaca.org/topic/375509-bloos-not-quite-scientific-antifreeze-foaming-test/ Since you have a pressurized system, I think you can use whatever you want.

That is what the old timers called "killed acid". It is super effective, and in my opinion the best sort of zinc chloride flux. The catch is it should never be used where electrical connections are involved.

I don't know for sure but someone in here will. It is 29NF for most Ford products of that period. If the spot in the battery tray is just a wee bit longer than a group 27 battery, but significantly narrower, and if the original battery was held down by a clamp at the very bottom of the battery case at the far end, almost certainly 29NF.

There is thinking something has been done right, and there is knowing. I prefer the latter.

Good plan. I don't really have any familiarity with the oil pump driven pump, though Buick also did that at some point. My gut feeling is that I would prefer the fuel pump driven one because it would be easier to get to if it needs service. Vacuum wipers on their best day are not great. Without a booster I think you will hate them.

In addition to what others said, maybe because you are burning as much of the fuel as is possible? The same thing occurs in gas torches. The flame gets hotter when there is excess oxygen. Why doesn't excess oxygen make more power in an engine then? Because to make maximum power you have to use all the oxygen available at the expense of everything else. Oxygen is the toughest thing to get in.

There are 3 points of maximum efficiency. Maximum power occurs around 10.5 to 1, although it varies by engine. It is more difficult to get more air into the cylinders, but easy to get more fuel. When you use every possible bit of oxygen available, you get the most power, but waste some fuel. The best burn efficiency is at the stoichiometric point, or 14.7 to 1. The best fuel economy occurs when you burn every possible bit of gasoline, but that leaves some oxygen left over. It varies by engine but might be about 16.5 to 1 or so. The blurb in the carburetor manual is probably intentional oversimplification. A couple of automotive engineering texts I have show they knew all this in the 40s, they just did not have economical enough hardware to control the mixture that tightly in mass production. In 1981 oxygen sensor fuel control became ubiquitous in the US. Overnight everything new ran at 14.7 to 1 under idle and cruise conditions due to limitations of the sensor, instead of chasing a point near the lean limit as had been common in the first part of the smog control era. Suddenly new cars ran terrific as long as the system was working. It turns out 14.7 to 1 under idle and cruise conditions is a very good place to be. Full power mixtures for hard acceleration were still set much richer as before.

As others mentioned, it is a tiny gulp of air to re-evacuate the booster after use, and it happens on a transition so you don't notice it. If it were a constant leak like PCV, the air would have to be let in at a spot where it mixes evenly with the air/fuel coming from the carburetor, and the carburetor would have to supply any extra fuel needed. PCV can't be way out on one intake runner like a power brake port usually is. Vacuum wipers leak whenever they are on, and in the prewar era were often fed from a less-than-ideal spot on the manifold. It worked because the engine had a little too much fuel.

Do any electrical connections depend on this?

I think you should PM @VW4X4 and see if he can help. 2 or 3 years ago he had a bunch of engines of various makes/models that had been outdoors for a while but still had some good parts on them. 2 of those engines were 1949-1954 Pontiac Sixes, and I am quite sure of that because both had front timing pointers, one of which is on my 36 Six now. It's been long enough I sort of doubt he still has the engines, but it is worth an ask. If you haven't asked California Pontiac Restoration yet, you should. Call. Don't believe the website.

When the battery charges to almost normal system voltage, the voltage regulator points open and drop the charge rate way back to something that works out to a trickle charge if the battery is full. But, with the generator cut back, the system voltage drops a little, points close, generator comes back on high, instantly gets to system voltage, points open, cuts back, BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.... ad infinitum until the battery gets so full it doesn't drop below system voltage with only a trickle charge.

Mechanical regulators regulate by bouncing or vibrating the points. The bouncing can be slower than normal due to excessive resistance in the wiring, sometimes leading to more noticeable flickering in the lights. If it is not objectionable, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Maybe clean all the connections. Keep an eye out for a degraded crimp getting hot. I would also do the things @EmTee mentioned.

I might be wrong, but I blame that on "restoration" tires often using whatever mold still exists and is available, not necessarily a mold of the correct size. Fortunately the tire manufacturers typically publish measurements of height and section width (the widest part) for each tire they make, so that can help. It's better than nothing.

It's not a big difference. Nash 600s were all about gas mileage, and it was also a lighter car so Nash would have been conservative about tire width. Figure an extra 1/2" (1/4" per side) at the widest part of the tire sidewall. Will it hit anything? I just looked at pictures online, and I see some 47 600s apparently have heavily skirted rear fenders and some do not. If the fenders are heavily skirted, oversize tires might be difficult to change on the back. That was an issue on the Bathtubs that came a few years later. If you have 600-16 now, try changing a rear tire and see if you have trouble getting the tire between the brake drum and the outer fender sheetmetal when you take a rear wheel off. You'll have to get an extra 1/2" through there. Also check the steering at full lock, etc.

He'd also need a throttle switch, but i gathered that part was already solved. I would expect the generator interlock to already be present on a 53 Buick.

EEC-IV wont like anything removed. I don't see this ending well. For one thing, vehicles of that age depended on the smog pump to light the oxygen sensor, so it probably can't control the fuel mixture a lot of the time. EGR will cause rough idle if the valve leaks, whether it is connected or not. Ignition timing is controlled by the computer. Without EGR, the timing under partial load will be all wrong. You can retard initial timing, but then under full power the timing is retarded. Good luck.

I'm not knocking barkeepers friend, and I always keep some around. There are other ways to buy oxalic acid though if one so desires. The crystals are on amazon (mix it yourself, no grit!) or maybe at the local pharmacy if you are lucky. I use it on small hardware sometimes. Based on what I have seen on TheCabe (bicycle forum) I believe oxalic acid may lift less paint from painted parts than evaporust or electrolytic derusting which is a third option. Paint comes off anyway if there is rust underneath, and there probably is. Any of the three are likely to remove plating in my opinion.

A normally closed vacuum switch would do the job. I don't know offhand where to get one.

I was really responding to Joe's post about needing full pressure in the rocker shaft all the time. Maybe he's right, but if so some engine designers have ignored it. You posted at about the same time. No matter. We are on a tangent here anyway talking about other engines. What I have seen in the past pretty much mirrors what you are saying. All that really matters for @Littlestown Mike's questions is the Ford 200, and in your last post it looks like you are getting to the bottom of the mystery. Carry on.

There are plenty of engines around that do not adhere to this idea. Chevrolet Stovebolts, at least some of them, had an open piece of tubing in the end of the rocker shaft to let the excess oil run out.

Yellow valve covers were a Studebaker thing, even in 1965 after the change to McKinnon (Chevrolet) engines. For 1966, the valve covers became black to match the rest of the engine.

That gets complicated though, because in 40 and 41 US Pontiacs came in 3 sizes. I've seen all 3 sizes of 40 parked next to each other at a Flathead Reunion a few years ago.