Of course I don't. I was looking at how it is attached, and kind of gave up the idea of doing it myself. I might tap it with a hammer or wrench a few times, and see if that "fixes" it
Apparently it leaks internally, so the gunk on the outside is just patina, as they call it these days.
If you don't have metric flare nut wrenches, do NOT attempt to take off that fitting.
I once saw a Civic where a do it yourselfer tried unscrewing the oxygen sensor with a crescent wrench. Of course, he rounded it off and the shop had to pull the exhaust manifold to fix it.
I HAVE the flare nut wrenches but I still think I would pay the hour labor charge!
Sounds like Consolidated Diesel was the "assembler". May have old Mack running gear. Consolidated is now a subsidiary of Cummins. But that company started in 1980 - my guess is that the company was indeed absorbed by Cummins some decades before that.
Helmethead Bob of Subaru fame has connections up in that part of the UP. He could probably help you out. I moved and don't intend to go back unless there's zero risk of snow.
I see a Falcon about that vintage on a frequent basis. Lives the next neighborhood over, and sometimes I cut through past that house. But, it is a brown wagon, with woodgrain sides. and it looks original but not bad for it.
Seems like Falcons get discussed more than just about any other 60s iron, if you count Canadian and Aussie versions...
That's one reason why this one caught my eye. And I got my Dad's 67ish Falcon stuck on the railroad tracks soon after I got my license, so that's another reason why I flash on the name when I see it in car ads and forum posts (jacked the car up and pushed it off the jack and managed to get traction and unstuck).
Hard to tell with my monitor but if that car is "moonlight cream" then it could be original RPO color and it would have come with black interior. My mom bought a used mist green 1950 styleline deluxe from a friend in 1953 and kept it in the family until selling it in 1977.
This CL Chevy looks like a good driver with a few updates. Looks like it has the optional oil filter (ours didn't) and even though the seller doesn't mention it, the alternator and ignition indicates 12V upgrade. Upgrades are welcome as long as all are sorted out. Seller posted engine bay pics with the + batt cable disconnected and missing valve cover cap. Hmm... I do like the car but not sure I'd want to relive the 1950 experience for the money asked. Spending about $10k or so now can open up a lot of choices. For some reason I really like this '72 custom F-100.
I sure don't remember that color and I grew up in a Chevy town.
I always have to wonder why people feel compelled to convert old cars to 12 volts and replace generators with alternators. Yes a 12 volt system with an alternator is "better" I suppose but on those cars with few accessories, the old 6 volt systems worked just fine.
I always have to wonder why people feel compelled to convert old cars to 12 volts and replace generators with alternators. Yes a 12 volt system with an alternator is "better" I suppose but on those cars with few accessories, the old 6 volt systems worked just fine.
Are 6 volt batteries hard to find, these days? I may have asked before, but can't remember the answer, but when switching from a 6-volt to 12-volt system, what all has to be changed out? You don't have to change all the wiring, do you? My guess is that there are some kind of ballast resistors or something in the system that are used to cut down the voltage to certain areas?
Back in 1986, after my Granddad sold his '53 DeSoto Firedome, the new owner tried to jump start it with a 12 volt car, and fried something in it. I never knew how badly it got fried, but the guy pushed the car to the edge of the woods in his back yard, and, as of Christmas 2013 at least (last time I was down that way), it's STILL sitting back there.
Could you use a modern battery charger on a 6-volt car? I guess the 50-60 amp "quick start" mode might do some damage, but what if you just left it on the 12 amp or the 2 amp?
I suppose you could use a resistor of some kind to drop the voltage but otherwise, you would have to change all of the light bulbs or they would quickly blow. The radio and fan motor would have to modified somehow.
Giving 12 volts to a 6 volt horn makes for a LOUD horn! If it isn't used much, it'll last for awhile. I once heard a Model A horn that was hooked up to 12 volts and it was so loud you could hear it for blocks. That old Chevy had vacuum wipers so no problem there.
We used to jump 6 volt cars with 12 volt cars and nothing ever happened. If you had your foot on the brake pedel the bulbs would blow. You had to make sure everything was off.
Again, I just don't see why people think this is necessary. The old 6 volt systems worked just fine in the day.
the 216 cid engine is a bit scary---babbitt (poured) bearings. But if you keep the speed down to around 55 mph you should be okay. The car looks like it has had some money put into it.
Price is a bit high for a #3 car. For $10K, you should get "local show" quality and this is just a bit off from that.
I own a 1948 Chevy Fleetmaster that's stock. The 48 and newer 216s are thin Babbitt engines, and, are more durable than the earlier versions. Mine will cruise all day at 55 - 60. If the dipper/oil nozzle setup is set up correctly, the rod bearings seem to do fine. A common mistake on these 6volt cars is to use battery cables that are too small to carry the load. They now make 6 volt alternators for these cars as well - that will eliminate reliability issues with the generator/ voltage regulator set-up.
I agree. The 216 engines were pretty rugged but they aren't made for high RPM's. Keep the speed around 55-60 and you had no problems. Make sure they don't get low on oil and at the slightest hint of a rod knock get it fixed.
But who knows how to fix these now? All of the old guys who used to know how to shim and adjust those rod bearings are all dead or long retired now.
But who knows how to fix these now? All of the old guys who used to know how to shim and adjust those rod bearings are all dead or long retired now.
I guess restoration shops is it. Heck, in 1974 nobody at the shop I worked at would have known how to shim and adjust those bearings. It was a lube/tuneup/brakes/etc garage on a Sohio gas station, so we did most work that 1960+ cars needed. Never saw a 1954 or older car.
It's not rocket science, so I think a clever hobbyist could easily acquire those skills. As for pouring new bearings, there are vendors in Hemmings Motor News who can do that. Or you can convert the engine to insert bearings.
It's not rocket science, so I think a clever hobbyist could easily acquire those skills. As for pouring new bearings, there are vendors in Hemmings Motor News who can do that. Or you can convert the engine to insert bearings.
Ah, thanks, I was wondering what the alternative to "babbitt" bearings was, and you answered the question, "insert" bearings. Now, I'll acknowledge my ignorance; can you explain what the difference is?
Also why, in your opinion, did Chevy continue using inferior bearings for so long? I assume the reason was cost, but there may be another reason.
It's not rocket science, so I think a clever hobbyist could easily acquire those skills. As for pouring new bearings, there are vendors in Hemmings Motor News who can do that. Or you can convert the engine to insert bearings.
I seem to remember you could convert the Chevy 216's to insert bearings but I don't remember how this was done. Did the 216's even have an oil pump or were they strictly splash lubrication?
I remember an old shop that had a fixture so they could align the little dippers correctly.
It's not rocket science, so I think a clever hobbyist could easily acquire those skills. As for pouring new bearings, there are vendors in Hemmings Motor News who can do that. Or you can convert the engine to insert bearings.
Ah, thanks, I was wondering what the alternative to "babbitt" bearings was, and you answered the question, "insert" bearings. Now, I'll acknowledge my ignorance; can you explain what the difference is?
Also why, in your opinion, did Chevy continue using inferior bearings for so long? I assume the reason was cost, but there may be another reason.
Well, for one thing there weren't many freeways at that time and people just didn't drive at high speeds for extended periods of time.
And those bearings weren't THAT bad, really if you drove at sensible speeds and, once again, had them adjusted if they started to knock.
Of course, in those days engines were typically overhauled around 60-70,000 miles. That's after your 40,000 mile valve job. If you somehow made it to 100,000 miles you needed a rebore for sure!
Of course, in those days engines were typically overhauled around 60-70,000 miles. That's after your 40,000 mile valve job. If you somehow made it to 100,000 miles you needed a rebore for sure!
Yeah, I was just thinking about this earlier this week for some reason. I was born in '56, so I have memories of driving with my parents in the early-mid '60s, when we would see cars from as old as the late '40s on the roads. Seeing early-'50s Chevys and Fords was not at all uncommon. And it was not unusual to see cars belching out clouds of blue oil smoke as they drove along. Engines wore out much quicker. That's why products such as STP, Motor Honey, and Bardahl were so prevalent back then. You just don't see oil burners hardly at all now.
@ab348, Born the same year as you. My 40th high school reunion is tomorrow, not sure if I'm going to go, but I could drive the same car there that I drove to the 20th.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
I think sometimes there was pressure at GM to find ways to keep Chevy cheaper in some respects, to give buyers a reason to move up the hierarchy to a Pontiac, Buick, or whatever. For instance, Chevies were stuck with 2-speed automatics long after the competition had dumped them for 3-speeds. And Chevy kept those messy drop in oil canisters until around 1967 or 1968, long after most brands had gone to spin-on filters.
So maybe the bearings in the old Chevy 6-cyl engines were another example of this?
Ford and Mopar, being smaller companies, didn't have the vast resources that GM did, so they had to standardize a lot of things much earlier on. It almost sounds contradictory, but GM, having more money, could afford to cheap out on the Chevies! But, then they'd often make up for it in other ways. For example, it often looked like GM threw a few more bucks into a Chevy interior, compared to a Plymouth equivalent.
I think sometimes there was pressure at GM to find ways to keep Chevy cheaper in some respects, to give buyers a reason to move up the hierarchy to a Pontiac, Buick, or whatever. For instance, Chevies were stuck with 2-speed automatics long after the competition had dumped them for 3-speeds. And Chevy kept those messy drop in oil canisters until around 1967 or 1968, long after most brands had gone to spin-on filters.
So maybe the bearings in the old Chevy 6-cyl engines were another example of this?
Chevys were definitely built more cheaply back then. A friend is restoring a '71 4-4-2 that ended up needing a new roof. He was looking for A-bodies being parted out and found a Chevelle, only to discover that the inner structure of the roof was much simpler and lighter than the Olds. Astounded. And of course the Chevies used lower-quality trim/upholstery, less sound deadening, etc compared to the other GM brands. Even the SBC engines, while renowned, had the main advantage of being cheaper to make than the others.
And Chevy kept those messy drop in oil canisters until around 1967 or 1968, long after most brands had gone to spin-on filters.
My 1969 C20 had a canister filter originally on its 307 engine. I still have the canister for it, but I converted to a spin-on after the second oil change on that puppy. The real driving force to swap it came as I prepared for our first "cross-country" trip. I did three oil changes while we were on the road, and I really wasn't looking forward to that with the canister filter. But, I kept the original for the day that I put everything back (also in this category is the original Motorola AM radio).
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
It's not rocket science, so I think a clever hobbyist could easily acquire those skills. As for pouring new bearings, there are vendors in Hemmings Motor News who can do that. Or you can convert the engine to insert bearings.
I seem to remember you could convert the Chevy 216's to insert bearings but I don't remember how this was done. Did the 216's even have an oil pump or were they strictly splash lubrication?
I remember an old shop that had a fixture so they could align the little dippers correctly.
I think they simply machine the big end of the rod to accept an insert. The 216 does have an oil pump - makes 14 psi and moves 20 gpm at speed. The oil pump supplies oil to the main bearings, the valve train, and the nozzles which spray oil at the rod dippers at speed. In addition to the tool to align the dippers, there's also a jig to correctly aim the spray nozzles in the oil pan.
Of course, in those days engines were typically overhauled around 60-70,000 miles. That's after your 40,000 mile valve job. If you somehow made it to 100,000 miles you needed a rebore for sure!
Yeah, I was just thinking about this earlier this week for some reason. I was born in '56, so I have memories of driving with my parents in the early-mid '60s, when we would see cars from as old as the late '40s on the roads. Seeing early-'50s Chevys and Fords was not at all uncommon. And it was not unusual to see cars belching out clouds of blue oil smoke as they drove along. Engines wore out much quicker. That's why products such as STP, Motor Honey, and Bardahl were so prevalent back then. You just don't see oil burners hardly at all now.
I'm not an expert on engine wear, but my guess is that modern oils, particularly synthetics (even though oil change intervals have been extended), fuel injection (less cold start cranking) and lower numerical axle ratios are three factors that have contributed to the extended engine life in modern cars. Any other factors? Better machining, resulting in closer tolerances, maybe? Have improved oil filters played a role?
Of course, in those days engines were typically overhauled around 60-70,000 miles. That's after your 40,000 mile valve job. If you somehow made it to 100,000 miles you needed a rebore for sure!
Yeah, I was just thinking about this earlier this week for some reason. I was born in '56, so I have memories of driving with my parents in the early-mid '60s, when we would see cars from as old as the late '40s on the roads. Seeing early-'50s Chevys and Fords was not at all uncommon. And it was not unusual to see cars belching out clouds of blue oil smoke as they drove along. Engines wore out much quicker. That's why products such as STP, Motor Honey, and Bardahl were so prevalent back then. You just don't see oil burners hardly at all now.
Did additives such as STP, Motor Honey, Bardahl, Marvel Mystery Oil actually extend engine life, and/or provide other benefits, or were they snake oil products?
I imagine the overdrive option, on models that offered it, was one way to extend engine life, back in the day. Of course, it only helped when it was engaged at highway speeds, which was generally when the engine had reached normal operating temperatures. That was only a fraction of the driving time.
Did additives such as STP, Motor Honey, Bardahl, Marvel Mystery Oil actually extend engine life, and/or provide other benefits, or were they snake oil products?
I don't know what else they may have brought into the equation but the ones I am thinking of were all thick, molasses-like in their consistency, to help fill oversized clearances and reduce oil consumption. I remember my brother buying a can of Motor Honey for an old Chevy pickup we had at our country place that belched blue smoke and indeed it was as good as its name. It looked like honey and poured out at about the same rate. It didn't seem to do much for the smoking though. Eventually he changed the rings to solve that.
That VW might not look bad if he had left the front fenders on and smoothed out the front. The half disassembled interior doesn't inspire much confidence, though.
2012 Mustang Premium, 2013 Lincoln MKX Elite, 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander.
Comments
Apparently it leaks internally, so the gunk on the outside is just patina, as they call it these days.
Messed up and went to the UP Craigslist this morning and wondered why there were so many rusty beaters for sale. Did find this for @xwesx.
This Caddy is more like it.
VanNatta Truck Museum
Oh, heck yeah! Hey, would you mind driving it up here for me, Steve? My schedule is a little tight right now....
I kind of like the paint job.
1999 Crown Vic. Oh my... po-leeze.
Tyrod, Barrens
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Classy.
Each in its own way.
-Mathias
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
1950 Chevrolet Styleline Deluxe
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
This CL Chevy looks like a good driver with a few updates. Looks like it has the optional oil filter (ours didn't) and even though the seller doesn't mention it, the alternator and ignition indicates 12V upgrade. Upgrades are welcome as long as all are sorted out. Seller posted engine bay pics with the + batt cable disconnected and missing valve cover cap. Hmm... I do like the car but not sure I'd want to relive the 1950 experience for the money asked. Spending about $10k or so now can open up a lot of choices. For some reason I really like this '72 custom F-100.
I always have to wonder why people feel compelled to convert old cars to 12 volts and replace generators with alternators. Yes a 12 volt system with an alternator is "better" I suppose but on those cars with few accessories, the old 6 volt systems worked just fine.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Back in 1986, after my Granddad sold his '53 DeSoto Firedome, the new owner tried to jump start it with a 12 volt car, and fried something in it. I never knew how badly it got fried, but the guy pushed the car to the edge of the woods in his back yard, and, as of Christmas 2013 at least (last time I was down that way), it's STILL sitting back there.
Could you use a modern battery charger on a 6-volt car? I guess the 50-60 amp "quick start" mode might do some damage, but what if you just left it on the 12 amp or the 2 amp?
I suppose you could use a resistor of some kind to drop the voltage but otherwise, you would have to change all of the light bulbs or they would quickly blow. The radio and fan motor would have to modified somehow.
Giving 12 volts to a 6 volt horn makes for a LOUD horn! If it isn't used much, it'll last for awhile. I once heard a Model A horn that was hooked up to 12 volts and it was so loud you could hear it for blocks. That old Chevy had vacuum wipers so no problem there.
We used to jump 6 volt cars with 12 volt cars and nothing ever happened. If you had your foot on the brake pedel the bulbs would blow. You had to make sure everything was off.
Again, I just don't see why people think this is necessary. The old 6 volt systems worked just fine in the day.
Price is a bit high for a #3 car. For $10K, you should get "local show" quality and this is just a bit off from that.
Regards:
Oldbearcat
But who knows how to fix these now? All of the old guys who used to know how to shim and adjust those rod bearings are all dead or long retired now.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Also why, in your opinion, did Chevy continue using inferior bearings for so long? I assume the reason was cost, but there may be another reason.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babbitt_(metal)
And here's what an 'insert' (also known as a 'plain') bearing looks like:
I remember an old shop that had a fixture so they could align the little dippers correctly.
And those bearings weren't THAT bad, really if you drove at sensible speeds and, once again, had them adjusted if they started to knock.
Of course, in those days engines were typically overhauled around 60-70,000 miles. That's after your 40,000 mile valve job. If you somehow made it to 100,000 miles you needed a rebore for sure!
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
So maybe the bearings in the old Chevy 6-cyl engines were another example of this?
Ford and Mopar, being smaller companies, didn't have the vast resources that GM did, so they had to standardize a lot of things much earlier on. It almost sounds contradictory, but GM, having more money, could afford to cheap out on the Chevies! But, then they'd often make up for it in other ways. For example, it often looked like GM threw a few more bucks into a Chevy interior, compared to a Plymouth equivalent.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Regards:
Oldbearcat
I'm not an expert on engine wear, but my guess is that modern oils, particularly synthetics (even though oil change intervals have been extended), fuel injection (less cold start cranking) and lower numerical axle ratios are three factors that have contributed to the extended engine life in modern cars. Any other factors? Better machining, resulting in closer tolerances, maybe? Have improved oil filters played a role?
I imagine the overdrive option, on models that offered it, was one way to extend engine life, back in the day. Of course, it only helped when it was engaged at highway speeds, which was generally when the engine had reached normal operating temperatures. That was only a fraction of the driving time.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
http://southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/4712623481.html
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Saw an El Camino today. Looked in pretty good shape but the string of LED brake lights around the rear window didn't do anything for me.