neil morse Posted March 30 Author Share Posted March 30 1 hour ago, Ben Bruce aka First Born said: Neil, may I ask where you obtained the shiny one? Looks better made than most. Ben I will have to look back and see if I can unearth the origin of those shock links. I suspect I got them from Bob's, but I can't remember for sure. I will let you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootey Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 On 3/28/2024 at 9:28 AM, neil morse said: On 3/27/2024 at 10:08 PM, kgreen said: “Ah ha, the photo above shows your trick to eliminate the clang of the emergency brake hitting the torque tube on a road bump.” Shootey here. After reading about the belling or clanging of the parking brake against the torque tube I looked at how my car was set up. Below is a photo of my front parking brake cable and it’s bracket attached to the torque tube. Notice that there is an extension added to the bracket which lowers the entire cable an inch. This is the same bracket shown in Neil’s photo with the grommet. By lowering the cable, more room is created to prevent the cable from slapping against the torque tube. Ignore the nut you see in the photo. It is part of the cobble job on my setup and it, I think, gave more length to the front cable by mating some threaded rod to the threaded portion of the front cable. I’m speculating that the front cable the prior owner used was several inches too short. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted March 30 Author Share Posted March 30 @Ben Bruce aka First Born, yes, those shock links came from Bob's Automobilia. https://bobsautomobilia.com/shop/suspension-steering/shock-links-1941-53-see-list-sl-412/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted March 30 Author Share Posted March 30 2 hours ago, Shootey said: Shootey here. After reading about the belling or clanging of the parking brake against the torque tube I looked at how my car was set up. Below is a photo of my front parking brake cable and it’s bracket attached to the torque tube. Notice that there is an extension added to the bracket which lowers the entire cable an inch. This is the same bracket shown in Neil’s photo with the grommet. By lowering the cable, more room is created to prevent the cable from slapping against the torque tube. It's interesting that we have now identified two very simple and different ways that people came up with to deal with the clanging of parking brake cable on the torque tube. You would think that Buick would have changed things to eliminate the problem! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmTee Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 On 3/28/2024 at 12:28 PM, neil morse said: Yes, but that is not my trick. That was the fix that was installed by a previous owner -- very simple, a length of heater hose and two zip ties. I read somewhere the torque tube was sometimes referred to as the "Buick bell" because of the clanging sound produced by the cable equalizer hitting the tube. I did something similar to eliminate that 'clang' on my '38. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted March 30 Author Share Posted March 30 Buttoned Back Up I put the cover back on this morning. I made two guide pins by sawing the heads off two bolts to help keep everything lined up. I put a thin coating of black Permatex on the gasket and stuck it on. Next, hung the cover on over the guide pins, coated the threads of the bolts with a bit of Permatex, and bolted everything up. The guide pins made the whole thing easy as pie. I will let everything cure overnight and then fill it up with this GL-4 80W-90 gear oil. I opted for the GL-4 after doing some reading on the forum to make sure I was using something that was okay for yellow metals. A good day. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootey Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Here is a bit of trivia. My car has the brake line routed around the top of the diff housing with a single clip at the 12 o’clock position. Neil’s is routed across the housing with two clips, one on each side. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted March 31 Author Share Posted March 31 For whatever it's worth, the shop manual shows the brake line routed like mine. I filled it up with the new gear oil this morning. I know I was using the right stuff because I felt nauseous for an hour after the job! Now I just have to watch for leaks and hope I don't see any. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted April 8 Author Share Posted April 8 More on Parking Brake Clanging When we were having the discussion about the "Buick bell" phenomenon earlier in this thread, the ever sharp-eyed Thom @Shootey pointed out to me that there was actually a part on the parking brake diagram in the shop manual that was missing from my car. It turns out that this part is, in fact, what the Buick engineers came up with to prevent the clanging of the Buick bell. They are available from Cars, Inc. and they look like this: https://oldbuickparts.com/product/brake-cable-buffer-3/ I ordered one and installed it today. Sure enough, it prevents the "yoke" of the parking brake cables from hitting the torque tube. In the earlier discussion, several people mentioned a "rubber grommet." I just assumed they were talking about the grommet, seen in the top of the photo above, where the threaded shaft goes through the ring attached to the torque tube. If anyone was talking about the "buffer," I apologize for not getting it. In any event, it turns out that Buick had a factory solution to the "clanging" problem, but one that probably didn't hold up too long as the rubber doughnut eventually deteriorated and fell off. In any event, in the interest of authenticity and correctness, I have substituted the buffer for the DIY heater hose solution that the previous owner had installed. 6 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmTee Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 15 hours ago, neil morse said: It turns out that this part is, in fact, what the Buick engineers came up with to prevent the clanging of the Buick bell. They are available from Cars... Well now, that's good to know - thanks, Neil! I'll have to look and see whether there's anything like that shown in my '38 shop manual... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sebastienbuick Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 Thank you very much for this information ! Indeed on my parents' 1941 Buick there was the handbrake cable which hurt the torque tube and I didn't know that originally there was this rubber washer. So I attached the cable so that it no longer moves, but now that I know that there was this rubber washer originally, we are going to order this part ! . THANKS ! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonMicheletti Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 '38 shop manual does not show that grommet (or doughnut) in Fig. 5-6 nor 5-18 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted April 9 Author Share Posted April 9 What a coincidence -- I was just writing this post based on an email exchange I had with Don. Don is too polite to say anything critical here, but he pointed out to me that I actually installed the rubber doughnut incorrectly. I couldn't really tell from the shop manual exactly where it was supposed to go (the drawing is pretty difficult to interpret clearly), but as Don pointed out, the doughnut should be sandwiched in between the metal clip holding the return spring and the "equalizer" (which I called the "yoke" in my earlier post). That way the doughnut is held in place and can't "wander" up the threaded rod. However, as a practical matter, I can tell you that the hole in the doughnut fits very tightly on the threaded rod. In fact, it had to be spun on there like a nut. So I don't think it's actually going anywhere. I have to admit I'm still a bit surprised that these rubber doughnuts seemed to deteriorate so fast back in the day that so many Buicks had the clanging bell problem. It may be that the reproduction sold by Cars, Inc. is an improved version, but it is very hard rubber and quite thick and robust. I know we can't compare our "pampered babies" to cars that were driven thousands of miles in a year, but I would have expected the doughnuts to have lasted longer. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonMicheletti Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 The doughnuts must have been pretty poor because that "bell" was very common to hear on Buicks. You just gotta be old enough to have heard them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootey Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 My 1960 chassis master parts book lists the buffer as follows: ”4.784 Buffer, Hand Brake Cable 1304505 1938 thru 1958 (5/16”I.D x1 1/2” O.D x 1/4” rubber)” 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted July 17 Author Share Posted July 17 Thom's Woody A great day in the Noe Valley neighborhood of San Francisco as Thom ( @Shootey ) took his '41 woody out its first shakedown cruise since he acquired it several years ago. This was literally the first drive other than once around the block, and in the meantime he had done a bunch of work, including installing Century brakes and 15" wheels (recently painted and pinstriped). Here's a little video of the magnificent machine coming into the light of day. A few more pics: The test drive was -- what shall I say -- "instructive." She starts, she stops, but we discovered a very disconcerting tendency for the throttle to stick wide open! Further review revealed that a previous owner (or mechanic) had decided that it was a good idea to adjust the throttle linkage so that the rear carb throttle opened as soon as the front carb. I know from my own car that the carbs were intended to be sequential or progressive -- the rear carb only kicks in after the front carb is at about 75% throttle. My theory is that changing the linkage buggered things up so that it had this tendency to stick. But I don't want to get ahead of myself (or of Thom). Thom is going to tinker with it and we will report on the result. But I have to say it was a treat to ride around the neighborhood in this lovely vehicle, even for just a short time. Other than the throttle problem, it ran well, and I'm sure this bug will be eliminated very soon. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmTee Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 I like it! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonMicheletti Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 Great Thom! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmTee Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 Looks like it has dual exhaust. How is that implemented? Does it have a dual carb exhaust manifold, or does the single pipe split somewhere under the car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootey Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 I’ll let Neil give you a full analysis of the dual pipes as he is interested due to his car’s issues of leaks. But from my owner perspective, the prior owner stated in a March 2008 Woodie Times article that the duals were the only non-stock thing he did in the restoration. I suspect he and his restorer didn’t want to mess with the joining of the two pieces into one. Matt Harwood has previously commented that he doesn’t like the exhaust sound of the duals. Sounds ok to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted July 18 Author Share Posted July 18 The dual exhaust on Thom's car uses the stock twin exhaust manifolds, but then runs separate pipes from each one (instead of the "Y" pipe under the manifolds in the stock system). The front pipe runs under the oil pan and exits out the right side. The rear pipe stays on the left side, following the route of the stock single pipe. Yes, this avoids the problem of a leaky slip joint in the "Y" pipe (which I continue to have trouble with on my Waldron replacement system), but I think it's very unlikely that the previous owner of Thom's car installed the dual system because of any concern about the "Y" pipe. It's a very expensive and labor-intensive way of avoiding a problem that can be solved much more easily! I suspect he just liked the idea of dual exhaust and maybe was trying to improve performance. It definitely has a different sound than my car, but I'm sure that has more to do with the muffler choice than anything else. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted July 19 Author Share Posted July 19 Here's a further report on Thom's woody: Today, I drove my car over to Thom's garage so we could have the ability to do an instant comparison and try to determine exactly what was going on with the throttle linkage on his car. We pretty quickly determined that there were at least two major problems with Thom's car: (1) the control rods to both the front and rear carbs were about 4" longer than they should be; and (2) the two return springs were missing and someone had instead jury-rigged a substitute spring that was completely wrong. After looking at the set up in direct comparison with my car, I was amazed that we were even able to have the short ride that we took two days ago. The control rods on Thom's car looked OEM, but as mentioned were about 4" too long. The rods have a threaded portion at the carb end that allows some adjustment. On Thom's car, the rods had been jammed in by adjusting them to the shortest possible setting (but still too long). This resulted, among other things, in making it so that the rear carb throttle opened as soon as the front. It also resulted in the throttle sticking wide open on both carbs. The explanation? We suspect that the previous owner (or mechanic) had gotten a set of control rods for the Roadmaster/Century engine, and tried to make them work with the Special/Super engine. This makes sense since the 320 engine is about 4" longer than the 248. Just a theory. So Thom is now looking for a pair of correct control rods for the 248 c.i. engine -- if you're reading this and you have any lying around, please let me know! If we can't locate a set of the correct rods, we will use the rods off my car as patterns to fabricate a new set. Also, there were some questions about the dual exhaust system on Thom's car. I took a few photos today that show how it is set up. 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted July 20 Author Share Posted July 20 Further update: We have confirmed that the throttle control rods on Thom's car are for a 320 engine. An elaborate bartering deal involving both Dave Tacheny and Greg ( @2carb40 ) is now underway that will hopefully get a set of the proper 248 rods to Thom. What a great hobby this is -- I am continually grateful for the all the helpful and very nice people involved! 7 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 Grant Zippel Visit I had a great visit today with @Grant Z who is here from Australia taking a drive from Seattle to Los Angeles with the apparent goal of checking out every '41 Buick on the west coast. We went out to lunch in my Super and then went over to @Shootey 's garage so Grant could see Thom's car. Grant showed us a lot of videos and photos he has taken on his trip, and I made him promise to post a thread with photos once he gets home. Here's a photo of Grant (on the left) with Thom, and another of the two Buicks. A great day! 10 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgreen Posted July 25 Share Posted July 25 Great looking woodie Thom! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted August 7 Author Share Posted August 7 (edited) Oddest Comment Yet Over the seven years I have owned my Super, I have gotten many comments from people. Almost all are positive, "What a beauty," "So nice," "My father had a Hudson just like this," etc. Some are a bit off-the-wall, "Wow, where's your tommy gun?," or "Didn't Al Capone drive a car like this?" Today, I came back to where my car was parked to find a guy studying it. As I usually do, I said, "Would you like to look inside?" He said no, and then said, "I hope you don't mind me for saying this, but this looks like a car that Adolf Hitler would drive." I was speechless for a moment, but then explained to him that Hitler had plenty of German cars in 1941 and would not have driven a Buick. You can't make this stuff up! Edited August 7 by neil morse (see edit history) 2 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew_Latvia Posted August 8 Share Posted August 8 On 8/7/2024 at 6:42 AM, neil morse said: Oddest Comment Yet Over the seven years I have owned my Super, I have gotten many comments from people. Almost all are positive, "What a beauty," "So nice," "My father had a Hudson just like this," etc. Some are a bit off-the-wall, "Wow, where's your tommy gun?," or "Didn't Al Capone drive a car like this?" Today, I came back to where my car was parked to find a guy studying it. As I usually do, I said, "Would you like to look inside?" He said no, and then said, "I hope you don't mind me for saying this, but this looks like a car that Adolf Hitler would drive." I was speechless for a moment, but then explained to him that Hitler had plenty of German cars in 1941 and would not have driven a Buick. You can't make this stuff up! My imagination must be very weak, as I never wouldn't think of Buick as a Hitler's car.🤦♂️😁 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee H Posted August 8 Share Posted August 8 If this was San Francisco, he probably just thought you were a (self-deleted due to partisan politics ban). 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buicknutty Posted September 18 Share Posted September 18 On 8/6/2024 at 11:42 PM, neil morse said: Oddest Comment Yet Over the seven years I have owned my Super, I have gotten many comments from people. Almost all are positive, "What a beauty," "So nice," "My father had a Hudson just like this," etc. Some are a bit off-the-wall, "Wow, where's your tommy gun?," or "Didn't Al Capone drive a car like this?" Today, I came back to where my car was parked to find a guy studying it. As I usually do, I said, "Would you like to look inside?" He said no, and then said, "I hope you don't mind me for saying this, but this looks like a car that Adolf Hitler would drive." I was speechless for a moment, but then explained to him that Hitler had plenty of German cars in 1941 and would not have driven a Buick. You can't make this stuff up! That's rather incredible! I guess he perhaps meant the style or era? But Hitler?? Wow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmTee Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 Similar to the 'gangster' comments I occasionally receive about my '38... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted Saturday at 02:57 AM Author Share Posted Saturday at 02:57 AM Compound Carburation Adventures This is a somewhat complicated story that I thought I would post because I thought it might be helpful to other ’41 and ’42 owners dealing with the stock dual carb (compound carburetion) system. In the course of trying to get Thom’s (@Shootey ) woodie sorted out, we were using my car as the model of how things were supposed to be. But thanks to the input of my buddy Konrad, we discovered that both my car and Thom’s car had (different) problems with the throttle linkage. It turned out that neither car was set up properly. I had been happily driving my Super for seven years since I bought it without understanding that anything was wrong with the linkage. But I learned that I had a problem that I was unaware of that was sapping my Super of its jack rabbit acceleration! If you own a ’41 or ’42 that’s set up properly, you don’t need to read further. But if you’re curious, here’s the story. Let’s start with how the set up is supposed to work. The focus here is the two-stage bell crank that transfers throttle response from the accelerator pedal first to just the front carb and then to both the front and rear carbs. (Just a reminder here: the dual carbs are set up to work sequentially – a forerunner of the 4-barrel carb.) Here’s a video of the bell crank on my car once I fixed the problem. You can see that the initial depression of the pedal only activates the control rod connected to the front carb (on the right in the video). At about one-third throttle, the second arm (on the left in the video) starts to push the control rod connected to the rear carb, and both throttles are fully open when the pedal is fully depressed. Here are some still photos of a replacement bell crank that Thom got that show how it works. The arm that’s connected to a rod from the accelerator pedal on one side and a rod to the front carb on the other side moves first to open the throttle of the front carb. Then a tab on the side of the arm engages the second arm connected to a rod to the rear carb and the rear carb throttle opens as well. So what can possibly go wrong? (Check back to the video if you are confused.) Well, two different things can go wrong, as we learned. First, here are several photos of the assembly from Thom’s car. You can see that the hinge pin is so badly worn (It had two deep grooves in it) that the two arm assemblies are able to get so cattywampus (technical term) that the tab on the arm connected to the front carb bypasses the other arm that it’s supposed to be pushing. As you can see, the paint has been scratched off where the tab contacts the side of the arm, evidence that this problem had been present for a while. A second (related) problem can occur if the arm attached to the rear carb control rod gets bent. The result is the same – the tab simply bypasses the arm instead of pushing on it. This was the problem with my car. When I disassembled it I found that the hinge pin was solid with no wear, but the bent arm meant that there wasn’t even the interference contact between the two arms that we saw on Thom’s car – the arm driven by the accelerator pedal just missed the other arm altogether. I unfortunately was a little late taking photos of my car so I don’t have a very good shot of what the situation was. But this photo (which you see was taken after I had removed the Jesus clip holding the assembly together and started to disassemble it) shows how the the tab on one arm was slipping by without engaging the other arm. So how, you may ask, was the rear carb throttle opening at all on my car? This really gets us into the weeds, but let me attempt to explain how someone jury rigged my car so it “sort of” worked but really didn’t. As we have seen, if the assembly is properly aligned, the tab on the front carb arm will push the rear carb arm at about one-third throttle. But even if the tab doesn’t contact the other arm at all, the movement of the front carb arm will eventually move the rear carb arm because the two arms bind against each other where the spring attachment is located above the hinge pin. But this is only at the very end of the travel of the front carb arm. (If you’ve gotten this far, I congratulate you because this is one of the most difficult things I’ve ever tried to explain in writing!) So … what a previous owner did on my car was simply adjust the rear carb control rod so that it DID open the throttle on the rear carb, but only at the very end of the pedal travel when the binding of the two arms caused the rear carb arm to move. This “sort of” worked because it DID result in both throttles being completely opened when the accelerator was on the floor. But the rear carb throttle opened much later in the throttle curve than it was supposed to. And not knowing any better, I just figured this was the way it was supposed to be. I could pull on the front carb control rod and see that it eventually caused the rear carb throttle to open, and so I thought everything was functioning the way it was supposed to. The solution for Thom was to locate and purchase a replacement bell crank assembly (shown in the photos). We will be installing it soon with hope that Thom’s woodie will finally be roadworthy. The solution for me was just to remove the rear carb arm, put it in a vise, and bend it back to where it should have been. I have noticed a significant improvement in acceleration, and I can now feel with my foot when the rear carb opens. I’m not exactly headed for the drag strip with my Super, but I’m happy to be experiencing the performance that it was intended to have when it came from the factory! 5 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnD1956 Posted Saturday at 03:04 PM Share Posted Saturday at 03:04 PM @neil morse great job writing that up. Sounds like an article Pete P would be interested in for the Bugle. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootey Posted Saturday at 05:51 PM Share Posted Saturday at 05:51 PM Yes Neil, a great writeup. Here are a couple more points about wear. The attached photo is a blown up crop of page 88A from the 1951 chassis parts book. The sloppiness of my original bell crank is in part attributable to wear on the hinge pin as Neil stated. There was also significant wear on the holes—holes on the two levers both where they mount on the hinge pin and where the long control rods attach to the levers. There is one final hole where the accelerator pedal rod attaches to the front carb lever. These holes got oblong and allowed for even more slop. One last place for wear is on the bell crank ends of the three rods. Mine had shallow grooves worn into them. As @2carb40 advised me, an engineering maxim is that several small problems, each innocuous, can add up to one big problem. That was likely the case with my original bell crank. The replacement bell crank I was able to obtain had essentially no wear. Thom aka Shootey 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonMicheletti Posted Saturday at 06:19 PM Share Posted Saturday at 06:19 PM Try explaining the operation of a differential with words. Great write-up Neil. Those are pretty robust parts, I wonder how they became bent or worn so much. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil morse Posted Saturday at 06:44 PM Author Share Posted Saturday at 06:44 PM Haha -- yes, I couldn't even begin to explain a differential! As far as your questions, I think the issue of the bent arm is pretty easily answered. Yes, those parts are pretty robust and I had to use quite a bit of force (hitting it with a hammer in a vise) to bend the arm on my car back to correct shape. But as Konrad noticed when we were working on the cars last week, that arm is only a few inches away from the bell housing. Konrad theorized (and I think it makes good sense) that the arm on my car could have been bent by being whacked with the bell housing when someone was either taking the engine out or (even more likely) when they were putting it back in. As far as the wear question, I would defer to your experience with metals. I don't know anything about different grades of steel, etc., but it's clear from the assembly from Thom's car that it had a great deal of use and the steel just wasn't up to the task. I think Thom estimates that his car had about 125K miles on it. Maybe the Buick engineers just didn't anticipate that much use? It also makes me wonder about my car. It had 38K miles on the clock when I bought it, and I've never known whether that was 38 or 138. I'm now thinking that maybe it was only 38 since the hinge pin on my car had no discernable wear at all compared to the one on Thom's car which was a mess. 4 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