Stude17

The method I would use to reclaim these parts is to build up the worn surface with nickel bronze and resurface in a lathe. You could reverse them if you so desire. I would not use anything harder than the parent material so that this part wears and not the grooved collar on the shaft as it would be easier to replace/or resurface these items than the collar.

I would say definately a Studebaker. The little cover plate just in front of the rear wheel on the running board valance is a good indicator. http://significantcars.com/cars/1916studebaker/fullsize.html

Good explanation and diagram Mike. Clearance between the "eyeside" of the impeller and the pump housing as well as end float of the impeller shaft within the pump housing I believe is critical. The shaft needs to be located within the housing so that it does not float more than necessary. I would leave the actual clearance of the impeller and end float to the pump re-builder. One of the things I would start with is measuring how much actual float there is in the pump shaft of the assembled pump in it's current state.

I would identify it as a 1916 Series 17 car and judging by the radiator it is a 6 cylinder.

I would suggest that the internal clearances of this water pump have been altered when the end cover was replaced and they need to be corrected. If I am correct then the pump will do what it is designed to do quite efficiently.

The water pump cover plate you used as a replacement for the cracked original does not look identical to me in that the original has a flat machined area for the impeller to seat against wheras the replacement does not. I would reinstall the original end plate to see if this could be your problem. Just my observation.

I agree with DI456 that Studebaker had very good Babbit bearings and that your knock may be a loose piston wrist pin (Gudgeon pin). If it were my engine I would remove the head to see if there is any evidence of the pin damaging the bore. Loose pins can damage the bore to the extent that it will require sleeving to save the block. https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fgrassrootsmotorsports.com%2Fforum%2Fgrm%2Fwrist-pin-walk%2F179274%2Fpage1%2F&psig=AOvVaw0mpMYORk9vDHiMccKIrWcu&ust=1630229058409000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAgQjRxqFwoTCNDU6eq00_ICFQAAAAAdAAAAABAQ

Although the gauge might read 0-30 psi by the way it is calibrated I would suggest it is designed to show the range 0-10 psi very accurately and would be used on equipment ( engine supercharger?) to measure pressure in this range.

A vehicle fitted with a supercharger?

Yes the decayed timber is certainly a problem. Have you considered something like a soft top ute? The chassis shouldn't need shortening for this and I'm sure you could fabricate the wooden back and brackets without too much trouble.

Well that certainly explains its current condition Oldcar with only 42,500 genuine miles. It was a dirt track racer for most of those miles.

In circa 1917 right hand drive Studebakers that hole is for the throttle shaft to cross over from driver's side to the carburetor on the passenger side. Not sure how the 1925 Studebaker Special Six engine linkages are set up but I would suggest that is what it is for. The hole would not be used on left hand drive vehicles.

A 1917 Velie and some interesting background of the company. https://journal.classiccars.com/2017/02/15/deere-car-not-farm-implement/

I don't believe these are Studebaker. From memory the mounting stubs for Studebaker were threaded and had a nut.

From what I can see the type of fuel he is getting will be the least of his problems (and probably others). A 1,000 litre pod filled with fuel on a very light trailer secured with one tie down and sloping to the back is a disaster waiting to happen in my opinion. I have no doubt he will fill it to the very top.

Good call.

Looks like a circa 1910 EMF 30 to me. https://rmsothebys.com/en/auctions/hf19/hershey/lots/r0050-1910-e-m-f-model-30-five-passenger-touring/759576 Edit: Too many hub bolts and different bonnet louvres so not an EMF.

I agree that it is a spreader rather than a compressor. The only possible use I can see for it is being inserted between the cam follower and valve tip to lift the valve to its maximum on side valve engines. With the head removed this would enable de-carbonising of the valve and port without removing the valve. Probably just as easy to remove the valve and that is why these tools are not that common. Just my thought on what it was used for.

Have you checked your universal joints recently? On many vehicles these receive little or no attention until it is too late causing all sorts of problems. I did see in another thread that you changed to modern joints some time ago.

Does your vehicle have a "Hill Holder" ? If it does could it be malfunctioning and holding the brakes on? Just a thought.

Does your Studebaker have vacuum wipers? If it does you could try disconnecting and plugging the vacuum line to them and see how it drives? The wiper motor/system may have a vacuum leak and need an overhaul.

1955 Chrysler New Yorker. https://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photo-chrysler-dashboard-vintage-car-new-yorker-convertible-image43544794

SC38DLS if after doing all of the repairs/replacements/adjustments you have outlined and you are confident that they have been done correctly and the problem persists I would go back to checking for vacuum leaks including the inlet manifold gasket.

To me they have the look of part of a 1920's vehicle spare wheel carrier.

Depending on the cubic capacity I would say it is a 1932 Singer 18-6 or a 12-6. Possibly a one year only model.