joe_padavano

I should add that the correctly calibrated OEM carb for a 1967 Riv with 430 would be Qjet number 7027240.

Every single carb that GM used had a unique identifier number stamped on it. With very, very few exceptions, GM used a specific carb calibration for every application and every model year. Rebuilders cannot practically stock that large a variety, so at best they stock carbs with compromise calibrations that are supposedly good enough to be used on multiple years and models. If GM thought one calibration could be used across that many applications, they would have done it to save inventory cost. In the case of your 1967 Quadrajet, the original carb had a round stamped tag imbedded in the driver's side of the carb at the front. This tag had the carb number on it.

To add to Frank's post, these are the key blanks referenced on that page. These are 1934-35 Buick only, according to the 1939 catalog. The Key Number in the table would be the code stamped on the key and possibly the lock. The L and R numbers are the depth of the cuts for each of the three cuts on each side of the key. Note the Depth Table in the upper LH corner of the page. These cuts are made from left to right on the key, with the leftmost position being the one closest to the head of the key blank. For example, key 5500 from your table would have cuts 1-3-2 progressing from head to tip on one side and cuts 4-3-4 from head to tip on the other side.

First, what year Riv? Second, what "replacement"? If this is a rebuilder carb, be sure it is actually correct for your particular application. Most are not as they are one-size-fits-many calibrations. GM had specific carb numbers and calibrations for every year and engine combo. They typically are not the same from year-to-year.

I would start by getting under the car, removing the dust cover under the flexplate, and visually inspecting the teeth on the ring gear. Have someone rotate the motor by hand as you inspect. If there are damaged teeth, then you need a replacement.

^^^THIS. "Replaced carb" with what? A correct, identical replacement? A generic rebuilder Frankencarb? An aftermarket Edelbrock that's calibrated for a 350 Chevy? Hard to help without more info.

Does it look something like this? P/N 382931.

With or without tilt?

Yup, the camber curve on the stock 64-72 A-body cars is just awful. I can't speak to the suspension design on the early Riv, however.

I'll add that I've owned five Olds 307s from 1984-86 and all of them have weak valve seals.

Looks like 73-77 A-body. Does the mounting bracket have an asymmetric bolt pattern at the firewall?

Better photos of the current booster would be helpful. It looks like it might be a 1977-up Impala/Caprice booster. Does it bolt flat to the firewall or is there a bracket?

Four digit date codes were used from 1974-onward, so the carb is at least 1974 vintage. 0341 would be the 34th day of a year that ended in "1", so likely 1981. Note that if it's a replacement carb, it would have the date of manufacture, not the date of application.

The B10 blanks were used back to 1936 (35?). Note that the key blank blades are exactly the same for B10 (octagon) and B11 (pear) keys. The only difference is the shape of the head. You can cut a B10 blank to fit a B11 lock and vice versa.

The one with the tabs is the Model 15

I have multiple Model 14 and Model 15 key cutters. I love them. While I have only used them for GM keys so far, I have the carriages for other manufacturer's keys as well. The tapered slots in the disk allow you to gauge a key to find the cut depth to allow you to make a fresh key from a worn one. The Curtis code book has several pages on how to adjust and tune the Model 14. This made a huge difference in the quality of the keys I was making. Also be aware that the highest quality key blanks are much tougher to cut, and when you get to the last cut at the very tip of the key, the carriage can move out of place, causing a mis-cut. I will clamp the carriage in place with a vice grip or something similar to preclude that from happening.

He's not changing the camber SETTING, he's trying to change the camber CURVE. The camber curve is the change in camber angle over the travel of the suspension. When cornering, the car body rolls to the outboard side of the curve, compressing the front suspension on that side and increasing the load on that tire. To improve cornering, the tire wants to remain vertical relative to the pavement as the body rolls. This means that the camber curve needs to move the top of the tire inboard relative to the body as the suspension compresses. Unfortunately most stock GM suspensions from the 1960s do pretty much the opposite of that, hindering cornering. Tall ball joints (or alternately tall spindles) change the rotation center of the front suspension, improving the camber curve. And as I noted above, tall ball joints typically require excess shims to get back to the correct camber SETTING at stock ride height, which is why most applications need shorter upper control arms as a result.

While I'll admit that I don't know the details for a 64 Riv, on most GM cars the use of tall ball joints or spindles requires shortened upper control arms to allow the camber to be set to spec without excessive shim stacks that will put the cross shaft retaining bolts in bending. To be honest, I suspect you'd feel more benefit from increasing front caster.

"Tossed them" is the usual problem. These were paper records and there was zero reason to pay to store documents like this for 50 or 75 years, especially when the cars they referred to were mostly scrapped decades ago.

Exactly what I was trying to say, and as Bloo points out, your "electromechanical" flasher is the bimetallic strip style that requires a specific current draw to heat up the strip.

Coming back in late, as it appears that you are on the right path. The mechanical flashers are just a self-resetting circuit breaker. If the resistance in the system (which includes the wire length in addition to the bulbs) isn't sufficient to generate enough heat in the bimetallic strip in the flasher, they won't flash. I was going to suggest that an electronic flasher that uses a timing circuit independent of current draw rather than a bimetallic strip might be a better choice.

Using a hub and drum as a fixture for holding a wheel and tire when balancing the latter is not what the OP is asking about. Also, the question wasn't about whether or not the drum could be balanced but if it needed to be balanced. Every replacement drum I've ever seen has balance weights installed at the factory. That SHOULD negate the need to balance it again on the hub. Obviously any runout or imprecision in balancing can cause vibration. Once the new drum is installed on the hub and the lugs pressed in, one CAN then check the balance on that assembly and correct if needed. The requirement to do this depends on the sensitivity of one's "butt accelerometer" and the quality of manufacture of the replacement drum.