Bloo

If you are going to put it up against that modern transmission, you need a 62-66 318 (or a 62-67 313 or 318 if you happen to stumble across something that is Canadian built). It should literally bolt up. Anything earlier is going to be a headache. No need to explain. The "wideblock" (poly) 318 is my all time favorite engine. The 270 is probably the "oldstyle" poly based on the hemi block, I cant remember for sure. Either way it isn't set up to hook to a modern torqueflite. It wont work easily. The 58 is the newer style poly, and is almost what you want, but it wont hook to the trans either. It is set up for a cast iron torqueflite or powerflite. If I remember correctly, the crank flange sticks out about 2 inches too far, has the wrong number of holes, and bolts to the torque converter directly (bolts in backwards) with no flex plate. The cast iron torqueflite is pushbutton and has no "park", instead has a drum type parking brake at the rear of the transmission. It is possible that the 58 would work if you put a later crank in. Even an LA-318 crank fits, but the LA-318 crank is usually cast, while the poly is forged. A 340 forged crank also fits. I think the piston weights are different, so you would probably have to rebalance if you used the LA-318 or the 340. The thing I cannot remember for sure is if the bolt pattern changed at the bellhousing. It STILL might not hook up... or maybe it would. If the 58 has dual quads or some other special parts, you can use them on a later poly. You can basically use everything from the 58. The only difference that matters is the fact that it wont hook to the trans you want. Hold out for a 62-66 318. You'll be glad you did.

Something to be aware of if you don't already know, there are 2 distinct engine families that people refer to as "poly". One is based on the old hemi blocks, and the other is the one that survived until 1966 (1967 in Canada). The newer design was introduced in 1956 in Plymouth only, and was used exclusively in Plymouth from 1956-1958. There were several displacements (including 318). However, the older design was also used in Plymouth in 1955 and 1956. A 1956 Plymouth could have either engine design. The new design did not appear in Dodge until 1959 (326ci). This replaced the older Dodge 325 (based on a hemi block). Actually both of these were 325ci, but Chrysler called the new one a 326 to "avoid confusion". Avoiding confusion on this subject is impossible LOL. From 1960 onward, the engines were all the newer design, and all 318s (except for 313s in Canada until about 1964 or 65). A big change came in 1962 when the aluminum transmissions came out. 1962 and later engines will bolt to A-block 727s, 904s, a833 bellhousings and so on. 1961 and earlier will not. The crankshaft is wrong for sure, and there might be a problem with the bellhousing pattern as well. You might get a better response if you tell us what you are going to put it in, or at least what sort of a transmission you plan to bolt it to. Best of luck in your search.

Not a foundry expert either, but it is not unusual to see remains of the casting core. Ford did get better at cleaning them out as time went on. Several years ago I got a so much sand out of a 61 352 block it filled a coffee can.

I thought that at first too, but then I started counting grille bars. it is sort of hard to count, but I got to a higher number just counting down to the bumper on the OP's picture than the '38 has altogether. I think it's a 37.

Wow... I had no idea it would be that easy to get the parts. In the past I have had to adapt bolts for newer starters to some really old ones. You can take it apart and look to really see the damage. The copper disc eats a spot off one side of the bolt head. On some starters it is possible to turn the head around backwards to get a new surface. More commonly someone has already done this, and both sides are gone. Here is how it is supposed to work: There is a little coil spring that "loads" the copper disc (it is not solidly connected to the solenoid). When the solenoid pulls in, and after it engages the gear, but before it bottoms in the bore, it hits a little rod that moves the copper disc. The copper disc hits the bolts, and the little spring compresses, but not very much, as the solenoid hits the bottom of it's bore. The spring tension holds the disc against the bolts while you crank. It is only compressed maybe .080" (guessing because I don't know the exact number). If the spring was not in the design, the solenoid bottoming and the disc bottoming on the copper bolts would have to match exactly, and it probably wouldn't last a week. As it is, the spring tension holds the disc tightly against the copper bolts as the heads wear. Over time, the heads get further away, and eventually the solenoid bottoms before the disc touches the bolts. Near the end, it is really a crapshoot whether the car will start or not.

GM's fuel injection of the time is almost the same system as CCC. You can ignore all my comments above about duty cycle and dwell. You use the same scan tool and the same troubleshooting methods more or less. All the hardware looks about the same. Ignore what the code says it is, and investigate why the code set. It is all inputs and outputs (sensors and actuators), just some different ones. The values can be looked at on the scan tool just like CCC. For instance, to make a decision on how much fuel to inject, once warmed up, the ECU needs either how much air (mass airflow systems) or the Manifold Absolute Pressure (MAP) and the engine speed (speed density systems). These systems move the mixture rich to lean and back quickly in closed loop just like CCC does, they just have to vary the width of the injector pulse slightly to accomplish it.

I wouldn't call them "false positives". Generally speaking, if you have a code on one of these cars, something is broken, and probably really broken. You have to troubleshoot. You cannot read a table and replace that part, (well ... you can, but it wont work). I think we all probably agree on this and are just stating it differently. One thing to keep in mind, and NEVER lose sight of, is that a code does not necessarily mean a problem with the electronics or sensors. These cars get all the same vacuum leaks, burned valves, ignition misfires, bad carburetors, etc. that happen on cars with no electronic engine control. Don't get tunnel vision about the electronics. I don't consider the scan tool useless on these either. There may not be many data points, but the ones you see are the same ones the ECU sees and makes it's decisions with. I doubt I ever let one of these cars roll through my bay without plugging in the scan tool. Don't think "oxygen sensor", think "what is wrong with the signal?" too high? too low? not crossing over? Ok, now look at the other values (in the scan tool) that the ECU is looking at. Are any of them screwed up? Which ones? What could cause the readings I am seeing?

The worn-out copper bolt problem is typically intermittent. Also, if it were a misadjusted linkage, that could be dependent on temperature and where the flywheel stopped the last time the engine was shut off. For this to happen the starter drive would have to be bottoming out. I'm not sure if that is possible on a 54, but it sure is on a 37. I would sure find a way to check it while the starter is off. The 54 manual wants you to pull the solenoid in with a couple of the cells of a 6v battery IIRC. Thats unlikely. You could probably remove the connection from the solenoid down to the starter motor and just use 12v or 6v I think. On a 37 you can do it by hand, and maybe you could here, too. The whole idea is to push/pull the solenoid in (just the big round part that moves) by the outer diameter of the part that moves, in other words dont push on the linkage. Then, at the starter drive (gear) push back lightly (toward disengage). Measure from the tip of the gear to the surface it could touch. I think its .010-.050 . It should definitely not bottom out hard from solenoid action. So, check that the next time it is off, but if I were betting, it is the copper bolts.

I am jumping in here kind of late, not knowing what all you have done but, if you are REALLY SURE you are actually hearing the gear engage..... There are really only 3 possibilities. 1) The cables or the connections are bad (bet you have been through this already). 2) The copper bolts at the back of the solenoid are worn out and no longer quite touch the copper disc that the solenoid pushes against them. Also check the adjustment of the solenoid linkage. If it were far enough off, I think it might prevent the copper disc from touching the bolts. 3) The brushes in the starter are shot and not making good contact with the commutator. Hint: it's always #2 #3 can be visually checked if you disassemble the starter. They are either worn really short or they arent.

That may be, but at 0.3 ohms he has less shellac than most of us at the low end, At the high end, the shellac would help. I'm not really disagreeing with you though, I also suspect the sending unit. 90 ohms worth of resistors would put it to bed in a hurry. That should make it read "full". If not, its the gauge. Maybe the float arm is bent a little. Typically a GM gauge has little room for error. If the float touches the bottom, it never gets to zero. 0.3 ohms is about the best zero I have ever seen. Maybe the float is hitting the top of the tank before it gets to 90 ohms?

Back when I was working on these, people were not putting them on other engines. They were just starting to reverse engineer and make aftermarket chips for performance use. Most techs who did not specialize in electronic engine control hated the CCC systems and were downright scared of them. looking back that seems silly, but its true. GM kept improving them of course, but it changed surprisingly little. GM's computer controlled carbs actually ran well, so there was not a quick push to get rid of them. The basic plan is this, when the engine warmed up, the system will dump or divert any air injection that might be blowing on the O2 sensor, and look for a signal from the 02 sensor, and if it is there, the system goes into "closed loop" In the carb are some metering rods. Unlike the old vacuum controlled ones, which ran all the way down (leanest) at cruise, these are designed to run halfway down. They are attached to a solenoid. The solenoid is controlled by a "duty cycle" signal from the ECU. The signal is going on and off at a high enough frequency that the solenoid cannot respond at the switching frequency due to its own weight. The result is that the ECU can move the solenoid up or down however much it wants, and just keep it there. For instance, if the signal is on 50 percent of the time, the needles just hang at 50%. On 75% of the time? 75% down, and so on. The signal from a hot 02 sensor is less than 0.5v for excess oxygen (lean) and more than 0.5v for no oxygen (rich). The curve in-between the two is very steep. In closed loop, the duty cycle of the solenoid is normally 50%. The ECU looks at the O2, If it is lean, it richens it up a bit by changing the duty cycle. this causes the 02 sensor signal to change to rich, so the ECU leans up the duty cycle a bit. Back and forth and back and forth and....... it goes on like this forever if it can. The 02 sensor responds quickly because it's curve is so steep. The ECU reacts quickly, and the result is that the engine runs with a 14.7 to 1 (by weight) air fuel ratio, and the variation between rich and lean is so slight that the driver cannot detect it. Back in those days, few people had duty cycle meters, so dwell meters were used. 30 degrees on the 6 cylinder scale is 50% duty cycle. There is a wire hanging out of the harness somewhere to connect a dwell meter. 30 degrees and varying back and forth is normal. Since the solenoid is halfway up, it can go equal distances either way to correct fuel mixture if necessary. The more the system is "correcting", the further away from 30 degrees (50%) the signal will be. At full throttle (low vacuum), the ECU simply takes the signal away from the solenoid. The needles come all the way up (richest position). This provides the function of a "power valve" for full throttle enrichment. (Hint for Ben and anyone else running a non-stock system: Deliberately running the closed loop duty cycle at something other than 50% changes the relationship between the cruise mixture, which is always 14.7 to 1 if the system works, and the full throttle mixture. If the metering rods are not halfway down (as designed) when the system is in closed loop, then the change when the signal goes away will be either more or less than it should be. For instance, if the rods were running a little lower than normal at cruise, the system would have less travel to compensate for a mixture that is too rich, and more travel to compensate for a mixture that is too lean. It would also result in more than normal enrichment when the signal goes away at full throttle) Air injection leaking or not shutting off? The 02 will report lean, and richen the carb as much as it can trying to compensate. Vacuum leak or misfiring plug? The leftover oxygen will make the 02 sensor report lean, and the ECU will richen to compensate, until it runs out of solenoid travel. Carburetor running over or choke not open? The 02 will report rich, and the ECU will try to compensate by leaning the carb until the solenoid runs out of travel. All of these things (and many more) will set an O2 code without a bad sensor. Nearly always, a car with an 02 code will also be found to have the dwell (duty cycle) stuck at one end or the other, maybe 6 degrees or 57 degrees, and not moving. On a normal system that is not broken, you should see about 30 degrees (50%) and varying back and forth. You should be able to see it react, for instance if you force the car rich, by maybe pushing the choke plate shut, the dwell (or duty cycle) should change. If you force it lean by pulling a vacuum line off, the dwell (or duty cycle) should go the other way. I agree with Larry Schramm that getting a scan tool attached would help a lot. GMs of this period have "live data", meaning you can look at all the sensor signals, you can see what the ECU sees. This often clues you in quickly to what the trouble is. In addition to the Tech 1, the OTC Monitor 2000 and Monitor 4000 can do this, as well as the Snap-On Scanner (and a few others I have forgotten the names of) , as long as there is a cartridge installed that covers the year the car was made, and a GM ALDL connector. I hope there aren't any mistakes here. It's been a long time....

I do not believe so. GM cars used 0-30 ohms from the 1930s until about 1964(?), and then switched to 0-90 ohms, which they kept until 1996 or so. 0 ohms is empty. The design is ridiculous, because any stray resistance will cause the gauge never to get to empty, likely leaving the owner stranded. 0.3 for empty is perfect. It is hard to get a sending unit to go that low, even though it needs to. 86 is still 4.3 ohms short of full. That doesn't sound like enough to cause you to top out at 3/4, but maybe. If you have an electronic supply locally, I would grab some resistors that add up to exactly 90 ohms, substitute them for the sending unit, and see what happens. It is a "balanced coil" type gauge, and you can read about that online. Most pages are about British cars. Resistances will be different, but the principle will be the same. You may be able to figure out how to calibrate the gauge that gets to 3/4, (assuming it still only went to 3/4 with 90 ohms connected). Edit: disconnecting the wire should cause the gauge to peg full. Does it? I don't remember. If it wont go high with the wire disconnected, disregard that last paragraph.

Floats are too high or a float valve is bad. Are they rubber tipped or steel? The steel ones often had trouble like this, though I understand people prefer them today for use with ethanol. Sink your floats in hot water and look for bubbles. Still ok? Put them back on and recheck float height and float drop. Didnt have to set? While the top plate is still off, blow through fuel inlet, and slowly turn the top plate over. The valves should shut off completely. Go slow so the floats dont drop suddenly and "pound" the valve shut when it might not shut tightly otherwise. Other thoughts: Does this carb use wire clips from the float valve needle to the float and are they in place? There are 2 float valves, do both of them run over or just the accelerator pump side?. You mentioned running out the top of the accelerator pump. Fuel would be running out the main discharge tubes down in the throats before the fuel gets high enough to come out the accelerator pump, and you should be able to see this in the secondaries, even if the choke is closed on the primaries and you cant see in.

My gut reaction was also 39 Pontiac.

Most assembly line installed plugs of that time frame had a dot of paint on the tip where the wire connects. If this is wrong for the Reatta, hopefully someone will jump in here and correct me. I don't think these plugs are original. Plugs don't typically break from age. They break because the plug wrench put just a little too much force on the side of the insulator. The tools are not perfect, and sometimes it just happens, especially when the plugs are stuck. AC plugs of that time frame were mostly green. The blue would indicate something special, like Platinum or whatever. In fact, you can see the little pointy tip containing the platinum (or whatever they used) on the center electrode. The tip of the center electrode on a "normal" plug should be flat with sharp edges, burning to rounded edges as the plug wears out. Someone probably shelled out extra money for some special plugs. As Ronnie says, its what you put in that counts.

Onca upon a time I worked on CCC systems all day. Listen to joe_padavano. O2 codes are NEVER (well, almost never) the sensor in these cars. Yes, O2 sensors fail. On old systems like this you absolutely must troubleshoot. If you go by code descriptions, you may wind up throwing $600 worth of parts at it with no change. Cars like this used to land in my service bay all the time. An O2 code (or any other code for that matter) means the ECU saw something that it thinks cannot be. For instance, the O2 voltage is stuck either low or high. reporting dead lean or dead rich. The most likely scenario is that the sensor REALLY IS seeing excess oxygen (lean) or extremely low oxygen (rich) and reporting what it sees to the ECU correctly. Joe outlined some possible reasons. P.S. you cannot have any vacuum leaks on this car. Every vacuum hose must fit tightly, with no splits in the ends, looseness, tape, etc. There can be no leaky diaphragms in any of the vacuum systems, This includes not only the engine controls, but also power brakes or anything else that might use vacuum (heater controls, etc.) P.P.S. It is never the ECU. I can count the bad ECUs I have seen on one hand. I have seen a few hundred cars with replaced ECUs, still with the same symptom someone was trying to fix.

IIRC Timken's literature always called for some slop in a tapered roller bearing. I know they often aren't run that way. New Departures own ball bearing literature (posted above) has you tightening the spindle to 45-55 inch pounds and leaving it there if the pin would go in, loosening slightly if the pin wont go in. I don't have an old GM spindle handy to try, but that procedure sounds to me like it will result in preload no matter what. Back in the drum brake days I was taught to tighten the (timken tapered roller) bearing while turning the wheel and then back off until the "click". The click wasn't actually a click, but a change in friction of the threads as you backed the nut off. It is really obvious when the wrench is in your hand, but harder to explain here. This results in a tiny bit of slop. When disc brakes came along, suddenly the (timken tapered roller) bearings needed to be run with preload, or there would be too much pad knockback and the brake pedal would be low. I am really not trying to argue in favor of tight ball bearings, or convince everyone that I am right (maybe I am not). I have some ball bearings to repack, and I would like to get to the bottom of this.

Teflon tape shouldn't be used on a car anywhere IMHO, and for sure not on a gas line. Despite popular lore, teflon tape is only a lubricant, and there is teflon paste available if you need a lubricant. The tape has a nasty habit of getting inside the fuel line and causing the carburetor to run over. Cars have burned to the ground over a little strand of tape in the float valve. Pieces of teflon can block oil passages as well (not from a gas line of course), leading to engine failure. As far as I know, 37-38 Buicks use double flare gas lines. The sealing occurs at the flare. Also, sealing the threads of a double flare fitting doesn't do anything.. If the flare leaks, the gas can just run out between the tubing and the threaded nut.

How quickly we forget ....

Ball bearings? I am pretty sure they ran with a little preload didn't they? Tapered roller bearings are the ones that required a bit of slop. No slop here... http://chevy.oldcarmanualproject.com/manuals/1952sbb/52bb12.htm

Good plan. Also, lots of good information already in this thread. If you are short on room, and have an inline filter, you can get a fuel filter with a third port for a return line. I think Buick had one like that in the 60s, but I use a Chrysler K-car one (80-84-ish 2.2 Liter with carburetor) as it is smaller. The third port has an orifice in it that I have drilled out. You might not have to drill it for this duty, but I would. It removes one detail to wonder about. The third port is smaller, and perfect for temporarily hooking up a gauge. Most automotive vacuum gauges have a fuel pressure scale that is right for carbureted cars. Thats what I use. On some GM cars that have a solid piece of metal line all the way from the fuel pump to the carb, I have resorted to just disconnecting or removing the stock line, and temporarily hooking up with brass fittings and hose. Don't get too hung up on exact pressure. If it is pretty close, its fine. There is going to be some variation as the float valve opens and closes. You will get to see what it looks like pumping, and what it looks like with the valve closed. As others have mentioned, pressure is controlled by the internal diaphragm spring in the pump. It just sits there pushing against the float valve. When the float valve is closed, the diaphragm just stays up, and the arm does nothing. As fuel flows into the carb when the float valve opens, the diaphragm comes back down and contacts the arm, and pumping resumes. You can only compensate so much for high fuel pressure by lowering the float level. A very slight change might be ok. I have also heard of people having to lower the float level slightly to compensate for the different specific gravity of today's alcohol-laced fuel. I have not had to do that yet, but I am not ruling it out. Don't add a regulator unless forced. If the fuel pump is the problem, fix, replace, or find some way to make it work as designed. Regulators, especially cheap ones, are the road to madness.

It also works well for cooking bearing races when assembling transmissions. Every shop should have one!

On thing for sure, you wont HURT it with too cold of a plug. The worst that could happen is that they will dirty up too fast. Even if that happens, I would double check carburetion/choke before assuming the plugs are the issue.

What make is it?

Not at all. I like Havoline. I must have written that very badly, but I can't seem to see it right now. I'll have another look when I am less tired. Havoline, like 600W, is just a brand of oil. What I am suggesting is that the formula has changed, and probably a lot, in the last 80 or so years. Mobil's current 600W, in the link, is rated for worm gear service, and that is severe gear service, because worm gears wipe the oil off like hypoid gears do. I am sure it is fine for lubricating some gears. I doubt it much resembles steam cylinder oil from 80 years ago, because oil engineers have had decades to develop better steam cylinder oil. 600W today implies nothing about viscosity. I believe (but can't prove) that 600W and SAE-160 were interchangeable for automotive transmission use when the SAE-160 oils appeared in the mid 1930s. Today SAE-160 does not exist, SAE-140 and SAE-250 are the closest. As you probably know, these SAE grades are not a specific viscosity but are ranges. There are charts, but it is tough to directly cross reference. Ray W, over on the VCCA forums researched this, and came to the conclusion that the old SAE-160 was much more like SAE-250 than SAE-140. He was working with Chevrolet's first SYNCROMESH transmission, the one that ended in 1936. IIRC the factory recommendation was 600W or SAE-160 depending on year. The transmissions themselves are apples and oranges thanks to the synchromesh, however he believes he has found a true equivalent to the old SAE-160 (in viscosity). The product is Lubriplate SPO-288, an ISO 680 oil that falls into the SAE-250 range. Current Mobil 600W is ISO 460 (lighter) for the "600 W Super" and even lighter yet (with no ISO rating) for the "600 W".