Bloo

Wait what? Is it not 6v positive ground anymore? If true, that would have been good to know. It would explain why things are all backwards in the other thread. https://forums.aaca.org/topic/412600-help-wiring-back-of-amp-gauge/

The way that is marked makes no sense to me. The little piece of wiring diagram you posted looks like the Chrysler in the linked thread, as near as i can tell, but the ammeter in the picture here makes no sense. Most of the loads connect to the fuse (top terminal), but the fuse should be fed from the GEN side. Is there any possibility that the strap to the fuse might reach the GEN post instead of BAT and somebody just moved it to the BAT post? Ignition should also feed from the GEN side. EDIT: Just found the other thread in "general" where @Joe Cocuzza posted the wiring diagram: https://forums.aaca.org/topic/412598-help-wiring-back-of-ammeter/#comment-2656465 Wire 7 (generator) and wire 24 (ignition) and the fuse strap are all connected to the lower left (in your picture of the ammeter) post. All other loads, wire 28 and 3 others, are connected to the fuse (top post in your picture), and wire 17 goes from the lower right post (in your picture) to the starter post. All that is as expected and makes sense except for the GEN and BAT marks stamped in the ammeter which are apparently backwards. I would connect it as in the paragraph above and try it. The worst that could happen is that the ammeter will read backwards, and if it does, you will have to reverse the connections, lower right to lower left (in the picture) including that strap that feeds the fuse.

There is a 36 Chrysler thread by @Professor where the ammeter was discussed. Ammeter conversation starts near the bottom of page 8 and continues on page 9. There are some pics of the back of an ammeter. https://forums.aaca.org/topic/344725-1936-chrysler-airstream-c-8-convertible-restoration/page/8/ More or less, a wire comes from the generator and feeds the (+) ammeter terminal. The ignition switch and the fuseholder are fed from this (+) terminal. On the fused (opposite) side of the fuseholder the stoplight, light switch, and dome light are connected. The remaining terminal (ammeter - ) feeds the wire to the battery (via the starter post) and the cigarette lighter if there is one.

I don't know about all lines, but probably. They were available in the 59 Cadillac for sure, and could be tripped from a button on the floor near the dimmer switch.

"Silver Streak" is probably not the model, They probably called it something else. As I understand it, a "Silver Streak" is any Pontiac that has the chrome trim going up over the top of the hood, so basically all of them 1935-1956. "Chieftan" "Chieftan Deluxe", "Streamliner" and "Streamliner Deluxe" would be good guesses for the true model name of an American made 4 door Pontiac around 1950, Streamliners having a sloping roof at the back. After 1940(?) or so, I believe the engine (six or eight) was optional without moving to a different model. Poke around on the Early Times Chapter site for more info. https://www.earlytimeschapter.org/1950.html https://www.earlytimeschapter.org/index.html Also, look for the "style number" from your Fisher body tag on the firewall. Style numbers are kind of a big deal in the Pontiac world, and are the most direct identification of a model. I did not see a decode table for 1950, but I did see style numbers used in some of the other documents posted. it is a good thing to know when trying to find parts, etc. There were also Canadian made Pontiacs at the time, which were commonly exported to other countries. They are smaller and use a lot of Chevrolet body stampings, and often looking at the back of the car will reveal some obvious difference. "Fleetleader"(?) and "Pathfinder"(?) are good guesses for the model name. I believe they were all 6 cylinder, so I am pretty sure you don't have one.

I don't know how DeSoto accomplished it, but it has to ground somehow or it wont light.

I wonder if it might be a fuseholder. Is that a regulator or just a cutout?

Are you sure that is from 1956? I'm no Porsche expert, but I doubt it. That looks like what is typically used for carpet padding in cars today. It's called "Jute" by everyone selling it, but it isn't jute, it is shredded old clothes. Check with a car upholstery supplier. It won't be quite as "loose" as that, and does come on a roll, but will look about the same. Don't go to a carpet store, they have something that looks about like that but it is bound up really tight with some kind of glue(?), and probably isn't what you want. Real Jute has a similar texture, but is all brown because it is plant fiber. Many cars used it in the 50s, but I don't know about Porsche. If real Jute is what you need and you happen to be in North America, it is completely unavailable. About 10 years ago, I found one restoration fabric supplier in the UK who claimed to be able to supply it, but I never tried to order any.

My 51 Statesman had it. The option hung around a long time, so probably. I can't rule out broken. I have seen that, though not on the Nash I owned. Somebody just might have released it. As you can see, the seat is not moved forward enough on it's tracks for the back to go all the way down.

I'll be the odd man out here. I remember using a homemade diesel fired steam cleaner about 30 years ago, and it was some sort of a miracle. I DO agree with the others commenting that you would not want to aim one at a whole truck. That would be a really bad idea. On the other hand, individual parts? Yes. A bare engine block or bare frame (for instance) that you will dry out thoroughly and refinish right after? Sure. I wish I owned one. It was way more effective than a pressure washer, though pressure washers are also useful.

I worked in an upholstery shop for a while in the early 80s. The shop was growing extremely rapidly. We moved into bigger space several times. People came and went, sewing machines came and went, some used some new. I have had an opportunity to sew on a lot of different industrial machines. My favorite was the Consew 206RB-1. The first one fell out of a truck during a move, and was replaced with 2 more. It was the only model I ever used that could run at full speed reliably on a high speed (3450RPM) clutch motor. Never buy a high speed motor, by the way. If you must have a clutch motor, get 1750RPM and the smallest pulley you can find. I learned on clutch motors and still use one, but I don't recommend it. Get a servo motor. Those weren't a thing back when I learned. I have an identical Consew 206RB-1 now, though I don't do upholstery professionally anymore, and haven't since those days. No matter what, get a "triple feed" (walking foot).

That is a stock Pontiac oil cap. Is it the wrong year or something?

He said Teves in the original post. As far as I know, that's ABS. There could be old threads in the Reatta and Chrysler TC sections of the forum that might help. I believe both of those cars used Teves at some point.

There is a Buick service bulletin with a dire warning about the angle mismatch, and I have seen it in the last year or so, but I can't quite remember. It occurred at either 1936/1937 or 1937/1938. It surprised me at the time. Until I saw that bulletin I had been thinking that the change occurred in the later 30s. Obviously not. This is for the 40 series transmission.

I can't really answer your question. It was a default for the older generations. My mother defaulted to that. I am not sure if it was law. It probably was somewhere. Prewar cars usually have an outside lock on the passenger door, and some a lot later. My 36 Pontiac's lock is on the passenger door, and my 66 Chevy truck's lock was too until I changed it. In the 20s you might still have wanted to exit at the sidewalk to avoid stepping in horse poo.

Could your clutch be dragging a little?

Good to know this works back to 38. A year or two further back there was a change in cone angle, and a potential gotcha exists with synchros that look like they fit but don't function in use.

I doubt I will be the one to identify them, as they don't look familiar, but I suspect different pictures would help a lot. Get pics from the sides of the hinges and the release/tilt mechanism, and underneath of the rails and seat adjustment release. Also, if there is a lever sticking out of the backside of the backrest for a rear passenger to release, get a picture of that. Someone will recognize.

I agree. Copper was a bad idea because it work hardens and cracks. Steel "Bundyflex" tubng is better than copper but can rust out. Today you can get CuNiFer, Nicopp, etc. It looks about like copper and is not prone to work hardening or rusting. I've not used it, but it has been around for years now, and so far no known downside.

Wow, it's a stick!

The reason you get multiple answers is there is no clear answer. Know the following things: 1) An alternator is limited at it's maximum current by it's stator, thanks to the way it is wound. The current is self-regulated at something close but probably not exactly 50 amps on a 50 amp alternator. It needs no further devices or efforts to protect it from overcurrent. 2) The ammeter should be wired so that all loads (accessories, lights, ignition, etc.) are connected to the *alternator side* of the ammeter, not the battery side. There should be nothing connected to the battery side (except maybe a horn on some cars). The ammeter is a flowmeter, current flows through it to get wherever it is going, and it should only be showing flow in or out of the battery. This is often incorrectly wired on modified cars or cars that have added accessories. Connecting an accessory or some headlight relays to the battery post (for instance) is not good. Anything current drawn from the battery side of the ammeter will show as a *charge* when it is in fact not a charge. The ammeter reading becomes meaningless. It also adds to the current flowing through the ammeter. My guesses on whether you can get away with this depend entirely on the loads all being connected correctly to the alternator side of the ammeter. 3) When you have a voltage regulator (and you do in a one wire alternator), the current will go up high for a few seconds as the energy used by the starter is replaced, and then go way down, because that is all current the battery wants. Yes, exactly. The alternator's VOLTAGE regulator will hold the system at about 7.5 volts if it can, and the battery will only draw the current (amperage) that it wants, and that will be the only current shown on the ammeter. Any current used by lights, ignition, radio, heater, etc is drawn off on the alternator side before it goes through the ammeter, because the car is wired correctly. This is why you can probably get away with it. The battery is most likely not going to pull 50 amps ever, and if it does it shouldn't be for long, because as I mentioned in normal operation it will spike up right after you start the car and go way down, but... 4) The alternator is limited (by it's design) to a maximum of 50 amps, and the ammeter SHOULD really be a +-50 amp ammeter or higher, so that it can handle anything the alternator can supply. This makes the ammeter burn out proof. In the real world, batteries when dead do not draw much current until they are partway charged. Then they draw a lot, and then a lot less when they get close to fully charged. So, the possibility exists that with a half dead battery on some cold rainy morning that the battery might want more than 20 amps, and it might want it for a longer than normal time. The alternator can do 50 amps if asked. Under this condition, you could *possibly* have something between 20 and 50 amps for an extended period, and that could *possibly* bend the needle, or burn out the ammeter, or overheat it's internals and cause permanent damage. The bigger the battery is and the more current the alternator can supply, the more likely this gets. That isn't going to help with the ammeter issue. Fuselinks are good because they don't add much voltage drop, and prevent burning the car down when something shorts to ground. Fire prevention is an almost completely separate issue, and anyway you don't put the fuselinks at the ammeter. They go at the power sources to protect the charging circuit wire. One goes at the alternator large post, and the other one goes at the "battery" more or less. In practice, it goes at the end of the last piece of relatively small wire in the charging circuit before you get to the battery. On a GM car that would be where the wire from the ammeter ends at the starter post. The current goes the rest of the way to the battery via the starter cable, but the starter cable is huge so you don't fuselink it at the battery. Maybe the same on a Dodge? 5) The only difference between a 20 amp ammeter and a higher current ammeter (like a 50 amp one) is the "shunt". The shunt is essentially a short circuit between the terminals, a wire more or less bypassing the gauge from one terminal to the other. If this were out of the car, and you had a friend with an electronics bench it might be possible to add a second shunt across the posts on back to make it a 50 amp ammeter. I have done this, but it is not trivial if you do not have the facilities to bench test it. 6) The trouble with ammeters on bigger systems is getting any useful information from them. 60 amps was about the limit on factory systems, and less is better. Lets say you have a 100 amp alternator, and you should then have a +-100 amp ammeter. The three amps or so that the battery is probably drawing after the battery is mostly charged is going to be very hard to see on a 0-100 amp scale on the right half of an ammeter. It becomes very hard to tell from the ammeter if the system is charging or not. This is one of many reasons modern systems with large alternators use voltmeters instead of ammeters if they have a gauge at all. It is much easier to see the difference between 12.6 and 14.7 volts (or 6.3 and 7.5 volts) on a voltmeter than it is to see 3 out of 100 amps on the right half of an ammeter. You'll get a lot of conflicting answers. Some have and like it. In theory alternators should be more reliable than generators purely due to mechanical wear issues. In practice, alternators are full of solid state diodes and usually have electronic regulators, and.... yeah... maybe not so reliable after all. Personally, I have had far more alternator trouble in my life than generator trouble, and I probably wouldn't change it. Good luck with your project.

I believe that would do it.

Can you reverse just the brush connections, without reversing the position of the field or brushholders? That should do it.

Volts don't mean much as there is no voltage regulation. You can't set voltage anyway. If you disable the third brush the voltage will be lower, but that will be because all charging stops. My advice would be to make sure the thermal switch is not stuck, and move the third brush as far away from the nearest main brush as it will go.