Bloo

Well, that is surprising to see. I had one break, and had to take it apart. The hinges are completely different than yours! Since my visors are a mess and will need more work in the future, I was going to bolt it. Let us know what you come up with.

And Buick among others used them.

My book stops in 1948, and the highest numbers in that series for whole generators were still in the 1102600's then. It must be later. Other than that, I've got nothing. The tag does not belong if it's a Delco generator, and must be from a rebuilder. Red means 12 volts on Delco tags, and that one is clearly stamped 6.

The best penetrating oil I know of is Mopar heat riser solvent, now known as "Mopar Rust Penetrant", part number #4318039AD. Amazon has it. Keep re-applying and give it time to work, like maybe a week. The secret to getting rusted bolts loose is that rust is strong but brittle. Shock waves are your friend. @jdtaylor65@hotmail.com's advice of the impact tool is really good because it shocks the rust. Just don't overdo it unless you actually want to twist them off. A little finesse and they might unscrew. In the old days a nut splitter was a necessary last resort tool if you didn't have a torch. Depending on how it goes you might need one of those too.

Apparently not, considering the direction this thread is going 😜. The sad truth is they are probably junk. That wouldn't stop me from trying to repair though. People used straight water for coolant then, and usually not even distilled. The passages in a honeycomb radiator are tiny. The small flakes of rust plug things up quickly. Mineral deposits from the water do too. There is no practical way to clean them out other than backflush. Better than nothing, but it doesn't do much. If the cores ever froze, there will be too much damage. That's how it was done, except it was to isolate the outside. In fact, I've done it when I was a teenager, but I don't remember how. I have also repaired some cracks in the middle of tube and fin cores when the radiator shop said it was impossible. Looking back on that, I think a lot of dumb luck was involved. By the way, you would fill a cell like that when the brass was cracked out in the middle of the cell. That's kind of a "worst case" repair. On a honeycomb radiator, the soldering is all on the front and back face of the core. Any solder problems would be fixed right there on the face. The information I had on how to fix these either came from Dykes, or from the giant stack of late 1938-41ish Mechanix Illustrated, Popular Mechanics and Popular Science my dad still had laying around from those days. Ok, so if you are going to plug a cell, something has to go in the hole. The solder on the outside of the core is the only thing that keeps the core from falling on the floor in a pile of parts, so you can't get it too hot. That is the biggest danger. The solder probably isn't going to bridge a whole cell by itself. Solder follows the heat, so if you heated it from the backside enough to fill the whole cell, both ends of the tube would be hot enough to melt solder and I think the core would fall apart. Oddly I think this is how it was done, and probably how I did it, but I can't imagine how. Filling it with copper wire won't work. It would not only be thicker than the brass, but it's way too good of a heatsink. An approach that sounds like it would work, just thinking about it now, would be to take a brass tube that would fit inside the cell, bend over a tab on each end of the tube to cover the hole, stick it in the cell, and solder each end separately. If I remember correctly, the old radiator shops used an oxyacetylene torch, or maybe an oxypropane torch and lots of liquid killed acid flux. Killed acid flux is a small miracle. I believe they used a slightly carburizing flame to avoid oxidizing the solder. In any event it was a hot torch. Keep it moving! If I were doing it, I would run with the flame turned down to keep the flame speed kind of low and less aggressive. I think the old axiom of electronic soldering applies here: "Get in, get done, and GET OUT". The idea is to get the work hot enough to melt solder, and it HAS to be hot enough to melt solder by itself, and get done before the heat has a chance to spread very far. Spreading heat is your enemy. Any time you are in doubt, stop and cool the whole radiator *all the way down* before having another go. I would definitely want a water hose handy to cool things down quickly if I stopped in the middle of a repair. You might need your final repair to cool naturally though. Don't tell yourself "I'm almost done, just a little more....." When in doubt stop. As long as the core hasn't fallen apart you can always have one more try. Recently, working on a tank leak on my 36 Pontiac radiator with a Harrison strip core (GM called that honeycomb, even though it isn't quite. It is still soldered on the core face like honeycomb). I used a piece of copper sheet to shield the front of the core, the idea being it might keep that solder on the face too cool to melt. I guess it helped. I'd start with Dyke's. Have fun.

It depends on who you ask. LOL 😜 In a minute, there will be a bunch of people piling on to tell you there were no VIN numbers until 1981, which is sort of true but not completely true. I don't find this detail very important, but some people do. Just know that the number that will go in the VIN field on your registration or title paperwork is probably not unique to your car. In a lot of cases, it is a simple serial number. On a 30s GM car there are 3 serial numbers. One for the engine, one for the frame/chassis, and one for the body. The one on the body tag is from Fisher Body, and is generally useless for registration because it might have occurred more than once on the same make and year of car. That leaves the frame/chassis number and the engine number. The frame/chassis number may or may not be tacked on the body somewhere as well as stamped in the frame. In the 50s, Chevrolet also tacked a plate with this number on the driver's door jamb. I don't know when they started doing that. Some states titled by frame number, and some by engine number. Some were just plain inconsistent. Today it would be desirable to title or register a car to the frame number if you have a choice because if the engine gets replaced the paperwork no longer matches the car. I don't know where the frame number is located, but someone in here probably will. On my 36 Pontiac for example, it is on an aluminum tag on the top of the frame, near the steering box. The engine number will be stamped into a machined pad on the engine somewhere. It will not be a rough cast (raised) number. One of them should match the paperwork. Another possible place to look is the VCCA Forum. The depth of Chevrolet knowledge over there is nothing short of unbelievable. https://vccachat.org Welcome to the forum!

Lots of good advice posted above. There's not really much to add. My first thing to check would be the u-joints. You should have an open driveline if it's a standard US market Pontiac. Safely jacked up, one rear wheel on the ground and one off the ground, engine off, car in gear, rock the back wheel back and forth slowly and carefully while "feeling" the outside of a u-joint (don't pinch your fingers!). It probably takes 2 people. You should be able to tell if one yoke of the joint moves more than the other. It shouldn't. That's not a 100% test for all u joint problems but it's close. @john hess had a bad u-joint with symptoms that were very similar to yours on a newer flathead Pontiac. My second guess would be the pilot bearing (for the transmission shaft) in the back of the crank, or the front bearing in the transmission, or both. The pilot bearing might have been a bushing by 1940. There is no way to lubricate it without taking things all apart, and it is possible no one has been in there in decades. That matters more if it is a bearing. Either way, if it is bad it can let the clutch run out of round. Since you have to take the transmission and clutch out to get to the pilot bearing, I would check all the other things suggested above. It would be nice if you didn't have to take out the transmission and clutch. If you do take the clutch out, any problem with the clutch disc should be evident when you can see it. For what it's worth, my 1936 had paint marks on the pressure plate and flywheel. Apparently Pontiac balanced them together. I don't know if this continued in 1940 but I would look for the marks and if there are none I would make some before taking the pressure plate off. Welcome to the forum!

9 hours and nobody knows? Well, take this with a grain of salt, but I have heard you can use a reproduction 37 Chevrolet tank, and that you would have to modify it by moving the fill neck and possibly changing some other details. Allegedly the new steel A bodies for 37 are very similar across the GM line, and that tanks are the same shape, but not the same. For what it's worth, Buick Special is also an A body. I've not seen this conversion with my own eyes, so I am a bit skeptical, but if you are out of options it might be worth looking into.

Nice car! Welcome to the forum.

I doubt anything shares the exact transmission assembly. That basic design may have originated at Oldsmobile(?), I suspect it did, but by 1935-36 (and probably quite a bit earlier) it was a Flint-built Buick 40 series part that other divisions adapted for their use. My 1936 Pontiac transmission overhaul thread lists the obvious outside differences between Buick, Olds, and Pontiac near the end of the thread. The tables ("code" windows) scroll sideways. The Oldsmobile internals will look like the ones in my Pontiac. That thread shows exactly what you will be up against. Quite a few of the internal parts are literally the same. Buicks are easier to find parts for by far as there are so many of them and they have such an enthusiast backing for the 30s models. Pontiac is a little bit more difficult. Oldsmobile is even more difficult as there seem to be even fewer cars left. Many of the internal parts are likely to be the same as Buick (or Pontiac), but believe the part numbers. You will definitely need a parts book. In Pontiac, a "Master" parts book for the chassis is the real one, while a "Wholesale" parts book is a heavily abridged version you wouldn't want. I don't know what verbage Oldsmobile used, just make sure you get the complete chassis book. The body book might or might not be a separate book. In addition to the normal Buick and Pontiac sources, who may be able to help once you have part numbers, there is also Northwest Transmission Parts in Ohio(?). A crunchy second could be as simple as a misadjusted clutch. After seeing what happened to my transmission with the detent springs breaking or wearing through, I might be tempted to preemptively tear it down and replace those even if nothing else was wrong. If you don't want to do that you could drain it, check for metal chunks and if you don't find any just put new oil in and see if it works better. It might have some super slippery GL5 hypoid oil in it now. I'm using a much more synchromesh friendly oil, Redline 75W140NS Synthetic, and I like it. There are others. In conventional oil, something like GL1 tractor fluid or even motor oil would probably be a better choice than GL4 or GL5 hypoid gear oil. @Dandy Dave was also working on one of these mid 30s Oldsmobile transmissions in fairly recent times.

I would have bet against it until a minute ago. Some Pontiac Eights have an up-swept exhaust manifold that looks about like that. I am still doubtful, but I guess it's worth checking if one could be machined to fit. Start by counting the ports and checking the length. It looks like the LaSalle manifold goes down from all the pics I have seen. My guess the LaSalle one would bolt to the block though. The LaSalle and the Oldsmobile engine are VERY related, unlike the Pontiac. The posting below from 2019 raises more questions than it answers for me. I would not expect anything from 1938 Oldsmobile to directly interchange from a 1935 Oldsmobile. It's a different engine. Nevertheless maybe? It doesn't look too different from yours.

Thanks for posting those. The Pontiacs are all A-bodies, and I believe the Oldsmobiles are too, but that makes no difference here. The wood structure of my A-body 1936 Pontiac looks exactly like these pictures. Since the Oldsmobile in question is a 1935, the front doors are hung reversed. They are hanging from the B pillar (door post), and it is made of wood. You can't see that here because of the steel wrap, but you could if you were looking from the inside out. I had a conversation a few years ago with a 1935 Pontiac owner about his adventures replacing the wood in the door post. When Fisher built it, they made the post and then formed the steel around it. He had to make and fit his new post from more than one layer of wood, and glue it all together inside the steel skin. EDIT: OOPS, the Olds Eight (L) is a B body according to at least one online source. Either way, it is going to look like 58L-Y8's pictures. EDIT 2: Wow, there are a lot of Oldsmobile "F" (6 cylinder cars) mis-identified as Oldsmobile "L" (8 cylinder cars) online.

Oh , and don't keep quiet. Lots of good stuff in that post. 👍

Get SAE 30R9 rated hose. Yes it's expensive. It always has been. It is also worth it. It's mandatory on fuel injection, and worthwhile even on a low pressure carbureted car. It is probably cheaper online.

I hate to be "that guy", and your post is otherwise full of excellent advice, but this part is just plain wrong. 1960-1969 Mopar alternator systems with the old "roundback" alternators charge by sending 12v to the field. One small wire comes from the regulator and connects to one brush. The second brush is grounded. On a 1960-69 roundback alternator, that second brush screws right to the case. In 1970, they started using an electronic regulator (the flat "potted" one with the 3 pin plug). That one does ground the field to charge. A new roundback alternator case was made with the second brush floating to allow the use of this new electronic regulator that grounded the field to charge. There were now 2 small wires to the brushes. It doesn't matter which is which. One of them 12 volt ignition hot, and the other was the "ground to charge" wire from the regulator. In 1971 or 1972, they started making squareback alternators (like the one on @OldChargerGuy's car). Since squarebacks began in 1971 or 72, after the regulator change, all squareback alternators have the floating second brush for use with the electronic regulator. @OldChargerGuy's car is a 1966 (per the original post) and has a 1960-69 style regulator still (there's a picture of it). Only the alternator is the later style. You can see the green wire from the regulator connected to one of the brushes. The other brush is floating. It cannot possibly work like that. The regulator will send 12v to the field to make the alternator charge, but the other end of the field (second brush) is floating so nothing happens. If he connects a grounded wire to that second brush it will probably just work.

The one piece top was brand new GM technology. It's first year was 1935, and not across the line. They advertised the heck out of the "turret top", and to this day many people think they are all steel bodies. They aren't. They're wooden bodies with a one-piece steel top. Chrysler on the other hand probably(?) really did have an all steel body, but with a conventional roof. In 1936 they put a steel insert in the hole, and they were driving a Plymouth around with a WW1 tank tied to the roof in their advertising. Chrysler was using Budd as a body builder a lot, and Budd invented all steel bodies. Dodge had all steel bodies in the 20s, but didn't stick with it for all models. GM got all steel bodies on all the smaller bodied cars in 1937, and the rest in 1938. I would not plan on driving 60-65 all day long. In my opinion if you are going to stick to freeways, a mid 30s car is a really bad choice. That said there would be a huge advantage in my mind to having a car that can do 60-65 for short periods without undue stress on the engine. For that reason a car with overdrive would win with me. As far as I know it was optional on Chrysler, so they probably don't all have it. It was not optional on GM cars. The Olds probably(?) is geared to have it's happy spot at 45-50 like most cars of the time. Almost nobody drove 60-65 in those days. Speed limits were low and roads bad. In my opinion it is a downside because it is so expensive and difficult to fix if it is bad. Look it over really good for wood damage. Condition is everything. Eyes wide open. As far as I know, no. Generally speaking it's a good transmission. However, you might plan on having to tear it down at some point, and then be happy if you don't. Chances are any transmission that old might need tearing down. It's really basic Borg Warner style internals, and when you get inside you will recognize a lot if you have worked on more modern transmissions. @Professor had to tear down his fairly early in his ownership of a 36 Airstream. The transmission stuff starts on page 28. https://forums.aaca.org/topic/344725-1936-chrysler-airstream-c-8-convertible-restoration/page/27/ The Olds will have a variant of the Buick Special (5 bolt) transmission. My 36 Pontiac also uses a variant of this transmission and I had to tear it down when it wore through a couple of synchronizer detent springs and dropped a couple of pieces of metal in the oil. I believe the miles to be fairly low. My exploits and some views of what those transmissions look like inside are here: https://forums.aaca.org/topic/375070-36-pontiac-surprise-gearbox-overhaul-like-buick-40/ Both cars look nice. Let us know what you pick. 👍

You'll have to make your own lonely wiring clip I think. Those small terminals are on the brushes. When the brushes wear out, they can be changed without taking the alternator apart. In 1966, the second brush screwed directly to the case. Later on the second brush was insulated and there was a second wire because the 1970s-era firewall mounted electronic regulator needed it that way. The 1966 regulator needs that second brush grounded. Hook a wire to that extra terminal and ground the other end. If I remember correctly there's a screw hole on the back somewhere you can use for a ground, but I don't see it in the picture. If there's no screw hole handy on the back, run your ground wire around front and put a ring terminal around one of the bolts that holds the case together.

They're defrosters. If that one in the coupe is mounted so it can't be aimed the other way, It's probably a modern add-on. In the early to mid 30s, quite a few cars had heaters, but no defroster plumbing yet. Defroster fans like that were available electric or vacuum powered. By the late 30s the dash probably had slots, and you could usually get defroster plumbing on a factory supplied heater if you wanted, but a lot of aftermarket heaters still wouldn't have had any. Then there were trucks. They kept putting these fans in trucks for what seemed like forever. Most of the antique ones mount to the steering column. You can easily twist the fan around backwards to blow on your face if you like, but that's not why it exists.

One thing I see offhand is the squareback (1971 and later) alternator. They don't have an internal regulator, they use a firewall mounted electronic regulator and different wiring. To use it with the 1966 regulator and wiring, you'll need to ground the second brush, seen in your second picture. It won't charge until you do. How many amps is that alternator? I can't tell from the pic because they all look alike. Originals were 32-35amp (no A/C) and 43-45amp (about) with a double pulley on cars with A/C. One thing you should be aware of is 60 amp alternators are pretty common among the rebuilt ones, but weren't common at all among originals. A 60 amp alternator will burn up or melt the bulkhead connector on the firewall. Buyer beware. Factory 60 amp charging systems were only on police package cars and by special order. They had separate wiring through the firewall for charging, so they didn't use the bulkhead connector for that.

Pontiac did, I don't know when they stopped. I'm guessing probably around 1950-1954? They work fine and don't have any sealing problems that I am aware of. You do have to tighten them good the first time. The biggest problems I am aware of are that basically no auto parts stores in the US stock any of the fittings, and the fact that the 90 degree fitting for 5/16 is no longer made. I'll happily adopt any 5/16" 90 degree fittings you don't need. 😛

Now is anyone able to tell from the casting number if it is really still the 1940 block? I'm not sure, but the engine stamping number might be a better way to tell. It is on the left side of the block, up high, at the front, right next to the head. Maybe the Standard Catalog would have a list of engine numbers? I agree with everyone else here that it is 222.7, if it is the original block.

A shop owner I worked for said don't put anything on it. He said the stiffness is caused by dirt and all the crap people put on trying to soften it up. It works at first, and then the "softeners" dry out inside the leather and make matters worse. "It's skin, treat it like skin. Just clean it" he said. Here is what he taught me to do. Go after small areas at a time with a nail brush and a bar of glycerin soap, and as little water as possible to dip the brush in to get the soap wet. This is easiest with the type of nail brush that clips around your fingers. Wipe with a clean damp cloth to remove the soap and grime. Keep water to a dead minimum. Redo until the cloth wipes clean, and then move on to a new spot. I do about a 6 inch square at a time, but you'll need to play that by ear. I did this every month or two to a 69 Cadillac with original black leather. Over a period of about 3 years, the leather, which looked good but was hard as a rock in places softened up considerably. The more crud you can get out the better it gets. The leather was really nice by the time I sold the car. I have cleaned up a lot of cars this way, and they seem to improve, although none of them started out as hard as that Cadillac. A year or 2 later a trimmer from the UK told me essentially the same thing. The only thing he recommended after cleaning was "a tiny bit of luggage wax on a damp cloth if you need a little bit of shine". Now, apparently that is a UK product because "luggage wax" gets you plenty of blank stares in the US. I was able to deduce later on that it is apparently beeswax softened with water. Of course if the leather has turned into the consistency cardboard that you can poke your finger through this won't help. Your mileage may vary.

Yes. No double flare nut though. The nuts do indeed crush the tubing a little and become part of it. There's no flare. Apparently there's no name for them other than "threaded sleeve"(?). The Australians have a name for them, and it escapes me at the moment, but it will do you no good if you happen to be talking to suppliers in North America. I like this car. There are 3(!) different body sizes in 1940 Pontiacs. Do we know which one this is? I think this is the little one, but the differences are subtle.

And you are absolutely right. Those little check valves are so important, and get so little attention from people trying to solve fuel delivery problems. I prefer tank socks. The automakers used them for decades on carbureted cars and still do use them on in-tank pumps. With a sock, a lot of the trash keeps falling back in the tank. With a filter in the line, it all goes in the filter. The inline filters that were intended to go with between the pump and carburetor have finer filter media than filters meant to go between the tank and pump. A fine screen like the one seen in tank socks and some sediment bowls would be a much better choice. I added an inline filter back at the tank on my first car because the tank was still shedding crud after I cleaned it out. The filter plugged constantly because all the trash that a sock would have left in the tank wound up in the filter. I got a lot of gas in my face changing it. I now consider that a mistake, and a lesson I learned early. Never is a strong word, but I'd never do it again under any ordinary circumstances. There are some tanks you can't put a sock in because of the way the fuel pickup is arranged. On the other hand an awful lot of them, including this 40 Pontiac have a pickup, that comes out with the fuel sender. That usually makes it possible.