Bloo

I have tools for 2 sizes..... It didn't work on those cranks like in the picture because the groove the tool needs to slide through was not cut all the way like a later handle is. Past the tips of the clip, the groove just stops. There is no way for the tool to slide in. I like your hacksaw idea.

I have had zero luck with the "slide it under" tool shown on my Pontiac (although it works fine on newer GM products). My Pontiac has literally the same door handles and bezels shown in the pics above. I like the paper clip idea, or a pick if you can make enough room to get it in. The trick is you need to hook one end and roll the clip sideways to get it out. The clip looks like Tinindian's pic. The clip is between the black bezel and the chrome handle. There is a tool with a c-shaped slot in the side to roll the clip out, but I could not find a pic online. I couldn't find my tool either. Hey mribbich@wi.rr.com, those doors look pretty solid! Are the bottoms there? More to the point does that car have back doors? Are the bottoms still in those? I would love to see some pictures if so.

True enough, but even more often it is motor mounts and/or linkage trouble, which don't require taking the whole drivetrain apart.

Was the tulip body only used one year?

On closer inspection, I think you are right. It was initially the hood vents that had me thinking LaSalle (with the whole radiator surround missing) rather than Buick. You can see them quite a bit better in the first video (if you stop it) than the still. I now see that if the LaSalle surround were gone, the headlights would be too. Thanks!

That would be a brass float with a groove to clip in at one end. Ford only recently discontinued them. Gm probably discontinued long ago, but they were used in Chevy trucks, so a Chevy truck vendor should have it if Bob's Automobilia doesn't. I was holding a bad one in my hand just yesterday that came from a 1960 Chevy 1/2 ton.

I think thats it!

This picture was probably taken in 1908. The car appears to be a prop in a photography studio. Anybody know what kind of car it is?

From "The Invaders" (1995). This was a revival of the Quinn-Martin show from the mid 60s. Car appears at 1:55:10 and again at 2:09:11. It appears to be a 1936 GM product I think. I looked it up on IMCDB where they think it is a Buick. I have my doubts. Not Pontiac, not Olds. 1936 LaSalle maybe? What is this thing? https://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_1056515-Buick-1936.html

You have to turn the drum inside the same direction the needle is going to turn. Counterclockwise when viewed from the rear.

In reverse.

Thats an Inland shifter for a four speed. I have one from a Chevy Monza that bolts to the floor like that (anybody need one?). Chevy Vegas were similar.

Non-detergent oil, I imagine.

It probably has a title (but you should ask). I doubt you could register it without one. The implication is that there would be no unpaid back registration fees to a California buyer (I think).

Is that even a Dodge? Radiator shell looks like mid 30s International.

Not to take away from anyone's efforts to find more authentic washers, but it is also of high importance to make sure the manifold can slide as it expands even when you don't have original hardware. Flat washers tend to restrict motion by squeezing down in the gap. Also pay attention to any studs that might get in the way as the manifold gets larger. As built the manifold may normally drag on the outside of the studs. This is so it will pull away as the manifold gets larger, and it won't bottom out on the inside of the studs. Belleville washers can help. The manifold WILL move as it expands. If something gets in it's way, it will just break.

I was still using one in the 80s, and I remember seeing them on the shelf at NAPA at that time. It held multiple quarts. I worked at another shop in the 90s that had bulk oil, and I have forgotten what we were using. Probably one of those. A method that had fallen into disuse was a glass jar that held a quart or maybe two. The jar had a cap that was shaped like a funnel.

Ball bearings. The whole scoop is here: http://chevy.oldcarmanualproject.com/manuals/1952sbb/52bb12.htm

You check kingpins by jacking a front wheel up, grabbing a tire at the top and bottom, and wiggle. I would pack and adjust the wheel bearings first. According to New Departure's 1952 instructions the bearings run with a small preload (no slop). Servicing the bearings first will make it easier to tell what is loose. Grabbing at the top and bottom, shake the wheel. You will no doubt feel some slop. Put a finger barely touching the brake drum and backing plate at the same time and wiggle with the other hand. This will make sure there is no looseness still in the wheel bearing. A worn spindle could cause there still to be slop with the bearings adjusted. Now lay a finger so it touches both the spindle and the axle at the kingpin and shake again. Your finger will verify that the slop is coming from the kingpin. You want NO slop, but on any car that has been running there will be a little. They need to be pretty tight to keep all the darting around that bias-ply tires do in check, and also to prevent fast uneven tire wear. All kingpins are extremely tough on grease and wear out too fast. Give them an extra squirt of grease now and then between lube jobs. Steering linkage is usually a serviceable socket that runs around a ball, and is adjustable with a huge screwdriver. The trouble comes if the ball is not round anymore. Tale a couple of measurements with a mic or caliper 90 degrees from each other. Replace any shot (oval) balls, and new or old, adjust with the steering off center and make sure it doesn't bind. There is a spring inside the socket to take up tiny irregularities, but don't try to use that to compensate for a worn out (oval) ball. If you do it will be loose in the straight-ahead position, and wander. Balls are available but might need to be welded on. Rebuild kits for the sockets are available if the parts inside are shot. The old stuff in the sockets is more than likely OK. Adjust as tight as you can get with no binding. There were probably leather or rubber gaiters originally to keep the dirt and small rocks out. Maybe not. I don't know where to get any. Grease it often.

I would try them on 6 volts and see if they work at all or if they are too dim. The voltage needed to initiate LEDs is well below 6 volts, and depending on how they handled the voltage reduction, it just might work. Polarity will matter.

Actually that was the 74 Pinto, the earlier Pintos being a completely different car. The 74-up Pinto and Mustang II are indeed the same car underneath. This is the version that donated it's suspension to so many hot rods a few decades ago. The geometry is actually REALLY GOOD. The 74 Pinto (or Mustang II if you prefer) was let down by a lack of body rigidity, not the front suspension geometry. It was probably a lot better choice than some of the other things used in hot rods back then. The thing is, now that there are a million aftermarket kits with tubular control arms, etc, somehow the strut rod has disappeared, and the lower control arm replaced by a wishbone. This probably makes it way easier to adapt to other cars, but I do not see how it could be the same geometry. Even if they did get the rotational axis of the lower control arm about the same (it doesn't look like they did), where would the rigidity come from under braking load? The wishbone isn't very wide. I too am extremely skeptical of these suspension kits. A real 74-up Pinto suspension would probably be better, but it sure ain't much to look at, and you need a rigid place to land the strut rod that might or might not exist depending on the frame width. Then there is track width. You can't just change it without a custom rack and pinion. I find it pretty amusing that they insist on calling it "Mustang II" instead of "Pinto".

Getting rid of the torque tube is an invasive, expensive process. Using Chevrolet truck arms is probably the most common way to so it. Those sure look like Chevrolet truck arms to me. If they're not the same ones, I wonder what they came from? For what it's worth, there are 2 types of the Chevrolet truck arms. The 60-61 version (used in the trucks with a torsion bar front suspension) ran at a wider angle than the later trucks (through 1972). The arms attach to the axle out much closer to the wheels on the 1960-61 trucks.

Up in these parts, we call this type a "Ford Wrench". I suspect this is the type Grimy referred to. A Monkey Wrench would be more like this:

All good advice, but I always start with the method KongaMan posted, moving on to some of the other ideas if necessary. I use a test light instead of an ammeter (multimeter) at first, to make sure I'm not gonna blow the fuse in the multimeter. Then if the lamp only glows dimly or not at all, I move on to the ammeter (multimeter). In addition to the trunk light, check the glovebox light if it has one. Any bulb you cant see is suspicious. As for the clock, if it is the "Borg" style usually used back in those days, it shouldn't be a constant draw. It should just pulse now and then. If it is a constant draw, the points are stuck and you probably just found the issue. Even though the clock doesn't draw constantly, every little bit runs the battery down some. Cars with clocks run the battery dead faster than ones without, and a old car with a mechanical voltage regulator and no clock should have no current draw at all. There is only the self-discharge rate of the battery to worry about. That is a good argument for pulling the clock fuse, or getting a battery disconnect switch. If you need the clock to work, maybe a battery maintainer.

Sometimes the old legends are more fun that the truth.... Do you guys know how Ball and Ball Carburetors got their name? It's because when you turn the fuel bowl upside down two tiny ball bearings fall out and go bouncing across the shop floor.