nickelroadster

Still wondering what the heck is this thing. I think I can read 5 or .5 mfd, 100 vots DC on the bottom. That would indicate it was a capacitor of some sort. It also looks kind of hefty for a capacitor. Maybe it is some kind of contraption to increase your gas mileage by an astronomical amount.

Radio suppression devices were not that common in 1932. It could quite possibly be a capacitor but it doesn't look Delco which it should be on an Olds.

Has anyone decided what the item first asked about is? Is it a resistor or a capacitor?

Some early cars had a resistor to keep the battery from running down if you left the ignition on. On Delco system this was a ceramic disc wound with a coil of wire and covered with a metal cover. This was a totally different reason for having a resistor than what the previous poster said about twelve volt systems with resistors to save the points from burning up.

Problem with it being a capacitor is they did not have much in the way of AM radios in 1932. Might it possibly be the capacitor for the ignition? Look at the rest of the wiring.and see if it has a more modern condenser installed. Agree with the external resistor being better on a six volt car.

Surely someone has a guess or two what this pin may have been awarded for. Come on guys, someone can make a wild guess here.

Just make sure that you understand that different grades of bolts have different values. I would use something in between grade 2 and grade five values.

I too will be most interested in what anyone has to offer on this subject.

I would suggest brass or better yet, modern cunifer brake line tubing as it bends so easily (ezibend by Brakequip is a good brand). Copper tubing tends to work harden and then crack which is especially bad on the fuel system and just messy on oil lines. Easily bent brass tubing is a little harder to find. Obviously if you flare the tubing you need to use flare fittings. Pipe or compression fitting are also ok but I would use what was there originally. The tubing does not handle as much pressure as brake lines so single flaring is perfectly fine.

Thanks for the guess. I am trying to think of what honor would be for an employee of an auto co. I wonder if 5M does not mean five thousand. Might it not mean something for charity like raising $5000 for some charity? Need some more guesses.

I aquired this pin at a Marmon club muster. It was sent to the club by the granddaughter of the recipient. She told us that he was an employee of the Marmon company and did not reallly know what it was. It says Marmon honor award 1926 with 5m in the middle. Does anyone have a clue or even a guess as to what the award might have been given for. Don't be afraid to make a wild guess as I have heard a few but none really seems to strike home.

You are right that the 1915 has more continuity from the hood to the cowl but the cowl still flares out and can be seen with a frontal view. The 15 also has more hood louvers than the 13 and 14 but that is something I can't see in the fuzzy picture. Are there no more views from the movie to see?

Use of a sealer like west's or quik poly will give whatever topcoat you have a decent "tooth" to grab on to and you shouldn't have any peeling problems if it is prepped right. Marine spar varnish is perfectly fine although you would probably have to re coat on occasion. I believe Tinindian drives the hell out of his car and you may not have to do it as frequently as he. A good catalyzed urethane clearcoat should last much longer although it will be more expensive to purchase. A marine varnish can also be applied with a brush whereas I would not use a brush with an automotive clear.

The frontal view could either be a model 32 or 48. My choice is a 48 from the apparent side view although it is rather grainy. The model 48 had a longer wheelbase at 144" whereas the model 32 had a 120" wheelbase. The side view looks to have a substantial wheelbase and I think it is more like the 48. I really can't see much of the cowl to make a judgement there. The hood on the 1915 48 flares out towards the cowl and that is something else that cannot be seen well. My frontal view of a 1915 48 does not show cowl lamps but that does not mean that they couldn't be had that way. What can you see about the cowl that makes you think it is a 1913 or 1914? I can see a difference between 14-14 and 15 cowls on my side views but cannot see it on the site pictures. Are there any more views from the picture? That would sure help.

My vote is for a 1915 Marmon model 48. The radiator shape and construction details, the front fenders and one piece windshield are correct for a model 48 The car that is labeled Moyer also looks suspiciously like a Marmon with the hood latches, number of hood louvers, one piece windshield and even seat profile matching up with a 48. It wouldn't have been the first time something was mislabeled

I agree with the folks who have suggested a tired restoration that needs a little help would be a good way to get started. Barn find are generally as you find them and you would probably be better to pass them up at this point and put them off until you have a little experience under your belt.

I have had very good luck with both Kwik Poly and smiths clear penetrating epoxy sealer. smith's is quite slow and takes 24 hours to cure and can be painted with your choice of paints as it provides a good tooth for paint to grab on to. Kwick Poly works equally well but is not as good for large areas due to it's rapid cure rate. I suspect that Smith's would penetrate a little deeper because of the slow cure time Both work well under an automotive clear coat which will be more durable than a varnish. If you are going to paint the wheels any of the automotive epoxy primers will work well and some will provide some body that will fill the grain of the wood. It is almost impossible to seal wood where it doesn't breath somewhat. A sealer would slow down the breathing and prevent the wood from drying out completely and cracking. Any of the sealers is going to be different than the old days where if your wheels dried out too much you drove the car into the creek and let the wheels absorb water to swell and tighten up.

No apology needed as what I am saying is that it happens so frequently I just suggested something to cut down on the moderators having to chime in all the time. Nothing personal to you and you were definitely not the first person nor the last to not follow the posting rules. As long as corrections are made, we are happy. We do like to have first time users. I did not mean to make you feel unwelcome.

I think that you are still misunderstanding my statements. In general, an internal combustion engine will be more efficient at higher temps than most of our old cars run at. This is theoretical and rather general. In practice it is only true up to a point. In addition most cars were not designed with this in mind so it in no way means that we should try to run the cars at a higher temp. For the first thirty years or so cars did not have thermostats and were often only marginal at cooling. Sometimes we can put a thermostat in an old car and it improves the operation. Other times it doesn't work very well because the cooling system has all it can handle running full time. The lack of a thermostat provided poor regulation of the temperature. One day the car might get too hot , the next day not hot enough leading to deposits and combustion products in the oil. When cars were designed with thermostats, they began to be designed with higher capacity cooling systems that were only operational intermittently. This provided a more stable temperature and better running. They began to use pressurized cooling systems long before there were any pollution regulations. This was because engines were more efficient running at higher temperatures and with a greater differential, more heat could be shed. You are correct that EPA made the cars run hotter but that was several years later. Cars also run more efficiently with a compression ratio of ten to one than they do at four to one. This does not mean that we should change all our old cars to a ten to one compression ratio. The real world has many other things that effect how we do things. I will still maintain that the Evans can transfer as much heat as water, it only needs a higher temperature to do it. Water is more efficient at transferring heat and will reach equilibrium (where heat produced equals heat lost) at a lower temperature than the Evans. Evans will reach equilibrium at a higher temp but unless it is really overwhelmed, will transfer just as much heat as water. If it did not then the system would keep retaining heat until the engine quit. I think that we basically agree that due to the characteristics of Evans, water is a better choice for you. You might even be better running water with just anticorrosion additive rather than a fifty-fifty water antifreeze mixture. I have enjoyed the discussion.

It must get old reminding people to include these items. Maybe the moderators should edit the sticky for buyers and sellers to have large red letters or something like that to get people's attention. Just a thought.

JW, Sorry about mentioning your carbs. I just remembered it had to do with your fuel system and fuel vaporization. You misunderstand what I am saying about heat transfer. Given equal temperature, water certainly is better at transferring heat. At higher temps where water would be boiling and not transferring heat, Evans would be more efficient. At 250 degrees Evans is still working. Heat transfer is going to depend on a temperature differential. At 250 degrees coolant temperature and say 130 degree underhood temp the Evans is transferring more heat than water at say 205 degrees and 130 degree underhood temps. 120 degrees differential as opposed to 75. Generally the Evans will transfer as much heat as water but will need a higher temp to reach the same equilibrium. I rather agree with your last statement that Evans may be useful in certain cases but not in yours. I actually have used Evans with no problems except that if you have any kind of leaks at all it gets terribly expensive. It is not that muchtrouble to change your coolant every couple of years.

Notice the discussion on Evans in the regular forum, The Evans may not be up to the job with your car. I would still check all the other parameters such as timing, crud in the cooling system etc. Vapor lock it aint. Vapor lock is not going to cause the car to run hot.

Evans claim of more heat transfer is probably due to the coolant running at a higher temperature. The greater the differential, the more heat is transferred. Their claim of more engine efficiency comes from the engine running hotter. One of the reasons cooling systems became pressurized is so they could run at a higher temp and thus were more efficient. Knowing what you went through with your carburetors I would think that you don't want any more heat regardless of whether your engine runs more efficiently. I would think that in your situation, it would be better to stick with regular antifreeze.

I have to second the recommendation here. Lots of attention to detail inside the unit that you don't normally see.

Vinyl top people were rather common until the early nineties when they started to disappear due to the fact that few cars were being sold that had them any more. I am sure that you can probably find an installer if you look hard enough. It is not something that the unexperienced should attempt to do. I would not even try to remove the old top beacause it would probably not save you any money.