Bloo

Is there any vacuum hose connection to the manifold near cylinder #1? If so you could try temporarily disconnecting and plugging the connection to the manifold.

the LM46 is still available, same heat range in a lawnmower plug. The insulator is shorter. The top doesn't unscrew. For what its worth, the old AC plugs apparently were shorter in height than the current ones . Heres a KL7 and an LM46:

That old AC numbering system went away I believe in 1937. I dug deeply trying to figure out what was equivalent to the K-7 recommended in the 1936 Pontiac shop manual. There is no good cross reference, but the best clues are in old postings on this site by user "mlander". I imagine I am telling you what you already know, as you are in some of those threads. "mlander" last posted here in 2006. The K-7 turned out to be about an AC-45. I also found an application chart from the 40s somewhere that backs that up. All I can offer is that if you are looking for K-9 to K-12, those are really hot. I would just get the hottest one offered in that size. http://forums.aaca.org/topic/97942-spark-plugs-for-a-1932/?tab=comments#comment-421927 http://forums.aaca.org/topic/87501-old-ac-sparkplug-chart/?tab=comments#comment-372303

Is it possible the shaft is bent? I think we canvassed this before. I was wondering that too. .003 seems a bit loose. I brought up those Chevrolet threads because I was wondering if its possible #1 isn't really as tight as the others, even though it seems so. Actually I think that works the other way. The splash oiled engines needed to be tighter. I have heard many stories over the years about clearances in these old engines being set to the modern "rule of thumb" and winding up noisy. In pressure fed engines with a lot of miles it isn't uncommon for the bearings to talk a little before the oil pressure comes up. Splashers do need fairly thin oil to ensure flow, especially cold.

I sort of doubt it has anything to do with the timing. Nearly all of my experience is with force fed engines, but as I understand it splash oilers need to run tighter than force fed engines. I think that rod tap-sideways test had more to do with checking the bearing clearance than the side clearance. I think their goal (on those Chevrolets anyway) is to run them as tight as they possibly can without binding, and they don't really quite believe what the plastigage is telling them. Any out of round would prevent getting the bearings very tight, as they would bind as you turned them. I don't know how much is too much. If it were mine, I think I would shim that bearing as tight as I could get it without binding, and see if it still makes noise. Even if it still does, that is a huge clue. It is so hard to tell about engine noises. All engines should behave about the same under the typical tests (cracking the throttle to listen for a rattle, disconnecting a spark plug and so on). In my experience they don't always. Usually, however, a small end (gudgeon pin) noise is a double knock. Usually it will change but not go away when you disconnect a spark plug. A rod knock should get quieter or go away. It is often hard to tell the difference between a small rod knock and some relatively harmless piston slap. What kind of pistons did you use and how much clearance? I would also wonder about the closest main bearing. How tight is it? I don't see how it could be anything to do with the camshaft. A noise there shouldn't change no matter what you do.

Assuming there is no problem with the small end (I was also wondering about that), you could try tightening the big end a little. I have used plastigage on almost everything I have ever worked on, but was reading the other day on the VCCA, and discovered that the 4 cylinder Chevy enthusiasts do not trust plastigage, and speak of tapping the big end sideways with a tiny hammer to check for clearance. They also turn the engine by hand to make sure the bearing being adjusted is not dragging to much. Apparently .0015 on those engines is on the high end of acceptable, and might make noise. Those Chevrolet engines are splash oilers. Is your Dodge splash oiled? Here are a couple of threads: http://vcca.org/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/306467/Re:_Adjusting_tightness_of_'30 http://vcca.org/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/243425/Connector_rod_clearance There are others over there as well. Another thing I have seen recommended is to turn the crank 90 degrees and recheck in case the crankshaft is a little less than round. This is to make sure it doesn't tighten up. Good luck.

My best guess: 1940 Ford Deluxe convertible.

As I understand it 195/80-16 matches 600-16 very close for diameter, so a match for 6.50 would need to be a little bigger.

^^That stuff is a miracle. It does the job, and doesn't leak out.

Not really. What is uncommon is one that does what you ask them to.

Do you have any more pictures of your pump? Is this a bronze housing? Is it driven at a right angle to the crankshaft by a flat disc coupler? I don't have a spare, but if this is indeed the same as 1913, I might be able to come up with pictures and maybe measurements.

Another Coo-pay.....

Probably wear on the steels of a clutch pack I guess. I dont have any books nearby that show me the inner workings of Dynaflow, but speaking in general terms, that is not much crap at all. I know this is counterintuitive, because ultimate cleanliness is necessary when assembling an automatic transmission. Tiny bits of dust can cause sudden and catastrophic failure by causing valves to stick, among other things. Clean assembly practices are crucial. In operation after the rebuild though, there is crap inside. A lot. A disturbing lot. In a 727 Mopar transmission, for instance, there is a donut shaped magnet laying in the corner of the oil pan, located by a dimple. These are extremely durable transmissions, and can easily go 200,000 miles or more if treated nicely, kept adjusted and full of clean fluid. When you take the pan off one of these at high mileage, that magnet will be a giant fuzzball. You cant even really see the magnet. There will also be a bunch of black colored powder and small flakes of non-ferrous material, that probably wore off of the clutches and bands, laying in the pan. Why this is not a problem, I don't know. If there are no recognizable big pieces of anything, you can wash out the pan, clean off the magnet, change the filter, adjust the bands and put it back together. If you take the pan off of a nearly new one, there will still be residue, and quite a bit more than you expect. Every automatic in use has some residue laying in the pan. Most have magnets like the 727. The magnet, If present, will always be fuzzy. If the magnet is catching stuff, thats good. Thats why its there. I would add it to any automatic transmission that doesn't have one.

Crap all over the magnet is normal in an automatic. I wouldn't be too worried.

No, Carl has it right here. There are many different kinds of wheels, some of which will tolerate caustic cleaners and some which will not. The trouble with aluminum is that what works on one piece might not work on another. I had a friend who restored a Triumph Bonneville. He got some acid from some other British bike restorer. It made short work out of removing the corrosion from the engine castings, then he finish-polished them with something... I think Simmichrome. This was work, but done much faster than I thought possible. I bought some of this "aluminum acid" too. I don't know what was in the bottle. Probably some common acid. On some kinds of aluminum it works great. Years later I tried it on some Japanese engine casting, probably a thermostat neck or a valve cover. It turned black. As it turns out the acid eats away the aluminum, leaving whatever else was in the alloy on the surface, probably silicon. Whatever it was, it was black. In the days before alloy wheels were coated, there was acid-based mag wheel cleaner. It worked great on old bare slot mags. By the late 1980s, it came with a huge warning not to use on anything except "bare uncoated open-pore aluminum wheels". There was a different formula for the coated wheels that were common by then. As for oven cleaner, that is caustic soda, the same chemical used in a hot tank. Aluminum dissolves and disappears in a hot tank. Caustic soda makes great paint remover, too. It removes nearly everything, including your flesh. Many years ago I have cleaned whole American engines down to bare pristine cast iron with this stuff. You just spray it on thick and then bag it so it can't evaporate. Check it every day and spray on more where necessary and bag it back up. After about 3 days, It can be washed off with a strong hose nozzle or a pressure washer. Its super-effective. Everything comes off, grease, paint, gasket residue, that baked on carbon by the exhaust port that the machine shop can never seem to get off when you get your valves ground. Gone, all gone. Clean enough for new paint. I am not advocating anyone do this today, I only bring it up because it illustrates how chemically active this stuff is. I would not allow it anywhere near a nice set of wheels. To each his own.

One thing to keep in mind is that the leading cause of tire failure is heat caused by underinflation. This was true before people started obsessing over date codes, and will likely remain true in the future.

No, I dont know what they're worth...

Someone will want them. If not here, probably on the HAMB.

Some of them prefer sedans....

Yes, Washing soda. Baking soda will work in a pinch. The soda is only used to make the water conductive, so I imagine caustic soda would work, but I cant think of a good reason to use it.

Yes

I think maybe its a Rambler, of about 1906.

1926??!!!

Are you going to save it?