WPVT

I used a butyl sealant tape. It was actually more like a cord, so I flattened it out as I applied it. It's plenty sticky, but not as messy as something you'd use in a gun. It sticks and seals but you can remove it if need be.

I disconnected the front mount and jacked up the engine just to see if vibration was still being transmitted to the cab. I didn't feel any difference, so I'm glad I didn't go to the trouble of replacing the mount. I checked both U-joints again and this time found some play in the front, so I replaced both front and rear universal joints. It made a big difference rolling down the road. Am I the only one who has replaced universal joints and managed to install them so that the grease fittings are inaccessible ? I don't remember having to pay attention to that detail last time I installed one.

Thanks. I'm thinking an older front mount may transmit vibration to the frame and then to the steering column which is mounted nearby. But I don't really know. That's why I'd like to hear someone's before and after comparison. I suppose I could loosen the existing mount enough to temporarily break the hard mechanical connection and see what that feels like.

I'd like to hear from anyone who has replaced their front rubber motor mount, specifically, whether it made an appreciable difference in the amount of vibration transmitted from the engine to the frame and cab. My rear mounts are still in good shape, but it's hard to assess the front mounts, as I doubt they were very cushioned to begin with. It looks like a fairly tedious job, and I don't want to do it unless it would make a difference that I could feel. Thanks.

Yes, this "dimple" had been enlarged and mutilated by a previous owner. We filled it in with a weld, and then were able to use the puller. The drum is now off. Thanks to everyone for sound advice.

We've decided against using the slide hammer to avoid creating other problems. Somehow, a previous owner created a concave recess in the center of the shaft, possibly by using a puller with too small an end and forcing it into the axle shaft end. In any event, we have enough length on the axle shaft to cut it off, creating a new flat surface for the correct puller to bear against. This will still leave enough threaded material to use the nut and re-bore a cotter pin hole. Fingers crossed that the drum will pop off if we follow the usual procedure.

I'm hoping it doesn't come to that. Just wondering if using the slide hammer may inadvertently pull the axle shaft or whether that's a safe alternative to the puller.

My mechanic (a good one), is having difficulty removing one of the rear brake drums on my 1954 1/2 ton. The end of the axle shaft has been damaged, making it difficult to use a puller. He is suggesting a slide hammer, but it occurs to me that this might pull the axle shaft along with the drum. Is this a possibility ? Thanks.

The quality and selection at restorationspecialties.com far exceeds any other supplier I have seen. They have every type of channel and fastener imaginable for restorations, and their catalog has sound advice as well. If you take the time to peruse their catalog you'll see what I mean. If you have a question, give them a call. They know what they are talking about.

My 1954 Dodge C-1-B6 1/2 ton truck currently has 6.50 X 16LT tires that need replacing. They are approximately 29" in diameter. The rims are original to the truck. It needs new tires and I'm looking for recommendations before I go to the local tire dealer. I'll be using the truck in the warm months only, for occasional use, around town and some highway driving.( I don't want whitewalls) Thanks.

Does anyone have viable part numbers for the front and rear universal joints on a 1954 C-1-B6 1/2 ton pickup ? 108"wheelbase, 3 speed transmission, 218 engine. Thank you.

Following advice, I cleaned the ceramic element with lacquer thinner for 24 hours. The glass filter bowl now fills properly as one would expect.

I think I have the situation figured out, although the vehicle is 100 miles away at the moment. With these ceramic element filters, the fuel enters at the top center, inside the element. The fuel passes through the element, fills the bowl, and exits through the top at the outside perimeter. What I am seeing must be the result of a clean looking, but totally clogged filter element. The fuel enters as explained above, can't pass through the element, so it pushes past a faulty gasket at the top, some of it runs down the sides of the bowl, and somehow enough makes it to the outlet at the top to run the engine. I have a new element on the way. Looking forward to seeing if it makes a difference in the engine at higher RPM's.

My guess, and it's only a guess, is that the age old sediment bowl design was at some point adapted by the Carter engineers to become a fuel filter by putting a ceramic element inside. It would also be pretty easy for someone to turn it back into a sediment bowl if the element became an impediment. Later this week I'll give the element a good cleaning in solvent and report back as to whether that has an effect on the amount of fuel in the glass bowl. Then I'll have an answer to my own question of whether the glass bowl should be full when a clean filter element is in place, and the fuel pump is working properly.

Thanks to you both. That is food for thought. For now, I'll stick to my original query, and take the advice of cleaning the filter to see if that allows the bowl to fill better.

Thanks JB. I'll do that. I'd like to see that bowl a little more full. Once they put the filter element in, the bowl must have ceased to be a sediment bowl, since the sediment bowl idea relied on the fuel flow's decrease in velocity once it left the fuel line and entered the bowl. Have I got the physics right?

My 1954 218 flathead with a Carter BB has a glass bowl at the inlet side of the carburetor, what I've always called a sediment bowl. This one, by Carter, contains a filter element made of a white, porous pumice-like substance. Can these filters impede the flow of fuel ? It looks clean, but it may be the original. The glass bowl never fills up....it only has about 1/4" of fuel in the bottom. The truck runs OK.

Thanks. I just installed the new seals and they fit perfectly. They were leather, so I oiled them before installation. One wheel had an old worn out seal. The other one had no seal at all. It had what appeared to be a steel shield, or perhaps it was all that was left of an old seal. In any event, they fit well, and can't help but be an improvement over what was there.

I just got done removing, rebuilding, and reinstalling the door latch mechanisms on a 1954 half ton Dodge. I thought someone in the future might benefit from my experience, so I'll list the sequence that worked for me. I won't go in to the rebuilding aspect, as that was just building up worn out pieces and re-machining them. Anyway, the trick is to install the latch when the window glass is up, but the window regulator is down. That means disconnecting the regulator where it attaches to the lower track on the window glass (there's a little clip that pops off easily), raising the glass and holding it up somehow, and lowering the regulator arm with the window crank handle. This frees up enough room to maneuver the latch into place, starting with the latch body, and then the interior handle spindle assembly. Disassembly would be the reverse of the above. I hope this is helpful to anyone attempting the same process.

I just got done removing, rebuilding, and reinstalling the door latch mechanisms on a 1954 half ton Dodge. I thought someone in the future might benefit from my experience, so I'll list the sequence that worked for me. I won't go in to the rebuilding aspect, as that was just building up worn out pieces and re-machining them. Anyway, the trick is to install the latch when the window glass is up, but the window regulator is down. That means disconnecting the regulator where it attaches to the lower track on the window glass (there's a little clip that pops off easily), raising the glass and holding it up somehow, and lowering the regulator arm with the window crank handle. This frees up enough room to maneuver the latch into place, starting with the latch body, and then the interior handle spindle assembly. Disassembly would be the reverse of the above. I hope this is helpful to anyone attempting the same process.

Thanks JB, I'm glad my numbers looked OK. Curious that I see the Victor 49237 crossed with a Timken 5836. I guess the dimensions are identical and it is up to the purchaser to figure out whether they are leather or rubber. I think the leather seals should do the job adequately. I'm a little surprised they still bother to make them. I hope this information is a useful addition to the knowledge base.

Regarding the front wheel inner seals for a 1953 1/2 ton, I did some research so I am posting what I found. The numbers I found were: Mopar 668-479 Atlas 806-017 Victor 49237 National 5836 Timken 5836 SKF 17145 Dimensions are 1.734" shaft, 2.73" OD. The most useful number is the National/Timken 5836. These are readily available at a reasonable price from many different sources. (I've ordered the National 5836, and if they don't fit, I'll repost.)

Has anyone come up with a current number for the B series front inner wheel seal ? This is a 1953 1/2 ton Dodge pickup. Thanks.

The Gabriel application listing calls for the same front and rear, so that's what I am planning on using.

JBNeal, It was a typo. I meant Monroe 66858. I'm glad you replied, as I trust your judgement with all the research you've done. Sounds like I've found the right shocks.