Jump to content

32 Nash 1063 convertible sedan


F&J
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yes, 18".     White Glove has a pair on ebay as 31/32 Nash, but they don't look like what mine had. 

 

Your Dad might know Don....AKA "Scout"..  "D&D auto body"  Kensington or Rocky Hill area.  He was into series 29-32 Packard roadsters, and also had a large mixed collection including "Mrs. Wards" of Montgomery/Ward...a 31-ish Cad limo.  Many others from 1 cyl Cad, early '09 Ford, (He said " Doesn't every collector have a 1cyl Cad and an early '09T T") LOL.  He did resto's on customers antiques for decades.  Hope he is still with us, as he was quite along in years.

 

Picked up my new parts late today, and did test fit the master to see if it will clear everything.  I had to make the bail flip from the other side (it holds the cap on), but now looks perfect for fit.  Cap has inkjet small printed; "use only DOT3 from sealed container"  ??? I web searched that brand to see why, but can't find anything.  I am still going to use DOT 5 fluid.

 

Tomorrow will be a very busy day, running all steel lines, finish the master mount, make a pushrod, maybe get to replace the rear cylinders if time permits.

 

I'm way ahead of schedule for originally hoping to test drive by the "end of weekend", it should be ready by Friday late.

Edited by F&J (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The car is not registered/insured, and I live on a busy State road....so my brake testing will be on my big test track ..LOL.  There were businesses here, so a long driveway, a parking lot, and we made a road around the back of my biggest building, so I can get up to 35MPH.

 

The only reason I'm pushing to test it, is that I still have major concerns on the front wheel cylinder bore size.  I just can't predict how those Midland internal band brakes will work.  They were reputed to be grabby and lockups if not adjusted correctly, so I can only hope they won't need a bigger wheel cylinder,  There is no room left for a bigger one, or at least the other ones I looked at online. 

 

I've been studying the old repair manual illustrations, trying to understand why they want the forward top of the band shoe to "not touch" the top anchor.  You can see it in the left side of the pic.  The only way you could get that not to touch, is by tightening up the adjustable length of the armored flex cable on each wheel.  The only thought I can come up with, is that if there was a gap, meaning the shoe is already moved out a bit, that would guarantee that each cable has no slack?  What I mean is that if there was no gap on each of the 4 wheels, each cable could be stretched to different amounts of slack, and pressing the brake pedal would only activate the wheels that had less slack?

 

With my hydraulic conversion, there is no way to have the shoe ends not touch the anchor. 

 

So, this is uncharted ground, and I don't know what to expect.  I chose to test this with the old brake lining on the fronts, as well as the Mustang rear brakes.  The reason is that the old linings have been "seated" into each drum.  If I put all new linings on, most times a pedal might feel spongy and a bit lower to the floor.  Then I would not really know if the Master is the right size, or if the pedal ratio was OK.  I will replace linings when I get this sorted out.

Image54.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will your emergency brake system be using the Mustang rear brakes? As you say, this is uncharted ground, so a good backup system would be advantageous.

 

I do admire your willingness to attack a problem and think out of the box! Hoping this works out, and will be waiting anxiously for an update. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These brakes work great if they are adjusted correctly. That being said you have removed the finicky part of the system, the cable. 

When the cable is used you have to have it adjusted just right so your fulcrum is able to apply max force with minimum effort when brakes are applied. you should be able to adjust them out so they just barely touch and your wheel cylinders should be fine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎6‎/‎29‎/‎2016 at 1:47 PM, r1lark said:

Will your emergency brake system be using the Mustang rear brakes? As you say, this is uncharted ground, so a good backup system would be advantageous.

 

I do admire your willingness to attack a problem and think out of the box! Hoping this works out, and will be waiting anxiously for an update. :)

Yes, I will use the original 65 Mustang E-brake cables.  I would never run without an E-brake, as there is no good excuse not to.  At some point, the old "E brake" wording, was replaced with "parking brake" by the auto companies.  One nice thing about hooking newer E=brakes to the old hand lever, is that the extra leverage and controllability can be used in an emergency....rather than just for parking.

 

The front end of each Ford cable will connect to the original R&L solid steel brake rods.  I will make an adjustable clevis on each, so I can get both E=brake cables to pull exactly the same.  Most cars with E-brake cables had various types of "self equalizing" center point.  That is so both cables will always apply the same pressure, in case one side stretches over time.

 

Some cars did not have an equalizer, so those cars had an adjuster on each cable, and should be checked for adjustment during normal servicing of the car.

 

It is so simple and quick, if I just go with the old brake rods, and just make sure they pull the same.

DSCN3482.JPG

DSCN3483.JPG

Edited by F&J (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CHAD THOMAS said:

These brakes work great if they are adjusted correctly. That being said you have removed the finicky part of the system, the cable. 

When the cable is used you have to have it adjusted just right so your fulcrum is able to apply max force with minimum effort when brakes are applied. you should be able to adjust them out so they just barely touch and your wheel cylinders should be fine. 

Yes, I read up on the fulcrum, and having it apart, I can see that there is a difference in where the fulcrum is preset.

 

The unknown factor for me, is that I have no way to guesstimate how much force is applied to the brake shoe.  I hope I'm right, when I assumed that the cable and fulcrum might not have any more force than my undersized 3/4" bore cylinders?  I have no way to calculate that.

 

If I miscalculated and either the fronts lock up, or the rears lock up on unpaved driveway or grass, what I can do, is add an adjustable inline proportioning valve.  I do have a NOS high quality one made by Chrysler Corp "Direct connection" division which sold race car items.  This would force more pressure ratio to the wheels that don't lock up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took longer that I planned to finish the master cylinder mount.  I wanted it to be dead perfect as far as in line with the brake pedal push point.

I started making the mount before I even had the new master here.  I got lucky with how far back it is, now that the cylinder is mounted.  It could not go further forward, as it is too close to the X member, and it can't go backwards more, because the body framework would block the access to the filler cap.  As it turned out, the cap was tough to get off as it was hitting the X.  So I did a slight trim on the top of the X.

 

I have not made the new pushrod yet, but I have more clearance through the original hole in the X, than I first thought.

 

I did make new steel lines on the rear end housing, installed new rear rubber flex line, and made the line to the rear end, and the main feed from the master to the brass tees.

 

Tomorrow I do the front lines, assemble the front brakes and adjust the fronts.  Getting closer..

DSCN0608.JPG

DSCN0611.JPG

DSCN0609.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you should be good with 3/4 wheel cylinders. I believe that is what is on my friends Auburn with the same size drum. Also, they used different sizes in the front, one side was larger so in a panic situation the car has a tendency to pull to the ditch and not oncoming traffic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, CHAD THOMAS said:

you should be good with 3/4 wheel cylinders. I believe that is what is on my friends Auburn with the same size drum. Also, they used different sizes in the front, one side was larger so in a panic situation the car has a tendency to pull to the ditch and not oncoming traffic!

I hope you are right :)

That Auburn you mentioned; was that one that had these Midland brakes and was converted?   I ask because I read somewhere that Auburn did have these, but I don't know if the last Auburns had them, or hydraulics?

 

 

Today I made up the front steel brake lines and got all the bends done nice as they fit good.  All lines are done.  So then I remembered I needed to make an adjustable brake push rod.

 

I do have the correct 64-66 Chevy pickup brake rod, but the pedal end won't fit the Nash pedal, and it is too short anyways.  That Chevy rod is in the backround of the pic below.  I used one of the original Nash push and pull rods which are made of U channel pressed steel. 

 

I measured what rod length I need, then cut off some of one Nash rod channel.   Then I used a long barrel nut and used a press to force it to the bottom of the U channel.  Then I bent the top edges of the U, to fold around that long nut, and welded in the gap.

 

Then I made the round rod end from a long 3/8" bolt, ground the head off and made the rounded point that goes into the master.  Then a thin jamb nut locks them from turning after the master free play is set.  Works perfect and it clears the original rod hole in the X frame.

 

I also assembled the front shoes and springs and put the spindle and tierod back together.  I had those parts off so the king pin set and tierod end could be matched up at the old parts warehouse.

 

What's left is pull the rear drums to install the new Mustang wheel cylinders, bleed and adjust all 4 brakes, bolt the seat and battery back in..  Getting close now

 

 

DSCN0612.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wished I had Chad here when I was doing the LAST thing....adjusting the front brake shoe...  (Bleeding went super easy with no helper!  Found out the Mustang uses 15/16" bore rear cylinders.  The new ones fit fine.)

 

I took the time this morning to read the Midland illustration again, and it says to turn the adjuster clockwise to tighten.   I started at the left wheel, and before putting the drum on, I saw the adjuster was all the way one direction and no threads left.  That made me think the last owner ran out of adjustment, so I ended up putting a 5/16" ball bearing above the adjuster, in the bore that the threaded stud goes in.  That got the shoe fairly close to spec, but not quite.  I then assumed the shoes are too thin, but they look normal to me.  So, not to worry, I just want to test the brakes..

 

I get to the right wheel and that one was halfway on the threads and the shoe was close.  So I really studied why, and noticed the adjuster works opposite of what I thought.  So, I take the other drum back off, removed the ball bearing and went the "wrong way" with the adjuster wheel, and it worked perfect.. 

 

The problem is, when they say "clockwise".  If the fender was off and you could look DOWN at the adjuster wheel, you DO go clockwise.  If you are on a creeper looking up, you need to turn it counter clockwise from your point of view!

 

So, now all 4 brakes adjusted..do I dare try pushing the pedal to see how horrible it may feel?  LOL ...I did push it with my hand and was shocked that it gets hard right where a normal car pedal would be.   I don't have the seat in yet to see how it feels by my foot.  I need to leave the car jacked up until my son stops by after work, and have him keep trying to turn all 4 wheels as I keep adding more pedal pressure.  I think that is a good start, and if it passes that test, I will remove the jacks and yard drive it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, r1lark said:

Sounds very promising! Keep us up to date. :)

My son got here a bit late, as storms were coming..

 

We did the wheel spin test:  With very light hand pressure on the pedal, he could feel the fronts start to drag before the rears did.  A very slight increase in hand pressure, the fronts dragged a bit more, but the rears were starting to drag.  Then just moderate hand pressure, and he could not budge any of the wheels, and he is quite strong..  I was really happy that the fronts acted that way, as the fronts need to brake more than the rears.

 

When using the same floor jack, lifting the front axle, the front is very heavy, like a straight 8 car, but lifting the rear axle, it feels extremely light, as there is no weight back there with this short body style. 

 

By the time I got the seat and battery in and started the car, it started to sprinkle, so I only did a bit of testing, straight back 30 feet onto grass, then floor it back into the shop cement floor.  It has a noticeable nose dive as I jammed the pedal hard, and that is what you want.  I could not get enough speed on the short grass area, but none of the wheels locked prematurely on grass.

 

Supposed to be a nice weekend, so I will drive it quite a bit around the lot, and after the shoes get reseated, I will do some panic stops on grass and packed dirt driveway.

 

It will not need a power brake unit.  It stops great with very little foot pressure.  I am beyond "quite happy" so far.  Chad was right about the front cylinder size.  The large 12" front drums and small rear 10 drums seem to do what I wanted, and far beyond my expectations.  :) 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I drove it around the lot on Sunday, and the brakes are nice.  If I try to ram the brakes any harder, it feels like I am beating on this old car.  They are fine.

 

The car never had a way to start the car from the driver seat.  The key locks the column and prevents the toggle switch for the ignition, from moving.  Parts were missing and broken, as usual....   I was lucky to get the last NOS Hurd key tumbler that would fit this column bracket that Pease had in stock.  It is kind of generic as many cars used this lock setup, and for a quite a few years.  These tumblers are held in place by a blind anti theft plug that has to be drilled out.  And the replacement tumbler had two corresponding shallow holes for that plug to jamb into.   Took forever to realize that neither hole was in the right spot for the Nash.  Fixed that with another hole in the brass tumbler body(thank goodness it is not that old fragile potmetal like I think the old original ones are)

 

I was robbing some pieces from what was said to be a 34 Buick column.  The electrical switch was the same, but there is a detent system to make the toggle lever "click" into off or On.  My Nash was missing those detent parts.  It is a wide flathead screw thing, but is counterbored for a tiny 1/4" dia spring, and I think a ball bearing goes in, to drop into the on and off "grooves" in the slidebolt/toggle shaft.  The Buick had the screw and spring, but no ball.  A small ball from a carburetor kit works great, but that special screw is too long to tighten up.  The Buick hole is deeper in the column housing.  I can't cut off any more threads, as the spring won't have a hole deep enough to hold it.  Maybe I'll add a thick washer, so I can tighten it enough to not loosen up later?  (I put a red arrow at it, in the pic)

 

So now I have a locking column, and I can eliminate the old jumper wire to the coil.

 

The starter; I am not positive how it was activated...more missing parts again :) .  I have a NORS starter switch in the pic.  It has a small lever you pull up, to make the starter work.  The hole on the lever is way too small to be for a solid linkage rod, so I assume it had a dashboard mounted "pull cable" like a choke cable.  So, I had a cable that was the right length and made a bracket above the starter to hold that end, and it works great.  There was an extra hole in the dash for the other end.

 

Also found a deco looking gas pedal that I will use.  The one in the car is newer Hudson I think, kind of boat shaped, and rubber covered.

 

 

I promised my son I'd start on the 32 Ford by July 1st to finally finish it, as it is so close.  So I will stop on the Nash now.  The last big battle to figure out on the Nash, is that the steering box is junk.  The worm is worn, and the "peg" that rides in the worm has been brazed up, and even the nut is brazed, that held the peg onto the sector.  I never found anyone that has a used box, nor any NOS parts.  it's a Ross box, so I had hoped the internals would be available from other cars with Ross steering..no luck so far.

DSCN0614.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, alsancle said:

That Ross box should have been in a number of other cars.  I would think you would be able to get a gear or another box.   Any video of the momentous occasion?

No, I was alone, my son is at Block Island for a while.  I'm glad there is no video.... I nailed the brake way too hard on packed gravel, and all 4 tires are soft because they are too rotted to take more pressure....so it stopped so violently with so much tire grip, that the big truck battery where the back seat fits, slammed the back of my seat and fell out through the missing rear floor.  "what the heck is dragging under there? "

5 minutes ago, edinmass said:

Post a photo of you box, several if you can, I think I know where one is. Ed

Here is the only pic I took so far.  I will take more in daytime.  This frame is boxed from the factory, so the mounting flange sits not in a channel type frame; it sits alongside the inner edge of the rail.  This makes for a much longer sector shaft (pitman shaft).  Can't really see it in the pic, but the side cover is huge for this small chassis car.

 

N.B. Pease did not even look to see if he had the gear or shaft, as he must have known his inventory by memory.  He did not offer to look up interchange, and that may mean that is one book he does not have, or that he just does not have many NOS gears/sectors?  If there was a chance, he would have tried.  He's helped me out so many times before.

 

One more tidbit; I contacted a guy in New Mexico who had some small parts on ebay for a 32 First series Nash.  I talked him into selling/shipping the steering box.  It was totally different: I assume because those are not boxed X frames, rather they are 1931 old style ladder frames. 

DSCN0507.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like a small series Ross, there is a good chance the internal parts are common to all the boxes, only the casting would be Nash only. Get me more extensive photos and measurements, and a photo of the light switch, there may be hope at the end of the tunnel for you. Ed

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The steering lock and switch is called a Hershry Lock. Pierce, Stude, Stutz, and some other mid to high end cars used them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, edinmass said:

Looks like a small series Ross, there is a good chance the internal parts are common to all the boxes, only the casting would be Nash only. Get me more extensive photos and measurements, and a photo of the light switch, there may be hope at the end of the tunnel for you. Ed

 

I suppose I'd better change my plans for tomorrow, and pull the box out for some much needed better views....while I have someone willing to look....

 

Anyways, that light switch won't help the ID.  That is a 34 Buick switch that I adapted to the Nash box.  I bought a used column from Pease years ago, and old faint chalk marks said "34 Buick" on the column.  He was not sure what it was, but there was nothing in that gearbox that could fit the Nash box.  I bought it for the other pieces, not the gears.

 

Thanks for the offer to help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Ed, here are some pics and measurements. 

 

Let me do one pic at a time to explain each:

 

1-3/8" column tube...but that can be modified at the box end if the donor is wrong diameter.

 

The offset shows how far "up" the centerline of the inner steering shaft, compared to the centerline of the sector shaft going through the frame.  I suppose there is some way to use a box that is slightly wrong.

DSCN0617.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The measurement below, is from the center of column shaft, to what would be the "backside" of the pitman arm.  I did it this way because if the donor box is way to short on this, my pitman arm will rub on the side of the frame.

 

I might be able to use one 1/4" to 1/2" less, as I think my pitman had some room behind it.

 

 

DSCN0618.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bottom view.  I did not bother to measure where the 3 bolt flange is, or what angle it is, compared to the centerline.  These would be different on another type of car with a Ross box.  These flanges can be trimmed away, and a new triangle 3 bolt flange can be welded on, at the correct angle....if needed.

 

I'm not concerned on splines for the pitman arm, if the donor box does still have it's pitman arm.  I could modify that arm as needed.

dscn0620.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got it, will check out the boxes at my friends shop tonight or tomorrow. Looks smaller than I expected. Are there any casting numbers on it? I have a interchange book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, two casting numbers:

 

one is on the cover:    605 998

 

the other one is easy to miss on the main housing.  It is at the bottom where grease hides it, very close to the edge of the cover.  Flip the box upside down, and look close to the part of the cover has the adjustment screw.  It will be on the main body casting.: 602 998

 

 

I'm in no rush, so no need for a special trip.   I decided to leave the box out for a week or whatever.  The car is not in the way, and does not need to move.

 

I need to work on the other car as planned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can't find another box, or parts for yours, perhaps you can make an early-to-mid '50s Ford F-1 or F-100 pickup steering box work:

0803rc_03_z+steering_box_options+.jpg

 

I believe the pitman arm points down on these boxes, but not totally positive. They are used in a lot of '30s hot rods as a steering upgrade, so the internals are available. Not pushing modifying a survivor car, but if you can't steer it, you can't drive it safely. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, r1lark said:

If you can't find another box, or parts for yours, perhaps you can make an early-to-mid '50s Ford F-1 or F-100 pickup steering box work:

 

I believe the pitman arm points down on these boxes, but not totally positive. They are used in a lot of '30s hot rods as a steering upgrade, so the internals are available. Not pushing modifying a survivor car, but if you can't steer it, you can't drive it safely. ;)

Thanks for the thought....yes, because I do set up work on traditional hot rods...I had kept the F1 and F100 box in the backup plans..:)  The differences between the F1 and F100, is that one has the worm above the sector, the other is below.  That comes in handy when using an early Olds Rocket in a 32 ford, the F100 will clear the Olds starter, and the F1 would require the starter be moved to the passenger side with the old aftermarket starter housing.  I'm just not sure if either have a long enough sector shaft.  The F1 has conventional tapered splines with the big nut, and the F100 has a couple of teeth on a straight short shaft, with a sideways pinch bolt to tighten the "split" arm hole.

 

 

I decided to pull the box apart to see if it really was as bad as I recalled some years ago...  This was right after I did an ebay search for "ross steering".  I spotted a repro "Ross sector peg" which has bearings...  I did recall that my peg had the nut end all brazed up, so I wanted to look again.

 

Well I'll be....mine also once had a bearing type peg.  It must have went bad and started to make the peg get jambed in the worm.  If that peg gets even a bit of play, the steering wheel will have HUGE amounts of slop.   If you look at the pic with the pencil; it points to the chewed up top edge of the worm, at the part of the worm that would be damaged by loose parts, in the straight ahead position.  Part of the bearing, or race, or peg got moved up to hit there.  That does not affect it, but you can't really see the side face of the worm right below it....that surface is nicked and gouged, so it won't feel right.

 

 two pics show the brazed peg.  They filled in the huge area on both sides, where the bearings were, with brazing rods.  The 2nd of those pics show the peg sides are chewed up, too.  There is a new copper penny there for size comparisons.

 

2nd pic, shows the worm ball bearing races that are machined into the worm on both ends.  These are pitted as most cars are, but perhaps savable because it's not really bad.  One ball was missing from each end of the worm.  I can get those local, if I don't have some here.

 

1st pic; ebay pic of the repro roller peg.  $171.00 plus ship..yikes... seems it fits the "big boys cars", so it's priced accordingly  LOL 

...but I have no idea if my sector can be any good where the brazing is, and don't know if the bearing will fit.

 

Quote

Roller bearing type peg & race for Ross steering boxes as used by Duesenberg, Pierce Arrow, Reo, Franklin, Stutz and others. Made of heat treated 52100 bearing steel.


Same as Timkin part #00055 and #00053, part of Timkin bearing assembly #00055 90014.

 

Our part number J-4600-18.

 

s-l225.jpg

DSCN0623.JPG

DSCN0622.JPG

dscn0621.jpg

DSCN0624.JPG

Edited by F&J (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is probably NOT a grease nipple on the steering box. It is probably an OIL nipple, with no ball and spring mechanism. The steering box may have failed because it was filled with grease. One turn and the grease is wiped off. It doesn't flow back again so there is no lubrication from then on.

 

My Studebaker has a Ross steering box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Spinneyhill said:

That is probably NOT a grease nipple on the steering box. It is probably an OIL nipple, with no ball and spring mechanism. The steering box may have failed because it was filled with grease. One turn and the grease is wiped off. It doesn't flow back again so there is no lubrication from then on.

 

My Studebaker has a Ross steering box.

Yes,I know it needs oil.  When I took the box apart some years ago to find out why it steered so badly, I ended up putting it back together and hand greased the worm and bearings to lube and prevent rust.  I could not use oil, because the light switch rod was also missing, so the oil would run out the bottom where the rod seal is.

 

There is a Ross number on the brazed-up sector, 604 989 , and I tried searching the number with words like "ross, nash, shaft, sector, steering" but nothing came up.

 

If I could find a car that has the same exact Ross side-cover part, maybe the internals can fit my Nash box.  At this point, I really would prefer to keep the original box style, rather than adapt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More researching on possible donor parts:

 

Here is a used mid 30's Pierce box that is definitely Ross, and the side cover "looks" the same, but could be smaller/bigger?  Maybe if the cover had the same number, then the worm might be the same.   But, looking at the threaded end of the sector shaft, the Pierce pitman slides into the housing, so it sure looks like the Pierce sector shaft is way too short.

 

other pics are my repeat pic of my brazed peg.  Also a pic of a 1959-60 Studebaker sector and peg on a blue backround:  This type of Stude peg and bearing looks a lot more like my Nash had compared to that odd shaped repro one I posted yesterday.   But this Stude peg sort of looks smaller than my Nash pic?   (the Stude sector shaft is too short and likely too small of a diameter, but maybe the peg and bearing would work?)

 

Any thoughts or advice??

 

.

pierce.jpg

DSCN0622.JPG

studebaker.jpg

s-l225.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you fit that repro peg (or something similar)  into your peg mounting? The lower shaft you show looks like it has a bolt head on the right with a shakeproof washer - looks like a repair?

 

You may be able to find a similar worm. It is probably a press fit on the shaft with a keyway? Maybe you can even find one in usable condition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Spinneyhill said:

Can you fit that repro peg (or something similar)  into your peg mounting? The lower shaft you show looks like it has a bolt head on the right with a shakeproof washer - looks like a repair?

 

You may be able to find a similar worm. It is probably a press fit on the shaft with a keyway? Maybe you can even find one in usable condition.

Thanks for the reply.

I believe my Nash sector, and that 1959-60 sector, were pegs that were mounted with some sort of bearings.  There would be no other reason for such a large diameter "bore" that is evident on both of those sectors.  I just don't know what type of bearings could fit in there when new.   If they did have bearings, I have to believe that the O.D. races must have been machined "into" the sector forging...just like the permanent races on the worm gear.

 

If you look at that 59-60 sector closely, I see blued coloring which might be from when the "race surfaces" were case-hardened?

 

A friend looked at my brazed sector, and he felt it was worth it to try to melt out the brass and old peg, to see if the race surfaces could be saved.  I would have a small wire brush ready, to scuff away any bits of brass from the surfaces while still hot enough.  I am out of ideas, as that repro peg;... I just can't understand how it could fit to my Nash sector?...because...  The Nash as well as that 59-60 both have threaded studs,  That one with the lock washers and nut; could that be some sort of bend-over-tang type washer to prevent loosening?

 

Oh well, I did buy that 59-60 sector this afternoon to at least learn how it is made, even if the peg is smaller, or not.  It may get here by Saturday or Monday, so I will not remove the brass yet.  It was cheap enough, so even if Ed finds a much better solution, it's not a big loss.

studebaker.jpg

stude.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Spinneyhill said:

Hope that is useful to you.

Fantastic.  Thanks for taking the time.  It seems to prove that there are no separate O.D. bearing races in the sector bore, and has twin opposing tapered roller bearings..

 

I had an idea on restoring the inner races that will still have brass coating embedded, after heating.  I do have valve/seat grinder here, and I could redress a valve seat stone to the correct angle, then make a fixture to hold a guide pilot in the center hole.

 

That worm looks like it has wider teeth at the tips?, and the sector length might not be long enough.  I'm trying to determine if Ross worms/sectors can be swapped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the parts book picture. This type was used for 1934-36. 1306-9 are rollers; 16 in the earlier ones, 13 later. In fact this pin arrangement was only used on the models with B and C in their designation (at the bottom of the page).

StudeSteeringParts.jpg

 

They list the post and cam as one item (1304-1).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...