Jump to content

Paterson Chris

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

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

Paterson Chris's Achievements

500+ Points

500+ Points (2/7)

  • Collaborator

Recent Badges



  1. I think I'll probably pass on it then because, yes, I would be inclined to remove the (California) top without putting it back on again. And once they become separated, the top would just become another obstacle taking up space in the garage and gathering dust. So I'll hold out for something else. Thanks for enlightening me.
  2. Oh, I'm not discounting its historic worth. I would just like the conventional folding alternative as well in order to get the true, open car convertible experience. I sold my open topped, name sake '23 Paterson during the worst of this last recession a few years ago and have regretted it ever since.
  3. Hello all -- I'm interested in the possible purchase of a '24 Flint E55 touring and though the condition of the car on the whole is very good, it currently wears a one-piece, non-folding, removable top instead of a folding one like I associate with most touring cars from this era. If I were to acquire it, I'd like to return it to the folding style of canvas top, but, am reluctant to put in an offer until I can get an idea of how hard a folding top assembly would be to acquire for it. Is the framework and top bows considered unobtanium or are there still enough cars extant where the odds are good that I might find an assembly that would work? Any thoughts? Thanks -- Chris
  4. Check the McMaster-Carr website. I bought my material from them when I re-did the rear brakes (external contracting) on my former '22 Paterson. No shortage of types/ varieties. Worked out great with no difficulties in riveting.
  5. The real story behind me posting this is because: 1. It seemed like a good, cheap, fool-proof and physically unobtrusive idea. 2. The idiots at Fedex have taken over two weeks -- and counting -- to get the damn part to me from a Kansas supply house. Chris
  6. I posted a thread a few weeks ago asking about fuel regulator recommendations in order to lessen the pressure on an aftermarket electric fuel pump installed on my 20s car. Some useful replies -- thanks. Then it occurred to me that maybe I could do without one: Simply install a "T" fitting at the outlet so fuel can continue to the carb and likewise also be routed back to the inlet of the fuel pump via another "T". As the short length of tubing going back to the inlet would be of a smaller diameter, and because we know fluids always takes the path of least resistance, there should still be an adequate pressure head at the carb. So, in effect, a restrictive bypass. I've always worked as either an electrician or a machinist -- never a plumber. And yet, before I purchase some tubing and "T" fittings, I'll ask if this idea seems to have merit? Thanks -- Chris
  7. Chris and Nickelroadster, thanks for the replies. So far I'm going to lean with either purchasing the 12 volt fuel pump or, I see Holley makes a simple regulator (that I haven't seen any bad reviews for) part number 12-804 that has an adjustable output of 1-4psi. About $30. I previously tried using a "Spectre" brand regulator that had the same specs but it was junk. Never worked from day one -- even after opening it up, checking parts and re-assembling. I thought mine might have been a fluke dud unit but I see here on the 'net that complaints about them are pretty common. Which has sort of turned me off to the idea of using a regulator in favor of the low pressure pump but as Holley has a good name, maybe I'll go with them. I might be able to hide some/ all of the works inside the shell of the old vacuum pump too -- but only if I can creatively do it with no modification of the original housing. Thanks -- Chris
  8. Some time ago I bypassed the old Stewart vacuum tank on my '22 Paterson (it would crap out at the most inopportune times) in favor of a generic electric fuel pump -- that I think I got from NAPA. Very quiet and works fine but the 8psi it puts out is a little too much for the carb float assembly to handle. So...can someone recommend a decent and not too expensive fuel regulator that I can install between my fuel pump and carb? It only needs to drop the pressure from 8psi to 1 or 2psi. I'm seeing many listings on the NAPA auto parts website but nothing specific that jumps out. Surely there must be other guys on here who've done the same? Thanks -- Chris
  9. Thanks Rusty -- Will this also make for more than normal carbon/ soot build-up in the combustion chamber? Or if the carb mixture is set right is it then no more of an issue than if one were to use just regular pump gas only? Chris
  10. Holy cow, this has been an eye-opening thread and I'm going to pass it on to our AMCA (motorcycle) chapter members to get their responses. If I'm correct in reading this then I take it it would be to my car's advantage -- '23 Paterson with a 4.5:1 compression ratio -- to dilute the regular pump gas with diesel or kerosene in proportion to its compression ratio? It has seemed to run hotter than it should. Also, if I go ahead and start blending (or maybe adulterating would be a better word) my fuel, how will this affect my driving at higher elevations? I live at 3000ft and regularly take my car on old dirt mining roads up to 7000ft. Any personal experience here? At 45, I've been wrenching on old cars and pre-War motorcycles since my late teens and I'm almost embarrassed to write that this is the first time I've ever come across a thread about mixing fuel with kerosene/ diesel in this way. But then I've also gone on innumerable rides with the majority riding pre-War stuff -- of very low compression -- and never saw anyone "mix-it-up" when we stopped to refuel either. Thanks for posting this. Chris
  11. The Indian "Prince" was a single cylinder model motorcycle made around 1926-28 that would have used this engine. Displacement was 30 cu in. (500cc). Was kind of a dud in the marketplace at the time as the earlier twin cylinder Scouts could be had for not much more. A complete and running example of this engine would bring you around $1500 -- give or take -- at one of the summer AMCA flea markets. If you know the engine # that would narrow it down too. Chris
  12. Moriarty? What is the name of this car wrecking yard? I tried Googling something but no luck. I sometimes make trips back east from L.A. so I'm always looking for an interesting excuse to break up the monotony of that drive. Chris
  13. Jan -- I don't want to see the original muffler rust out but now that I've disassembled it and see how easy it would be to rebuild it over and over maybe I will keep it on there. I'm puzzled as to why the inlet of the muffler is almost twice as large as the outlet (tail pipe) though. Seems very dinky and thus, restrictive? Layden -- I'm going to look again at the motor mount bolts, see if they're castellated, and possibly loosen them enough in the way that you describe. I wonder if my 1925 copy of Dyke's will have anything to say on this also. It's been my main source of reference. All -- It just seems to me that with the general state of the roads as they were back then and the way engines were secured to their respective chassis' (allowing for, to my perception, almost no movement) that there would have been lots of stresses applied to different parts. On the other hand as a guy who's never owned a car older than a '36 Pontiac coupe maybe I'm underestimating the robustness of the car chassis' of that era? Chris
  • Create New...