Bloo

Never leave one of those unattended. I did, and while I was over in another section of the building, a bulb exploded, broke the lens and sprayed pieces hot broken glass everywhere. Some of those pieces landed on a nearby table that had papers on it. The papers had holes in them bigger than the pieces of glass. Apparently they caught fire and went out. It could have easily burned the building down.

One reason for the jumper might be ballast resistors. Some Fords and Lincolns in the 1930s used them. I don't know about 1927, but it wouldn't surprise me if it had a pair of them. Modern normally shaped 6 volt coils don't use ballast resistors. If the Lincoln had some ballast resistors, and they weren't removed from the coil supply lines, for instance if they were under the dash and no one saw them, the jumpering may have been done to get full voltage to the coils.

Heed this post^^. The packing needs to weep to stay cool. If it seals 100%, the packing will fail and destroy the shaft when it does. I live in an agricultural area near the Columbia river, and there are a lot of irrigation pumps around here, some are decades old. Packing nuts for sealing are common. They leak. Some of them leak rather a lot, intentionally. They leak enough that you would think something had failed if you were driving by. Every now and then, someone inexperienced person will "stop the leak" by overtightening the nut. It is a very expensive mistake, as it usually burns the shaft. The pump will need to go in to a shop for overhaul with a new shaft. Obviously you wouldn't want to let it leak too much like that just to be sure it isn't leaking too little on a car. For one thing, the pump would suck air and cause coolant foaming and overheating, and for another it would just make a mess. Getting the leak down to a minimum is desirable, but never stop it completely. A steady drip is too much, but it should always be moist under the packing nut.

Good plan. Probably not. If it did, it would be running on 4 cylinders. You can think of this as 2 separate 4 cylinder ignition systems. Most likely they fire alternately. I would avoid adjusting any points for now. The 2 "systems" will be the same. Check both and compare. Key on, points open, you should have battery voltage (more or less) on both connections to one coil (small wires). No voltage? Figure out why. Only on the supply side? Disconnect the wire going to the points. Still no voltage on the points side of the coil? Bad coil. Voltage on both sides of the coil now? Something is shorting the points out. It's as if the points never open. Do whatever is necessary to clear the short. Now hook the wire back up if you had it disconnected and close the points by moving the crank a little. You should still have battery voltage on the supply side, but nearly nothing on the points side now that the points are closed. If there's significant voltage still there on the points side with the points closed, the points are not grounding the coil (as you suspected). If the points do ground the coil, and the voltage goes to zero (more or less) on the points side with the points closed, it's fine. Check for spark at the coil wire (not a plug wire). Still no spark? The condenser is probably bad. If that doesn't fix it, try a coil. Repeat the last 2 paragraphs for the other coil, points, and condenser. I think you'll find the problem. Once again, avoid any points adjustment for now. The points in a distributor like that must be set up so that the 2 "systems" are an exact number of degrees apart. Otherwise you will have 4 cylinders either leading or lagging in time. The easiest way to set something like that is with a distributor machine. Doing it without, while possible, is going to be very time consuming.

The fitting is probably for oil. On the 1936 model, it is a flip top oil cup. The oil is supposed to soak through the porous carbon. I have noticed zerks on slightly newer models, and can't imagine how grease could work at all. Oil guns existed at that time. What does the shop manual say about it? When mine was out of the car during a transmission overhaul, I soaked it in clean hot heavy motor oil for a few hours, and also filled the oiler cup. The carbon does not rotate, it just stays oily and runs against a smooth steel surface on the pressure plate. The grooves are a wear indicator. When they're gone, it's worn out. That one is kind of chipped up. I don't know how much it matters, but I wouldn't want it falling apart, because it would probably damage the surface on the pressure plate. I would consider replacing it.

All good suggestions so far. Is this a new problem? Did you ever see it work correctly or has it always been like this since you've had the car? Does the car have signal lights added, and if so, do they share the 1154 brake/tail light bulbs?

I don't think the manufacturer currently recommends using them with steel. They are all over old cars used with steel, and it works fine. The first time it is assembled, you might have to make it fairly tight. Properly installed, the sleeve bites into the tubing and becomes part of it. You should be able to take the tube and nut loose from the female fitting as many times as you want, but the nut remains attached to the tube. If there's any doubt, take it apart and look. Steel brake tubing ("Bundyflex") has layers of copper rolled into the steel during manufacture to facilitate bending. It is a bit more malleable than pure steel would be. Maybe that's a factor. This replacement steel line was made in the mid 2010s usingbrake tubing from NAPA and threaded sleeves from Blackhawk. I did take it back off after the initial crush to inspect.

Very, very, very slowly...... Ok, I'll show myself out now.

If I could upvote this comment 10 or more times, I would.

A great opportunity to get rid of that cheap nasty plastic timing chain timing set that will surely fail at the worst possible time, leaving the driver to find another way home and the engine full of shards of broken plastic. I don't believe this is an interference engine.

It is desirable to go in at least 3 stages to avoid stressing the cast iron too much when the gasket compresses. Nothing wrong with more.

One possibility for a replacement part: http://www.fiatplus.com/ I've not ordered anything from them for a long time, but I think if they can't get it they might know who to ask.

Looks like 65-70 lb-ft. A 1940 Oldsmobile manual is here: http://www.oldcarmanualproject.com/manuals/Olds/1940/index.html

I just sent it along.

I don't know. It is likely that grade 8 would be better in every way, but hard to say for sure. Steel making knowledge advanced rapidly during WW2. Torque wrenches weren't a common thing in the 30s, and most manuals don't list torque until 1941 or so. On some cars, you can just look in a newer book. That works on 1936 Pontiac, because the engine designs are so so similar from 1933 forward. On the Oldsmobile F Six though, 1937 appears to be a fairly major engine redesign. It appears to be more than just closing in the water jackets around the cylinders as many makes did around that time. Other things got moved on the side of the block and the overall look changed. If you could verify somehow that the head bolt size is the same on 1937 F as it is on 1936 F, I would just use a later Olds F torque spec from the 1940s. If by some chance the headgasket is the same, you could probably use a later torque sequence too. 40-45 lb-ft sounds low to me, but maybe you have smaller bolts than I do.

This is the first I have heard of it, as I've not been in SDC for decades. Should I have? I'd be happy to help any way I can. I couldn't get any new pictures right now as the car wont even be accessible until spring. This one is kind of old.

Because the hose appears to have a threaded sleeve connection on one side. If that's not true, and there is really a flare seat in there, then you wouldn't. Or you could get a different hose. Or you could make your own hose with a couple of double flare 5/16" hose barbs. If you used 30R9 hose and fuel injection clamps, it would probably be the best solution from a technical viewpoint, but would be obviously wrong if you plan to do judged shows. Because bits of it break off and cause all sorts of havoc. The most common place for it to get stuck is in the float valve. It has caused a lot of car fires over the years. It's really a bad idea anywhere on a car, not just the gas line. Technically you don't need sealer on tapered pipe thread (NPT) anyway, and on the other fittings the threads don't do the sealing. If thread sealer is wanted, plenty of other thread sealers do exist that aren't in tape form.

Could have it been cut down from a coupe?

That's a double flare. What model is this? Is that the line coming from the chassis? Assuming it is, connect the double flare end of the rubber hose to that. Use a 5/16" threaded sleeve to connect the other end of the hose to a piece of 5/16 brake tubing. Brake tubing usually comes double flared at both ends, with one nut that looks like the one on old cars, and one that is much longer. The long one fits all the same stuff, it just looks wrong. You don't need it anyway, you need at the most one correct looking nut (maybe none) and the piece of brake tubing will have one. You'll need a tubing bender of course. The only pics I could find online that show the front end of the line on a car that has the line attached to the draft tube were of this 47 Roadmaster. It looks pretty messed with and wrong at the hose end, but you get the idea. So if this is correct it uses a straight fitting at the fuel pump. I would have guessed a 90 degree fitting but apparently not. At the fuel pump end you need to get from the 5/16" brake tubing to 1/8" NPT pipe thread. You have 2 choices. Option 1 is the easiest. Use your one good looking nut and one premade double flare end from your piece of brake tubing. Use a 5/16" double flare (AKA inverted flare) female to 1/8" male NPT brass fitting on the fuel pump. Thread sealer on the pipe threads might be a good idea, but isn't strictly necessary. Don't use tape. The double flare end needs nothing. Option 2 is to cut off the front end of the brake tubing also, and use a second threaded sleeve. In that case you would need a 5/16 female threaded sleeve to 1/8" NPT brass fitting. Blackhawk supply has that, as well as the threaded sleeve nuts. You'll need at least one threaded sleeve nut to connect to second end of the rubber hose. https://blackhawksupply.com/collections/plumbing-brass-fittings-double-compression They also should have the double flare to pipe fitting you need at the fuel pump if you go with option 1, however that is a super common parts store item, and I am fairly sure you can get that locally. I don't know which option Buick used. I suspect the option 1 (double flare). Either will work fine.

The Mercury didn't. @37_Roadmaster_C and I fixed it right where it was sitting in my driveway without pulling the heads. It still just sits around. It gets only ethanol-free gas now, unless someone is driving it a lot, and that hardly ever happens. I did drive it most of last winter though.

I cant help but wonder if the bracket is just bolted on the horns backwards. Even if it is, you are still missing the front support bracket. My car has something similar, although it hangs from above, and I think it is important. There's a lot of horn hanging out there, and the metal is thin. Probably. Maybe not that exact stuff. It's similar. If I remember correctly the factory coil replacements for 36 Pontiac had a removable cup on the bottom of the coil where it engages the top cap, but the originals probably did not. Probably those were fixed. I believe these are in both cases the same coils as Oldsmobile, but I can't prove it as I have no Oldsmobile books that cover this period. My guess is if you don't have all of it, it would be easier to find another one. In Pontiac, that is all one piece, never meant to be taken apart. Chevrolet calls it "Electrolock" It's actually the second generation of Electrolock, the first version had the armored cable going to the distributor to short out the points. I don't believe Chevrolet ever advertised that there was a difference, but it is useful to know if you start Googling "Electrolock". Anyhow, I suspect the electrolock on a 36 Pontiac is the same as a 36 Oldsmobile because I have seen Oldsmobiles with the original coil still hanging, and its in the same spot. If the key is in the center of the dash on a 36 Oldsmobile, it it almost certain to be the same Electrolock. Again, I have no book to verify. A 36 Chevrolet Electrolock is different. They mounted the coil on the engine, and the armored cable is longer. The coil is almost right, but the mounting bracket is welded on, and in the wrong place. You wouldn't try to take it off. The bracket is pretty thick but the coil sides are paper thin. I think this is how some previous owner damaged the Pontiac coil that is on my car. When I bought the car, the coil was hanging loose in an incorrect bracket. If you do need to replace the wire inside the armored cable, you have to take the switch apart, and remove all the internals to get to the bottom where the wire is. The switch is staked together. Nothing about this sounds like fun, but it's doable. There are people on the VCCA forums you can hire to do it, or so I'm told. Mine still works with the original wire. The cap doesn't come off of the cable. That's kind of the point. It doesn't come of the coil easy, but can be released with a feeler gauge to remove the coil. In order to hide the cap and cable, they would have had to remove the switch, take it out through the engine compartment because the hole in the firewall is not big enough to go the other way, reassemble with the cap, cable and all inside the car under the dash, and then add a piece of wire to go through the firewall to the coil. You might find that. I'll bet you find a hacked up mess instead. I hope I'm wrong. Supposedly there have been a lot of failures of coils of this age in more recent times. It's probably true. I am stubborn and am going to keep pushing my luck. Your mileage may vary. I doubt a Pontiac fan would fit but maybe? Don't try to run it if it turns out to be bent. I agree completely The Olds pump is similar in construction to the Pontiac one. There's a flat plate on the back. It might be hot garbage. Someone may have gooped it up out of frustration. I have 2 33-36 Pontiac back plates. One came on a remanufactured pump and is rusted out beyond any reasonable use. The other one that came to me mounted on the car is sort of OK, but I discovered that there was erosion on the gasket surface that was not initially obvious. It was a pain to get sealed up. Paper gaskets and Indian Head weren't getting it done. The plate just wasn't flat enough. There are lots of things you could use though that don't leave silicone turds sticking out everywhere. Hylomar (blue) is the obvious one, but it's a little difficult to source. Permatex Anaerobic Sealer is probably what I used. Even some thick shelllac putty like Permatex #2 probably would have been fine. Delco 936T generator and 5588 regulator, probably. I believe that is a small frame third brush generator, similar to a 1936 Pontiac generator, with a fixed third brush, an external field terminal, and meant to be used with a 2-relay voltage regulator (cutout and regulator, probably firewall mounted).

That gas MIGHT have been 2-4 years old, worst case. It shouldn't have needed cleaning out. The car hadn't been daily driven since 2002, but got exercised every few months until that happened. I was driving around the neighborhood after taking it a little way down the highway. I barely got home. A bunch of pushrods were bent and the valves were glued solid. This seems to be happening a lot more than it used to. Maybe due to changes in the fuel? It has happened to at least 2 other forum users this year and there have been threads about it.

My 36 Pontiac still has covering like that. I believe it is a canvas sleeve with a zinc shell around it. I use that same Penrite grease you linked in an earlier post. It is the only graphite grease of the type used back then that is still made as far as I know. I get it from Restoration Supply (California). The factory tool to put grease inside the covering periodically is a "Lubroclamp". I got one on ebay.

Last I heard there was only one Coey Flyer. Have any others surfaced?

It's closely related to the 1913 Studebaker. Studebaker was a manufacturer of horse drawn vehicles, and the first gasoline cars they made entirely for themselves were the 1913 models. That isn't the whole story though, earlier they dabbled in electric cars, and also invested in and partnered up with other companies to get gas cars to sell through their dealer network. The first of these companies was Garford. The second was EMF/Flanders. Studebaker apparently sold these cars with a "Studebaker" radiator script. Sometime in 1912, Studebaker bought out EMF. There were 3 new Studebaker models for 1913, a small four, a larger four, and a six. All three of them were evolutions of the 1912 EMF "30". That is why some parts look similar or the same. All in all, 1913 Studebaker was a very close guess.