Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


TodFitch last won the day on December 14 2015

TodFitch had the most liked content!


About TodFitch

  • Rank
    Zen Master, I breathe vintage mopar!

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Spanish Village by the Sea
  • My Project Cars
    1933 Plymouth


  • Location
    Southern California
  • Interests
  1. Dim headlights

    The O'Reilly Auto parts website shows the EiKO Ltd. manufactured H6006 they carry as being 40/50 watt. Which is exactly the same as my 1970 vintage GE lamp guide listed for the 6006.
  2. 6v positive ground question

    I believe you were told wrong: Neither the starter nor the generator need to be replaced. The starter should "just work". The generator would have to have the magnetic field in its soft iron core reversed which can be accomplished by "flashing" it, at task normally accomplished by momentarily shorting a couple of terminals on the voltage regulator. Longest part of the job of changing polarity, as long as you haven't added components/accessories using solid state electronics, is probably swapping the battery cables. The reason why it is so easy is that the starter motor and generator use field coils rather than permanent magnets. In the case of the starter when you reverse the polarity on it you are reversing both the field and the armature so the direction of rotation remains the same. Similar concept on the generator. Edit: You may also have to swap leads on the coil. So I guess that adds a little time to the conversion.
  3. California & The Internal Combustion Engine

    Recently signed legislation will raise the gas tax by $0.12/gal and license fee by an amount based on value of car with a minimum of $25. I decided to plug this into a spreadsheet with inflation adjusted numbers from 20 years ago. It looks like I will continue to pay the state less for the use our highway system than I did back then (this is for my fully depreciated cars so the value based portion of the license and registration is comparable). I suspect that will also be true for most people but it depends a lot on how expensive their car is, the MPG it gets and how many miles they drive per year. Anyway, here is my "back of the napkin" calculations: 1997 2017 2018 License & Registration (Not adjusted for CPI) $37.00 $91.00 $116.00 Gas Tax (Not adjusted for CPI) $0.30 $0.30 $0.42 MPG 25 45 45 CPI 1.527 1.000 1.000 Gas Tax $/mi (2017 $) $0.02 $0.01 $0.01 Mile/yr 14000 14000 14000 Total $/yr (2017 $) $312.98 $184.33 $246.67 If that is what it is what it takes to fix the roads, I'm willing to continue to pay less than I did in 1997. The issue is that if you wait decades to adjust prices then you get a lot of push back when you do. Going from $184/yr in 2017 to $247/yr in 2018 will be a big sticker shock to lots of people. Even I won't really like it even though its only $1.21/week, way less than the candy bar I sneak into the grocery cart at the check out stand. But nearly everyone will have forgotten or been unaware of how much the inflation adjusted cost actually has gone down over the last 20 years. Especially since lots of people don't believe the Fed's inflation measurements. And, of course, big jumps in taxes and fees can lead attempts to repeal the increases. A repeal, if successful, which will by any objective measure mean the roads will continue to get worse. If you do a small incremental change each year (like private business usually does) then people just accept it. Here is where I got the numbers for the above calculations: Registration & License fees from my personal records. Gas Tax from several internet searches CPI from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (all Urban average) MPG from my records for the daily drivers I own(ed) at the time Mile/yr, an average number from my records but seem to be similar to publish average values
  4. Gas cap pressure

    There is no one way or check valve in the vented gas cap on my old Plymouth. I'd be really surprised if there was a one way flow mechanism built into any car's gas cap until the advent of fairly strict smog controls. Strike that: I believe there were some early cars that used a pressure pump on the gas tank to feed gas to the carburetor. But by the 1920s or especially 1930s when mechanical fuel pumps were introduced I think my above statement is correct.
  5. Dim headlights

    Any corrosion in your 70 year old electrical system will increase resistance and thus reduce the actual power at the headlights considerably. The lower the system voltage the more issues there can be with unwanted resistance. Example: On my '33 with lower power headlights than you have, I once calculated that 1ohm of extra resistance (can't even really measure that with a cheap analog volt-ohm meter) could decrease the light output by 80%. So I am taking you "probably they are the correct brightness for this car" with a grain of salt. If you haven't replaced all the wiring to the headlights with appropriate gauge new wire, replaced all connectors and cleaned up the contacts in your headlight switch your headlights are going to be a lot dimmer than when the car was new. All that said, going to lower power devices like LED lights will mitigate the situation. But I've not yet seen LED replacements for the PAR56 style automotive headlights. Surprising to me, there is a vendor in England that purports to make a LED bulb replacement that should just fit in my 1930s car (I haven't tried them yet as they are expensive and the quartz-halogen I have in there now work pretty good). So if 6v positive ground compatible PAR56 replacement headlights are not available now I bet they will be at sometime in the near future. In the meantime, getting your wiring up to snuff would be a good idea regardless.
  6. Draft tube

    It is my understanding that a couple of high priced makes used a PCV setup as early as the late 1920s. And I think military vehicles went with it in the 1940s for the side effect of removing a place where water could get in the engine when fording rivers. But Detroit decided it was better to save a couple of pennies and stuck with a draft tube ventilation system. They didn't care that they could make an engine last longer by better ventilation of the crankcase. Maybe that was a feature for them instead of a bug as the sooner your engine wore out the sooner you'd buy a new car. In any event, they stuck with the draft tube until air pollution laws came into force. Apparently the largest source of pollution causing hydrocarbons that escape a totally uncontrolled engine are from the draft tube. In addition to the original purpose of the PCV setup of keeping your engine cleaner and lasting longer, it turns out to be a good first step on reducing vehicle related air pollution. However, for a long time people then associated PCV setups with evil government air pollution controls and wanted to remove them. I knew of at least one fellow who insisted on removing the PCV setup on his 1980s car. Instead of putting a draft tube on the car he just plugged it up. Then he wondered why his crank seals kept leaking (from crankcase pressurization from ring blow by).
  7. Draft tube

    There is supposed to be a tube attached at that point that extends low enough to get into the airflow under the vehicle. The airflow across the opening of the tube creates a partial vacuum (Venturi effect). That vacuum pulls air, cleaned by the oiled wire mesh in the oil filler cap, through the crankcase to remove any combustion byproducts that get into the crankcase.
  8. Problem bleeder my brakes.

    Spending about $20 at the local garden center and auto supply stores to get the parts to make a pressure bleeder was probably the best think I did for my brakes. Right up there with getting some sticky backed sand paper from the hardware store to use inside my drums to arc the shoes to fit the drums. Between the two (shoes arc'ed to fit the drums the are in and easy one person bleeding) the brakes stay high and firm and can lock the wheels. Plans/description on how to make a pressure bleeder can be found with the search function on this forum or on the web in general.
  9. California & The Internal Combustion Engine

    Hmmm. I confess to being a bit compulsive. And one manifestation of that is keeping pretty detailed financial records. Looking at the registration cost on my cars the registration has increased $1/yr total for each car in the last 7 years. That is the registration cost I pay now is only $1 per car more than it was in 2011. There is another fee listed on the payment which is based on value of the car. Looking at our two newer cars, it seems that goes down each year for the first 10 years and then is stable after that. The net result is that I've seen no increase in DMV fees for my cars in years. Other costs like insurance, parts, repairs, etc. have gone up but amazingly those prices are largely set by the thrifty private sector and not our rapacious government. The most recent statistics I've looked at are from 2016. As of last year there is still a net migration into California from other states. I read about high profile people who leave the state for cost and tax reasons. But my sense of it, having known some pretty rich people when I worked in Silicon Valley, is the number of really rich people leaving due to taxes is very low. This seems to be backed up by studies like this one: http://web.stanford.edu/group/scspi/_media/working_papers/Varner-Young_Millionaire_Migration_in_CA.pdf That study is a few years old so things might have changed but I'd want something more than a sensational news headline to confirm it. I suspect the middle class is more affected by the higher cost of living here than the really rich but I haven't seen a study that directly looks at that. Since the census shows a net positive migration in from other states then I have to assume that if large numbers of middle class were leaving then there must be a whole lot of millionaires and poor people migrating in. That seems a bit unlikely but I guess it is possible. That said, California is a big state and what is true for one part or even the whole as an average is not necessarily true for all individual parts. The Central Valley where you live has been at an economic disadvantage compared to the more urban and/or coastal parts of the state for a while now. So in your area there might well be a net migration out.
  10. California & The Internal Combustion Engine

    Got a link to that article? FWIW, pretty much every law I've seen or heard about regarding automotive equipment had a "manufactured on or after" clause in it. Heck the last I checked, the California Motor Vehicle Code still has the details about what you need to do to be legal with solid rubber tires (seen that on a big truck in the last 90 or so years?) and carbide headlights (seen that on a car in the last 100 years?). Both of those are legal but may have the same restrictions now they had way back when (e.g. there is a pretty slow maximum speed for vehicles with solid rubber tires).
  11. Is 4th gear 1:1 ratio?

    Mopar engine designs of that era had to survive 50 hour tests running at max BHP. That would be at 3600 RPM I've seen that 80% or 85% number in a number of places and believe that was (and perhaps still is) a pretty good rule of thumb. So basically the engine, if in good condition, should run happily all day at 3000 RPM. I have a personal preference for not exceeding 3200 RPM on long "high speed" drives which works out to about 60 MPH in my older car (190 cu.in. fitted with the stock 4.375:1 rear end and skinny 17" bias ply tires). Above that speed the car begins to be a bit uncomfortable with respect to its suspension, etc. With your tire diameter, my calculator shows you running 66 MPH when at 3200 RPM (assuming a 4.1 rear end).
  12. I found the new required fields annoying. There was a reason I left them blank before and put innocuous values in there now.
  13. Torque?

    FWIW a couple of years ago when I was looking at stacking another drawer unit on my small 1970s Penncraft roll around (remember when JC Penny's sold tools like Sears?). I looked on line for something that would fit at a good price. Turns out Sears showed a Craftsman unit that seemed to fit the bill. So down to the local Sears I went, first time in years and years and years (the local hardware store carried Craftsman wrenches, etc. so that is where I'd been getting those). The in store experience was horrible and I almost walked out without buying it. To top it off, a couple of months after I bought the drawer unit I was in a Harbor Freight and I looked over their equivalent offerings. Turned out the Harbor Freight one seemed to be higher quality and I wished I'd gotten it instead. Sad to think that a discount tool place not known for the quality of their goods had a nicer, better built unit for basically the same price as Sears Craftsman. And the shopping experience, while low end, was vastly better than Sears. It doesn't surprise me that Sears is nearly out of business, only that they are still in business. I hope that the company that bought the Craftsman brand off them does okay by it even if it does mean that there really is only one company making all the consumer, "pro-sumer" and professional tools based in this country (Stanley, Black & Decker, DeWalt, Porter-Cable, Bostitch, Mac Tools, etc. and now Craftsman). Seems like Snap-On is the only brand not under the Stanley Black & Decker company's umbrella.
  14. Safety glass

    If you can get tempered glass made for your car's side and back windows, that would match new car standards. I am now trying to remember if the local glass shop I went to when I got my windows made was not able to do tempered glass or if I did not want to wait for it. Safety glass can be cut and installed on the spot (assuming the shop has some in stock). But for tempered they need to cut the glass, verify fit, etc. then send the glass out to be heat treated to make it into tempered glass. That can take a day or two and if they are doing the install two visits to the shop with your old car.
  15. Safety glass

    Safety glass was standard for the windshield on my '33 Plymouth. Not sure when Chrysler started that, maybe after Ford, but a '46 car of any make would have safety glass for the windshield. In 1933, safety glass for the other windows was optional. I'd be surprised if any glass in a '46 of any make wasn't safety glass. My '33 did not have safety glass in the side and back windows when I got it but it does now. Anyone who restores, or just fixes up, a car with plate glass has rocks in their heads if they don't replace that with safety glass.