Bloo

Oh wow.... Thank you!.

I have never seen a complete answer either. I don't think anyone has successfully done it. I have seen a bunch of threads where someone changed over to 12v because they thought they needed to, and then post "my transmission wont shift". There are a bunch of those all over the web. I'm sure you have seen all that. As someone who used to fix electrical (and fuel) systems on cars professionally, 12v conversions to me are just a bunch of godawful messes I had to clean up. We live in a time when ebay is full of Chinese DC_DC converters of various sizes, and automotive techs are not typically scared to death of electrical systems anymore. I am surprised SOMEONE hasn't got one of these transmissions working on a 12v system but I have never heard of it. I have also wondered why. Good luck on your quest.

So does my '36 Pontiac.

Does the blue not go deep enough at the sweep? I can't see the weatherstrip you mentioned at all.

Yes, the Ford hub is smaller. I remember long ago grinding out the centers on some 14x7 Mustang wheels to get them on Mopar hubs.

The 33 would be a wooden door anyway. If GM It would need to be newer. The pattern on the crank and door release does sort of suggest Olds.

The air temp sensor should be verified just in case. It would richen things up if bad. John348 is correct that this points to the map. I am almost sure at this point that the solution is going to revolve around the MAP somehow. I did not originally understand how California's test works, and could not understand why there were two lines with about the same engine speed. First of all, apparently California does not test at idle in a case like this... at all..... (they must have solved all those traffic jams. I should look into moving there). No, this is an "ASM" test (only), run on a dyno. I should take a moment to explain that power enrichment on cars is not usually gradual. It is either on or off. There are exceptions, like 60s Chryslers with 3 stage fuel metering, but even those aren't really gradual in the transition to power mixture. On a carburetor with a typical style power valve, like a Holley for instance, the enrichment is either on or off. GM CCC shuts off the fuel control solenoid altogether at wide open throttle (full rich). Some cars have a "three dimensional fuel map". They really do, but it is just little changes to improve things under different conditions. For all practical purposes, the enrichment is either on or off. This applies to almost every car ever made that is new enough to have power enrichment. You could do it with a switch. In fact it has been done. If anyone doesn't believe this, hook a vacuum gauge to your car, tape it to the windshield, and go for a drive. the transition from cruise to acceleration is several inches of vacuum. You'll see. Now back to the California test. MarkV's post shows that it is an ASM test. Whats that? Well according to this (page 12): https://www.bar.ca.gov/pdf/Smog_Check_Manual_ENG_2013.pdf "The ASM emission inspection includes two loaded mode sequences known as the 50/15 test and the 25/25 test" So then, what the hell is a 50/15 test and 25/25 test? California didn't bother to say, but according to this (page 2): https://www.saddleback.edu/uploads/atas/autotech/courses/bar-97-transition-class-student-workbook.pdf "ASM testing equipment tests the vehicle at two constant speed and load levels (A). 50% load at 15mph (known as a 50/15 test) (B). 25% load at 25mph (known as a 25/25 test) Now we are getting somewhere. I see what they are up to. When you take off from a stoplight, you probably give the accelerator a pretty good stab. When the car gets moving you probably let up and continue accelerating, but with less pedal until you get to your desired speed, then you back off on the pedal some more and cruise. The are trying to see if you are getting into the power enrichment mode during acceleration in normal driving (not hard acceleration). Remember that mode is almost like a switch. A perfect cruise mixture (IMHO) is stoichometric, or 14.7 to 1 air to fuel by weight. This corresponds to 0.3% CO (theoretical) or 0.7% CO (practical). Leaner cruise mixtures give greater fuel economy, until you get to the point of lean misfire. GM was apparently trying to do that in the late 70s on carbureted vehicles (it did not work out well). They very well could have calibrated this car leaner than 0.7. They wouldn't have calibrated it richer. These are numbers all for the engine itself. The tailpipe CO emissions (after the catalytic converter) would be lower. Now lets have a look at MarkV's numbers again. HC 47ppm 43ppm CO 1.60% 2.00% O2 0.00% 0.00% CO2 14.1% 14.0% NO(x?) 108ppm 97ppm Now, what would I expect? On a healthy engine, BEFORE the catalytic converter, something like this: HC 188ppm CO 0.7% O2 2.2% CO2 13.6% NO(x?) 400ppm? So what do the numbers show us? They show us that the catalytic converter is working. HC is below 100ppm, and you generally don't get below 100 without a catalyst. Low 02 proves you really do have a sample of the exhaust. CO is 14, and you don't usually get that high without a catalyst either. You might get 13.8 if the mixture wasn't too rich, but it is too rich. 1.6% CO proves that it is too rich. NO(x) wasn't looked at much in my day, but MarkV's numbers are lower than what a healthy engine emits, so that also points to a working catalytic converter. Since the catalytic converter is working, we can infer that it is reducing the CO also. From MarkV's numbers, I would guess the actual CO is 6% or higher. 6% is in the neighborhood of a perfect full throttle rich fuel mixture for maximum power. Some engines may like a little more, and many are calibrated more like 10-12%, sometimes causing a slight reduction in power. Yes, that is all wild speculation, but I used to do this for a living and I'll bet it isn't far off. Since this looks like a full throttle power mixture, there is a good chance that this car IS into it's power enrichment. How does the system decide when to do that? With the MAP sensor. How does the MAP sensor determine that? By measuring the Manifold pressure (vacuum). When vacuum gets low enough, the power enrichment comes in. Why would the vacuum be low? Cam timing could do it (probably not on this car, it has a new cam and cam chain) Ignition timing could do it. (It needs to be checked, or re-checked, and set in the right way, whatever that is. Many cars of the late 70s and 80s have some "gotcha" in the timing procedure). Vacuum leaks could sure do it. Either a leak in the map hose causing the MAP to measure a lower vacuum, or just general vacuum leaks everywhere, causing the vacuum to be low. Bad diaphragm in the purge valve? Bad diaphragm in the diverter valve? Hole in the brake booster diaphragm? Just leaky old 1977 vacuum hoses that don't fit on their nipples tight enough? The MAP itself could be bad, but I would suspect dirty connections or vacuum leaks first Remember that this car was backfiring through the throttle body due to the bad camshaft. That could have blown out a diaphragm somewhere.

Those euro (Volkswagen style) fuseboxes can be made to work reliably. Every spring, take all the fuses out and clean all the contacts with a good aggressive contact cleaner (Wurth Contact OL or similar) and a small brass wire brush. Smear dielectric grease on the clean contacts. Both sides. Not a lot, just get them wet. Bend the contacts slightly to hold the fuse a wee bit tighter. Put all new fuses in and spin them once. Do it again each spring. No surprises, no hassles. Try it, you'll like it. You wont get half the light out of a 12v bulb running at 6 volts. Two tenths of a volt is quite noticeable in a headlight. At 6 volts on a 12 volt bulb I am guessing you would see dim orange and not much else. Light bulbs (and rotary electric fuel pumps) lose efficiency startlingly fast with only a slight drop in supply voltage. If that Volkswagen has the taillights with the little snowflake reflector, and I believe a 61 does, they were always dim. LEDs are going to be the answer once you get some that work, Get extra bright. Get red.

I will have to wait for the experts, but I am gonna be shocked it that is not a big six. Special six usually had a distinctive radiator shape that this car does not have. FIre truck? Maybe. That is a lot of fuses for anything in 1926, even a fire truck. I wonder if it could have been a house car?

I have no problem with that, It is just interesting that the discount for bringing your own oil is often 2 dollars or something like that. I sure don't expect them to give up to give up whatever their markup would have been on the oil. I use 10w30 diesel rated oil in a couple of my "modern" gas cars. If I need someone else to change it on a long trip, I go buy my jug of Rotella first and throw it in the trunk. I always ask if they have some 10w30 diesel rated oil. I will just buy theirs if they have it. So far, only Jiffy Lube in Boulder, Colorado had any. So, at most places, $40-45 to pull the plug and put on an oil filter. I don't even need them to check anything else. Sometimes they insist, but I won't have them top things up anyway. There's Redline MTL in the transmission, probably GTLMA (DOT4) in the brakes, DexCool in the radiator, etc. More than likely they don't have any of that. Nobody is gonna have 600W either, and 600W is probably what a model A owner is going to want.

Thank you, I figured it must be a clearance issue of some kind, but am amazed they put it around a corner! Long shot: Speaking of fuel, you wouldn't happen to have an elbow fitting like this would you? (The one at the carb. It is not double flare.) I have heard Pontiac used this type of fitting all the way into the 50s, but there don't seem to be many lying around.

Yeah, $25 sounds like a good price. The quick lubes, for instance, do not give you much of a break for bringing your own fluids. $90 sounds like a lot at first blush. I guess a Model A split rear axle has a plug in the bottom? And the transmission too? That shouldn't be too bad if so. Have you looked at it? Is there some way you can get the new fluid in using gravity? It will probably be 600W (or equivalent) oil for the transmission and maybe the rear axle too. Viscosity of 600W about SAE 250, really thick. Any process involving a suction gun will leave you muttering under your breath for several years.

Yes. It can be an extremely slow drip if you like, maybe a drop every few minutes. Without that, the packing (and possibly the shaft) might burn up in a hurry. The nut gets tightened a notch or two every now and then to keep the leakage down to a reasonably small drip. When it leaks too much and the nut wont go any further, it is time for new packing.

What is a fuel pump adapter and why was it needed on the 40 torpedo? Just curious, Thanks!

I don't know, I can only tell you what I am doing (1936 Master Six). There is a setting for the choke housing in the manual, and that is how I set it. (It would be something close to straight up, maybe a notch or two either direction). Yours would be close but possibly different. One would richen it up a notch if the factory setting wasn't enough, due to a tired thermostat or extremely cold climate or something, otherwise leave it alone. Unlike some later cars with similar chokes, there is a piece of cork inside the choke housing, possibly used as an insulator, and a screen to strain the air drawn up the little flex pipe from the choke stove, because that air bypasses the air filter. You might want to look in there and make sure everything is in order. The little butterfly valve at the end of the air tube, I can't remember how I have it set, but could look when I get home. Probably closed. The butterfly was missing, and I made one. I would set it for fastest heat riser opening, whatever that is. You want it to behave like a 1960's heat riser, heating everything up for a short period, then opening completely. I suspect the tube is to blow cold air, keeping the heat riser closed longer when the butterfly is open (it is radiator air, but the exhaust is probably hotter). I imagine in 1936-37 the kerosene laced gas of the 20s was still fresh in everyone's mind, and they probably thought a bunch of extra carb heat would sometimes be necessary. Today, not so much. Moving on down to the heat riser itself, there is one caveat. My heat riser weight is not original. It is a reproduction made by me from blurry whole engine pictures on the Internet. I think it behaves just like the original but don't really know. I believe the thermostat spring is correct and probably original but I can't prove that either. It works about like I would expect it to work.

To each his own. I agree, people should drive the kind of cars they want to. I did not mean to suggest otherwise. The most reliable cars I have ever owned have been bone stock or nearly so. The engineers did what they could with what they had, but they were not idiots, and more often that not changes involve bolting on parts from the 1970s and 1980s, a time of notoriously unreliable cars. I do not consider that an improvement, but many people do. I hear that you can get parts while on the road. If I thought I was going to break down on the road, I would take a different car. On the day I brought the Pontiac home, 10 miles into the trip I stopped at a mini-mart for gas, and as I came back out I noticed a puddle of green under the car. It is true that if it were a small block Chevy, I probably could have bought a water pump and bolted it on right there. I did have tools with me, and there was an Oreilly a block away. As it was, I tightened my packing nut up a couple of notches and headed on up Stevens Pass. No more leaks. The real key to reliability is fixing things right, and sorting out the car. It is the same if the car is modified or stock. If I had a model A, a Mitchell Overdrive would be at the top of the list of potential modifications. All the best. :)

I use Texaco Marfak #2. This is just a good old fashioned chassis grease such as was used long ago. People were commonly cautioned not to mix grease, since chemical differences could cause unwanted results. This is the grease that was used in Texaco gas stations, and is probably pretty similar to what everyone else used (I guess). I suspect Marfak #2 is out of production. It may live on as Chevron Multifak #2. I have not been able to absolutely verify that it is the same grease, but I think it is. On parts that I have disassembled and cleaned completely out, I use Redline CV-2, a synthetic grease. Water pumps that have a Zerk need water pump grease. Penrite still makes it. In the US, Restoration Supply is a source for Penrite. A grease gun develops way too much pressure and can easily break some water pumps. Be careful.

High CO results from a mixture that is too rich. High HC is generally caused by a misfire of some kind, such as a lean misfire or an ignition problem (among other things).

This smacks of machosim, as you can just turn up the voltage regulator on a stock generator system, and you are going out of your way to use something that is not adjustable.... but that isn't what you asked ... The quick and dirty way to do this is to cut loose the "sense" connection on the alternator. There may already be a pin for this on the outside of the alternator. There was probably one on the alternator when it was a 12v negative ground unit. These are often unused on "one wire" type systems to the detriment of performance. Anyway, the idea is that the wire goes to the battery and then the regulator uses that to "set" the charging voltage, instead of using the voltage at the big post on the back of the alternator. Without this feature hooked up, whatever voltage is lost in the charging circuit (big wire) is lost, and the system undercharges by that amount, maybe a little maybe a lot. To get the system voltage up, you need to feed this "battery sense" wire a lower voltage. You could use a zener diode to do this, or you could string up some diodes. Silicon diodes have a constant voltage across the junction of about 0.7 volts. Shottky diodes are usually about 0.3 and can be bought lower. You may need a handful of both, as junction voltages vary. Some experementation will be necessary. Zener diodes can be bought in many voltages, and you might want a few of those too, as they typically have a 5% tolerance and may be worse at the low current they will be running at. If you go this route you should probably get 2 or 3 different voltages close to what you think you need. Note that you would connect a zener diode in the opposite direction that you would connect a string of diodes. One zener would be a cleaner solution, but you might have a tougher time hitting the right voltage. The voltage you need to hit is the difference between whatever the system voltage is now, and what you need it to be with the 8 volt battery, something a little over 2.1 volts I'm guessing. Note that 0.1v is a typical adjustment step in charging systems, and 0.2v is a whole bunch. You are going to have to nitpick this. A few tries may be necessary. Also be aware that typical regulators for street driven cars turn themselves up a couple tenths or more in the cold, and diode junctions are temperature sensitive as well, so always do your testing with the alternator about the same temperature. If you put it outside the alternator (assuming the correct terminal is available outside the alternator), connect from the battery (or large alternator terminal) through the diode to the sense terminal. If you try to put it on (or better yet inside) the alternator, you need to protect your diode or string thereof from vibration. Glue diodes and wires down to some sort of insulator with epoxy or electrical-safe stiff silicone, and attach the insulator inside very solidly. Diodes are at Newark.com, Mouser.com or Digi-Key.com. 1n4007 is a common cheap power supply silicon diode with a voltage drop of about 0.7. I don't know any schottky numbers right offhand. Zeners are sold by their voltage drop. Yes, its a kludge. it does work. Good luck.

As a six volt guy I don't worry too much about buying electrical parts. I don't really need to do it often, I just scrape off the regulator points and reset the charging rate now and then. Maybe put in a set of brushes every 10 years. The local parts store wont have those brushes, but who knows if they will even still be in business by the time I need some?

1938 Nash.

Borg Warner, BWD and Standard/Bluestreak are all the some source these days (BWD).

I always heard "tighten it until it strips, then just a little bit less". But seriously, torque specs are almost always for cleaned/chased oiled threads. If not, the book will specify, for instance bolts into a water jacket will have sealer on the threads instead of oil. If the threads were not clean and oiled, you could not know whether two of them would behave the same. There were tables in older books of torque specifications just based on the size and thread pitch of the bolt. I''ll bet thats in Dykes, for instance, but I can't remember for sure where I saw it. I suppose that would be the only resource for someone using a torque wrench before car manufacturers started publishing specs. Thats pretty much how it was done as far as I know. Sometimes you can look up a newer engine of the same engine family, and get the spec that way, if the bolts have remained the same size and pitch. If enough years have passed between what you are working on and what you got the spec from, it might pay to do a little less, as the earlier metallurgy may be not nearly as good.

The "Graphite Grease" used on springs is not the sort of graphite grease you might encounter today, that has a little graphite in it as an additive. No, this stuff was almost more graphite than grease. Penrite still make it and Restoration Supply in California have it. From the 1936 Pontiac shop manual: "Graphite grease is No. 2 1/2 cup grease to which has been added 40% to 50% graphite by weight. G.M. Number 4529-M"