Bloo

Despite what the title says (and what the title of this thread says), the car is a 37. The last Standard, with it's 5 lug wheels, was a 1936 model. IIRC in 1937 it would be either a Master, or a Master Deluxe. The 1937 engine is the first 216. As others have mentioned it is shorter than a 1936 207 engine, but only by 1/2 inch. It mounts the same way. BearsFan315 mentioned the VCCA. Those guys, with a little information (probably various stamped numbers and/or a picture of the body tag) can tell you more about the car than you would think possible. https://vccachat.org/

Its a Kaiser, 1951 or later. My best guess, 1951.

I have had good luck so far with Barum Briliantis 2. I see they come in your size.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Fiat has never had any reliability problems. There are certainly brands with a better reliability record. The thing is, in the US, Fiat is constantly made out to be the worst thing ever, and it just isn't true. People who have actually owned, driven, serviced them, (a very small minority in the US) know otherwise. Italian quality did slip in the mid to late 70s, but it never slipped as far as Detroit did during those dark days. Like most Italian makes back in the day, Fiats mechanical parts were made out of the best materials available. Interior plastics, etc, were made out of the lightest stuff available in the interest of weight saving. Generally the lightest stuff turns out to be the cheapest crap available. As for Consumer Reports, I am not suggesting they are subject to behind the scenes influence, and their methods suggest they should be quite unbiased. The fact that they buy all the stuff they test impresses me. The trouble is, where cars are concerned, in the 80s and 90s I saw them missing the mark badly over and over again. This extends to automotive related things like tires. They seem to ask all the wrong questions. They really don't get it. I have taken their recommendations on things I know little about, like garbage disposals, dishwashers, etc. Honestly, it has turned out OK. Every time I do it though, I think about their car picks, and wonder If I could have done better throwing darts. As for the quality FCAs current products, I have no experience. I have talked to several "new 500" owners over the past few years. People love them. My complaints about FCA only have to do with things I perceive to be stupid marketing, like Alfa Romeos with no clutch option, etc. People should drive what they want. If the picks in Consumer Reports make you happy, go for it. I swear I won't try to stop you. I wonder what Consumer Reports would think of this car?

Did it run before you replaced that stuff? An occasional backfire and nothing else is the classic symptom of a distributor 180 degrees out of time with the cam. If you have never seen the car run, this is likely. Get #1 on the compression stroke. It is only on the compression stroke every OTHER turn. You can check with #1 plug out, Bump the starter (tiny bumps), and when you get the "puff", stop, and bring the engine right on up to TDC (with a wrench) as shown by the timing marks. Take the distributor cap off and see which cylinder the rotor is pointing to. If it is pointing to #6 instead of #1 the distributor is 180 degrees out.

Not much, other than someone posted a picture of a Buick 6 a while back that had been cut into a pickup, probably long ago. It had a similar downdraft setup.

That may be, but I doubt it. As a tech who was constantly fixing broken cars I had a fairly good idea what was good, what was mediocre, and what was crap. I was often appalled by their choices. P.S. If reliability is the only important parameter, you will probably find yourself in a lot of really boring cars. The Camry comes to mind. Pick any year. By that metric it just might be the best car ever made. One thing to keep in mind about reliability, most European cars have, and have had for years, a strict maintenance schedule that must be adhered to. Things go south pretty quick in the reliability department if you defer any of it. Many Americans defer it. Some German companies shame people into doing the maintenance. A car that falls apart because it wasn't kept up is simply dismissed as a "poorly maintained example" that shouldn't reflect on the brand. Generally speaking, Italian brands (with the possible exception of Ferrari) have not been able to pull this off. Some Japanese companies have done quite well engineering vehicles specifically for people who they know will not maintain them. It is telling that so many European cars are simply modified to meet American regulations, while Japanese ones are often (not always) designed from the ground up for us.

Now I have a question for you 1937-38 owners. I understand originally the front floor covering was a rubber mat. How do you access the floor plug over (well, not really over) the master cylinder? Is the floor mat attached? Is it caught or held down any way by the front of the front seat, the kick panel, or the sill? Can you just lift it up (and were you supposed to hold it up like a tent or something while trying to access that master cylinder that isnt quite under the hole)? Another one, what happens where the carpet meets the rubber mat? I saw in GaryW's thread that the rear carpet has two bound strips sewed on that come up along the front seat. How does this meet the rubber mat? Does one lay on top of the other? If so, which way was it? Did they just bind the carpet edge and have the two butt against each other?

That's the automotive equivalent of a hollow chocolate bunny.

Glass fuses are the worst.... But if it is an inline fuseholder there is much less chance of trouble than if it were in a fusebox.. In that case I would leave it alone, particularly if original. It probably takes a slow blow fuse, due to the current inrush caused by cold tube filaments. If you can figure out what size fuse phycially fits in there (standard AGC, SFE, or 5mm metric or whatever), and measure it, we can probably figure out what the number is for a 7.5 amp slow blow. If the automotive suppliers don't have it, Newark, Mouser, or DIgi-Key will. The constant glass fuse failures aren't really the fuse's fault. It is the fusebox. Some sort of springy metal is used for the clips, probably stainless but I'm not certain. Whatever it is, it will not solder. These clips are generally riveted on, and after some years the connection degrades due to corrosion. The rivet then gets really hot, The heat telegraphs up the clip into the glass fuse melting the solder inside. It also melts the hot glue that is holding the fuse end cap on. The air inside the fuse expands from the heat, pushing the end cap off just enough that the fuse element inside no longer touches the pool of solder. Then, everything cools back down. The fuse will look fine but will not work anymore. If you look at it really closely you will see a little bit of glue on the glass where the end cap slid. Hold it up against a new fuse, and it will be a tiny bit longer.

Not necessarily, in fact usually not. I think fiber is a case where there is likely no difference, and you will be fine. I am extremely skeptical of any kind of sealer on gasoline, I think that is the road to madness. If it were me, and I had a fiber washer that fit nicely, I would put it on there, tighten it good, and not give it another thought.

Hard fiber is used on carburetors for various things, like Carter BBD float valves, for instance. It should be fine. If not, try a copper washer. I don't know what was used originally. Maybe someone else in here does.

There is a 1933 Buick manual on OldCarManualProject, and like the McLaughlin manual you describe, it has a blurry picture of the gears and neglects to mention how to time them. There is, however, a diagram of the valve opening/closing events for all models, and unlike many manuals I have seen they tell what lash and how much lift the measurements were taken at. It should be possible to set the intake valve at .008, and with #1 on the overlap, look for the intake valve to open just barely before TDC (4 1/2 degrees). It could be a bit late due to gear wear, but you should be able to count the teeth on a timing gear and calculate how many degrees a tooth is worth, I'll bet a lot, and probably enough to show if the valve timing is wrong. http://www.oldcarblog.com/manuals/1933/1933 Shop Manual/page1.html

Interesting thread. Have any of you guys (edit: other than padgett) ever owned Fiats? Driven them? Worked on them profesionally? You know, its funny... Car guys never seem to gravitate toward the stuff Consumer Reports likes. Why is that?

Fiat is huge, nipping at Honda's heels in production according to Wikipedia.

Better yet, do it anyway.

I gather you are trying to put an AB pump on a 1947 engine. From the posts above, It sounds like that will not work. I also gather that the pump you took off looked like an AB, and not like the AJ that allegedly should be on the 1947 engine. Do you still have the pump you took off? Could it have been some sort of frankenstein someone built up so they could use all the 1938 vacuum and fuel plumbing on the 1947 engine? Now would be a good time for pictures of the mounting flanges on the block of a late 320 and an early one (if anyone in this thread has such pictures handy) I can't tell for sure, but from Spineyhill's pictures it looks as if one of those pumps mounts on an upside down flange. If so, that would be another early/late incompatibility in addition to the arm. Which way is up? and did it change from AB to AJ?

I get what you are saying Reaper1, but I suspect this may be a special case. E-code headlights are required in some countries, and they are very different than what we had ~20 years ago. Many American cars can be changed over fairly easy. Those with sealed beams can just have a lens-reflector assemblies and H4/H1 bulbs installed in a few minutes. I have been using lights like this on most of my daily drivers since 1984 or so. The difference in USABLE light is pretty astounding, while they look dimmer (on low beam) to oncoming drivers. WA specifically allows these, as do some other states/provinces up here in the PNW, though they could be a problem at inspection time in some parts of the US. They aren't technically approved by the US government except for motorcycles. On newer cars with aerodynamic headlights, If a version was ever sold in Europe, you can just get the aerodynamic lens/reflector for the European model, if you can find it, and put that in. We were stuck with sealed beams in the US for what? 50 years? In Europe, they continued to develop headlights, and the standard E-Code beam pattern of today is very different than a sealed beam, the E-code having a sharp cutoff on low beam to keep light out of the eyes of oncoming drivers. When aerodynamic headlights were finally approved in the US, they had a pattern that was basically the same as a sealed beam. Later on the regulations relaxed a little bit. I remember by 1994 or so seeing US market Hondas with aerodynamic headlights, H4 bulbs and a beam pattern that was more like the European one (but not the same). Much later when the regulations were relaxed a little more, there were/are lights with both E-code and DOT markings. The TC, as I recall (I am no TC expert) was limited production, and sold only by a few dealers. I also recall that it was a little late to market. That would push the engineering of those headlights back to 1986-87 or maybe even earlier. That puts them in the very earliest days of aerodynamic headlights in the US. Chrysler (or more likely Maserati, as they were building the bodies) would have had to design those headlights to a US DOT sealed beam light pattern. If they intended to sell any in Europe, at that time they would have had to make a separate E-code light assembly. WIth context it makes perfect sense that these are Italian lights with no E-Code.

Keep it up, Matt, and thank you for all the posts you make helping others.

Is that schematic for the 10si/12si?

The pump should try to tilt, however if it is bottoming out and will not snug down, that suggests the arm may be incompatible and bottoming out. It really argues for getting the correct year pump, unless someone can verify that the pump you have (is it 38?) will work on the 1947 engine. It also matters where the fuel pump cam is in its travel. If it is all the way up, it is extremely hard to mount a pump. That shouldn't prevent you from doing it though.

Next time it is off of the rig, look at it closely from the bottom and see if the throttle plates could be hanging up on the bore due to throttle shaft wear (shaft not holding the plate centered as it closes). I don't recall ever having to fix that on a WCFB, but I have seen it on many other carburetors.

The Previa has the "flat" engine under the van. That earlier Toyota (and the recalled Nissan) do not have flat engines, They are both laid out like a Dodge A-100, with the engine between the front seats.

Same in WA (70s, 80s). If someone said "flat 6" I would be looking for the Corvair (or the Tucker).

Another thread about a seal like this. Car is newer, but it looks about the same.