Correct carb's when judging etc

[Guest Peter Woyen]

A friend and I are restoring two 1929 Stearns Knight 8 cylinder cars. They originally ran updraft Tillotson carbs. The Tillotsons are made of potmetal and sadly cracking beyond repair. We've been recommended the largest size (there are three sizes) Carter BB1 as a great replacement with an adjustable high speed setting and etc. The BB1's were produced from 1932-1963 so a few years after our 1929 Stearns. Will we run into a judging snag with AACA and CCCA if we run BB1 carbs on these cars? Thoughts anyone?? Thanks!! -Peter

[msmazcol]

My first thought is the owner of a car can be his own worst enemy. Every Judge cannot know every brand of carb on every car. Don't be so quick to tell the AACA community what is wrong with your vehicle. Do your best possible job on your project and roll it on the show field with pride.

IMHO.

[Guest Peter Woyen]

Point well taken. I notice also that in the 2009 judging standards there is no mention of carburetors correct or otherwise.

[Restorer32]

Most judges experienced with early cars would likely recognize the BB-1 as non original and it would be subject to 5 point deduction with additional deductions possible for linkage, piping, etc. Even more likely in would be picked out in CCCA competition.

[Guest Peter Woyen]

Do you know where in the judges handbook it talks about carbs? I couldn't find any mention in the AACA judges handbook. Do you know what CCCA says about it? Thanks, Pete PS: nice list of cars

[MCHinson]

An incorrect component warrants the maximum point deduction.

See Page 54 in the judging guidelines.

An incorrect carb can cost you 5 points.

[West Peterson]

For CCCA, there used to be a separate line for authenticity. If a judge caught it, he could take it there. As mentioned, many times judges are not going to catch such a thing if it looks correct for the period. If you happen to get a judge who knows that type of car inside and out, you'll be docked. I don't think there are too many Stearns experts out there.

[Guest Peter Woyen]

Thanks Gentlemen for the input. You've all made good points.

I'm inclined to go with a period correct updraft carb and save the BB1's for touring.

-Pete

1929 S-K

1925 Ford roadster-pickup

1910 Cad Model 30

[carbking]

Pete - your Stearns used a 385 CID engine. The 1928~1929 Lincoln used a 384 CID engine. The carburetor of choice for the Lincoln was a Stromberg O-3 (brass carburetor).

Jon.

[Durant Mike]

Pete

First I wouldn't worry about it. I'm a Judge and can tell you most of the judges would not know if that carb was correct for that car or not. As long as it is period it should be alright. The Tillotson carbs were also put on many Durant products like my car. Most of the Durant owners have long since removed them or they just were not with the car when they purchased it. These carbs were poorly made and fell apart many years ago. I recently talked to a carb expert who rebuilds all kinds of carbs back to the teens professionally. He advised that I would never want to put a Tillotson on my car because they were very bad and would leak like crazy possibly causing a severe fire hazard. He only recommended it if it was to be a museum static display car. I'd say look for a good period carb from another manufacturer and not worry about it to much. What's the chance of finding a judge that knows Stearns anyway.

[1937hd45]

Limp onto the AACA show field with the correct carb. As soon as the judges are finished swap it for one that works and have a nice trip home.

Thanks Gentlemen for the input. You've all made good points.

I'm inclined to go with a period correct updraft carb and save the BB1's for touring.

-Pete

1929 S-K

1925 Ford roadster-pickup

1910 Cad Model 30

[MCHinson]

Peter,

Earlier I gave you a factual unemotional answer to your question. I agree that most judges will probably not know much about your particular car. I think you should keep your mouth shut and find the carburetor that is the closest to original and still safe and go with that. If the original carb is going to drip any fuel, personally, I would prefer that you take safety as your first priority and authenticity as your second priority.

If I were you, I would take a chance on losing a few points before I would take a chance of burning the car. Choose something that will not be too obviously wrong but will not leak any gasoline and you will more likely than not be OK. If I ever judge your car, I will probably forget that you said anything about the carburetor being incorrect anyway.

[Restorer32]

Apparently the cars ran well enough on their original carbs to eventually earn Classic status or am I missing something? Were Stearns' prone to bursting into flame? Were they not very good cars from the factory? I am confused.

[MCHinson]

I do not know anything about them, but based on his comment of "They originally ran updraft Tillotson carbs. The Tillotsons are made of potmetal and sadly cracking beyond repair.", I would stay away from the original carbs.

I have seen a potmetal tillotson carb leaking gasoline on a hot engine on another antique car. It was not a pretty sight.

[1937hd45]

The AACA Judging rules are unfair to this car, you can SEE the carburetor, not so with a 1985 Whatchamacallit.

[edinmass]

I think any fair minded judge would not deduct as long as the carb on the car was available when new the car was new. Many Stutz cars have been converted to Stromberg uu2 and uur2 carbs. The Zenith factory carbs are just about all failed or on the shelf. I would run a uu2 on it.

[Guest De Soto Frank]

Apparently the cars ran well enough on their original carbs to eventually earn Classic status or am I missing something? Were Stearns' prone to bursting into flame? Were they not very good cars from the factory? I am confused.

The Tillotson carbs were probably decent when new... many Model A guys seem to feel they get better performance and mileage out of Fords running OEM Tillotsons...

The issue is with the die-cast alloy : pre-war "pot-metal" is notorious for "swelling", warping, cracking, & crumbling. One theory on this is called "inter-granular corrosion", due to high lead content of early die-cast alloys... they self-destruct over time. Exposure to moisture can accelerate this problem.

This is not just limited to carburetors.

Certain talking machines made extensive use of pot-metal for various motor parts, as well as the hollow tone-arm and sound-box castings... it is common to find such machines with these working parts seized, broken, and/or incredibly fragile.

Even the almighty ( and usually "bullet-proof") Victor Talking machines had a few now-problematic die-cast parts by the 1920's, particularly with their extremely expensive first-generation automatic record-changing machine.

[Restorer32]

Of course the majority of Detroit Lubricator carbs as used on Packard have been upgraded with bronze bowls. I doubt there is enough demand to reproduce Tillotson carbs. Better to see the car on the show field with the wrong carb than to not see it at all. I do disagree with the statement above that "a fair minded judge would not deduct as long as the carb on the car was available when the car was new". The rules require just the opposite. A fair minded judge SHOULD deduct if the carb is not what was originally on the car. To not do so would penalize the owner who showed the same car with the correct carb.

[Shop Rat]

Of course the majority of Detroit Lubricator carbs as used on Packard have been upgraded with bronze bowls. I doubt there is enough demand to reproduce Tillotson carbs. Better to see the car on the show field with the wrong carb than to not see it at all.

Are correct carbs available? If so then don't give the 5 point deduction away, unless that is that you have a 400 point car otherwise. Then you could afford to take the hit.

If a correct item is no longer available from any source owners can submit a request to verify that and have it waived, right? I know that this can be done regarding tires.

I do disagree with the statement above that "a fair minded judge would not deduct as long as the carb on the car was available when the car was new". The rules require just the opposite. A fair minded judge SHOULD deduct if the carb is not what was originally on the car. To not do so would penalize the owner who showed the same car with the correct carb.

I agree 100%. To not deduct, when a deduction is fair and called for, in a way penalizes the owners that did do it right.

[carbking]

This issue is not limited to the Stearns.

Lots of carburetors in the early 1920's to mid 1930's were constructed from zinc alloy (pot metal).

While it is possible to recreate the carburetor on the Stearns by using lost-wax casting techniques; the process is horribly expensive, and one still has a Tillotson carburetor (not good) when finished.

As to one poster's question, are any useable original carburetors available? Probably not. Even if the castings APPEAR decent, it is a matter of when (not if) they fail.

A long time ago, we submitted some of this early zinc alloy to a metallurgist who proceded to analyze the composition of the alloy. His comments were that the early zinc alloy contained about 4 times more lead than the later compounds. It was his opinion that the extra lead led to failure.

Jon.

[Restorer32]

I believe the exemption for unavailable items is meant to apply to things like tires or headlights which are consumable and might not be currectly reproduced in the size or configuration originally fitted to the vehicle. I don't think it is meant to apply to rare parts. I think it would be a huge mistake for AACA to start granting exemptions for "rare" or "difficult" or "expensive to repair" parts but I don't make the rules. A new bowl for a Detroit Lubricator costs $350-450. If there is enough demand for Tillotson parts they will likely be reproduced at some point.

[carbking]

I believe the exemption for unavailable items is meant to apply to things like tires or headlights which are consumable and might not be currectly reproduced in the size or configuration originally fitted to the vehicle. I don't think it is meant to apply to rare parts. I think it would be a huge mistake for AACA to start granting exemptions for "rare" or "difficult" or "expensive to repair" parts but I don't make the rules. A new bowl for a Detroit Lubricator costs $350-450. If there is enough demand for Tillotson parts they will likely be reproduced at some point.

i agree with you on the exemption.

As to reproduction of the Tillotson parts; consider the following:

Even though Packard used some 40 plus different Detroit carburetors from 1929 to 1932, all but the 734 use only two bowls. And the ones you mentioned require HOURS of machining after the initial cost.

With the Tillotson, every different carburetor was different, and the parts are significantly more complex than the Detroit. I don't know how many 1929 Stearns-Knights survive, but doubt if more than 25.

I would seriously doubt anyone would ever commercially reproduce castings for these things. Now if some totally independently wealthy individual decided to restore the car Grandpa was married in, that might be a different story.

Jon.

[Restorer32]

Good point. I would think a period correct bronze carb on the Stearns would pass undetected but the B&B sets off bells every time I see one. We are working on a very early car now that came to us with a John Deere carb installed.

[Guest windjamer]

I havent the slightest idea what you guys are talking about (but Im willing to learn) as far as s Starns Knight and carb bowles are concerned, but I paid over $600. for my tires and I think the next guy should do the same. Do it right or take thededuction. Just my 2cents

[carbking]

I havent the slightest idea what you guys are talking about (but Im willing to learn) as far as s Starns Knight and carb bowles are concerned, but I paid over $600. for my tires and I think the next guy should do the same. Do it right or take thededuction. Just my 2cents

What is being talked about is somewhat like the old saw of being "a little bit pregnent"! In this case, what should have deducts or should not.

Both Restorer32 and myself offered the opinion that if the judge knows then the wrong carb should have a deduct; however, at least in my case, I have no influence on the judging, so that is simply an opinion.

Others have opined that few judges will know what carburetor is original (they should frequent my website ) and thus some deducts will not be made that might be with a more informed judge.

I have the highest respect for any who will volunteer their time to act as judges. I have never judged at a meet and I never will (see first sentence of this post). This may prolong my life due to a reduced number of unhappy car owners.

But if I did, all you Packard dudes with the brass bowl on the Detroits would get deducts; not because of the use of brass, but because while the bowls may be functionally acceptable, they are not exact in appearance. And in fact, Packard used at least 10 different bowls on the 1929~1932 Packards, and yes, I do know the differences.

And as to the $600. tires: are these a size, tread design, and exact sidewall reproduction of a tire that was available during the time period? or are they simply a "functional replacement"?

We have actually "made from scratch" two carburetors for showcars when the carburetors simply did not exist. So I do have some background in this area. The cost is simply ridiculous. One was an early Chevrolet V-8; the other a Hispano-Suiza. Each were exact reproductions.

Jon.

[Restorer32]

We once built an entire steering column for a 1917 Barrie Bell (look that one up in your Encyclopedia). Wood wheel, spider, center controls, column, steering box including case and all internal gears, pitman arm, gears for throttle and advance etc. Cost almost $8000 but it put a one of a kind car back on the road and was indistinguishable from the original (which we borrowed from a different car using the same box).

[Shop Rat]

I believe the exemption for unavailable items is meant to apply to things like tires or headlights which are consumable and might not be currectly reproduced in the size or configuration originally fitted to the vehicle. I don't think it is meant to apply to rare parts. I think it would be a huge mistake for AACA to start granting exemptions for "rare" or "difficult" or "expensive to repair" parts but I don't make the rules. A new bowl for a Detroit Lubricator costs $350-450. If there is enough demand for Tillotson parts they will likely be reproduced at some point.

No it isn't meant to apply to rare or hard to get items. Only items that are no longer available. And it has to be confirmed by the person in the AACA that is in charge of that. Not sure who that currently is.

[Guest Peter Woyen]

John,

Thanks for the input. Does the Stromberg 0-3 have an accelerator pump and a high speed adjustment? Curious about that. We bought a couple of brass Zeniths that look correct but don't have the high speed adjustment etc. My info talks about the 384 cid Lincoln being rated at 90 hp at 2800 rpm. The Stearns is rated at 120 at 2800 rpm. Not critical as far as the carb is concerned if it fits up properly and the car performs as it should. Thanks for your help.

-Pete

[Guest Peter Woyen]

For my wages a period correct carb will have to suffice. We've spent tons of time and effort having exact copies made of all sorts of things. We could spend thousands on carbs but those funds will have to go for plating and a correct interior etc. I started with a car that was missing it's driveline and all of it's brightwork. It's been a literal coast to coast chase to find correct parts. There are approximately twenty 1927-1929 Stearns 8 cylinder cars extant. A small portion of that number are running and on the road. We hope to add a couple more to that number in the next few years. Thanks for all of the input.

[Guest Peter Woyen]

John,

Thanks for the input. Does the Stromberg 0-3 have an accelerator pump and a high speed adjustment? Curious about that. We bought a couple of brass Zeniths that look correct but don't have the high speed adjustment etc. My info talks about the 384 cid Lincoln being rated at 90 hp at 2800 rpm. The Stearns is rated at 120 at 2800 rpm. Not critical as far as the carb is concerned if it fits up properly and the car performs as it should. Thanks for your help.

-Pete

[Guest windjamer]

Jon, thanks for the reply. Tires are exact repos. of what was on the cars when new. Lack of knowlege pertains to the Sterns Knight and the carbs. Owners would love me as I wouldnt know or have any idea what was right or wrong on the vech. I judge 50s and newer as that is what I spent 40+ years working on. I did ONCE:eek: under protest, judge model A,s. I think I drove the team Capt. nuts with (Is this right)? I now visit the model a class of every show I attend local or nat. and question the owners on there cars. Should I ever get stuck judging the model a class again,I may be stupid but it wont show:D

[Guest De Soto Frank]

Peter,

You may have to decide between the lesser of two evils: "incorrect" carb to make the car a reliable and safe driver, and/ or a "correct" ( possibly fragile / semi-functional OEM Tillotson) carb if you're going for points in a show.

I don't know if it's practical to drive onto the field with the replacement carb, then swap-on your authentic Tilltoson for judging ? ( I've heard many stories of folks doing this with batteries, just to avoid taking the hit for a non-authentic, but functioning battery )

[Restorer32]

We showed a 1928 Autocar which was not originally fitted with an electric starter. Fitted a starter to it, fired it up, drove it on to the show field and removed the (non original) starter and replaced the original blank off plate. Broke my arm once cranking it, wasn't going to give it a second chance. I would show the Stearns' with a period correct carb and see how they advance up the Awards ladder. Sometimes tough competition in the class it would be in.

[Guest Peter Woyen]

Yes, we'll have to go with a period correct brass or cast iron bodied carb. We have two original Tillotson's. One was rebuilt about 30 years ago and never run. Nice job and beautiful looking carb until you study it and see all of the tiny cracks and swelling both inside and out. Internal cracks like that render it a useless carb. I won't risk an engine fire or gas leaking on newly restored parts.

Are you in the restoration business or work for one?

-Peter

[Restorer32]

Both and a hobbyist before that. It was more fun as a hobby.

[Guest De Soto Frank]

Yes, we'll have to go with a period correct brass or cast iron bodied carb. We have two original Tillotson's. One was rebuilt about 30 years ago and never run. Nice job and beautiful looking carb until you study it and see all of the tiny cracks and swelling both inside and out. Internal cracks like that render it a useless carb. I won't risk an engine fire or gas leaking on newly restored parts.

Are you in the restoration business or work for one?

-Peter

Swap carbs on the show field, and use the restored Tillotson for your "static display" / judging...

It is interesting that show judging is based primarily (entirely?) on appearance, with no regard to function, other than the vehicle getting onto the show-field under its own power... things like lights, horn, radio, heater, power-accessories, etc. are not checked for function... they just have to "be there, be correct, and look pretty."

So a "pretty" '41 De Soto with non-functioning lights / dead radio / inoperative wipers would always "win" over my trusty-rusty '41 De Soto "jalopy" which does not look great, but EVERY single bit of equipment functions properly ?

I'm "getting into the trees" here... as we go further down the road, perhaps some allowances will have to made in the judging standards just so that vehicles can remain functional ?

In this case, it is a well-known and documented fact that pre-WW II Pot-metal is very unstable and self-destructs over time... how many useable original Tillotson pot-metal carbs for Stearns-Knight are there left?

[MCHinson]

Frank,

I understand your thoughts about the perfect looking non-operational components. The best explanation is that it would be too time consuming to check everything for operation in AACA judging. This would be very difficult to implement with all of the different makes and models of cars judged in AACA competition.

Some clubs that specialize in a particular vehicle check everything for operation, bu they normally judge a smaller number of cars and take a long time to do it.

[Guest De Soto Frank]

Matt,

Yes... MARC and MAFCA, for example, can make an AACA gathering look like cruise-night at the local vintage diner...

( No disrespect intended towards either Model A group or the AACA - just noting how SERIOUS they are about their A's ! )

Perhaps instead of a points-deduction for the non-stock carb in this case, a declaration of substitute equipment ( and why) , accompanied by the authentic carb on display with the car should be considered ?

And if another '29 Stearns-Knight is at the same show, and is equal in every aspect, but is wearing the actual (functioning) carb, it could get "extra credit" ?

This is new territory to me, never having owned a "judgeable" car...

( The '61 Rambler might be an exception...)

But I am quite familiar with the frustration caused by early pot-metal parts...

Cheers ! :cool:

[Steve Moskowitz]

This sure has generated a lot of discussion. The official answer is that a car will be judged according to the specifications when manufactured. So, as others have said, if someone on the team knows the carb is wrong it will be lose points.

Sometimes you have to make a tough decision. Before the electric starters on brass cars was approved we made a decision to "hide" one on the 1911 Olds. Three back surgeries indicated that I should not be cranking a 702 cu. in. engine! Could anyone tell...Nope, the car had a full bellypan. However, if it was found, I knew I had to live with the points deducted.

When my 1908 was restored, I did not put a starter in it as it would have been too obvious so I made the decison to risk cranking the car over. Risk versus reward if you are serious about the competitions.

I think given the car, many times some of us make a change for safety sake or if we just can't find the right part. It is a call we just have to make and hope for the best. I am sure curious now about the other Stearns-Knights that have been shown AACA. I know a lot of guys replaced the Johnson carbs on early Oldsmobiles as they felt it was an inferior carb as well.

Edited June 16, 2010 by Steve Moskowitz (see edit history)

[Mark66A]

Steve: I have photos of 18 of the remaining 8 cyl cars. There are 9 running cars, 8 of which are in the USA - 2 of those in museums - and 1 in Australia. I do not believe any of those have an original Tillotson installed including the one in the AACA museum. Several of the non-running cars have Tillotson carbs still mounted, but I doubt any are able to be saved. A Tillotson was just rebuilt for a third 8 cyl Stearns currently under restoration, but some of the critical parts were re-cast in brass many years ago - thus not at "original" carb either. This carb was likely the largest Tillotson updraft carb made in that era. The 1927 Stearns 8 used an early version of the carb, and the very late 1929 Stearns 8 used a Tillotson 2BBL updraft carb. Anybody ever seen one? An excellent working or restorable carb for these cars would have to be made of that ultra rare metal called unobtanium. Pete and I thank you-all for all the input!