1929 Chrysler 65 fuel pump question

[Gasket]

My 1929 Chrysler Model 65, engine no. P227193, fedco no. DP403D, has a mechanical fuel pump.

Is that correct?  All the AACA Forum threads seem to show only vacuum type fuel pumps.

Also, assuming mechanical fuel pump is correct, can anyone point me to a replacement pump or rebuild kit?

The pump I have has no manufacturer name--only 'B.C' embossed on top.  So in a parts search, I don't know how to describe it, nor do I know anything about possible interchange.   

Also, do rebuild kits--if available--include the activator arm that rolls off the cam--to power the pump?

It appears that a previous owner decided to convert to electric pump by removing the activator arm but leaving the pump in place to cover the hole in the side of the block.

 

Thanks for any guidance.  

[Sasha39]

As far as I know 1929 Chrysler model 65 was only with a vacuum fuel pump, which also ran the windscreen wiper. 

[hwellens]

Your engine code is correct for a 1929 Model 65. You car is supposed to have a vacuum tank. (see attached) Can you post a picture of the right side of the engine that shows a fuel pump.  Maybe someone installed a later engine and changed the engine serial number.

The other possibility is if your engine number starts with "P2" and not a "P". That would make it a 1936 Plymonth engine. Does the engine look like the picture below which is a 1929 Chrysler engine

Edited July 19, 2020 by hwellens
Add data (see edit history)

[ArticiferTom]

Your embossed top maybe AC . they where manufactures of pumps . Probably type B , easily rebuild-able . Finding just arm not so much . Pump cores can be found for under 50 bucks . You may want to look at cam make sure it is OK before proceeding .

[kings32]

1929 model did not have a fuel pump    Howard

[Gasket]

Hi All,

Thanks to everyone for your helpful feedback.  

So, the plot thickens...

I will post photos of the engine tomorrow--to help determine if it is a true '29 engine or a '36 Plymouth. 

Attached is a photo of the engine number (and one of the car itself). 

Thanks Hwellens for the photo from your archive.

I just acquired the car last week, and drove it a bit, but encountered what appear to be fuel feed problems--even with electric pump.  My thought was to return to mechanical fuel feed.

More later.

Yours truly

[hwellens]

Based on the removable water jacket cover on the left side, it looks like an early engine and not a 1936. Need to see more pictures.

 

[Vintageben]

I believe the Chrysler 66 had the mechanical fuel pump is there any chance that it has a 66 engine in it? I’m not sure of the correct engine numbers as I don’t have the info close handy at the moment, or is there a chance these engines were fitted at the end of 65 production. Anyway more photos would certainly help.

[maok]

Curious on what that copper(?) pipe attached to the water jacket bolts is for? There really shouldn't be a need for piping on that part of the engine.

[hwellens]

14 hours ago, Vintageben said:

I believe the Chrysler 66 had the mechanical fuel pump is there any chance that it has a 66 engine in it? I’m not sure of the correct engine numbers as I don’t have the info close handy at the moment, or is there a chance these engines were fitted at the end of 65 production. Anyway more photos would certainly help.

The model 66 engine prefix is "CC"

[Vintageben]

5 hours ago, hwellens said:

The model 66 engine prefix is "CC"

Excellent I knew that someone else would definitely know what the prefix was. Yep more photos would definitely be good 

[Sasha39]

Did the 66 have C C embossed on the head also? sorry about the quality of the photo.

 

[Sasha39]

22 hours ago, maok said:

Curious on what that copper(?) pipe attached to the water jacket bolts is for? There really shouldn't be a need for piping on that part of the engine.

Hi maok,

looking at the photo and placement I'd dare say that they ran the wire through that pipe from the generator back to the dash , you can see the original wiring harness in the photo above.

Edited July 20, 2020 by Sasha39 (see edit history)

[Gasket]

Hi All,

As mentioned, here are more photos showing fedco no., right side engine, detail about mechanical fuel pump placement, detail about the pump itself, and also left side engine.  My Series 65 does appear to be of fairly late manufacture.  Standard Catalog of Chrysler (John Lee, 1990) states engine numbers for Series 65 run from P175001 to P241336.  Mine is P227193.  Fedco no., DP403D, also indicates fairly late manufacture, April 1929, which gives plausibility to Vintage Ben's idea about on-line upgrades during production--something that Chrysler (always ahead on engineering) was known to do.  Standard Catalog of Chrysler--frustratingly short on details--states mechanical fuel pumps for 1930 Series 70 Chrysler, but says nothing about 1930 Series 66.  If mechanical fuel pumps could be confirmed for Series 66--or for other late production 1929 Series 65, that would be the clincher.  If the engine layout and fuel pump location were the same between my 1929 Series 65 and succeeding Chrysler engines, would it then be worthwhile for me to search for a replacement fuel pump among those models?    

P.S. Thanks to Artificer Tom for info about the availability of pump cores--although, per your advice, I could not get a look at the cam.

P.P.S. You will notice the reconfigured intake manifold to accommodate downdraft carburettor, also starter solenoid. The temperature gauge is in Spanish--in degrees celsius. The voltage cut-out on the generator, and the custom air-cleaner (not shown) are embossed 'Argentina.' 

[maok]

WoW! Without the posted pics, I and others probably didn't believe you, that definitely is a  mechanical fuel pump. I wonder if it was a very late '29 block just before the '30 models were released. Interestingly its at the back of the block rather front.

 

Downdraft carb upgrade instead of the normal (for that year) updraft carb.

[Narve N]

One of my several Series 65 engines had serial number starting with 228809 and dated March 23 of 1929 (zoom in between oil filltube and oil pressure regulator - other locations also seen), so the number 227xxx on its own does not make the car a transition model. Can you locate any casting date on your engine? Very interesting, this is the first 1929 Chrysler (65/775) engine I have seen that do have a fuel pump. Is the manifold modified to take a downdraft or made like that? With a one-piece windshield is the car built outside Detroit?

[maok]

9 hours ago, Sasha39 said:

Hi maok,

looking at the photo and placement I'd dare say that they ran the wire through that pipe from the generator back to the dash , you can see the original wiring harness in the photo above.

 

That was my initial thought too but it looked like a copper pipe rather than an electrical conduit.

[F&J]

The opening for the fuel pump does not look factory to me, it should have a machined boss?  I am pretty sure this was modified by a past owner.

[carbking]

Difficult to be certain from the picture, but the downdraft carburetor appears to be a Rochester type B, introduced in 1950.

 

Jon.

[hwellens]

1 hour ago, F&J said:

The opening for the fuel pump does not look factory to me, it should have a machined boss?  I am pretty sure this was modified by a past owner.

If modified, it would also need a new camshaft to run the pump. Hard modification just to eliminate  a vacuum tank.  The firewall looks like it has the 4 tapped holes for the vacuum tank brackets.  May have been some experimental engine? The 1930 models had a fuel pump. but, located forward.

[F&J]

3 minutes ago, hwellens said:

If modified, it would also need a new camshaft to run the pump. Hard modification just to eliminate  a vacuum tank.  The firewall looks like it has the 4 tapped holes for the vacuum tank brackets.  May have been some experimental engine? The 1930 models had a fuel pump. but, located forward.

It definitely looks backyard modified to me.   A pump should be mounted to a casted boss, to be properly machined flat.  I already wondered how they made the fuel pump cam, and hope we get to see at some point.  I'd drop the pan out of curiosity myself  

 

I have a 34 LaSalle that came from the desert.  Somebody wanted to go to a better long distance rear end ratio...they actually cut off the old pinion casted nose, and welded on some unknown snout with a better ratio.  I can't help but think that person lived so far from stores or even a town, so the old "necessity is the mother of invention" phrase comes in to play.

 

 

[hwellens]

May be an old Chrysler marine flat head block? Fuel pumps were in the rear as he has shown.

Marine engines had fuel pumps in 1929.

 

 

 

Edited July 21, 2020 by hwellens
add info (see edit history)

[Gasket]

Hi All,

Please forgive this tardy reply....

The consensus appears to support F&J's and Hwellens' view that this is a modification (less flatteringly, a 'backyard' improvisation). The lack of machined boss to support a fuel pump supports that.  Also, courtesy of Hwellens, mechanical fuel pumps on series 66 Chryslers--successors to the series 65--were located forward on the block; not backwards on the block (as on mine), which weakens the view that mine is a late production upgrade.  Also, Narve N has later production blocks with engine numbers higher than mine which do not have mechanical pumps. 

When time permits, I hope to drop the pan and have a look at the pump cam--as suggested by Articicer Tom, and F&J.  If it looks feasible, I would still hope to find a fuel pump that can work.  Thanks to Artificer Tom's info about the availability and repairability of this type of pump, I will set my sights on AC type B pump cores--perhaps with different activator arm configurations--until I can find one that fits.   

P.S. I appreciate F&J's anecdote about his 34 LaSalle.  Sometimes these wonderful artifacts survive only because at a critical point some enterprising person did some expedient improvisation that kept the car functional just long enough to become worthy of preservation.  (Anyway, I think I would rather have a mechanical pump than a vacuum type.)

P.P.S. My block does not have any date of manufacture embossed on it--unlike Narve N's example.  I have heard of people contacting Chrysler to get data on date and place of manufacture and even customer/dealer to whom the vehicle was first delivered?  Can this be true?

P.P.P.S. Hi CarbKing, My carburettor is marked 'Rochester' with the letters 'GM' just beneath.  Can the carburettor be dated with this info?  It would be fun to guess about a time frame for when the manifold improvisation--assuming it was contemporaneous to the date of the carburettor--was done.  Attached are photos of the carb and the manifold.

Many thanks,

Jack 'Gasket'

Columbus, Ohio

[Fossil]

It sure would have been fun to have watched these modifications taking place and to know what led up to them. 

You've uncovered an interesting vehicle. 

[carbking]

Jack - the Rochester model B was introduced to (foisted upon ???) the world in 1950 on 6 cylinder 216 CID and 235 CID Chevrolet.

 

There may or may not be some additional stamped numbers on the throttle body (lower casting) that might date it later.

 

There originally would have been a triangular tag under one of the four screws holding the top casting (air horn) to the center casting (bowl).

 

Should the tag be present, there would be a seven-digit identification number plus a date code. If the tag is gone, so is the ability to narrow it to year.

 

Jon.

[Narve N]

20 hours ago, Gasket said:

P.P.S. My block does not have any date of manufacture embossed on it--unlike Narve N's example.  I have heard of people contacting Chrysler to get data on date and place of manufacture and even customer/dealer to whom the vehicle was first delivered?  Can this be true?

 

 

 

You can also look behind the generator for casting date, this one is signed by Hercules foundry:

 

If however, your engine is marked with CWC your are into less luck, as this foundry apparently did not datestamp their work:

 

As for Chrysler Historical records: these are sporadic for pre 1930 and early 1929 (my March 1929 Series 65) was not covered. You should anyhow give it a try.

 

[Gasket]

Hi All,

In case there is any lingering interest, posted here is a belated reply to F&J's and Artificer Tom's suggestion about dropping the pan and looking at the cam...

I finally got around to that; the third image, attached, shows that a mechanical fuel pump could ride on the cam of #5 cylinder. The cam lobe is visible at the top of the image; below that, light shines through the opening that was cut into the right side of the block for the pump (the right side of the image faces rearward).

Right now it's running on new electric fuel pump, but it would be fun to someday see if the earlier modification could be repaired.

(If Hershey reopens for Fall '21, I can snoop around for matching AC type B fuel pumps.) 

 

Also, thanks to Narve N's suggestion, I was able to look behind the generator and find the block cast date, April 6, 1929, embossed there.

 

Thanks again, Jack 'Gasket'

[JACK M]

So,  the idea was that this pump would actually ride on a valve cam lobe ?

Interesting, this "Mother of invention".

[Gasket]

Hi Jack M,

As stated in several of the above postings, Chrysler introduced mechanical fuel pumps the very next year, 1930.  Quoting the Chrysler series 77 Instruction Book (July 1929), "Fuel system [is] driven from [the] camshaft...(p.80)."  These 1930 fuel pumps were located on the same side (right side) of the block as what was improvised on my 1929 series 65, but more forward--roughly adjacent to #1/#2 pistons.

I don't know whether 1930 fuel pumps--and beyond--had their own designated cam (as opposed to letting a valve cam do double-duty), but not having looked inside any 1930 engines, cannot say for sure. However, a photo posted by Saulius in AACA technical forum, April 12, 2019, of a 1930 series 66 camshaft shows no more than 12 cams. (I take the liberty of pasting Saulius photo here--hoping this is not a breech of forum

protocol.)

As you say, one can appreciate the ingenuity.

 

[hwellens]

Here is a detail of the 1930 Model 70 that had a fuel pump. Manual dated July 1929.  I do not see any lobe specifically for the fuel pump unless it is above the main bearing no 2 (piece # 52)?

 

Edited February 13, 2021 by hwellens
add data (see edit history)

[ArticiferTom]

Did you check all over that fuel pump for numbers ,letters or date codes . May not be AC to hard to see in pic . Check angle edge above mounting flange to engine for etched numbers (not stamped ) . Can be hard to read .

[Sasha39]

It's a BC fuel pump, you can see the BC on the top the pump in one of the first photos,

there one on eBay at the moment: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-BC-Fuel-Pump-with-Glass-Bowl-/233571644169 

Although the outlet is in a different position to yours but I think you can make it work.

 

Edited February 13, 2021 by Sasha39 (see edit history)

[ArticiferTom]

Look at ebay " vintage fuel pump BC " . you will see at least two BC which looks to be associated in late models with Airtex . But there are two different style arms one AC type lever the other spring plunger type .  Also under filter bowl glass remove brass screen, may show a casting or model number .

[Sasha39]

Yes this one is more like your style https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-BC-Ford-1946-48-Fuel-Pump-w-Glass-Great-Condition/233636201478?hash=item3665cd8406:g:avAAAOSwofVe~P7k 

no sure about the lever type.

As Tom said have a look under the screen filter and see if there is something there like this

 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Sasha39
Added picture (see edit history)

[JACK M]

23 hours ago, Gasket said:

As you say, one can appreciate the ingenuity.

 

I like to learn new things, I had never thought about the "double duty" before.

As I contemplate that, the lobe profile occurs to me, as every fuel pump cam I can recall is simply an off center circle.

Often added at the cam gear. These early engines have lobe profiles that are like a steep mountain and I would think running a fuel pump on one may open up all kinds of problems.

I should add that I am not all that up on prewar stuff.

I hope some one familiar with these old engines will expand on this.

 

[Gasket]

Hi All,

Got casting # for upper body--GI-126--(located under brass screen above the glass bowl--thanks, Sasha and Tom); and for lower body--GI-110. Also a '4' appears on the lower body near the left side of the mounting flange. I'm guessing that lever-type arm would be the right kind. So I know exactly what to look for. Seems likely that e-bay will turn it up sooner or later.

That said, and reflecting on Jack M's post, above, I took a second look at the 1930 camshaft, pasted above, and see what does look like a soft cam/eccentric--designed for a fuel pump--just after the valve cams for #1 cylinder--which I originally took to be for a bearing. (What was I thinking?)

So, I'll proceed with caution, per Jack M's caveat. Perhaps, this improvisation was not all that effective. If I get it to work at some future date, I'll let you know.

Thanks again.