The Car Which Shall Not Be Named III (1935 Lincoln K)

[Matt Harwood]

Water pump and generator are back in (with new gaskets), all the oil lines are hooked (up with new gaskets), the water manifold is attached (with new gaskets), and it all seems to be sealed up. The generator is generating, which was a big relief. Melanie helped me once again with hoisting the generator/water pump assembly into place using the cherry picker. I left the mounting nuts a little loose so it would be easier to wiggle everything into place. This was the easiest installation yet, so hopefully it will also be the last. I'm sick of making gaskets.

 

I had to call Melanie to come back to the shop so she could hold the hood open while I filled the radiator. Ordinarily I'd use a prop rod to hold it high enough to access the filler neck (which is stupidly located almost directly under the center of the hood) but since the last time I used a prop rod the whole hood broke loose, I decided not to chance it. Melanie held the hood open while I filled it up. All good. I will never trust that hood again.

 

We let it idle for about 15 minutes and there were a few drips from the water pump packing nut, but nothing like before. I tightened it about half a turn. We'll see if that holds once we get a chance to drive it. 

 

All that's left is a ton of clean up, an oil change, and a few little detail things, but the car should be ready to tour this summer. A big relief.

[AB-Buff]

Matt, I’ve been wanting to tell you about the hood. Once you put the new rubber corners on from Ray, you really don’t have to worry about it, but I do because it can cause some serious damage if the wind picks it up and happens to fall off. I was at a Lincoln picnic and I saw some guy that had a broom handle sticking in his hood, it look pretty tacky and I thought what would look a little classier. I am a collector of vintage valve sticks probably have over 30 of them around here so I grabbed some that look nice, I carry two with me and I slip them in just like the photo. It has kept the hood from falling down and it doesn’t look too bad. And it might even start a conversation on what is that. I think it works well a little bit of insurance.
L

[8E45E]

I would repurpose a genuine Gatsby Cane for that.

 

Craig

[Matt Harwood]

Even though everything was technically finished last week, I still had a lot of routine maintenance to do today. Firstly I wanted to fill the cooling system with something other than water, lest it start rusting again. So I opened the petcock and let the water drain out. 

 

While it was doing that, I removed the air filter to have a look inside. It's not a particularly effective piece and I think even Lincoln called it a 'silencer' rather than a 'filter.' When I assembled it, it put some fresh copper mesh in there, which was more for looks than anything else--it probably kept birds out but not much else. I saw a video with a skillful lady mechanic working on a Porsche 356 like the one I just acquired, and she used a foam air filter hidden inside the original air filter housing. Good idea! So I bought a K&N foam filter designed to wrap around the outside of an open-element filter on something like a muscle car. 

 

Air filter housing on the bench.

 

Copper mesh that I installed when the engine was

first finished was slowly being ingested by the

carburetor. Good thing I went in when I did.

 

Even with the mesh, it wasn't doing much 

actual filtering of the air.

 

  

I bought a K&N foam filter and cut it to fit inside the

air filter housing. I initially thought I'd also install the

copper mesh just for looks, but it wasn't feasible.

 

Foam was a little bit too RED and would

probably show in the engine bay.

 

I disguised it with a light coat of black spray paint.

Once the paint was dry, I oiled it with some

spray-on K&N filter oil that helps trap

extra particles. I'll pull it out each spring

and clean the filter.

 

 

Painted and oiled foam fits neatly inside the

filter housing and won't get sucked into

the carburetor throat like the copper mesh.

 

Once the air filter was finished, I reinstalled it and closed the cooling system drain. Then I filled it with 32 ounces of No-Rosion, 3 gallons of green anti-freeze, and about 4 gallons of purified water (not quite, since the No-Rosion took up some space). Melanie wasn't available to hold the hood, so I made myself a custom hood holder to hopefully cure my issues with the hood falling. I used a plastic tube that was just the right length and cut some slots on one end. Those slots would fit on a little square metal shield that protects the thermostat for the side louvers. With the lower end of the tube secured on a handy bolt head and braced against the radiator support rod, I was able to prop the hood open much more securely than before. Hopefully it never falls again.

 

  

New hood prop rod should cure my falling

hood problems.

 

Seven gallons of old, contaminated coolant,

ready to recycle.

 

Once the cooling system was full, I used my bleeder valve on the water pump to eliminate the air bubble in that location, then pulled the oil drain plug. It was REALLY tight, probably because I kept snugging it up to kill a leak. I used a copper crush washer last time I changed the oil, but it wasn't very effective. I used an O-ring this time to hopefully get a better seal. Oddly enough, the oil drain plug was the biggest leak I had on the new engine, so I'd like to cure it.

 

 

O-ring replaces copper crush washer to hopefully

eliminate a leak at the drain plug. For future

reference, the drain plug is 1-1/8" and takes a

7/8" O-ring.

 

I've been fighting an oil pressure problem since I started driving the car, and my next step was to use some straight 50-weight oil. I think with more than 1400 miles on it since it was finished, switching to synthetic is OK at this point--it should be fully broken-in. The only brand of synthetic oil with an SAE 50 is Royal Purple, which I've used before in my Audi Ute (particularly the gearbox, which shifts like butter now). I bought 12 quarts of the stuff for the Lincoln. 

 

Filled the sump with THREE GALLONS of

this stuff. It was the only straight

SAE 50 synthetic available, but

it should be more than adequate.

 

Then it was time to fire it up. With a little cranking, it finally fired and ran extremely smoothly--noticeably smoother than before. It clearly likes the thicker oil. Oil pressure was EXCELLENT at about 55 PSI at idle, but bear in mind the engine was cold. It sure sounds sweet:

 

 

Feeling good, I cleaned up and got behind the wheel. I drove it on my usual 20-mile test loop just to see how it felt. Pretty much the same as always, good power, very smooth, lots of torque. Oil pressure was better than usual throughout the drive, never dropping below about 30 PSI on the roll and staying above 10 PSI at idle, both improvements. However, it was also only 45 degrees outside, so that's definitely a factor. We'll see how it goes on a 90-degree day. And as always, the engine ran at ambient + 100 degrees, staying rock-steady at 140 degrees throughout the drive.

 

LOTS of oil pressure at start-up.

 

The only thing on my mind was seeing the ammeter slowly creeping up to +20 amps or so. That's a lot, and more than I've seen in driving before. I suspect that the third brush has moved (or is moving due to vibrations during driving) and is increasing the charging rate. I need to figure out how to secure that third brush to keep it from wandering around. Should be easy enough, right? I turned on the headlights to reduce the strain on the batteries and finished my drive without incident.

 

When I arrived back at the shop, I let it idle for a minute and looked underneath--this is when the water pump would start leaking. No leaks now! We'll see how it looks tomorrow or Monday to see if it leaks after it's been parked. I sincerely hope the water pump issue is solved. I do NOT want to take this thing apart ever again.

 

NOW the car is ready for the summer. I need to clean it up a bit, but mechanically, I think it's 100% ready to rock. 

 

Me, however? I'm more sore than I've been, maybe ever. I spent a lot of time crawling under the car and getting back up, and I guess I'm not as young as I used to be. That was an unhappy realization. I'm gonna go relax and watch the Maple Leafs in the NHL playoffs...

 

 

Edited April 21 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[dalef62]

Be very careful with that rubber O ring!  It could slowly work its way out and cause a major leak! 

[Laughing Coyote]

1 hour ago, dalef62 said:

Be very careful with that rubber O ring!  It could slowly work its way out and cause a major leak! 

I used one of those metal washers with the rubber seal fused into the ID of the washer. No leaks. 

 

 

[Laughing Coyote]

2 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

Me, however? I'm more sore than I've been, maybe ever. I spent a lot of time crawling under the car and getting back up, and I guess I'm not as young as I used to be.

I hear you on that Matt. Changed out 8 body bushings on my 73 Vette today. Rolling around on the floor, tugging, lifting, and everything else to get them all in. Now I'm sitting here with a sore back and aches in places I haven't felt in a while. The love of old cars.

[Matt Harwood]

So back to the generator. My generator expert who fixed it said the third brush was all the way advanced, which blew the fuse and burned up the old regulator. He reset it to its lowest setting, but was unable to "lock" it in place because of the unique mechanism that allows it to be adjusted using an external screw. So it's not exactly "loose" in there, but it can possibly move on its own.

 

Towards the end of yesterday's drive, it was showing 20 amps on the ammeter and about 5 amps with the headlights on. That's obviously too much. But why?

 

I opened the generator today and moved the third brush around. It was almost all the way to the minimum end, so it hadn't moved much, if at all. So why was it cranking out so much current yesterday?

 

I experimented a bit in the shop, moving it around a bit, turning the headlights on, turning up the idle, and seeing where it would go. It was inconsistent, sometimes charging, sometimes showing 0, sometimes showing a strong discharge even at higher RPM. Is this the regulator's normal operation? It took quite a bit of cranking to get the engine started yesterday--was the 20 amps just the regulator trying to put all that electricity back in? Would it really take 15 miles of driving to do it? Can the regulator even get to 20 amps if the third brush isn't in position to do it? I have so many questions.

 

I took another drive and it seemed to stabilize at about 9-10 amps. Turning on the parking lights and it dropped to about +5, and with the headlights it was about -5. That tracks, since the headlights seem to draw about 15 amps. A lot, but consistent.

 

I'm not really sure how the system is supposed to operate, to be honest. The primitive regulator may be doing something, but I don't know how it does what it does and therefore I can't determine whether it's working properly. I feel that a constant +10 amps is too much, so I may try to turn it down a little more and see what happens. But without any way of locking the third brush in place, maybe it'll move again? I don't know.

 

Am I over-thinking this? It was stable and predictable before the regulator blew up, and now it's wonky. Should I just not worry about it unless it starts to cook itself? Will I even notice before it's completely fried again? I never saw what happened last time, it was just suddenly broken.

 

One solution would be an electronic regulator but the guy who makes them is dead, so I'm kind of SOL there. Maybe rewiring it to use a Delco regulator like in my '41 Buick is a different solution? I'd like to eliminate the third brush to get rid of this concern that it will eventually go to max output and fry itself again.

 

Oh, and the water pump is slinging graphite paste. I'm guessing the shaft is just rough enough to chew up the packing. We'll see how long it holds...

[Bloo]

This has a voltage regulator, right? It sounds like the points might be stuck.

 

I don't see why the third brush is having that much effect. In a system with a voltage regulator, the current regulation (third brush) mostly exists to protect the generator. Sure it should be set right, but on a car with a voltage regulator that is driven and doesn't have a half dead battery, I wouldn't expect it to matter much.

 

When you have third brush WITHOUT a voltage regulator, the generator tries to do its maximum CURRENT (Amps) setting all the time, as much as it can. It can't at idle obviously because it is a generator. As you go faster current rises until it reaches some magic point, and then as you go even faster the current goes down. This is just a characteristic of a third brush generator. It is not ideal, but it's OK until the battery gets full. After the battery gets full, the third brush generator keeps charging at whatever it current it was charging at before. The battery cannot do anything useful with this because it is full, so it has to dissipate all that power as heat. The battery might boil.

 

In a third brush system WITH a voltage regulator, the third brush current (Amps) is set to a safe maximum for the generator. It is mainly for generator protection. In some systems the third brush is even riveted in place. Why? Because with a voltage regulator, the voltage is held to some pre-set maximum. As long as the generator is keeping up it tops off the battery and continues with only a trickle charge just exactly like a modern alternator would. As long as the voltage regulator is working and set properly, it can't really overcharge because when the system voltage gets to the level the voltage regulator is set to, the VOLTAGE regulator cuts back the charge rate to a trickle. CURRENT (Amps) should be super low at that point no matter what.

 

If you charge a dead battery with a voltage regulated source like an alternator, or a generator with a voltage regulator, the voltage remains constant. It will be about 7.5 volts on a 6 volt car (at room temperature) for best results. The dead battery will draw almost no current at first. When it gets charged partway it draws a bunch of current for a while, and then as it gets close to full it draws less current.

 

In a normal situation, with the battery fully charged, when you start the car you should see it charge pretty hard at first as it replaces the energy used starting the car, but right away it should taper done to almost nothing. It is exactly what you would see on a more modern car. Current regulation (third brush) enters into this little if at all.

 

When current regulation matters is when the battery is half dead. The generator will charge as hard as it can trying to get to the system up to the voltage regulator set voltage (7.5 volts or so). It will give the battery all it asks for. If the battery asks for more than the generator can safely do, the generator will do its best, even if it means burning itself up. Something must hold the generator back to protect it. That is why systems like this (third brush plus a voltage regulator) still have a third brush for current regulation.

 

A current regulator would also work for protection, and on two brush generators that is typically how it is done. In that case the maximum current available is unrelated to vehicle speed, and that is an improvement. In a regularly driven car with a two brush generator and a good battery, the current regulator never does anything at all, sometimes for years.

 

 

Edited April 21 by Bloo (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

Thanks, @Bloo. I think the problem is that what Lincoln called a "voltage regulator" is really just a primitive hi/low switch. I was reading my massive National Service Manual last night for the description of how the system works. It only has one coil with one set of points to regulate voltage, plus a cut-out. The voltage coil is normally closed and once battery voltage gets to a certain level, they open, which should drop generator output to half its former level. It's not really regulating the current to match the battery's needs, it's just going as hard as the third brush will allow, and once the battery is mostly topped off, it drops to a lower level. I have not seen that on the ammeter while driving, but it's apparently supposed to happen.

 

This sort-of tracks with what I was experiencing, although 20 amps seems like a lot. I'm going to leave it alone at about 9-10 amps and see how it behaves once we have some warmer weather. There are also some tests described in the manual where I can apparently hook up a volt meter and watch the points switch from hi to low range (which is a difference of about 1.2 volts).

 

The good news is that it's charging. Fine-tuning it will hopefully be easy and I think I can devise a way to lock down the third brush to keep it from moving around--maybe a piece of plastic in there somehow so it's non-conductive. I'm running dual Optima batteries, so I think they're probably tough enough to handle 8-10 amps constant charge and if I get concerned that they're over-charging on a long drive, I can always turn the lights on for a while.

 

I did send an E-mail to the one guy in the world who has one last Peterson solid-state regulator for these cars, begging him to sell it to me. We'll see if I get lucky...

[EmTee]

Have you verified the battery's state of charge?  How old is it?  Could the battery be the problem?  Based on your description of the 'regulator' and Bloo's preceding theory of operation, I might try running a points file through the contacts once or twice, followed by a piece of paper soaked with contact cleaner.  Does the shop manual specify a regulator point gap or spring tension?

 

Edited April 22 by EmTee (see edit history)

[ply33]

I don't think the 3rd brush setup was a much of a problem back in the day as you were driving the car daily on a pretty regular schedule, say to & from work, so the charging requirements were much the same from day to day and only needed adjusting with the seasons (colder & more headlight use in winter needed a different setting that summer, etc.).

 

But for a collector car that is not doing the same drive every day the situation is different. If you are planning on driving the vehicle a lot in a mix of local and road trips, that hidden electronic voltage regulator that Peterson made is a really great change. For short local trips you want a fairly high charge rate to replenish the charge lost when cranking. For road trips you want a much lower charge rate. Except at night when you want a higher output. With a straight 3rd brush setup for current regulation you end up having to adjust it all the time and/or play with the headlights to keep the battery charging about right. With that regulator you just get in and drive.

 

Assuming he is still around making them, I highly recommend getting one.

 

It is one of the two modifications away from stock on my old car, completely reversible, that I am really glad I did it about 20 or 25 years ago. The other modification from stock for me is getting quartz-halogen bulbs for my headlights, again totally reversible. I'd do LED headlight “bulbs” but I am not aware of any that properly focus in my bulb & reflector style headlight.

[Matt Harwood]

7 minutes ago, ply33 said:

Assuming he is still around making them, I highly recommend getting one.

Unfortunately, Mr. Peterson passed away in 2022. One of the Lincoln Club members had the foresight to purchase a bunch of Lincoln-compatible regulators, but he's down to one and he's saving it as a replacement for the one that's on his car, should it ever fail (that's the one I'm trying to buy). @AB-Buff has another one that he's trying to reverse-engineer, so I'm hoping that project bears some fruit.

[DavidMc]

I am not sure how relevant this is, I restored a 1920's Packard many years ago and in the process had an auto electrician check the generator.  He removed the third brush and cut out and fitted a voltage regulator from an early 6V Volkswagon.  It worked very well - initially.  The ammeter would show about 20 amps after starting the engine, then slowly reduce as the battery charged.  Some time later the generator failed because solder in the windings had melted. 

Further investigation confirmed that this generator should not exceed about 8 amps otherwise it will overheat as mine did.  The problem with many of the generators of the era is that they are located in hot areas of the engine bay and poorly cooled.

[John E. Guitar]

9 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

Unfortunately, Mr. Peterson passed away in 2022. One of the Lincoln Club members had the foresight to purchase a bunch of Lincoln-compatible regulators, but he's down to one and he's saving it as a replacement for the one that's on his car, should it ever fail (that's the one I'm trying to buy). @AB-Buff has another one that he's trying to reverse-engineer, so I'm hoping that project bears some fruit.

Matt, a few Model T guys with electronics backgrounds have developed a new electronic voltage regulator for the Model T/Model A. If you haven't already checked with them they might have something that would work with your car. The guy actually making them is a Porsche/Model T guy (rare combination) in California.

 

https://modeltstarters.com/voltage-regulators-cutouts/

 

https://modeltstarters.com/contact/

 

https://www.mtfca.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=38035

[ply33]

45 minutes ago, John E. Guitar said:

Matt, a few Model T guys with electronics backgrounds have developed a new electronic voltage regulator for the Model T/Model A. If you haven't already checked with them they might have something that would work with your car. The guy actually making them is a Porsche/Model T guy (rare combination) in California.

 

https://modeltstarters.com/voltage-regulators-cutouts/

 

https://modeltstarters.com/contact/

 

https://www.mtfca.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=38035

That looks like a different approach to the problem than Mr. Peterson took. Peterson’s regulator fit inside the generator and replaced the third brush for powering the field coils. Nice smooth operation and you use the original cutout or, by cutting a jumper to change the voltage set point, a cutout that has a diode replacing the original contacts.

 

The one linked to looks like it is a replacement cutout that toggles the output on and off based on the system voltage. I guess it would work but the videos show it switching between discharge and charge periodically which would bother me. And I wonder how high the no-current voltage generation inside the generator might get. I am not an expert but I’d want some assurance that the insulation on the armature and field coils, etc. can stand up to that abuse.

 

If @AB-Buff can successfully reverse engineer Peterson’s design I think will will be a nicer solution.

[Bloo]

14 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

It only has one coil with one set of points to regulate voltage, plus a cut-out. The voltage coil is normally closed and once battery voltage gets to a certain level, they open, which should drop generator output to half its former level. It's not really regulating the current to match the battery's needs, it's just going as hard as the third brush will allow, and once the battery is mostly topped off, it drops to a lower level. I have not seen that on the ammeter while driving, but it's apparently supposed to happen.

It absolutely should. That's pretty much how a voltage regulator works. Apparently not all of them buzz, most do. I don't know why some don't, maybe Delco had a patent? I've never seen any evidence of that, but in the mid 30s Autolite had something called "two charge" that apparently(?) ran on a longer hysteresis loop. It probably wasn't very long. In any event a year or two later Autolite was making regulators that buzz like most of the others. The idea was the same though, cut way back when the voltage gets to 7.5 (or so) and let the system cycle, and let the battery do the rest.

 

Believe the manual about the voltage though. Most 6 volt cars are 7.4-7.6 volts depending on what system, but if uses something weird like a long hysteresis loop, I guess it could be different. Probably not too different. I'm not sure about that.

 

Some regulators add an additional level of sophistication with a second contact point that shorts out the field entirely if the voltage drifts high after the regulator has been on low a while. This contact also buzzes if the voltage gets high enough in most systems I have seen. The mechanical regulators for Chrysler "roundback" alternators did this. There were a few others with the extra contact, but a majority of regulators just have high and low, and most buzz when they are at system voltage.

 

13 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

Unfortunately, Mr. Peterson passed away in 2022. One of the Lincoln Club members had the foresight to purchase a bunch of Lincoln-compatible regulators, but he's down to one and he's saving it as a replacement for the one that's on his car, should it ever fail (that's the one I'm trying to buy). @AB-Buff has another one that he's trying to reverse-engineer, so I'm hoping that project bears some fruit.

Those got good reviews from just about everybody who ever had one. I have seen a technical description somewhere but I still don't understand how they work. it can't really be a traditional voltage regulator controlling the field based on system voltage, because if so it would still need the third brush to protect the generator, and I am pretty sure the third brush gets disabled with the Peterson system.

 

3 hours ago, John E. Guitar said:

Matt, a few Model T guys with electronics backgrounds have developed a new electronic voltage regulator for the Model T/Model A. If you haven't already checked with them they might have something that would work with your car. The guy actually making them is a Porsche/Model T guy (rare combination) in California.

I wouldn't go down that path with a newer car if it is like the "fun projects" regulator, and I suspect it is. If I understand how those work, it is shunt regulation. Also they just cut back and you run on the battery for a while. That would mean no stable system voltage, and the headlight brightness would vary a lot depending on what mode the regulator was running in and how much charge was in the battery. I don't think this is directly comparable to anything else we have been discussing. It's great for the T because it fits in a T cutout housing and does not require adding a field control lead (second wire) coming out of the generator. any "better" method would require a second connection.

 

4 hours ago, DavidMc said:

I am not sure how relevant this is, I restored a 1920's Packard many years ago and in the process had an auto electrician check the generator.  He removed the third brush and cut out and fitted a voltage regulator from an early 6V Volkswagon.  It worked very well - initially.  The ammeter would show about 20 amps after starting the engine, then slowly reduce as the battery charged.  Some time later the generator failed because solder in the windings had melted. 

Further investigation confirmed that this generator should not exceed about 8 amps otherwise it will overheat as mine did.  The problem with many of the generators of the era is that they are located in hot areas of the engine bay and poorly cooled.

There's the rub. Adding a voltage regulator can work well, but since they removed the third brush there was no current regulation. Probably it was fine for a while and then one day the battery was down and the generator stayed at 20 amps for a while and melted trying to bring it back up. If they had not removed the third brush, it probably would have been fine. Another way would be to use a three-unit regulator. That is better yet, but the current regulator (third relay) would have needed to be set to 8 amps if that is what you cannot exceed. Most off the shelf three unit regulators come out of the box set to something more on the order of 40 amps.

 

 

Edited April 23 by Bloo (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

Well, the Lincoln is back to its old ways:

 

  

 

Took it out for a drive to get it ready for tomorrow's day tour and it lost power. I limped it into a parking lot, hit the electric fuel pump, and it seemed to come back online. OK, that's not unprecedented, it's kind of hot today. Half a mile later, it sputtered to a stop and that was it. Some side-of-the-road diagnostics (removing the fuel line at the fuel pump and turning on the electric pump) showed no fuel flow. Initially thinking that I'd run out of gas, I called Melanie and she brought me 5 gallons. We poured it in the tank and still no start. Time to call the flatbed. Another $250 ride for the Lincoln (its 11th, for those of you keeping score at home). 

 

Back at the shop I dove into it a little more intensely. It's obviously a fuel problem. I jacked up the front of the car so I could slide underneath and examine the in-line fuel filter I installed when I rebuilt the fuel system several years ago. There was some debris in it, but not nearly enough to clog it. Step two was disconnecting the fuel line at the fuel pump once again and running pressurized air back to the tank. It struggled then there was a big BURP and it started bubbling.

 

 

Figuring the obstruction had been cleared, I hooked up the fuel line and tried to fire it. No go. Still no fuel flow. I took a hammer and rapped on my electric pump and the one-way check valve next to it, and the car fired up and ran properly. OK. Just to be sure, I removed the fuel filter and cleaned it out. A few granules, but more troubling were a few balls of rubbery slime.

 

Shiat. The fuel tank lining is coming undone.

 

The good news is that I had Gas Tank Renu restore the tank when I first got the car seven years ago and was having problems making it run. The bad news is that the local Gas Tank Renu shop burned down last year and is out of business. So I need to drain the tank, remove it, and send it to another Gas Tank Renu shop and hope they'll honor the lifetime warranty. And I don't know how long any of that will take so the car is going to be out of commission for an indefinite period of time. 

 

Alternatively, I can pull the tank and take it up the street and have the fabrication shop make me a new one out of stainless. Hmmmm...

 

I can't trust the car anymore, of course. Even though I know what's wrong, it's going to clog up again and leave me stranded if I try to drive it any distance. I know what the solution is, but it's neither fast nor something I can do myself. The last tank I had restored by Gas Tank Renu took about four months. Looks like I might be writing off this summer with the Lincoln. 

 

What's my motto again? Oh yeah...

 

[MCHinson]

 

Sorry to hear of this problem but at least you know what is wrong and it is a fairly simple fix. Still a pain, but it could have certainly been worse.

[Laughing Coyote]

55 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

Alternatively, I can pull the tank and take it up the street and have the fabrication shop make me a new one out of stainless.

I would, or even aluminum. I fabricated one for my tractor out of aluminum since the cheap steel tank was rusting from the inside and plugging up the fuel line and starving it. It works great now. You will get it resolved and back to motoring.

[kar3516]

1 hour ago, Matt Harwood said:

Alternatively, I can pull the tank and take it up the street and have the fabrication shop make me a new one out of stainless. Hmmmm...

So much better than your (many) previous problems.  Easily diagnosed problem with a known answer.  I would absolutely spend the money for a new stainless fabricated tank if they can build it quickly and you get the season back.  I’m pulling for you to get the immediate and continuing enjoyment from this car that you deserve. 

[Roger Zimmermann]

I can feel your pain. When I restored my '57 Cadillac Brougham, I gave the fuel tank to a man for repair. Due to circumstances I don't recall exactly, the guy coming to take the scrap metal away took the tank with him. Gone! The repair shop began to make one in aluminum, but it was not fitting well as the '57 Cadillac tank is irregular in shape. Finally, I bought a used fuel tank in the US which was in a rather good shape.

Some years later, restoring my '56 Biarritz: gave the tank to the same shop for verification. All was OK and to be agreable with me, he lined the inside with a red-orange product, telling it will be the best. 

As the restoration process for the car took some years, the tank was stored for maybe 4 to 5 years. Shortly after installation, when the engine could be started, I quickly saw red-orange bits in the fuel filter glass bowl. I replaced the filter element; went well for some time, but not so long: again some debris in the glass bowl. Took the fuel tank down, gave it back to the man requesting the removal of that sh.t! 

Since that time, I don't believe that those miracle products have some value.

[Zimm63]

Sounds like fabbing a new tank is the best answer for a car you want to drive.  Solve that problem forever.  With any luck you will catch the shop at a good time and they can get it done in a reasonable time.  

 

 

[Stude Light]

I've had my local Gas Tank Renu line several tanks with no issue over 10+ years of service. Several friends also have had their tanks done over the years with great results. I'm rather surprised yours failed. I typically have a one week turnover time with them. I use the one in Swartz Creek, MI - a bit of a drive for you but maybe you need another trip north.

Scott

[DavidMc]

Those tank lining products are only as good as the internal condition of the tank.  Unless the inside of the tank is 100% clean and corrosion free (and there is no way of being sure), then the bond of the lining material to the tank may be fine but where the lining is over corrosion, say a corner or crevice, then you are relying upon the bond of the corrosion to the tank.  When that lets go it takes the lining with it.  Then you have a serious problem.

I used one of the tank lining products that lasted for the 30 odd years I owned the car.  BUT before applying it I cut a large hole in the top of the tank and soaked it in molasses until I could see that the inside was perfectly clean with no rust, then I soldered a patch on the top and sloshed the lining inside in accordance with the directions.

A new tank is tempting!

 

[Matt Harwood]

Well, the good news is that Gas Tank Renu is honoring their lifetime guarantee and fixing the tank for free.

 

The bad news is that I have to ship it to Flint, MI to have it done, since my local Gas Tank Renu burned down.

 

The car is slated to be at the Father's Day Car Show, which my wife runs and where I'm the head judge, so I guess I'll try to limp it to the show with a sludgy gas tank and take it apart after that. I'm sure they'll turn it around pretty quickly and I won't lose the whole driving season. It'll still be more than a month, though.

 

I explored having a new tank made, but given the dimensions and the requirements it was going to be somewhat expensive ($1500+). This is the first failure I've ever had with Gas Tank Renu, so I'm going to chalk it up as a fluke and not something that should be expected. And as a warranty claim, I'm guessing they'll go the extra mile to make sure I'm happy. So we'll give them a shot and see what happens. If it fails again, then I'll have the new tank made.

 

 

Edited May 23 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[edinmass]

MTBE is a gas additive that will attack gas tank liners. It is almost gone from regular stations, but a friend filled up on an Indian Reservation with his V-12 Caddy, and they had it in their fuel.......it dissolved the liner and went into the carbs.........long story short, they paid for the repairs which were like 15k or somewhere around there. Thus.....be careful what type of fuel you buy with tank liners. For the record....non of my cars or the collection cars have gas tank liners in them....I have had way too many issues with them over the years.......we just make new tanks now. Another can of worms, and it's expensive, but it's "one and done" for the next 50 years. 

Edited May 23 by edinmass (see edit history)

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

I am glad some of you folks are able to spend those big bucks.  I am not, happily.  So I [  and MOST others] am able to see the low buck buys.   Tank's inc. $300 replacement, going strong.😁😁.

 

  Ben

Edited May 24 by Ben Bruce aka First Born (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

Well, I'm not quite sure what to make of my recent gas tank experiences.

 

Today I went to the shop planning to remove the gas tank and get it cleaned out and ready to ship back to Gas Tank Renu. I hooked up an electric pump to suck the gas into a gas can (the drain plug is buggered, thanks to Gas Tank Renu--I planned to ask them to remedy that). I used a jump box to power the pump and let it run for a few minutes. It faithfully pulled about 4.5 gallons out of the tank and then started sucking air. Strange. No way it could have burned more than a half gallon of gas idling for 20 minutes, right? Melanie and I dumped 5 gallons in it by the side of the road and I'm almost sure I dumped in a few more gallons once we were back at the shop. But nevertheless, it stopped at 4.5 gallons.

 

I used an electric fuel pump to suck out the

gas in the tank.

 

Figuring there was a baffle or something in the way of the hose, I cleaned up the drain plug, which was covered with some kind of sealant goop, and removed it. A bit more gas trickled out, but not very much. Less than a soda can's worth. I guess it's empty.

 

Drain plug was covered with sealant of some

kind. I removed it (it was rubbery) and

was able to remove the drain plug.

 

OK, with the tank drained I checked to see what was involved with removing it. There are three large bolts holding it to frame crossmembers, plus I had to remove the filler tube and the sending unit, which also has the fuel line connection. Then I looked at the fuel in the drain pan I used when I pulled the drain plug. It's clean. No trash, no goop, no signs of gas tank liner. Same with the gas in the gas can that I pumped out. Clean and fresh. The drain plug was also clean on the inside and as you can see, if there was trash in there, it would have settled into the drain plug area. Instead, the inside of the drain plug was clean. Puzzled, I removed the filler tube and shoved an engine cleaning brush in there and moved it around--when I pulled it out, there was no goop on it. Clean. 

 

Finally, I went and grabbed my endoscope and shoved the camera in there. The color and resolution leave a lot to be desired, but the inside of the tank looks clean to me. Do you concur?

 

 

Photos are lousy, but that looks like a clean gas tank to me.

 

I debated the next step for a few minutes. I had no explanation for why the electric fuel pump wouldn't move any fuel even after we put 5 gallons in the tank. I could hear it working. The car eventually started and ran just fine back in the shop after we had it towed back. There were two little chunks of rubbery goo in the fuel filter. Circumstantial evidence pointed to a clogged pickup in the tank. But all the other evidence said the tank was clean and everything was fine--I just ran out of gas.

 

Conclusion #1: I stupidly ran out of gas while I was driving it two weeks ago, which is what left me stranded.

 

Conclusion #2: I think my electric fuel pump is either not doing its job or is gummed up somehow. That's why it didn't move any fuel when I tested it by the side of the road. Had I cranked the car for a few more seconds before calling the tow truck, I bet it would have started on the mechanical pump.

 

I decided to leave the tank in the car and see what happens. I cleaned up the drain plug and surrounding area, touched up the paint, installed a new copper crush washer, and reinstalled the plug. Then I reinstalled the filler tube with a fresh gasket. It was a bit of a pain in the butt, but eventually it went into place.

 

Cleaned up the drain plug and reinstalled it.

 

 

Reinstalled fuel filler tube. What a pain.

 

I poured the 4.5 gallons in the gas can back into the tank through a strainer. No trash, no goop, nothing. Just clean gas. I fired it up and it started like it always does. I cautiously backed it out of the shop and drove it up the street where I pumped 20 gallons into the tank. No leaks, which is good. Then I drove it on my 20-mile test loop without incident. No hiccups, no stutters, no need for the electric pump. It worked like it always does. I drove it home and it's sitting in the garage now.

 

So what's the deal? My theory is that I simply ran out of gas and for some reason, when I disconnected the fuel line at the mechanical pump to test for fuel, the electric pump wasn't doing its job. That fooled me into thinking that everything was clogged up when it was actually just out of gas. I will do some additional testing on the electric fuel pump and make sure it's working, but if not, it's easy enough to replace. I'm going to drive it some more and see what happens.

 

I think this was a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. Ugh.

 

[dalef62]

Could the goop be coming from the electric fuel pump?  Coming apart?  Any rubber hoses between tank and fuel pump?

The fun of cars!!!  I have two cars down with faulty charging systems!

[keiser31]

Thanks for showing the fuel pump siphon idea. Now I know how to get rid of a full tank of bad gas in my '31 DB coupe!

[MCHinson]

I think if I were you, I would put a new electric fuel pump on it. The existing electric fuel pump would always be suspect in my mind. That sounds like the most likely source of the gunk you got out. 

 

Other than that, the good news is that it sounds like the problem ended up being a lot less of a problem than you were thinking it was. 

[Laughing Coyote]

2 minutes ago, MCHinson said:

I would put a new electric fuel pump on it. The existing electric fuel pump would always be suspect in my mind. That sounds like the most likely source of the gunk you got out. 

X2

With how things are made now a days and the way gas is it's probably eating it up and sending it down the line. Glad it's not the tank. 

[AB-Buff]

My two cents. Hate to disagree with some of you guys, but mine came with electric fuel pump and it was a pain in the ass. It caused restrictions and bubbles and all kinds of things in the sediment bowl at the fuel pump. I took it off, threw it away. Took the fuel pump apart made sure that diaphragm was loosen enough and i stuff enough diaphragm in the pump before you tighten it up and I have driven it 5000+ miles and I don’t even think about the fuel pump. That’s my two cents. Try not to offend anybody on here but it seems like every time I say something I do so forgive me. I’m an old man and I’m tired. 

[kar3516]

1 minute ago, AB-Buff said:

My two cents. Hate to disagree with some of you guys, but mine came with electric fuel pump and it was a pain in the ass. It caused restrictions and bubbles and all kinds of things in the sediment bowl at the fuel pump. I took it off, threw it away. Took the fuel pump apart made sure that diaphragm was loosen enough and i stuff enough diaphragm in the pump before you tighten it up and I have driven it 5000+ miles and I don’t even think about the fuel pump. That’s my two cents. Try not to offend anybody on here but it seems like every time I say something I do so forgive me. I’m an old man and I’m tired. 

“…caused restrictions and bubbles and all kinds of things in the sediment bowl.”  
If there is trash or debris in the sediment bowl where is it coming from (tank, fuel line, or…) and why is it the fault of the electric fuel pump?  Because of greater suction draw from the tank?  Because the electric pump is generally installed near the tank rather than at the engine?

[MCHinson]

9 minutes ago, AB-Buff said:

My two cents. Hate to disagree with some of you guys, but mine came with electric fuel pump and it was a pain in the ass. It caused restrictions and bubbles and all kinds of things in the sediment bowl at the fuel pump. I took it off, threw it away. Took the fuel pump apart made sure that diaphragm was loosen enough and i stuff enough diaphragm in the pump before you tighten it up and I have driven it 5000+ miles and I don’t even think about the fuel pump. That’s my two cents. Try not to offend anybody on here but it seems like every time I say something I do so forgive me. I’m an old man and I’m tired. 

 

For normal operation, I agree that the original mechanical fuel pump is best to use. I am however, a firm believer of using an electric fuel pump to refill the carburetor after the modern fuel has evaporated out of the carburetor when the car sits for over a day or so. In warm environments, (at least with my 1937 Buicks) an electric fuel pump will also save you from vapor lock, especially when touring in locations in which non-ethanol fuel is not available. A quality electric fuel pump mounted near the tank will save you time and a lot of wear and tear on the starter, and can be the difference between sitting beside the road waiting for the fuel near the engine to cool down, or just continuing to drive and enjoy your old car.

[Matt Harwood]

I'm also a believer in electric pumps. I have mine configured with a bypass and a check valve so that the original mechanical pump can pull easily from the tank but when the electric pump is on, it doesn't force the gas back to the tank. I have used it several times to combat vapor lock, usually after a long, high-speed drive on a warm day (of course). It always instantly cures the problem, so I will definitely be keeping it. 

 

I've already ordered a new one and will install it as soon as it arrives. It's a Carter rotary vane type (part number 4259) so it's not like there's a diaphragm to fail, but I can't figure where else the small pieces of goo came from. The rest of my fuel system is metal, no rubber lines. 

 

Edited June 2 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[kar3516]

I’m not arguing against electric fuel pumps.  I’m asking @AB-Buff why or how he deduced the accumulation in the sediment bowl was an electric fuel pump issue.  Does he think its debris from inside a failing pump? Or the other issues I previously mentioned?    Sorry about sidetracking the topic.

[Lee H]

9 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

I'm also a believer in electric pumps. I have mine configured with a bypass and a check valve so that the original mechanical pump can pull easily from the tank but when the electric pump is on, it doesn't force the gas back to the tank. I have used it several times to combat vapor lock, usually after a long, high-speed drive on a warm day (of course). It always instantly cures the problem, so I will definitely be keeping it. 

 

I've already ordered a new one and will install it as soon as it arrives. It's a Carter rotary vane type (part number 4259) so it's not like there's a diaphragm to fail, but I can't figure where else the small pieces of goo came from. The rest of my fuel system is metal, no rubber lines. 

 

I run the same Carter pump, and I seriously doubt it’s a problem there. Very likely there is spot inside the tank (that you can’t see, natch) that the lining has just begun delaminating from. But I’m the pessimistic type.

[Zimm63]

Thinking of adding a pump to my 63 Riviera.  I think I see how you set the pump up with the bypass, but not where the output of the pump ends up.  Could you put a sketch of how you set it up, including the check valve location?  

 

Thanks.