Sign in to follow this  
buick man

Should NOS Torque Ball Boot have part number embossed ?

Recommended Posts

Just picked up what was reported to be  an NOS torque ball boot for the 57 Buick.  Received it but there are no markings nor part numbers anywhere on the rubber.  I seem to recall some years ago I had one with the box and it had numbers embossed on the side.  Could this even be the right one or worse a NORS one ?  I did not get the box with the sale as I thought I would ... Anyone ? Below is the sale photo: 

 

583670604_BootTorqueBall-2.thumb.jpg.807ea28aba00129d0e54229b8cfb6ad5.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never seen such a thing.  Where is this supposed to go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It covers the u-joint at the rear of the transmission.  Buicks has them for many years.  Same idea as an axle boot on a modern car-to keep outside dirt and foreign objects away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The boot looks like one for a 1948-1952 Buick in the catalogs. The last digit written on the box with a black marker looks like the top-half of a "3" was ripped-off and you might have been ripped-off too.  :D   Besides that, Group 5.565, Part #1346201 is correct for a 1953-1954 Torque Ball Boot according to my 1928-1954 BUICK MASTER PARTS BOOK. That part number might be good for additional years beyond 1954 . . . I don't know.  EDIT: correct for 1955 Buicks also. See my post below.

 

Al Malachowski

BCA #8965

"500 Miles West of Flint"

Edited by 1953mack (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1346201 is a 1953 boot.  It is my understanding that a boot was not used when they went to the outer torque ball retainer with the bonded rubber in 1957.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that a 60+ year old rubber part, even if it is NOS, is probably too brittle to be of use other than as a conversation piece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... thanks guys.  Your right Al that is most likely the story with the last digit.  The boot itself however is actually very pliable and like new so is most likely if not factory than aftermarket boot from the 70's or 80's - perhaps.  Anyways, bought the boot without a lot of thought or effort on my part. The ebay seller indicated that the box was to come with the boot but just the boot arrived. The box has the part number but the rubber seal has no I.D. or part number embossed upon it.  Cost me $ 15 so no big deal ... did not do my usual due diligence and this is what happens.  I know that the 57 does not have an external boot so thought it was something additional and did not look up the part number just to see ... don't know what I was thinking 😴 Al, I know you have a 53 and if you could use this boot let me know and I will ship it out to you free of charge. If Al does not want it then anyone else who could use it is welcome to it.  As far as fitment goes I have no idea but It is soft, pliable and undamaged. - dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Dave,

Thanks for the generous offer but it will not work on a 1953 Buick with a Dynaflow transmission. After doing some additional digging, the donut-shaped boot in your picture with the incorrect box is listed in the Buick Part’s Books as Part #1334298 for 70-Series 1948 Buicks with D.F. and 1949-1952 Buicks . . . but a few supply houses say it is also used on some 1953 models but don’t explain which models. Part #1346201 that’s printed on the box is listed in the Buick Part’s Books as the original and correct number for 1953-1955 Buick boots and was replaced by #1170199.  

 

The OEM boots do not have an embossed number and I agree with you that they remain very pliable. I wouldn't hesitate using mine after rebuilding another transmission. 

 

FWIW. 1956 Buick transmissions used two bonded rubber compression rings which acted as a double rubber cushion and seal between the torque ball and the inner and outer retainers. In 1957, a single bonded rubber contact ring between the torque ball and outer retainer formed the oil-tight seal.

 

Al Malachowski

BCA #8965

“500 Miles West of Flint”

 

 1-IMG_1053.thumb.jpg.f0681b7a3890b9de472ac62dd7c5ac4c.jpg      1-Scan-027.thumb.jpg.667b788dbbe5050e19c7adb552ce4143.jpg    1-1-Scan-001.jpg.da87c1ace26a3fe94285dc600eefc034.jpg

Edited by 1953mack (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Wow, thanks Al for the photo clarity and tech info. So it is for a straight eight then .... The 53 Buick Special came with a last year offering from Buick for the straight eight as all other models for 53 and onward now had the new nail head V8 mill from the factory.

Edited by buick man (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this