Jump to content

Beulah Back on the road... MAYBE?


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

 

 Installed the new timing gear. Installed the re-re-built water pump with new seals in the output side. New bushing and packing on the input side. Patrick Reeve of Reeve Enterprises who rebuilt the engine re-did the pump bushings wanted to put the doubled up lip seals on that side also. But when the (expensive recommended) seals I had installed failed, the stainless spring wore a groove in the shaft at that area. So that side has traditional packing.WE wanted to save that SS shaft I made.

DSCF8161.thumb.JPG.8e0494f64138c06fd7c594bd270d3de3.JPG

  After doing the static timing the engine fired right up and ran well. I let it run for about 20 seconds then shut down. Yesterday (May 31st) son Alex helped me put the radiator and hood back on and fill the cooling system. I took her for a drive several times around the block about 2 miles. Still need to tweak the timing and carb etc. After I shut her down I tried to restart …. Oh, crap!! The starter is binding and not motoring! At least this time I knew what the problem was. Previously I had set the coupler to the S/G too tight and had the same problem. I had used the exact same pin locations on the shaft of the pump I rebuilt. (Not original to the car). Finding out later that these were fitted IN ASSEMBLY. After surface grinding .020 off the face of the "Oldham" coupling plate and reinstalling all was fine.

DSCF7371.thumb.JPG.da74b1ad7d88d52809bef82dea3ea4b0.JPG

 The same pump and shaft was reinstalled so what changed??? I made a new gasket for the front bearing to the pump shaft gear crankcase bore surface. Mistake... This time I used 1/32' sheet stock instead of the 1/64". So, effectively moving the shaft back .015 and causing binding at the coupling plate.

DSCF8160.thumb.JPG.4aaf2e568eb4d6777dcdb1ed18503936.JPG

 I had to remove the taper pin at the retaining collar, undo the three bolts holding the bearing to the crankcase, slid the bearing back on the shaft. I then replaced that too thick gasket with the proper 1/64" thickness. Reassembled all and now the starter is functioning properly.

 In the above photo I also did another adjustment. There is a hose stand off. Originally missing from this car. I took the one from my spare 25 engine. Great! another found missing piece. Pat Reeve and I were concerned about the 1925 style pumps that since they "Float" (No solid attachment to the engine) that there may be too much lateral pressure on the pump unit. This time I was very careful when re-mounting the pump. Not much give with the short hoses. With the upper output hose attached the lower input hose stand off was 1/8" off. To force the short hose on could cause twisting of the pump on the shaft causing binding and hot spots running on the bearing. I added (2) 1/16" gaskets to the stand off mount. The input hose now slid on with no apparent twisting or tension on the pump. Keeping fingers crossed again.

 Little things do mean a lot.

 

 

 

Edited by dibarlaw (see edit history)
  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry

 

That's a pretty important piece of information on the gasket thickness at the front gear bearing to crankcase bore . I'm printing this off and attaching it to the rebuilt pump that has been sitting on my bench for five years .

Just in case I ever get around to putting it back together!

Our is an earlier engine without the additional lower hose support. A running change apparently . I'm afraid to try and find out why they thought they had to do that!

 

Brad

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, bradsan said:

Larry

 

That's a pretty important piece of information on the gasket thickness at the front gear bearing to crankcase bore . I'm printing this off and attaching it to the rebuilt pump that has been sitting on my bench for five years .

Just in case I ever get around to putting it back together!

Our is an earlier engine without the additional lower hose support. A running change apparently . I'm afraid to try and find out why they thought they had to do that!

 

Brad

Brad, 

      So your engine does not have the pad on the block with the 2 studs?  Larry and I were just talking about how the earlier water pumps had an attachment to the block, and that in 1925 the pump now floats and is held only by the hoses. 

Larry,   

      Thanks for the write up and the photo of the shim under the hose stand off.  I updated my procedure to include your photo and a note that this is yet another place to ensure your pump housing connection is aligned to minimize wear on the bearings.  

   Hugh 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hugh

 

That is correct. No pad on the block, no studs . I seem to recall that there are two different crankcase casting part numbers shown in the Master Parts List,; likely for this reason. Our engnie is 'before'" by serial number and the our spare engine has it and is "after". I have  a spare crankcase wit the pad and the studs an I though about swapping it over but I'm not certain which problem I am trying to solve and what I might make worse!

 

Brad

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1925 Standard Book of parts I have notes.... Part # 186584  Water pump inlet hose support. After Engine # 1310789.

My car's engine #1312686. The spare engine I took the support from. #1354467

 The crankcase illustration Plate 1 does not show a mounting pad or studs.

 The 1925 Master Book of Parts shows a similar support...Part #186603 Water pump hose support. After engine# 1302686.

 The crankcase illustration shows no mounting pad or studs. My Master "Remley" does not have the support. His engine # is 1290160

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry

 

That is what i recall as well.

I can only think of two reasons they would do it

1) an elaborate way to prevent bottom hose collapse

2) It helps to support the assembly and prevent wear on the pump bearings by picking up the weight of the pump.

 

I think 1) is wishful thinking!

 

Brad

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/4/2020 at 1:05 AM, bradsan said:

Larry

 

That's a pretty important piece of information on the gasket thickness at the front gear bearing to crankcase bore . I'm printing this off and attaching it to the rebuilt pump that has been sitting on my bench for five years .

Just in case I ever get around to putting it back together!

Our is an earlier engine without the additional lower hose support. A running change apparently . I'm afraid to try and find out why they thought they had to do that!

 

Brad

Brad that was a mid year improvement because the hoses back in those days didn't have much support like what we have today and those long hoses would suck together and cause cooling problems. That support pipe fixed the problem but caused a head ache to the mechanic that replaced hoses on it.

Edited by carmover (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

After about 75 miles on the reassembled engine all seems well.

 After a good run I check the temperature of the pump and surrounding components with a laser thermometer.

 The front bearing packing nut was around 136 deg. (still using regular packing). The rear bearing has new double lip seals and runs about 145 deg. Pump body around 150 deg.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Woah... lets not get too confident on solving issues...We had a lovely drive on Wednesday and did about 10 miles doing errands. The water pump temps even went down a bit after the drive. So the front bearing is settled in. BUT! On our drive out to the grocery store I noticed that oil pressure was a steady 25#. Great!  Then it dropped to 5#. No engine difference, noise or anything too indicate a problem. I was travelling at about 35-40 MPH. The pressure built up to about 10# at idle at the next stop light. We parked the car and did our shopping. When I started the engine after a 40 min rest the pressure ran up to 20#. Then it began to drop back to 10# and driving home at the same speed the pressure fluctuated between 10 and 15#. This is with an original style National 0-30 Gage. The gage had indicated between 20 and 22# since the engine was rebuilt several years ago.

 I talked to Pat Reeve who rebuilt the engine. The first thing recommended was to check oil. No problem there. Oil just up to full line shy 1/16"

 I added about another 1/2qt. Now it was 1/16" above full. Started engine and pressure up to 22#.  Great!  But, the pressure quickly dropped back down to 15-16#.

Yesterday I tried several other gages. Another original National 0-50. Cold start up 25# then drop to 17# at idle.

   The 0-50# SW gage that was in the car when we bought it. Fast idle 20#. Normal idle 16-17#. Slow idle 12#. Visual estimates since the markings are in 10# increments.

 Possibilities.

 My gut tells me that one of the joints on the oil line manifold to the mains has opened up. When I first got the car and checked the bottom end someone had RTV blue sealer on one of the joints! DSCF2226.thumb.JPG.7e2409a0a6a8b72e9894bb6bac7203b3.JPG 2012

I removed the assembly, cleaned and re-soldered the joint.

DSCF2229.thumb.JPG.f45e77304b83104242aa994adffd3e73.JPG

The delivery tube from the manifold to the Y fitting also has a soldered copper bandage on it. The other thing Pat said was that the pump check valve may stick open. They had rebuilt the pump also. 

 I had just cleaned out the bottom end from the timing gear failure.

DSCF8150.thumb.JPG.0d6a95616f550be907025a22e488317a.JPG

That prompted me to finish up the same job on the Master engine from 2017. It has  steady 15# showing on its gage with a rebuilt oil pump. I am getting pretty tired of crawling under these cars to do jobs over again! Oh my aching back....

 

Edited by dibarlaw
Added content (see edit history)
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • dibarlaw changed the title to Beulah Back on the road... MAYBE?

Larry, 

     I hate that you have to go back into the oil pan again.  I also recall that Kevin's oil line had broken in multiple places.  I was going to offer you the oil line that was pulled from the engine that came out of the blackberry patch, but mine is not looking any better.  I think this break may have occurred when it was disassembled though (not by me).  One thing I noticed was the lack of quality control on the soldering of the joints when I grabbed this part for the photos.  First I will refer to your last photo and my first photo - nearly identical photos with regards to showing poor use of flux, likely insufficient cleaning of the copper, or burning off the majority of the flux prior to soldering.  A quality job would have solder on the entire section that is in the joint as the flux should have pulled all the solder in via capillary action.   I see solder just around the edge of the fitting and not on the entire insertion.  Maybe being a 4 tubing connection is just real difficult to get the heat right and not burn all the flux out of one of the tubing sections by the time you get to the 4th port.  Then without flux, nothing to pull the solder in.  Maybe they were trying to make sure no solder got into the tubing  or down another tube.  

2 other photos attached (I should have cleaned them).

One looks like a decent solder job, the other is over an 1/8" pile of solder on the exterior of the joint.  Looks like a rookie job to me. 

Maybe a discussion with a heating and air guy that solders high pressure fittings for a living might be in order.  I do know that the copper is very inferior to today's copper but that does not look like the problem here.  There are likely much better solders and flux available today as well.      Hugh

IMG_0552.thumb.JPG.059116741113eab1ff2ad7b181039585.JPGIMG_0549.thumb.JPG.2e3a933d34082e85523521da0249d5f0.JPGIMG_0547.thumb.JPG.6d40f34483c139e9dee8640ee878eaac.JPGIMG_0548.thumb.JPG.904c844fe9c2d9a24712bfbca626d3cf.JPG

 

 

    

Edited by Hubert_25-25 (see edit history)
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Hugh:

 I do have the spare 1925 engine I got from KY. here to pick from. I do not know what I will get into until I dive in again. This will be the 5th time I have had to pull the oil pan down. On top of that the Master rear cork is not sealing and I will have to redo that also.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2020 at 10:53 AM, dibarlaw said:

Thanks Hugh:

 I do have the spare 1925 engine I got from KY. here to pick from. I do not know what I will get into until I dive in again. This will be the 5th time I have had to pull the oil pan down. On top of that the Master rear cork is not sealing and I will have to redo that also.

 

Use some Loctite ultra gray on both sides of the gasket and that should fix the oil leak.

Edited by Larry Schramm (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maddening.... We drove about 5 miles today and the gage dropped down to about 5# once, then came back up to 22# and stayed there the rest of the trip. No matter what speed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Drove the car for several days and today we put on about another 10 miles up to 45 mph. It has stayed at 22# pressure with no fluctuations. Could have been pressure relief valve sticking open from left over timing gear crumbs. I HOPE that is all it was!

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...