Bloo

Some of those charts are better than others, but that one at the top of the page is just plain wrong. To get any size (excluding brass era pre-balloon tires and 1970s letter-size tires), start with the section width. That would be the first number in an old familiar tire size (6.00-16, 6-70-15 etc.) This is the width, at the widest point on the sidewall, in inches, on whatever rim width the designer designed it on. There is an acceptable range of rim widths, so the actual section width will vary with the rim width of the car the tire is mounted on. Multiply section width by the aspect ratio (60, 70, 75, 80, etc. percent) to get the section height, or distance from the rim to the ground. This is 90 or 100 (percent) for sizes introduced before 1965, and 80 for the "replacement" sizes introduced in 1965. These post-1965 sizes generally end in a 5 instead of a 0 (7.75-14 etc.). On metric tires, it is the same except the section width is in mm. On a 235/75R15 for instance, 235mm divided by 25.4 (convert to inches) gives you a section width of 9.25 inches. Multiply that by the aspect ratio 75 (9.25 x 0.75 = 6.94) gets you 6.94 inches of section height. Take the section height, multiply by 2, (6.94 x 2 = 13.88) plus the rim diameter (13.88 + 15 = 28.88) gets you a 28.88 tire diameter. Metric tires without the aspect ratio marked (example: 155R13) are typically 80 or 82 percent aspect ratio. This is all theoretical and only gets you close. For the real measurements you have to get on the website and look on the tire specifications page for the tires you have narrowed it down to. They will give the measurements of the actual tires, and if you are lucky, an actual revolutions per mile specification. Revs/mile varies a little bit from calculation even if you have the true measurements of the tires, due to the squish at the bottom of the tire. As you can see, since old American tires sizes are 100, 90 or 80 percent aspect ratio, and 75 series is the tallest aspect ratio you find a wide variety of tires in, modern tires are going to be much wider at the same overall diameter (to get your gear ratio and your speedometer right), or much smaller overall diameter to get the width right, so the tires don't hit at full steering lock, don't hit the rear fenders, don't have to be deflated to get the back wheels on, and so on. It works out just fine on some cars, not so well on others. Good luck.

This came up once before. Apparently in some parts of the US "flat 6" was common slang going back to at least the 60s if not further. It was a surprise to me. I (in the northwestern US) had never heard of it.

Copper work hardens and really shouldn't be used there. There are copper-nickel alloys now (cunifer, ni-copp, etc.) that are considered good enough for brakes, and should be fine if you want something copper-ish. Copper was sometimes used for fuel lines back in the model-t era. I think nearly everyone was past that by 1937, at least under the hood. A 37 Olds will probably have copper tubing as the fuel pickup in the tank, and transfer to steel at the first fitting back near the tank.

I doubt 75 series tires are going to be what you want. They will be even wider than what you have at the same height. The old number sizes changed in 1965 from about a 90 aspect ratio to an 80 aspect ratio. Going far enough back, tires were 100 aspect ratio or even taller. I don't know when the change from 100 to 90 occurred. 700r15 or 750r15 pickup tires are probably more like it. Edit: looks like the choices are really slim, even in 15 inch... I guess you probably have to use some 75 series tires.

Whichever is the same outer diameter. The new ones will be slightly wider at the same outer diameter. Going strictly by the marked sizes, and assuming pre-1965 tire sizing because the size ends in a "0", I am going to assume the aspect ratio to be 90. 6.50 x 13 6.5" (section width) x 0.9 (90%) = 5.85" (section height) 5.85" x 2 = 11.7 11.7 + 13 (rim size) = 24.7" overall diameter, in theory anyway. In practice this varied a lot between brands. 80 series (80% aspect ratio) tires are the tallest, or closest to 90% you are going to find in metric. Metric tires without the aspect ratio marked are usually either 80 or 82%. 175R13 or 175/80R13: 175 / 25.4 (convert to inch) = 6.89" section width 6.89" x 0.8 (80%) = 5.51" section height 5.51" x 2 = 11.02" 11.02 + 13 = 24.02" overall diameter 185R13 or 185/80R13: 185 / 25.4 (convert to inch) = 7.28" section width 7.28" x 0.8 (80%) = 5.82" section height 5.82" x 2 = 11.64" 11.64 + 13 = 24.64" overall diameter I would go with the bigger ones if it looks like they aren't going to hit anything. Also, get your front end checked and aligned. Always do that first. Radial tires can mask all sorts of front end problems, and you may not realize anything is wrong until you chewed up 2 brand new tires in a week.

If they are trying to sell them by SAE sizes, that is a good part of the problem. They are metric and will be marked 11-13, 12-14, 13-15, etc. When you ordered those clamps from NAPA back in the 90s, there was no telling which ones would fall out of the box. It seemed random. One shop I used to work for used to order them by the box of 10, usually 1/2" IIRC, and sort them out into their proper sizes. Sometimes several boxes needed to be ordered to get enough clamps of the same size to finish a job. FI hose varied quite a bit in outer diameter then depending on the source, and the clamps don't cover much variation in size. The sizes that didn't fit would get probably get used up with a different brand of hose later on. I was elated to see those clear-packaged assortments hanging on the wall in Autozone and Oreilly.

No, it needs a heater to heat clean air for it. Exhaust will screw it up. The 320 I saw with the Delco unit removed had a "well" underneath, separate from the exhaust, but hanging down in it to get hot. Have you ever seen the well for a well choke on a 60s Chrysler product? It looked like that. They had closed off the top (almost) to make a little oven out of that space, and the tube to the carb just sucked out of there. IIRC the fitting at the carb end supported the tube. Was it enough hot air? I'm not sure. It was completely non-invasive, and at first glance it looked factory. It is the first thing I would try.

Mazda rotary. The 13B is the larger of the 2 common ones (the other being the 12A).

On one 37 320 I saw, someone converted the well for the Delco choke into a stove for the Carter. It consisted of a tube simply dropped down in the well through a non-sealing cover, intended to let just a little fresh air in. I don't know how well that worked, but it seemed reasonable. It looked like it belonged there.

Yes. They should run.

I think If I really needed to replace it I would use real leather of some kind. IMHO modern vinyl never seems to hold up the prewar illusion for very long. As for the real thing, it may be a bit difficult to track down. A year or two ago I was trying to find a source for some real "leatherette". As I understand it, 1920s and 1930s "leatherette" was "Fabrikoid" in the USA and "Rexine" in the UK. Both were nitrocellulose products. I have no idea what was in French similicuir in 1924. I doubt PVC/Vinyl existed. As near as I can tell, Fabrikoid has been out of production for decades. There was an article circulating virally on the Internet a few years ago about a guy who rescued the last Rexine manufacturing equipment from a building that was being demolished. Supposedly he restored the machinery, started making more Rexine, and then discovered that Rexine was still in production in India. I'm not sure I believe the last part of the story, because if you search for Rexine in India, it seems that the word "Rexine" is also used for PVC/Vinyl materials. Of course the real thing might exist there, but if so, there doesn't seem to be a readily available Internet source, even now. For what it's worth "Pyroxylin" (the coating material) is a good search term. Here are a couple of potential UK sources that I never contacted: https://ratchford.co.uk/product-category/bookcloth-and-covering-materials/bookcloth-coverings/leathercloth/ http://www.hewitonline.com/product_p/cl-170-000.htm I hope you get more responses. This could be an interesting thread.

Kickdown, aka Passing Gear. It is downshifting for faster acceleration. I have never heard it called "whirlaway".

I had to sort out this mess on my truck a while back. I replaced the rear main seal also. It was a case of "while I'm in there" on the occasion of the cam going flat. The engine (which I did not build) is a smallblock chevy built out of truly random parts. The dipstick tube was wrong, chrome, on upside down, and I found a piece of another dipstick tube still in the block. I had been guessing about the oil level for decades. There are more permutations of that silly dipstick than most people realize. Truck pans hold more oil IIRC. My truck had a car pan, and I left it that way. The dipstick hole can be on either side of the block. Are you sure you shouldn't have a lower tube? I wish I could add more here, but I can't remember exactly how I figured it out. Probably by the casting number, and measuring to the crank as suggested above. As it turned out, I already had the right dipstick, but needed a new upper and lower tube, and needed to clean a broken piece out of the block. One thing I can add is that the Corvette parts houses (Ecklers, etc) have literally everything in reproduction if you can just figure out what you need. Best of luck with it, and I hope it doesn't drag out too long for you.

Weld the 12-28 ends on 12-24 bolts? They would be ugly, but it would be inside a wooden block..... Other than having someone turn down and thread two slightly larger bolts, I am out of ideas.

This is what, in the old days, we called a "battery charger" Frank DuVal nailed it. It is a manual charger, with not much inside. There is most likely a transformer, 2 diodes (probably copper oxide, riveted to the case), an ammeter, and a switch. Thats it. There were a bunch of brands, all electrically alike except for the appearance, and even the appearance didn't vary much. Schauer was a common brand. Yes, it is a good charger. If you connect it to a dead battery it charges it, unlike many modern "smart" chargers that will refuse to charge a battery that is dead (yes, that is really true). I don't think anyone still makes these chargers. IMHO hang onto it. I don't know where you would get a manual, but there isn't much to it. When you first connect the charger, if the battery is really dead, it wont draw much current (look at the ammeter on the front panel). As the battery gets more charged, it will draw more current, and then as the battery is getting full it will draw less current again. As Frank says, don't leave it on forever.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree..... Yes, the hose does not care what the application is, just as it does not care if it burns your car down. I don't want any of it on my car. When I was in the business cheap "fuel-emission" hose on any car with a "real" fuel pump was considered mickey-mouse and dangerous. You are absolutely correct that 30r7 is the old standard (fuel-emission) hose, and not an earlier grade of fuel injection hose. I had that wrong, and now I can't remember what the old stuff was called. I have edited my post and removed 30r7. On Continental's page for their 30r7 fuel emission hose it says: "WARNING Do not use for pressure lines or fuel injected engines." http://www.continental-elite.com/Products/Automotive-Parts/Shop-Hose/Fuel-Hose/Fuel-Line-PCV-Emission-Control-Hose-SAE-30R7.html .

The hose shown in the pictures is not applicable to fuel injection of any sort, in 1976 or now. This is a port fuel injection system. It is so called because the fuel injectors are in the ports. If it were a throttle body injection system, the pressure would probably be lower but you would STILL need fuel injection hose. 30 or 40 years ago some countermen may have been unaware. Today there is really no excuse. The "fuel/pcv" hose in the picture is used for fuel line on old carbureted cars with mechanical fuel pumps or small electrics that don't have much pressure or volume. Even so, it is a miracle more of those cars didn't burn down. One common place this type of hose was used was at the fuel filter or carburetor, where there would be one or two short pieces . The hose rots, and it doesn't take long. When it does, it develops tiny cracks along the reinforcement strings. Those turn into tiny streams of gas squirting out. Many times I opened the hood of some car that just rolled into the shop and found the top of engine drenched in gasoline, dripping around the valve covers and on to the exhaust. Fssss. Fssss. Fssss....... A fuel pump in a fuel injected car is typically a rotary vane or roller type. It can empty a 15 gallon tank faster than you would believe if there is no restriction on the output. Imagine what would happen if a rotten hose broke in two or slid off. I hope I could get the seatbelt off fast enough. In the 70s, 80s, and 90s fuel injection systems often had rubber hose under the hood. In the 70s, for instance, something like a Datsun 260z would have a 2 inch piece of hose on each injector, 2 or three more of them on the fuel regulator, and then 2 longer hoses connecting the engine to the car. This was fuel injection hose, and used fuel injection clamps, except maybe the connection at the injectors themselves. Those were sometimes crimped. The return line could be a lower grade of hose as there is no pressure, but it really shouldn't be lower grade. The cheap hose is prone to leak. If there is any question about the age or condition of the hose, ALL of it needs to be replaced with fuel injection grade hose and clamps. Fuel injection clamps can be reused, at least if they are the right size for the outer diameter of the new hose. Years ago, the outer diameter of fuel injection hose varied a lot between brands, so more often than not all the clamps needed to be replaced too. Worm-type clamps like the ones in the picture are not for use on a fuel injection system of any kind. The do not have a round cross section, and may leak. Also, most of them do not cover up the threads in the band, and extrude the rubber of the hose. Real fuel injection clamps can be made many ways, out of round wire, out of a metal band with a "tower", and the most common kind, an overlapping metal band with a machine screw and a square nut. There are probably others. All of them have a much rounder clamping area than a worm clamp. Most fuel injection clamps have a narrower range of size when compared to the worm clamps in the picture. It is important to get the right size. The tongue should slip under the band without walking up and bending, and the clamp should tighten firmly on the hose without running out of thread. Getting the clamps is much easier than it used to be. Today you can walk into an Oreilly or Autozone and buy a blister pack of assorted sizes. The fuel injection hose itself, years ago, varied in construction. Some had a liner inside, some did not. Either way it was meant to last for ages without burning your car down. It also had a higher pressure rating (300psi IIRC), but the pressure rating wasn't the main thing. The main thing was that it wouldn't squirt gas all over the place like the hose used on carburetors. American fuel injection hose today is sae-j-30r9, and it is lined. It is rated for gas, e-10, e-85, diesel, and some others.

I think you might have a fighting chance if the headliner were vinyl. Even then I am thinking it might be near impossible to keep the overspray under control. If it were me, I would probably live with it or replace it.

Good question, but if you are going to actually drive the car, it has to be able to run on whatever is at the pump at any little one horse town you might be in when you need more gas. Here in WA, and probably in the rest of the US, that means 10% ethanol. It does do damage, there is no question about that. I suspect, however, that "pure" gasoline is a myth, and if there is no ethanol, there are other additives, and who knows what those might or might not do? I have had surprisingly little trouble with the 36 Pontiac. Since rebuilding the fuel pump with an "ethanol resistant" diaphragm, getting rid of the electric fuel pump, returning the fuel line routing to stock, and repairing the heat riser, my fuel delivery problems have evaporated. It did have some boiling carburetor symptoms one particular day during our couple of weeks of ~106-108F weather this summer, when the coolant was also near the boiling point. It never stopped running. I currently have a "taxicab" metering rod in it (2 steps lean), and haven't lost any power. I suspect I could go leaner. Ethanol corrodes anything it comes in contact with. I will soon have to pull out the fuel sending unit I rebuilt a year or two ago, as the (original 1936) corks have apparently sunk. I plated the sending unit then with zinc to slow down the corrosion. I have a feeling it is going to be a godawful mess again when I pull it out. Time will tell.

The link is incomplete. If you cut and paste the whole link in your address bar, you get the intended 37 Buick.

Yes, Dodge Brothers designed and made their own engines. If that particular model has Lycoming in it, it is an outlier. The number of different flathead designs out there is staggering.

This, and I would be tempted to do it, making sure the car is absolutely clean, waxed, and dusted first. Any dirt will scratch. If you leave it bare the cotton couldn't hold moisture against the paint I guess. The dirt will build up, and if anything touches the car before you wash it, then that dirt will scratch....

Crack a window or two. Let it breathe. It doesn't take much. Yes, some dust will get in, hopefully not too much. If you leave it closed up tight it may start to behave like a terrarium. That does a lot more damage than dust.

What kind of stencil film are you using?

49 Buick