Buicksplus

Tishabet: Detach the field wire from the generator. Ground the field terminal on the generator to a good solid ground on the engine -- use some alligator clip leads to do this. This removes the regulator from the field circuit. If the generator charges now it is working properly and your problem is with the regulator current or voltage regulator. With the engine stopped measure the resistance between the regulator field terminal (keep the field wire detached from the generator) and ground. It should be zero. If it is not, you have a problem in the regulator. It could have dirty contacts, I have seen this happen even with a brand new unit. Clean them with 400 grit paper and some contact cleaner. Or, it may not be properly grounded. If your generator does not work with the field terminal grounded, check the voltage on the generator output terminal with the engine running and that field still grounded. If it is well under 6V, you have a problem with your generator. If it is well over 6V, then your cutout in the regulator could be the problem. Good luck and keep searching... Bill.

The upper lights are definitely 24 or 25 Buick, see for example http://www.buickcarclub.org.au/features/Willis%20D/1924_Buick_Front_Willis_D.jpg The 26 and 27 Buicks have similar headlamp rims, but the fender cross bar goes under the lights rather than through them

FYI The Buick Delco coil fits on the generator housing which is a cylindrical surface. There is a ballast resistor on the corner of your coil, I have several of these coils, but the resistor is usually gone or broken. It is a wound resistor on some sort of ceramic base. I see a lot of 20's Buicks at shows, not many of them have these coils on them now, but that is what they came with originally. Bill.

Larry: These are great suggestions. I certainly agree with Tom about the problems with the AC "Autopulse" pump (this inexpensive 6V pump is made under many different names, sold by JC Whitney and others). My 39 Buick vaporlocked badly until I removed this fractious little pump. It did better on the mechanical diaphram pump alone. My experience with the 6V aux fan is not as favorable. This fan is not very powerful and may actually restrict air flow at high speeds. I had better luck installing an RV flex blade fan right on my waterpump hub. These fans are available at autoparts stores and they move much more air than the original Buick unit. I might add that if you get the fuel system working right, your Buick can probably run reasonably well (not perfectly) with the engine in the 200 F range. Mine did OK in that range, though it was always hard to start when hot. It does not hurt to check for exhaust leaks into the cooling system (bad head gasket or head cracks) and flow test the radiator. Any good radiator or repair shop can check these problems for reasonable cost. Make sure the basics are OK before adding a lot of gimicks to fix the problem. Bill.

Ray: Looks like my center hole is 3 1/16. Since the wheel is aligned by that center hole, I cannot use them. It's amazing that GM back then made different wheels for Buick, Chevy, LaSalle, 60S, etc. Bill.

Do you have pictures? What is the diameter of the center hole and the bolt circle? I am wondering if they will fit my 40 LaSalle, probably uses the same wheels as your 60S. Could you clarify what's wrong with the hub cap clips? Thanks in advance for your response. Bill S

VMCCA Friends: I regret to report the death of Buck Shaver. Buck was in the VMCCA for years and participated in many national tours. He served as Technical Vice President a few years back. Buck was severely burned in a garage accident about a month ago. I don't know the details, but it involved a gasoline fire in one of his collector cars. His tragic death is a reminder of the need to be careful in our hobby. Many of us spend countless hours alone in garages and it's easy to overlook the dangers lurking around our old cars. My sympathy to his family, Buck will be very much missed in the VMCCA and Colorado Springs. Bill S Albuquerque, NM

I concur that you need to have the radiator checked and cleaned or re-cored. Any decent radiator shop can do this. While the radiator is off, try backflushing the block. Remove the thermostat and connect a hose to the outlet neck. Use it to blast out rust flakes and debris from the block. The big change in temperature between the engine (220) and radiator outlet (130) indicates that the flow through the radiator is very slow. Normally there is only a 5 to 10 degree difference between radiator inlet and outlet. I had a 39 Limited that benefited tremendously from a larger RV fan on it. The stock fan is skinny blades and does not move a lot of air -- compared to that RV fan. That and a clean radiator finally solved my cooling problems with that straight eight. It's a good idea to check for head leaks too. Most mechanics have a sniffer to detect exhaust gases in the radiator. Leaks like this add put plenty of extra heat into the coolant -- especially at higher speeds when the engine is under load. Good luck

Definitely not 28, they used a three element lamp (stop/backup/tail) that year. It is a 27 and probably earlier (24?). I have a 27 with a lamp like this, there are openings in the housing to light up the logo and license plate when the tail lamp is on. These cars had no brake lamp, just this tiny little running light. There may have been subtle year to year variations in sculpting on the bezel. The sculpting matches the 24-27 radiator shell shape.

These look to me like 39 or 40 LaSalle series 50 housings, though they appear a little short. Hard to tell without some sort of scale. The only difference between the 39 and 40 series 50 is inside the bulb holder (not seen in your pix). The 40 has two separate bulbs, the 39 one. The 40 series 52 has a completely diffeerent style lamp.

BJM makes it sound like CCCA is under attack from the outside by ACLU or CCCA wannabes who want to take over the club. Many people who post on this forum are long time members, potential members or ex-members of the CCCA. Is it OK for them to have comments about the direction the club is taking? Thanks for reminding us, BJM, that the CCCA can choose any car it wants to sit on its list. As if we didn't know. I think that vigorous discussion about classification is interesting and fun, I hope it continues. And I hope CCCA leadership might read some of the posts and maybe adjust its thinking now and then. Others feel the same way, this forum is usually dead until someone posts a comment about classification. ps. Quite a few years ago CCCA did mount a costly legal campaign to get folks to stop using the term Classic in a generic way for cars. It ended meekly with nothing more than the "Full Classic" trademark. The club found it was an impossible task to stop folks from using the term classic. This was long before Hemmings Classic Car was published.

Application had been made in the past for the all series 80 Buicks using Grandpa's argument. I remember it was rejected, I was not pleased with that outcome. Perhaps the earlier application was too broad, I think it included all series 80 Buicks, 1931-1939. Also, like the T&C, maybe one should try, try and try again. I have not done it, but I think applying for CCCA status for a model series is not that easy, you really need to want to get it done to go through the trouble. Bill.

Dave: I agree with your position on the T&C but I must say your pictures have made this thread very difficult to read on my computer! I suggest you reduce your pictures to 500X500 pixels or so, they will be smaller and easier to see without scrolling in every direction. I can't add much more to this discussion except to say that even undisputed traditional "Full Classics" have a wide spectrum of impressiveness. If you compare a senior Packard or Cadillac limo to a Dietrich convertible sedan, you could argue that the limo does not belong in the same room. Yet there they are, and many active members own and drive those lower end cars to CCCA events. Relax and enjoy those few T&C's you might now see at a CCCA event. They are hardly mundane and most folks will enjoy them thoroughly, 6 cylinders or not. Bill

This thread is funny, seeing folks creating rules and regulations for what qualifies as a classic, even though I doubt this is what the founders of the club did or intended. Weren't they wisely vague? I think they said the club was for "fine and unusual" cars. That would include just about anything the club members wanted on the list, certainly not just eight or twelve cylinder, expensive cars. Note the Lincoln Continental is similar to the T&C, it was a specific model built on a middle priced, non-classic chassis.

Dave: The 1934 LaSalle was rejected by the classification committee when I was in the club. CCCA passed over the 80 series Buicks, even though they are essentially the same as the "1940 Limited 80" which is a Classic. Other borderline classics might be all of the Lincoln Zephyrs, all Chrysler Imperials, and all previously excluded Cadillacs. I never had much problem with 6 cylinder Auburns either. Packard 120? Sure, it's a relatively cheap production car but fine and unusual these days. Based on past history, any member proposing to include these series would be wasting their time. I think most of these cars have been proposed and rejected before. I know that none of these cars are comparable to the big classics like senior Packard 12's, Pierce Arrows or Cad 16's. But they compare fairly well with the entry level end of the spectrum that has populated the CCCA list for years. Real post war classics? Wouldn't that be fun! I can't tell CCCA how to run its classification committee. I am only saying how the direction the club was going led me to not renew my membership. Who knows, maybe many other members joined for the same reasons I left. Merry Christmas!

Dave Mitchell's point about the lack of debate about classification is true -- and this is what has disturbed me about the CCCA. With few exceptions most suggestions for expanding or revising the CCCA list are met with LOL. I was a member of the CCCA for many years, and then I sold my classic. I had a couple of borderline classics that I thought might be accepted someday. Indeed, the club seemed then to regularly name new production cars to their list. I finally let my membership lapse when I realised that the club was getting more rigid and they were unlikly to expand their list in any major way. I could see no point to staying in a club without owning a car that I could use to participate in club events. Obviously, the CCCA is a great club and its members are going to guide the club as they like. It's exclusivity is probably OK to most members, but it does create a problem for some potential new and previous members.

I think the T & C represents a long overdue tiny crack in the glass ceiling called "The Classic Era". There was another crack in the glass floor with the admission of some pre-1925 classics. I have never understood the notion of The Classic Era being defined as rigidly existing from 1925 to 42. What happened in 1925 that started the era? What happened in 1942 that ended it? Did extravagence, grandiosity, and quality in car design and production end after WWII? I don't think so. Seems to me there are plenty of candidates built outside the classic era that meet the spirit and quality of the traditiional classic cars built in 1925-42. The T&C is just one of them. Bravo to the CCCA for taking this small step, I hope they open up and take more like it.

Sorry Ed, but I respectfully disagree. I left CCCA quite a few years ago partly because I felt the classification committee had become calcified and rigid. No sweat CCCA, you aren't going to be swamped with Chrysler T&C's, there aren't enough of them. And I don't expect them now to approve the Ford Sportsman. If they go further and consider updating and expanding the current prewar list along with including other important postwar classics, I just might renew my membership.

This is certainly a great loss. The depth and durability of her work was evident in all her writings, going back so many years. Fortunately, much was published and will endure for many years to come. Hopefully, car clubs, museums, and individuals will step forward to ensure these materials are archived appropriately. Thanks to Ms. Kimes for all those well written, edited and thoroughly researched articles, and my sympathies to her survivors. Bill S Albuquerque

FYI, here are pictures of the markings Bruce is curious about. What do the numbers mean?

Taco: Most folks who drive these cars plug up the manifold heating system, all it does is enhance vapor lock. With today's volatile fuels, it is not needed. I also removed the butterfly valve in the main exhaust outlet on the front of the engine -- even when this valve is open, it restricts the exhaust and reduces power. I saved all the original parts, they can be put back for show if necessary. If your car is backfiring, the mixture is probably way too lean. Open that needle valve on the bottom a half turn or more to richen the mixture. Also if your air valve flapper is not closing completely, (as per your earlier post) that will also give you a lean mixture. See if you can get it to seat properly. Bill, Albuquerque, NM

Taco: Here is a picture showing how that linkage on the power valve connects to the throttle. There should be pin on the throttle crank just made for that linkage: I note you're from the Netherlands. We had a nephew who lived in Eindhoven for several years. Loved it, but he is now back in the States. Good luck and good driving.

Taco: Those cracks in that flapper are probably no problem. You can safely repair them with JB Weld or similar epoxy. What is important is that the flapper valve moves smoothly and fits well to the throttle body when closed -- no sticking or major gaps. The plunger you talk about is a needle that is lifted by a short linkage to the throttle -- it is sort of a power valve, designed to richen the mixture when the throttle opens. If you don't have this valve, I suggest you plug the jet in the bottom somehow or she may run too rich. The two nuts are cleanouts below various jets in the bowl. Suggest you remove them and make sure the jets are clean and open. They are probably OK, your carb looks very clean. The main mixture adjustments is the lower needle with that wheel on it. Begin with it by closing the valve, then opening it until the notch lines up with that post on the carb. The other adjustment is the air valve, controlled by that knurled knob on the throttle body. Open this knob so the end is flush with the brass spring clip that rides in the knurls. If all the jets are open, close the choke and you can probably get the engine started. Marvels like to run rich, just crank open that lower valve and crank in the air valve if she needs more gas. You really have to get the car on the road to set the mixture right. Don't expect a super smooth idle with these Marvels, they sort of hunt about like a hit or miss tractor. If they are too lean the engine will run hot under load and she'll backfire a lot. If too rich, she won't rev up smartly and you'll get a lot of black smoke in the exhaust. Hope this helps, Good luck and good Marvelling! Bill.

Dale: I suggest you check out the Antique Studebaker Club They specialize in prewar Studebakers. If you go to their annual meet you will probably get a chance to see several Presidents of the same vintage and talk to their owners. That seems to be the best way to gather info on old cars. Although the President is a full classic, I have not seen many at CCCA events. These are fine cars and few seem to be around anymore. Glad yours has fallen into good hands. Good luck!

Thanks for all the guesses. I don't know what it is either, but it is similar to this 1930 Renault RY2. FYI, the original picture was taken at one of the early Barrett Jackson auctions in Phoenix, sometime in the 70's.