TodFitch

My 1974 vintage Pictorial History of Chrysler Corporation Cars shows: 1950 models as S14-1 (DeSoto Deluxe) or S14-2 (DeSoto Custom). 1951 models as either S15-1 (DeSoto Deluxe) or S15-2 (DeSoto Custom). 1952 models as S15-1 (DeSoto Deluxe), S15-2 (DeSoto Custom) or S17 (DeSoto Firedome Eight). 1953 models as S18 (DeSoto Powermaster) or S16 (DeSoto Firedome).

They used different schemes at different times. Ignoring export versions: Q is 1928 U is 1929 30-U is 1930 PA is 1931 PB is 1932 PC & PD are 1933 PE, PF & PG are 1934 PJ is 1935 P1 & P2 are 1936 P3 & P4 are 1937 P5 & P6 are 1938 . . .

Chrysler was engineering driven and I think the branding was done at the end of the cycle. In the meantime they needed a way to describe and document the project being developed. So all the drawings and thus the later parts books all used the engineering codes for the cars rather than the marketing name. And they kept it up in some respects until at least the 1980s as I recall that the service manual used engineering codes for the various cars lines. Heck, I noticed that in the service manual for the 1992 Jeep I once had too. That probably wasn't to out of line with general industry standards. Boeing used fancy names for their commercial aircraft, things like "Stratocruiser". But they hadn't come up with a name they liked when they started flying the prototype for design/project 707 so they just turned that into the marketing name.

There was a phase over to that scheme that took a year or two. In 1931 Plymouth switched to using a “P” for the first letter but used ascending letters instead of numbers (PA, PB, PC, etc.). They switched to using ascending numbers in 1936 and often used more than one number per model year. For example, in 1936 the P1 was the low trim car while P2 was the Deluxe.

They are the engineering codes for the cars. First letter indicates the make as @maok pointed out.

I am going to side with motoMark with calling that bolt on seal a rope seal. At least that is what I have called it and what the people I spoke with called it back in the 1970s when I first replaced mine. And to get the upper seal replaced back then I had to remove the flywheel. Even then it was not easy to get it on tight enough while lying on my back in the driveway. They really should be installed on the block and then properly rolled into place with some round stock before the crank is set in. Basically, a field repair with the engine in the car is unlikely to result in a good job compared to installing it when the engine is being properly rebuilt off the car. But I will have to point out to motoMark that the 4164 seal in Sniper's first photo is supposed to be a direct replacement for the old rope seal. Even if you are not going to replace the upper half I suspect using that more modern seal would be more likely to slow the leak. And if you decide to remove the flywheel to replace the upper half it will be a lot easier to get it relatively leak free using the neoprene seal than the old rope one.

Got the original Chrysler part number for the rear main seal parts or service kit? The kept a lot of designs for a lot of years. If your seal is the same as the 1930s engines then there might be a retrofit neoprene that would work.

I believe that Best Gaskets supplies a neoprene seal designed to replace the rope seals on the motors that only ever had rope seals. If I ever need to dig into that on my car again I will investigate that possibility.

I suspect that they were die cut. The fellow that had a shop behind the one my Mom owned did lots of screen printing and die cutting. If I recall correctly, he used a plywood board that he somehow embedded thin strips of metal to make shaped blades. Those were put into a press that looked a lot like an older letterpress printing machine. Drop a piece of cardboard into the holders on the machine, cycle it so the blade(s) on the plywood tool were pressed into the cardboard and Bob’s your uncle, the whole piece was cut into the final shape in one operation.

Yes. I just assumed the 51 Plymouth in his profile but it would be nice to have that confirmed.

Last I check, which I admit was quite some time ago, Best Gaskets was making fully rebuild kits for our engines and, I am pretty sure, they also made the rear main seal available separately. At that time they would not sell to the retail but it isn't too hard to find an auto supplier that carries Best Gasket products. Fuel pump gasket is easy (there aren’t that many different mounting flanges). But that one is also trivial to make from some gasket stock from your local auto supply. See my parts cross reference at https://www.ply33.com/Parts/group9#9-11-01 and the Best Gasket website still shows that their 4162 rope seal kit is in their system. Their engine rebuild set for your era also shows a fuel pump gasket with a part number of 3043 but I don't know if you can get that separately. Their fancy pop up results don't give me a link to the specific items so you will have to look them up for yourself. They have a list of vendors on a page on their website too.

There are some “smart” chargers that won’t start to charge if the battery voltage is too low. I don’t know if the Battery Tender brand is in that category or not.

When they were making the rules Coker Tire successfully lobbied to have an exception on the date code rule for collector car tires. So some collector car tires have a date code but not all do. I didn’t believe that when I first heard it so I went searching on the government website for the actual rules and found the exception. Then I went looking for the explanation of how the rules were determined and found that Coker was the one behind it. Been a while so I don’t have the links but that information is probably still someplace on a government website.

That 6-52-11 number looks like a "part type code" rather than a part number. I am away from my reference materials and, for that matter, don’t have a Dodge parts book to look up the part number. If you have the parts book, and if it is like the Plymouth equivalent, you will see some parts illustrations along the top then the "part type code" as in the heading for each column. You look down the column to your vehicle and that is where you will find the part number. For lots of miscellaneous small parts I have had good luck using the original Chrysler part number in places like Rock Auto and Napa Online to find the modern equivalent.

'33 does not have the full length water jacket and has a little more narrow block & head. I believe there are some studs on the '33 that do not enter the water jacket but do on '35 and up engines.

Early on this thread was the information that the timing chains are the same for all the 1933-54 L-6 engines. That said, for Plymouth the original part numbers from 1933-34 are different than the later part numbers. I suspect the interchange to the later part number still holds. For what it is worth, I do not have parts books for Dodge so I can’t check but on the Plymouth side the 1933 and 1934 use the same part numbers. Mechanically Dodge and Plymouth were nearly identical in 1933 & 34 so it seems very likely that your proposed interchange will work.

As @Dave72dt mentions, you can get a wider female spade that will probably fit. But don’t spend more than $30 on it because you can get a dimmer switch for you car with screw terminals like you want from you local auto supply for that. See, for example: https://www.napaonline.com/en/p/ECHDS101 I am grateful that there are specialty vendors that have hard to find parts for our cars but I always wonder why people use them for run of the mill parts that are usually locally available.

Chrysler tested these engine designs at max BHP in 50 hour tests. So basically it can run at 3600 RPM at full throttle for hours on end. Back that RPM down a few hundred for longer life and keep your cruise speed to maybe 3200 RPM. At that 3200 RPM with 4.11:1 rear and 600-16 tires you will be moving at 65 MPH. It will not be a quiet as a modern car but a lot of the noise will be from the fan. And if you weren’t used to driving in cars from before the early 1970s gas crisis it will sound like you are beating it to death. But you aren’t, that’s just how cars of the late 1930s through the early 1970s sounded when at speed.

And this story is also the reason why I would never consider buying a modified car unless it came with complete documentation down to the last nut and bolt that was non-stock.

A battery hydrometer is a useful tool to have if you are dealing with non-sealed lead-acid batteries. It will tell you the state of charge for each cell (should be the same or there is an issue) and let you know if the battery is fully charged or not. A quick check shows at least one 6v lead-acid car battery to have a 65 amp-hour rating. On my 1970s vintage charger with a max output of 6 amps it would take 11 hours to fully charge one. However lead-acid batteries are damaged if they are taken below 50% charge. And it sounds like you may have been doing that. Anyway, put your battery on a charger and while you wait visit your local auto supply store and pick up a hydrometer. I am assuming, of course, that they still sell such things in this age of sealed batteries. They used to be pretty cheap as there is not much to them. But they can tell you if a cell is bad, etc. and thus let you know if the battery simply needs charging or if it is due for replacement.

You had different parents than me. My father installed seat belts in our '61 and when that was replaced with a '63 in late 1963 he installed seat belts in that. And my parents required us to wear the belts anytime we were in the car so I got in the habit of fastening the seat belt long before I started learning to drive in the late 1960s.

In warm weather it would generally start pretty quickly. In winter I sometimes resorted to jump starting the 6v system from a 12v car something I would not recommend nowadays since I am a bit more cautious. That was when I first got the car 50 years ago. I was in college in Upstate New York and it was my “daily driver” but since I lived on campus I didn’t actually have to drive every day.

Way back when I first got my '33 Plymouth it was hard to start and missing some power but I drove it a few thousand, yes thousand, miles that way. When I finally learned enough to to a compression test I found it had 50 to 60 psi on the three “good cylinders” and zero on other three cylinder. So yes, I would expect an engine with the lowest compression a 50 to run. Probably pretty hard to start, but it should start and run. That sounds like an excellent idea. I haven’t heard of it before but it make sense.

https://www.ply33.com/Repair/tempgauge

Galley.