Jump to content

Gasket

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    Columbus, Ohio USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Gasket's Achievements

  • Collaborator

Recent Badges

2

Reputation

  1. Hi All, Got casting # for upper body--GI-126--(located under brass screen above the glass bowl--thanks, Sasha and Tom); and for lower body--GI-110. Also a '4' appears on the lower body near the left side of the mounting flange. I'm guessing that lever-type arm would be the right kind. So I know exactly what to look for. Seems likely that e-bay will turn it up sooner or later. That said, and reflecting on Jack M's post, above, I took a second look at the 1930 camshaft, pasted above, and see what does look like a soft cam/eccentric--designed for a fuel pump--just after the valve cams for #1 cylinder--which I originally took to be for a bearing. (What was I thinking?) So, I'll proceed with caution, per Jack M's caveat. Perhaps, this improvisation was not all that effective. If I get it to work at some future date, I'll let you know. Thanks again.
  2. Hi Jack M, As stated in several of the above postings, Chrysler introduced mechanical fuel pumps the very next year, 1930. Quoting the Chrysler series 77 Instruction Book (July 1929), "Fuel system [is] driven from [the] camshaft...(p.80)." These 1930 fuel pumps were located on the same side (right side) of the block as what was improvised on my 1929 series 65, but more forward--roughly adjacent to #1/#2 pistons. I don't know whether 1930 fuel pumps--and beyond--had their own designated cam (as opposed to letting a valve cam do double-duty), but not having looked inside any 1930 engines, cannot say for sure. However, a photo posted by Saulius in AACA technical forum, April 12, 2019, of a 1930 series 66 camshaft shows no more than 12 cams. (I take the liberty of pasting Saulius photo here--hoping this is not a breech of forum protocol.) As you say, one can appreciate the ingenuity.
  3. Hi All, In case there is any lingering interest, posted here is a belated reply to F&J's and Artificer Tom's suggestion about dropping the pan and looking at the cam... I finally got around to that; the third image, attached, shows that a mechanical fuel pump could ride on the cam of #5 cylinder. The cam lobe is visible at the top of the image; below that, light shines through the opening that was cut into the right side of the block for the pump (the right side of the image faces rearward). Right now it's running on new electric fuel pump, but it would be fun to someday see if the earlier modification could be repaired. (If Hershey reopens for Fall '21, I can snoop around for matching AC type B fuel pumps.) Also, thanks to Narve N's suggestion, I was able to look behind the generator and find the block cast date, April 6, 1929, embossed there. Thanks again, Jack 'Gasket'
  4. Hi Narve, You're not wrong. From browsing the internet, it appears that the term, 'honeycomb', is used somewhat generically. For example, one manufacturer, Brassworks, thebrassworks.net, in their descriptions of hex-honeycomb, v-cell, and diamond say that "They are commonly referred to as "honeycomb cores" but the patterns are varied." Thanks again, Jack
  5. Hi 1930 Kram66 and Narve N, Thanks for the great pictures--just what I needed; though, shouldn't honeycomb have 6-sides? (Looks like diamond shape to me(?)) Thanks again. Yours, Jack
  6. Hi All, What is the correct core material for 1929 Chrysler series 65? I'm guessing not honeycomb. Auburn / diamond? (Are they the same thing?) What I have now--that needs recored--is a crude job done in v-cell, which I doubt is original. Thanks for any guidance. Yours, Jack 'Gasket'
  7. Hi All, Please forgive this tardy reply.... The consensus appears to support F&J's and Hwellens' view that this is a modification (less flatteringly, a 'backyard' improvisation). The lack of machined boss to support a fuel pump supports that. Also, courtesy of Hwellens, mechanical fuel pumps on series 66 Chryslers--successors to the series 65--were located forward on the block; not backwards on the block (as on mine), which weakens the view that mine is a late production upgrade. Also, Narve N has later production blocks with engine numbers higher than mine which do not have mechanical pumps. When time permits, I hope to drop the pan and have a look at the pump cam--as suggested by Articicer Tom, and F&J. If it looks feasible, I would still hope to find a fuel pump that can work. Thanks to Artificer Tom's info about the availability and repairability of this type of pump, I will set my sights on AC type B pump cores--perhaps with different activator arm configurations--until I can find one that fits. P.S. I appreciate F&J's anecdote about his 34 LaSalle. Sometimes these wonderful artifacts survive only because at a critical point some enterprising person did some expedient improvisation that kept the car functional just long enough to become worthy of preservation. (Anyway, I think I would rather have a mechanical pump than a vacuum type.) P.P.S. My block does not have any date of manufacture embossed on it--unlike Narve N's example. I have heard of people contacting Chrysler to get data on date and place of manufacture and even customer/dealer to whom the vehicle was first delivered? Can this be true? P.P.P.S. Hi CarbKing, My carburettor is marked 'Rochester' with the letters 'GM' just beneath. Can the carburettor be dated with this info? It would be fun to guess about a time frame for when the manifold improvisation--assuming it was contemporaneous to the date of the carburettor--was done. Attached are photos of the carb and the manifold. Many thanks, Jack 'Gasket' Columbus, Ohio
  8. Hi All, As mentioned, here are more photos showing fedco no., right side engine, detail about mechanical fuel pump placement, detail about the pump itself, and also left side engine. My Series 65 does appear to be of fairly late manufacture. Standard Catalog of Chrysler (John Lee, 1990) states engine numbers for Series 65 run from P175001 to P241336. Mine is P227193. Fedco no., DP403D, also indicates fairly late manufacture, April 1929, which gives plausibility to Vintage Ben's idea about on-line upgrades during production--something that Chrysler (always ahead on engineering) was known to do. Standard Catalog of Chrysler--frustratingly short on details--states mechanical fuel pumps for 1930 Series 70 Chrysler, but says nothing about 1930 Series 66. If mechanical fuel pumps could be confirmed for Series 66--or for other late production 1929 Series 65, that would be the clincher. If the engine layout and fuel pump location were the same between my 1929 Series 65 and succeeding Chrysler engines, would it then be worthwhile for me to search for a replacement fuel pump among those models? P.S. Thanks to Artificer Tom for info about the availability of pump cores--although, per your advice, I could not get a look at the cam. P.P.S. You will notice the reconfigured intake manifold to accommodate downdraft carburettor, also starter solenoid. The temperature gauge is in Spanish--in degrees celsius. The voltage cut-out on the generator, and the custom air-cleaner (not shown) are embossed 'Argentina.'
  9. Hi All, Thanks to everyone for your helpful feedback. So, the plot thickens... I will post photos of the engine tomorrow--to help determine if it is a true '29 engine or a '36 Plymouth. Attached is a photo of the engine number (and one of the car itself). Thanks Hwellens for the photo from your archive. I just acquired the car last week, and drove it a bit, but encountered what appear to be fuel feed problems--even with electric pump. My thought was to return to mechanical fuel feed. More later. Yours truly
  10. My 1929 Chrysler Model 65, engine no. P227193, fedco no. DP403D, has a mechanical fuel pump. Is that correct? All the AACA Forum threads seem to show only vacuum type fuel pumps. Also, assuming mechanical fuel pump is correct, can anyone point me to a replacement pump or rebuild kit? The pump I have has no manufacturer name--only 'B.C' embossed on top. So in a parts search, I don't know how to describe it, nor do I know anything about possible interchange. Also, do rebuild kits--if available--include the activator arm that rolls off the cam--to power the pump? It appears that a previous owner decided to convert to electric pump by removing the activator arm but leaving the pump in place to cover the hole in the side of the block. Thanks for any guidance.
  11. Does anyone know when Chrysler products--Chyrslers, Plymouths, Dodges, and DeSotos--switched from externally contracting bands to internally expanding shoes on their drum brakes? Langworth & Norbye (1985) The Complete History of Chrysler... say Chryslers went to shoes in 1929, but do not mention whether that was true across the board for other Chrysler products. Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...