Bloo

Hupp Club (USA) has all the factory blueprints that exist, and I understand the collection is huge. You might be able to get copies of the original blueprints.

Sorry to not be more help about this, but it can be complicated. As @1937hd45 mentioned there were several vendors to Ford, and they were incompatible with each other. Eventually Ford made the suppliers all standardize, but that was later. I think what Ford standardized on was the "Hayes" design, but I am not 100% sure of that. There were also aftermarket kits to change to demountable rims that were never endorsed by Ford. Chevrolet rims exist that LOOK like the later Ford setup but don't fit because the valve stem is in the wrong place. Then, there were a bunch of other cars that used 30x3-1/2" rims like Studebakers, Maxwells, etc. All of these things show up in piles of Model T rims. You'll need to educate yourself on this subject, so you know exactly what you are buying, and then either 1) Buy a complete set from someone, and be able to verify exactly what you are getting or 2) Pick the pieces up onesy-twosy. Hint: Incompatibilities between manufacturers of demountable rims usually boil down to 2 things. 1) how the rim seats on the felloe, including but not limited to slight diffferences in the inside diameter of the rim and 2) what locks the rim in place so it does not spin on the felloe and break the valve stem off. The mounting wedges are separate pieces on some setups. They need to be the correct ones for the felloes and rims. The later standardized Ford setup had them welded to the rims. Most (all ?) of the Ford sanctioned demountable rim setups had steel felloes, so it may even be possible to just buy spokes and build the wheels yourself once you have all the steel parts. Were it me, I would gravitate to the setup (Hayes I think) that Ford had after they standardized. In my opinion they would be the easiest to collect a set of, and as far as I know there were no demountables from Ford yet in 1916. There are several old threads about demountable rims on the MTFCA forums. EDIT: A start... http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/506218/549275.html?1434340728 http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/257047/293804.html?1338855124 http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/179374/238915.html https://www.mtfca.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=33141 http://www.mtfca.com/encyclo/U-Z.htm#wheels

1964 Pontiac Tempest.

In my opinion nothing outlasts "true roller" chain. The rollers on a true roller chain can spin independently. It could be single or double row in theory, though I am not sure what you can currently get for a Nailhead. Plain roller chain, where the rollers are not free to spin, whether single or double row, does not seem to last any longer than silent chain from what I have seen.

One end or both?

The Chevy is a 1953. The car at the far left is indeed a Plymouth P-15, made from 1946 through early 1949. It may not be possible to nail down an exact year. The car just to the right of the P-15 appears to be a 1953 Plymouth.

The first Teslas used AC motors. I have no idea about current models.

Plastic gears should never have been used then, and definitely should not be used now. It reeks of cheapness. They probably justified it by saying it is quieter, and it is, but the teeth will fall off and it will leave you stranded. On Fords, gears like this have caused catastrophic engine failure by stopping the oil pump and twisting off the oil pump drive after pieces of the teeth got in the oil pump. I have never heard of that happening to a Buick, but leaving you stranded is a bad enough offense even if it does not destroy the engine. A steel set will wear out almost as fast as plastic, but in all likelihood will never jump time and leave you to walk, because the teeth do not fall off.

Thank you both!

I'll bet the clunk is high idle speed, or lash in the driveline, or some combination of the two. Ever looked at the u-joint yet?

37 and 38 are different. 38 hangs upside down, so the mounting ears will be reversed. Electrically they should match. 1941 is likely to be completely different. I would expect a 2-brush generator with a 3 unit regulator, since it was after the advent of sealed beams.

In a earlier thread this year (I don't remember whose Dodge Brothers it was for), a wiring diagram was posted. It added a lot of clarity. The way things were laid out, replacing with fuses did not look practical without wiring changes. Modern thermal circuit breakers would probably be OK. As for the double vibrating breaker in the picture, it looks pretty bad, but I'll bet it could be cleaned up enough to work. If it were my car, I'd make that thing work. I'm pretty sure it's possible. Just pay attention to current paths through it. Follow the current through the device. There could be some riveted connections that might require solder to become electrically solid again. Of course the points would need to be clean.

It seems to me the original adjustable tool is also made by Ammco, and someone either on this forum or the VCCA made and sold a tool that works on a similar principle. I wish I could remember who. And yes, brake shoe arcing is sort of a separate issue, but it really matters too.

What sort of cubic inches, RPM, horsepower etc. was this Dort?

Maybe you don't want that exact tool. Another tool exists for multiple-make use that has an adjustable arm and rotates. You adjust it to the actual size of your drum, rotate it, and check clearances wherever they need to be checked.

This is completely different and is not one of the Pontiacs that had Powerglide because of the fire. These use a Chevrolet chassis with a Pontiac engine. As far as I know, these all use Chevrolet transmissions whether Powerglide or stick. They have a Chevrolet torque tube and rear axle. A conversion sounds expensive. I would look into troubleshooting the clunk, which might not be in the transmission. In fact, it probably isn't. Nice car!

I don't suppose there's any chance those are the same as model N.....

I looked into this 2 or 3 years ago and was hoping the situation had improved and @Don Jr. would get some better options. Apparently not. When I looked into this, there was no coach paint in the USA at all, and UK would not ship. This all sounds very familiar. The coach paint you can get in the UK is still not quite traditional coach paint. The tutorials will tell you it does not quite lay down when brushed like the old stuff, but it is by far the closest thing you can get. @jdome mentioned One-Shot. That is meant to be laid with a brush, but is for sign painters and as far as I know is sold only in small quantities for a high price. I do suspect it is the closest USA product to coach paint. This thread has also gone off in the direction of japan colors. That might not be quite the same thing as coach painting(?). It does take forever to dry. As I understand it, paint was the biggest bottleneck in car production in the brass era, and why Ford settled on a simple black and dried it in an oven. There is something called "japan drier" (what a surprise). If I remember correctly mixing in too much degrades the quality of the job. It does speed things up. Another modern gotcha is that "japan drier" may or may not contain the same metals as it did in the teens. I think the reason you probably aren't getting guidance from Ronan is that probably nobody has used japan colors that way in decades, building up colors on a panel of steel or wood and then varnishing over it. They probably literally don't know how. I'll bet the last time that was done in the US was less than 10 years after the advent of nitrocellulose lacquer. As for me, I would love to read the rest of that book @George K posted a page from. Spot on. It is nothing like coach paint. The coach painting methods I have seen online simply would not work with it. I have had some success brushing it, but to say it is uncooperative might be the understatement of the year. If you are going to brush it, be sure to put Penetrol and hardener in it. Penetrol so it will lay down, and hardener so you can sand it down and recoat when it inevitably does not do quite what you wanted it to. Rustoleum will lift when you recoat if there is no hardener, and they don't sell hardener. @Don Jr., if you do some coach painting, please post about it and let us know if you were able to obtain appropriate supplies and how it went.

Washington checking in. Chains required this morning. Most of them are made from cable nowdays.

I would love to see pics when you get it.

I don't know but I like it. Looks like someone in it's past got a little heavy handed though. Aftermarket for Hupmobile?

Only the spark plug gap and rotor gap will make much difference in the spark voltage, not brand of coil, etc... If only changing the coil, nothing will change. Pertronix makes no difference either if it is installed properly and working properly. Resistance wires, resistor plugs, etc. could have a little effect but probably not much. Buick's hidden wires were always begging for trouble in my opinion. Running plug wires in parallel is a no-no. So is running them along a piece of metal. They mostly got away with it. It's possible taller spark plugs would cause more trouble by pushing the tops closer to the metal.

It's just 1/8 pipe. I took some pictures of my car with those 2 cups I have stuck in about the right spot with masking tape. The smaller one: The bigger one: The car in Florida: It sure looks like the smaller one is about the right size. I think I am going to try to unsolder the pipe inside.

I used the little harbor freight neodymium ones Ed says he has used for crapcatchers in various places. Since they are in holes drilled into the pipe plugs, they don't stick out any further than standard pipe plugs. EDIT: Might have been these. https://www.harborfreight.com/10-piece-rare-earth-magnets-67488.html EDIT 2: I just dug around in the bin down at the hardware store until I found 2 of them that weren't hollow. You can also kind of tell when something has been made from a chunk of steel rather than cast. This pic is a stainless one, but mine weren't. I think the Dorman ones might be steel instead of cast too come to think of it, though those would come from Auto Parts, not hardware like mine did.

I like the looks of that flex fuse thing, and it might even solve the problem for a while, but the root of most glass fusebox problems is poorly understood. If you are getting glass fuses that aren't blown, the wire inside is still intact, but no continuity, look for a yellow ring around one end next to the end cap. If you find this, it is caused by a bad connection where the fuse clip is riveted into the fusebox. The connection gets hot and the heat travels up the clip, melting the solder inside the fuse and the hot glue holding the end cap on. Hot air, trapped inside the fuse, pushes the end cap off a little bit and pulls the fuse wire out of the molten solder. With the load now removed, everything cools back down. The yellow ring, if present, is hot glue that was holding the end cap in place. If you compare to a new fuse, the bad one will be longer by the same distance the yellow ring is wide. The flex fuse thing might prevent this and keep working, in fact it probably would, but you would still have a connection getting hot and voltage loss in that circuit. Soldering an ATO (blade fuse) inline fuesholder on from the back before the current gets to the rivet would fix it forever, but wouldn't be pretty. I've not had much success just replacing rivets, and the clips for glass fuses are usually made of mystery metal that won't take solder. Your mileage may vary. If your old fuses don't look like what I described, ignore this post.