Bloo

I hope I haven't lead you astray by suggesting you not take the pin out. I have rebuilt a bunch of fuel pumps, but never that exact one. I think I remember rebuilding some pump where the pin HAD to come out, but I don't think it was riveted. I am sort of confused because in the Hometown Buick link it looks like you would have to have the vacuum diaphragm off before you could get the other one. It must be different. This part is always a pain in the ass on any pump. I imagine there is a spring trying to hold it hooked and centered, and you have to push it up and sideways at the same time, something it really, really doesn't want you to do. There is also the mechanism (slop) in the arm that allows the fuel diaphragm to not pump when fuel is not needed. I would love to see what Don made for a tool. That will probably be the next step. If you were close I would come over there and wiggle it out. You don't happen to be in central Washington State do you?

Exactly. The rim width is where the bead sits, and you need a tire off to measure it accurately. Those are only a close guess. It's purpose is to tell the balancing machine how far the weights will be apart. It would make sense for it to measure the actual distance, but as I recall the one I have is compensated, and measures something close to actual rim width, at least on steel wheels. It would read a little high on aluminum due to the extra thickness of the metal. The plastic thing touches the outside of the bead surface. The outside edge of the rim hangs out even further, and is usually not very consistent. It is hard to guess what they might have measured. If they truly measured to the outer edge, you probably have 5 inch wide wheels. If they just did it like they were going to balance a tire, then they are probably 5 1/2 or 6 inches. For what its worth, I was measuring some 1936 Pontiac wheels yesterday, and they match the book at 4 1/2 inches wide. They measure 5 3/4" at the outer edge of the lip, and so gained slightly over an inch when measuring that way. I would expect similar results on the Buick wheels.

Indeed. Those are the best flare wrenches EVER! (but not cheap).

I like Indian Head on any threads holding back coolant. It is more slippery than you would think when it is wet, so be careful how tight. Other shellac compounds like #1 or #2 Permatex would also be good. Hylomar works, as does Teflon pipe dope. Duct tape? Super glue?!! LOL I'm not that brave.

Consider drilling a tiny hole at the lowest point in the muffler to let the water drain out. Not too big or you will hear it talking. Did you say 2 mufflers? Dual exhaust cars are especially prone to dropping the bottom out of one or both mufflers. They fill the muffler up with water from the combustion process, and it just sits there rusting its way to freedom. The mufflers never get hot enough to boil the water out. The further back on the car they are, the worse they rust. The bottom will drop out of the muffler on the heat riser side in about 6 months. On a car without a heat riser it takes a bit longer, but the bottom falls out of both of them. All of this assumes you are daily driving the car. I suspect this is the real reason most cars were built with single exhaust during the time when dual exhaust was fashionable. The automakers didn't want to warranty a bunch of mufflers. Drilling a hole is no panacea, but it helps. Glasspacks cure the quick rust-out issue, but are the wrong answer since you want quiet.

There was a time, not that terribly long ago, when any engine that had a cast iron block and an aluminum head (or heads) could be expected to blow a head gasket at about 80,000 miles. Many cars, especially front wheel drive, were built this way. The reason is that the aluminum expands more than the cast iron. The head not only slides back and forth sideways with heat cycling, it also gets thicker and thinner, squishing the gasket tight when hot, and then letting some of the tension off when cold. It seems this can only happen so many times before a fire ring on the gasket cracks, and then things get bad in a hurry. Today it is common to see cars with 200,000 miles or more on an iron block aluminum head engine, still with the original head gasket. Torque-to-yield bolts (along with better head gasket technology) is the reason, Because the bolts are stretched into their plastic region, they behave like springs, keeping tension on the gasket as the head slides around and gets thicker and thinner with temperature changes. Larry Schramm mentioned this a few posts back. I have never heard of replacing head bolts on general principles on something as old as a 320 Packard, but they should be inspected closely, threads checked, and measured for stretch. On the other hand, better bolts (ARP) are available today than anything offered back then (assuming you can find some to fit a 320 Packard).

And that should keep the brass from corroding. It is a little hard to ignore the crunching that occurs because hypoid gear oils are so slippery they cause synchromesh not to work. As I understand it, in other parts of the world you can buy gear oil labeled "EP" or "NON-EP", I have seen bottles like this pictured in service manuals. This would make it real easy to decide what to put in a hypoid differential (EP) and what to put in a transmission (NON-EP). In the US, the gear oil kept getting slipperier and slipperier for decades, and no such distinction was ever made. In the 1980s and early 1990s nearly every manual transmission car sold here used either ATF or motor oil in the transmission. There were few exceptions. Today synchromesh fluid is available in any parts store here, though probably not in a thick enough viscosity for a 1930s transmission.

They didnt have gear oil as slippery as we have now in the 30s. That is the problem (as far as the transmission is concerned). Most oil formulated for transmissions today is synthetic.

Is this really some transmission-specific oil you have in there now or just gear oil? Synchronizers are a brake. Most gear oil available in the USA is far too slippery. If the synchronizer cant stop the gear, it is going to grind. To make things worse, we have an idiotic rating system (gl4/gl5) that really tells you nothing about whether the oil is suitable for a transmission. There is also the separate issue that the oil might eat the brass over time... or not. If it were mine, I might try Redline MT-90 in it, or motor oil. If you try motor oil, keep in mind that it is rated on a different viscosity scale. SAE 30 motor oil is about the same 85W gear oil, SAE 50 motor oil is more like 90 weight. (in viscosity) I don't know if heavier weight will help. Heavy oil is usually a detriment on most cars, causing the synchronizers to work worse until the oil warms. On the other hand, heavy oil creates more drag. This would help you get into the unsynchronized first gear quicker at a light. I did hear of one situation where heavier oil helped a lot. The pre-1937 Chevrolet transmission has a weak synchronizer on high gear. One user over on the VCCA discovered that by using heavier oil shifting was improved. The original oil was SAE160, not a standard weight anymore, so most use SAE140 these days. By going heavier instead of lighter, he found the transmission shifted better hot. I suspect the drag of the oil may have been slowing things down faster so the synchronizer had less to do. Nevertheless, it worked! Whatever you try, let us know how it turns out. .

The gas fill on a 59 Cadillac is in the center on the back.

The two came together, and no other way. At least the Mitsubishi engine (and carb) would idle.... The carburetor system on the Chrysler-built engine was far, far worse, and spoiled what was otherwise a bulletproof engine. TBI or Turbo is what you want.

When did Pontiac stop using compression fittings? The ones they used weren't ferrules like you find at the hardware store, but something called a "threaded sleeve". It was a form of compression fitting. My 1936 Master Six uses these, and I saw a newer Pontiac carb on Ebay, probably a 1941, with one hanging on it. Summershandy: Nice job!

3 Speed!

It might very well sell for that reason.

Your Proportioning valve (the smaller one) looks to be a Kelsey Hayes more or less like this one: https://www.ebay.com/itm/68-69-MUSTANG-COUGAR-BOSS-NOS-FORD-C7AZ-2B091-A-DATED-MAY-68-NICE-/321745123162 and so probably takes this kit: https://www.musclecarresearch.com/2B091-Kit-2 The bigger part with the electrical switch (that I was calling a metering block) Frank is calling a differential pressure switch. Frank is correct, by the way. This is my best guess for a kit, but I cant positively identify from those pictures. https://www.musclecarresearch.com/valve-kit-wagner-dist You are at the point where you really need to get the part numbers and then dig around on the musclecarresearch site until you find matches. You may need to remove the parts to see the numbers. Be sure to crack all the lines loose before unbolting anything. If you dont already have some, now would be a good time to go buy a set of HIGH QUALITY tubing wrenches. Good luck

Was it the copper bolts? Not making contact? In some of these copper bolt setups it is possible to turn the bolt around and use the other side of the head. Have you looked in there yet? Sometimes you find out that was already done back in the day and there is nothing left. I don't know where to send you for parts. Someone around here will know.

When the solenoid pulls in, it knocks a copper disc back against the two big copper bolts, shorting the one bolt that is connected to the battery cable to the other bolt that is connected to the starter windings. That makes the starter motor run. If you have a battery connected to the starter (positive and ground), and you put 6v on one terminal of the little relay,and ground on the other, the relay kicks in, triggering the solenoid, which kicks the copper disc against the bolts, and the starter should run. It sounds like this is exactly what you are doing. I would bet one or both of those copper bolts are burned up. It is extremely unlikely the starter is shot. It just may need a little attention. Just for grins, try connecting 6v directly (heavy cable) to the other copper bolt. Starter motor (only) should run. Be careful, its gonna kick. Here is a thread with some info about how the starter circuit works. There might be some minor differences due to year, but not that much. Buick kept autostart until 1960.

The 1926-1931 Fisher Body Service manual refers to something called "upholsterer's hair" as one of the layers used when building an armrest.

True enough, but what do you guys think is going to happen when the car starts and the generator cutout pulls in? Food for thought....

I m currently rebuilding a combination valve from a 70 Marauder. I think 69 is different. I would look around on West Coast Classic Cougar, and find a setup that looks like yours and order parts for it. You probably have a separate metering block from the proportioning valve. The proportioning valve may be back further on the car somewhere. https://secure.cougarpartscatalog.com/propvlvkit.htm That is for a metering block and prop valve that looks like this one: https://secure.cougarpartscatalog.com/c8zz-2b257-assembly.html Rebuild video: Edit: Oops, they look to be out of stock of 69. They had them last week. Try here: Prop valve kit: http://www.deadnutson.com/catalog/item/2965331/9981991.htm Metering block kit: http://www.deadnutson.com/catalog/item/2965331/10061180.htm (apparently sold separately at this outlet) Or here: http://www.mustangsunlimited.com/Mustang/Brakes/Proportioning-Valves/Distribution-Proportioning-Valve-Rebuild-Kit-1968-1969-Mustang-Disc-Brake.axd Or here, this may be the actual source: https://www.musclecarresearch.com/valve-kit-wagner And a rebuild article: https://www.musclecarresearch.com/valve-rebuild-wagner Try to match part numbers on the valves if you can. If the numbers dont match, but it is an exact match visually, the seals will probably fit. Any calibration differences would have to be springs. If it is not an exact match visually to the stuff I listed, look around on those sites. There are some other valves Ford used during that period. Good luck!

I think anyone who thinks 1980s Chevrolet parts are going to be more reliable than a well-sorted Packard is gonna have a bad time.

Very true. One thing I am gonna throw out there is that back in the day, every clued-in driver knew "where the needle ran" on the particular car he/she drove every day. There was not necessarily any expectation that it be in the center of the gauge. It varied from car to car and most people regarded that as normal.

A 160 degree thermostat isn't going to help you much with cooling. On some level it actually hurts. The limit on how much you can cool is usually the the size of the radiator opening and the amount of air you can funnel through it. You can add more layers to the radiator, but once you get to three layers, adding a fourth doesn't really do much, other than add space for a little more coolant, which is good, but probably doesn't justify the expense. Cooling is also limited by difference between the temperature of the air flowing through the radiator, and the coolant in the radiator. If the coolant is hotter in temperature, the radiator can remove more actual heat from the engine, because there is a bigger difference in temperature at the radiator. a 160 degree thermostat gives you a little more "headroom", a little more time to see that the temp is rising, but at the expense of actual cooling efficiency. None of this matters that much once you get close or exceed the limits of the cooling system. The system will run hotter. The thermostat only sets the lower limit. I would consider running a 160 degree thermostat if it were original equipment for the car. It cant hurt if it is part of the original design. 180 degrees will get you a lot better heater. If there is some question whether an engine runs too hot, just temporarily put a real mechanical gauge on it. Recalibrating the factory gauge isn't crazy if it reads hot and the engine is actually running at the thermostat temperature. 160 degree thermostats only exist because of alcohol-based antifreeze. It is below the boiling point of the alcohol. Does anyone still use this?

Or, you could buy this one for $1500.... https://phoenix.craigslist.org/wvl/cto/d/1997-buick-regal-gs/6421326179.html

Are you sure that backing the screw out is what makes that carb leaner? Most go the other way.