Bloo

What? Thats a small block Chevy.

The black is probably carbon blowing past the rings. Newer cars, especially for the last 20 years or so have better ring sealing. Old cars foul the oil. It isn't just carbon. Other combustion by-products get blown into the oil too. It is a good reason to change the oil a lot. Diesels are another matter. Black oil is just the order of the day in those.

1946 3/4 ton in NC https://asheville.craigslist.org/cto/d/franklin-1946-dodge-truck/6859011109.html 1946 1/2 ton in Cali https://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/ctd/d/indio-1946-dodge-1-2-ton-wc-pickup-runs/6837690830.html

How close does it need to be? For what it's worth, 1941, 1946, and 1947 all look almost exactly alike. 1939 and 1940 have the headlights in closer to the center and different grilles, but still pretty close to that look. Plymouth trucks existed back in those days too, at least for part of those years. They look pretty similar too.

Glad you got it working!

People seem to see a little oil burning these days and assume the engine is shot. Take a good look at this graph of normal oil consumption. It's from the 1936 Pontiac shop manual, and it's pretty close to the truth..... ....and look at the huge improvement from 1935 to 1936! The chart is in Miles per Gallon, of oil. Let that sink in a minute.

Ok starting at the battery, there is a cable to the starter. From the starter it continues on a small wire to the ammeter (and also the horn relay and the cigarette lighter). The terminal on the other side of the ammeter splits off and powers everything else (and also connects to the charging system via the voltage regulator). If the ammeter gauge is not in the car, the wires that are supposed to connect to it would have to be shorted together for anything to work. (Except the horn and the cigarette lighter, those should work no matter what with the battery in.) If the ammeter is in the car, it would be a good place to start testing. Make sure there is battery voltage on both sides. With the ignition switch not in, not much is going to work. I am not familiar enough with the 54 to know which stuff needs the key. I would expect at least the brakelights and the headlights to work without it.

The good news is that it is postwar, and that will make it easier to find one. Probably cheaper too. Welcome to the forum!

Does your gauge cluster have an ammeter that is not connected? If so, current has to flow through that to get from the battery to almost anything else.

Chevrolet Garage (a blacksmith shop before cars came along). Athena, Oregon

Yeah, its amazing how many of the "right" tools out there just make a mess. Brillman sure is a great source for wire and ends. I did not know they would crimp them up for you.

Midway Motors (Buick-Dodge Bros.), Waterville, WA. In the 70s, when I remember it open it was Chevrolet and a few other GM brands. I believe it was called Big Bend Motors. Much more recently it had an antique store in it. It still stands.

Those wires must be huge!

Where do you find big enough wires to fit it that are not spark plug wires?

I used to crimp a lot of wires and I can tell you many of the tools sold for this purpose do not work worth a damn. What do you mean by "standard ends"? I am guessing the type used on modern wires, where 2 tabs curve around and stab into the insulation like this: In my experience, crimpers that combine spark plug crimping with something that looks like a hardware store crimper (even from Snap-On !) don't work worth sour owl manure. I have one that works. It came from some wholesaler in Texas, circa 1992. MSD was selling the same one a few years later. Look closely at this picture. This tool actually works. You might be able to find one used: MSD currently sells a different tool that has thick jaws like a professional tool. It is expensive. It looks like a real tool that might actually work. I have not used it. Back in the day there were also "Rajah" terminals. Note that they have a cylindrical area that you stuff the end of the wire in. They take a weird star crimper. If that is what you need, one company still makes a crimper (Westwood T-200-10 695). It isn't cheap. I have no idea whether it works right. Otherwise you need to look for a decades-old used one.

True enough, but I always try to help if I have any ideas. I have yet to see a 12v conversion with every last thing working. These DC-DC converters commonly available are a tool we never had back in the day. When resistors were used for everything, the resistor had to use as much power as the accessory did. It will be interesting to see how well DC-DC converters solve the problems. I am a bit skeptical because pre-computer automotive electrical systems are extremely dirty, often with spikes over 200 volts on a 12 volt car. Car batteries make horrible filter capacitors, and they are even worse if the connections are bad. I wonder if the DC-DC converters will be able to deal with the dirty electrical systems. Time will tell. I still think a resistor is the best solution for running a 6 volt horn on 12 volts. The back EMF from something like a horn is probably going to blow that converter to smithereens. As for the gauges, the converter might work just fine.

Not mine..... just noticed it and thought about this thread. https://wenatchee.craigslist.org/pts/d/wenatchee-1963-chev-1-2-ton-pickup-grill/6837739004.html

Typically every cylinder is bored because it incresases displacement, and possibly piston weight. Not always. It was not uncommon in the old days to fix one cylinder by overboring. A one-cylinder fix today usually involves sleeving the really bad cylinder to match the good ones. .010, .020, etc are piston and bore oversizes. An .020 piston ring goes on an .020 larger piston in an .020 larger bore. If a bore has wear it is possible to put in larger rings to compensate for wear, to some small extent. These are called "File-Fit" rings. They are made just a little too long and you file the ends to get the ring gap where you want it. They can be used in new engines when trying to get the ring gaps absolutely perfect (for racing, etc.). In old engines they can be used to make the wear situation a little less bad. The limitation is that worn bores have taper, and if a ring gap closes when hot, the ring breaks and it destroys everything in sight. You have to set the gap at the bottom of the bore (the least worn part), because the gap is tightest there. The part that matters most to the ring's function though is the top, and the top is more worn. No matter what you do the ring gap at the top of the bore will be too loose, it will just be a little less loose than if you had just put standard rings in. It helps, but is no substitute for a rebore and new pistons. People used to also knurl pistons to compensate for piston skirt and bore wear, to keep them from slapping and making noise. For the most part, nobody does this stuff anymore.

The surge current of the horn is probably way too high. They are pretty much a dead short until the diaphragm starts to move. You probably need to use a resistor instead for the horn. I might try a Chrysler ballast resistor, and see if the horn sounds about right. Leave plenty of room around the resistor. It is gonna get hot when in use. That shouldn't be much, but you must plan for the day the horn sticks and the resistor gets really hot.

How much difference in length between the old Dynaflow and the new transmission? A difference in length would change the angle of the front two joints, possibly causing the problem. If I remember correctly, 64 and 65 use a different transmission (400?) that is not a Dynaflow. The length of the transmission was probably different. That might have required the carrier bearing change. To instead run a single piece driveshaft with two conventional universal joints, the angles on the u joints must be equal and opposite with the car at normal ride height. It is likely that they are not since the original driveshaft was a different type. You may be able to fix it by changing the pinion angle. I think the upper link on the rear suspension is adjustable on a Riviera.

There is nothing inherently wrong with radial tubes in radial tires. With some types of rim you must run a tube. It is better to run tubeless if you can, because a puncture in a tube type radial will cause sudden deflation just like it does in a tube type bias ply tire. In a tubeless tire you are more likely to get a slow leak and have someone point and say "hey buddy, you got a low tire!". You might even be able to re-inflate it and drive to the tire shop.

Fix the title first. As others have pointed out, it is Canadian. Someone could have driven it down to Texas from Canada and broke down. It may have never had American paperwork. Cool truck!

Generally speaking, not Riviera specific: For a one piece driveline, the rules are simple. The joints must have angles, and the angles must be equal and opposite. What this means is that if the crankshaft is level, the rear axle pinion must also be level. If the crankshaft points down at 6 degrees, the pinion must point up at 6 degrees, and so on. The idea here is that the speed variations of one joint cancel the speed variations of the other joint. The yokes welded in the driveshaft tube must be aligned correctly with each other for this to happen. Some factory jobs (of various makes) put a little too much angle on the rear joint, the idea being that the angles are equal and opposite (and the driveline smoothest) under hard acceleration. Personally I think I would rather have the angles perfect at part throttle cruise. If the universal joints have no angle at all, there are no speed variations to cancel, but then they will fail right away. The needle bearings will pound little dents into their races. Joints that have plain bushings instead of needle bearings can run with no angle, but then they must be bathed in oil to survive. Old Buick and Chevrolet torque tubes with only one U-joint are an example. Trying to figure out how it should be for a two piece driveline makes my head hurt. Hopefully someone else in here knows how. The speed variations would still have to add up to zero.

Hello from Wenatchee, Is that Australia? I thought we (Washington State USA) had you beat for impossible to pronounce place names (Puyallup, Semiahmoo, Wawawai, Skamokawa, Quetilquasoon, etc.) but I guess not.....

In the US, "Valiant" was a separate marque in 1960 (first year of production). In 1961 it was a Plymouth Valiant. That makes the one in the picture most likely a Plymouth since the picture was taken in New Jersey. I agree with Keiser that it is a 61. I am fairly sure that round V-200 emblem wasn't used in 60. In 1962 (USA models), the taillights weren't in the fins anymore.