SpecialEducation Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Because fuel pumps never fail at the END of the season... Anybody running a truck pump on their Buick? We've never had our original pump off, we just keep replacing the top diaphragm. They last longer now that we avoid ethanol, but they still don't seem to last more than a couple years. Parts store doesn't have any 1956 Buick pumps, but they do have NEW 1958 GMC 322 pumps for $50. Not worried about the vacuum side, but the fuel in & out are clocked different... Thoughts? Glad to see the forums still hate unedited iPhone pix, too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NC-car-guy Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Why is the arm so different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpecialEducation Posted June 10, 2017 Author Share Posted June 10, 2017 Just now, wndsofchng06 said: Why is the arm so different I donno, what does normal look like? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemon Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 That's a 56 pump. The pump they gave you looks like a SBC pump. You could maybe swap arms? I'm not sure. Your best bet, if you're willing to go the extra mile, would be to swap a 57-61 timing cover and then use the over the counter 364/401/425 pump. Otherwise, stick with what you've got. You could call Russ and see if he has any truck pumps, but expect to be rebuilding them the same. Or, upgrade the pump with ethanol parts and forget about it. Before I tore my car apart, I was driving on 2 years with the same pump almost daily without issue. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1956322 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Yeah the pump you're showing isn't for a 322.. You can use a truck pump out of a heavy duty Chevy truck from I think 56-59...gmc used Pontiac motors Chevy used Buick.. But I think the pump you're showing is for an inline 6... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NTX5467 Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 As a side note . . . with Nailhead production having TWO sections . . . Nailhead I being the 264 & 322, engine in model year 1956 and Nailhead II being the 1957 364-401-425 versions, I'm wondering if the 1958 model year hd truck 322 is actually a smaller Nailhead II architecture engine? if that engine would use the same pump as a 364-401 motor? We know the camshafts have differences, which would also relate to block castings, along with timing sprockets and chains, so might that hd truck 322 be more related to Nailhead II motors? As someone noted, in the discussion of modifying 401 camshafts for a Nailhead I 322 in a '56 Buick, the 322s have fewer things available for them as the 364-401 engines are more modern and popular, by comparison. Just curious . . . NTX5467 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1956322 Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 According to Russell Martin the HD Chevy Buick 322 fuel pump can be used on all 322s... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 12 hours ago, Beemon said: That's a 56 pump. The pump they gave you looks like a SBC pump. You could maybe swap arms? I'm not sure. Your best bet, if you're willing to go the extra mile, would be to swap a 57-61 timing cover and then use the over the counter 364/401/425 pump. Otherwise, stick with what you've got. You could call Russ and see if he has any truck pumps, but expect to be rebuilding them the same. Or, upgrade the pump with ethanol parts and forget about it. Before I tore my car apart, I was driving on 2 years with the same pump almost daily without issue. What's the rest of the story on modifying to a newer front cover? Didn't the water pump have to be newer, but not past 61? Pulley alignment same? Thanks for the reminder! I'm gonna have to sort that out soon if the radiator guy finally checks my radiator out after farm tractor priorities and being called to jury duty and now I get to be a lucky captive audience to all this drama, as I wait, with no idea how tied up the jury duty will make him, ahhhhhh!, He said, running for the shelter of his mother's little helper! Oh wait, that's a different story. Thanks again for reminding me about that possible upgrade on the timing cover. I now know I won't be rushed for time doin it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemon Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 Greg, 56 to 61 I think is the same pattern, then 62-66 is the bigger pump that you can still buy new. If you use the 56-61 pump with the earlier cover, everything should line up. I'm not too sure about the later pump, but for $50 it doesn't hurt to try. I think 60 was the first year for the aluminum cover. The TA Performance cover covers 56-66, but is $300. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old-tank Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 I am using a the chevy truck pump on my 264 in the 51 f-1 The kit below will also work to rebuild just the fuel portion of the dome top 56 fuel pump. Then And Now Automotive 447 Washington St. Weymouth, Ma. 02188 781-335-8860 part # FPA219 Most of the pumps of that era shared the same internal parts like diaphragms, which can be swapped as can the arms. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 (edited) Thanx 4 all the studied responses. One of the anecdotal findings folks have observed is the tendancy for the 62& and newer timing covers to corrode behind the pump impellor and in an area that allows antifreeze to leak into oil passages with possible disastrous consequences. The alumin covers made prior to 62 dont seem to exhibit this problem near as much. Ill be choosing a prior 62 cover, as I can confirm this caveat is accurate, based on my own disassembly of numerous nailheads with aluminum covers. The attraction of the reproduced covers is you SHOULD not have to worry about water pump flow or intrusion of anti-freeze into to engine oil. Careful inspection and monitoring of condition of oil, (no milky look), should be safe enuff, IMHO, to use the first gen(pre62) covers, saving some dough, leaving you with MO bucks, ah ha ha! Devils in the details to keep you from the horns of a delema. Wish i cood spel! Edited June 11, 2017 by Guest (see edit history) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemon Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 7 hours ago, old-tank said: Most of the pumps of that era shared the same internal parts like diaphragms, which can be swapped as can the arms. Swapping arms is no big deal, then. Might be worth looking in to, but the aluminum cover shaves off 60lbs, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NC-car-guy Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 60??? I must be stronger than I thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemon Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 Hyperbole, probably closer to 20 or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NTX5467 Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 Why not print one up in composite NTX5467 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpecialEducation Posted June 12, 2017 Author Share Posted June 12, 2017 12 hours ago, NTX5467 said: Why not print one up in composite NTX5467 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NTX5467 Posted June 13, 2017 Share Posted June 13, 2017 With the two versions of the aluminum housing, are there any casting differences which might cause the different durability issues? Many coolant formulations, back then, did not have "ratings" for aluminum, but I seem to remember some brands having products specifically for aluminum engine parts (which were just coming into mass production in the earlier 1960s, even engine blocks, in some cases). OR possibly was there a different mixture of aluminum alloy in the later pumps? Considering economic issues when the later pumps might have been original spec'd out might have dictated a less expensive mix? Just curious. NTX5467 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpecialEducation Posted June 13, 2017 Author Share Posted June 13, 2017 Well, alcohol was still standard in early '56. "Permanent" antifreeze was an option mid-year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now