James_Douglas

I would like a photo of what they used for the dashpot (anti-stall) on this carb please?

Agreed that one of the reasons they went to ball joints was to get more anti-drive without having to go to stiffer springs. Remember, that until the ball joint era, speeds were a lot less. Before the advent of the Interstate Highways and the increased speeds...high speed (over 50 MPH) braking was rare. I suspect that a number of changes came about due to the higher speeds. I know that there is a MOPAR technical note someplace that talked about the higher speeds and the heat build up on the rear axles. They suggested to increase the Axle shaft end play up from about .008 or do to almost double that. Apparently, the Axles were growing so much in highway driving that they were binding on the center block in the pumpkin. My point is that I think the anti-drive in the older cars is not as great as people think, I really would not want to spend a month taking measurements and doing the math to definitively find out. Since there is a reasonable chance that the anti-drive is a combination of suspension "A" arm placement and spring load...and minus any hard data on it...I would not substitute a spring that did not have the same load and rate as that which was done by the engineers at Chrysler. One may get lucky and it will work great or one may not. Since most people reading this probably do not have a bunch of chassis books on the shelf nor have every designed their own chassis...below is a link to a short article on Anti-Drive in Hot Rod that goes over some of the issues. https://www.hotrod.com/articles/antidive-suspension-tech-parameters/ James

Unfortunately for the 1940's Chrysler front ends...there is very little anti drive built into the placement of the front upper control arms as far as I can tell. What little there may be is sharing the duty with front coil spring. If anything the front of the upper control arm looks level to down bubble a bit, suggesting little to no anti-drive. If they is the case, then it is all spring. One would have to measure it to see if there is 3 to 6 degrees in there or not and then go through my chassis books to do the math to see how much is anti drive and how much is spring rate. James.

The AMA sheet for 1949 shows the front springs as: Free Length: Right = 15-5/8 inch Left = 15-13/16 inch Length under curb weight = 11.00 Inch. You would have to call Eaton or one of the other manufacturers so get the springs blueprint Spring Load and Spring Rate for that particular make and model. I always find it interesting how folks toss around swapping springs without doing the research or the math. When the car is engineered, the spring load, spring rate and the like are designed in to deal with the particular cars weight and also its wheelbase. The load shifting during brake application comes into account as well. One may pick up something that looks like it will work only to find it does not ride well or perform well like when going over a speed bump. Sometime folks get lucky, sometimes not. James.

I spent a lot of time on this subject. The rebuild of the 1947 Desoto for x-country road trips. After lots of thought on how to get Power Steering and A/C on the car, I am going a totally different route. It will not be cheap, but should prove to be a good option. I will use just one belt, a stock one, that will be driven off the crankshaft then run an A/C compressor then a very high current Alternator. No Water pump. No Power steering pump. I am going to use an electric water pump and set of two electric puller fans. I am also going to use an electric power steering system that will allow me to use my stock steering box. This way I am shedding a fair amount of parasitic HP loss from the water pump and the engine driven fan. I will loose some back to the large alternator, but it will be a "win" HP wise. I also found a company that tells me they can make me a 12v gear reduction starter. By going all electric, I will make the front of the engine "less fussy". I am working on the theoretical design of the fuel inject this month. The big issue is the reversion due to the Siamese ports. What I am going to do it to drill the Edmund's manifold (I heard people crying out!) and place three bugs facing into each block port (if you have seen an Edmund's you will know what I mean). I am going to use some JenDev throttle bodies that can be used either with an injector or as just an air body. That way if we have revision issues, I can punt and go to two throttle body injectors. I will use two carbs to break the engine in at the machine shop and put the unit into the car and then add the FI after everything else is worked out. It will be interesting to see how this works out! James

FYI, the screws (22-02-27) that hold the dash to the body as on 1949 and 1950 they were NOT 1/4 inch even though they looked like it. They used a #14 screw that it no longer made. I had to hit a auto junk yard with period cars go through a half dozen of them to get a handful of good screws. If you try to use 1/4 inch they will strip out the caged nut and then you are screwed especially as one does not figure this out until AFTER the car is painted. Take good care of those screws if they all came out clean. James.

http://www.imperialclub.com/Repair/Lit/Master/012B/page09.htm Bottom of page... I suggest that you spend a few hours reading the booklets on the imperial site.

10W non detergent motor oil.

Lets see, a few things to ponder... 1. If they did not place small wooden tapered blocks between the fluid coupling housing and the little flywheel on it and secure it with some bailing wire, there is a 50-50 chance that the carbon seal in the fluid coupling will be cracked and then leak. Before one removes a transmission on a fluid coupling car, one should put three little blocks in to keep the flywheel from "rocking" once the transmission input shaft is pulled back. A note from the folks at Northwest Transmission on a coupling I had them service 15 years ago told me to remove the blocks they put in for shipping. I called and they explained why they do that. Also, go searching through the threads to find my posting on the fluid drive fluid. You should clean your unit out and refill fill once it is in the car. 2. The engines on these cars were often swapped for a rebuilt one. The blocks on the Chrysler and Desoto's are all basically the same with only minor differences. The thing that decides what the engine final size will be is the crankshaft. There are three crankshafts for these blocks over the years. The 4-1/4 inch, the 4-1/2 inch, and the 4-3/4 inch. They are 237, 251, and 265 cubic in respectively. 3. I have never had good luck with the cloth wires. I also know several people who also have not had good luck with them. For a street car, not a #1 concourse car, I use (https://www.taylorvertex.com/spark-plugs/spiro-pro-universal-wire-sets/) the Taylor sets in black. Lacquer thinner takes off the white printing on the wire with one or two wipes. I have the same set on my 1947 Desoto now for 10 plus years. The 90 degree boots are nice for the flathead. In the little round sections of the boot with the "T" in them, I out in little round paper with a dab of rubber cement with the plug number on it. There is my 2 cents worth. James.

Don't worry about being sarcastic...let me tell you a story... In 2017 we tore down the small attached residential garage on the house we will retire to. I designed and we built as large a one as the space would allow. I wanted to have a garage drain so that I could wash down the floor from time to time and to also wash a car out of the sun. Turns out that the building inspector wanted a commercial oil separator system to put a floor drain the the garage. An expensive thing to do and maintain. He went and made a call to another inspector in another jurisdiction, all here in Northern California, to talk about it. When he came back he told me that I could put in a floor drain as long as the drain emptied onto my front lawn and not into the sewer. Now stop and think about that for a moment. I could not drain soapy water that had some floor oil in it to the sewer where it would get treated. I could however drain that same water onto the lawn, which is 4 feet from the storm drain which drains directly to a creek a 1/2 mile away that they are tying to re-establish the salmon runs on. Here in San Francisco both the sewer and all the drains go to the treatment plant, including my c.1922 garage drain. The idiots in this State. I can have a floor drain in new construction that will pollute the waterways, but not one which will capture it and treat it at the sewer plant! When asked why, I was told that if there was a drain in the garage, that I might pour engine oil down the drain instead of taking it to be recycled. Of course in the toilet room off the back of the garage, which was part of the new construction, we could put a floor drain so the room could be washed down and the washing machine if it were to have a house fail would just go down the drain...The garage is on the other side of the door. I asked what was to stop me pouring oil down that drain? I just got a blank look from them. Only in California. James.

If you have a lawn or a tree or a shrub...just run the output of the water over that area and do the test...

Try this and report. 1. Make sure the engine is dead cold overnight. 2. Remove the radiator and the fan and the thermostat. 3. Put the T-Stat housing back empty. 4. Put the radiator hoses back on the engine side. 5. Stick a garden hose into the water pump intake hose. 6. Turn it on and let water flow out onto the driveway. 7. Start the engine.. 8. Let it run and keep an eye on the temp. 9. Record the temp every 5 minutes for 30 minutes or until it gets over 200F. 9a. Shut it down and take out all six plugs, line them up and photograph them. 10. Come back here and report the results. If the engine temp gets over about 160F then there is something wrong in the engine. Either the water pump is not doing its job or the water distribution tube was not put in correctly or the block was not cleaned correct or something in the compression chamber/cylinder is blowing into the water jacket. The last possibility is that the thing is running WAY to LEAN and it is getting hot from that. If it is a lean condition then the plugs will show the tale. James.

My ARP Main and Head Stud Order from 2005 that is running in my 251 engine since then.

Hi All, Sitting here at my desk working on the specifications for the upcoming work on the big heavy Desoto Suburban Sedan. I am working up what rear axle ratio I will use. For the last 10 to 15 years, I have been using either the 4.11 gears or the 3.91 gears. With the "Fast" second gear and the 3.91 the car is great around town. I just use second gear and the OD as long as I am not stuck at a light on a big hill here in San Francisco. I do like the really high first gear in the M6, the 3-speed first is a little weak with the fluid coupling. Attached is a screen shot of my gearing spreadsheet. Take a look and comment. At freeway speed the Borg Warner OD of 0.70 gives me a nice flat land highway RPM. However, to get that with the Powerflite and the Gear Vendors overdrive, I would need to drop down to a 3.55 gear set. The problem is coming out of second gear into direct gear the gearing falls off. I am concerned that the mid-range will be a little to low. Of course the standing stop to that point will improve a lot, I am worried it will bog a bit in traffic. I could go with 3.73 and sacrifice a little highway RPM (MORE) to get a closer "high end" of second gear closer to what I am driving now. But, since we will be traveling around the USA in it, mileage is a concern. I will also have an engine that is producing 10 to 20 more HP, or so I think. That may cancel out and mid-range gearing issues using the 3.55. I may have to have a rear axle made up by Curry, and there may be some gears in between i could use and split the difference. Thoughts? James.

My 1962 MOPAR "Fast moving parts Catalog" says a 1954 V8 uses a Champion XN-16Y. It also show the cross reference to an autolite AGR52 and AGR82 and that they are all Projected core nose plugs. James.

I think I am almost more concerned with the loss of knowledge than the parts. I spent the fall reading everything I could find on the Powerflite. What was interesting was the response I got from one of the acknowledged sources for parts and repair of transmissions that he had never heard of the items I had listed. It makes we wonder what people are paying for when they go to these sources. In this particular case most of the items I asked about were in the big blue Motors books that almost everyone has on their shelves. I think that people are correct in the fact that a lot of information was locked up inside peoples heads and when they are gone --so is that information. A buddy of mine is dealing with a PITA problem with his 1958 Cad Eldo not shifting correct. Turn out that GM used two sets of carbs on those cars. A 4-bbl and the 3x2BBL. The problem is they also used some, but not all, different linkage to the carbs and also back down to the trans. His car was a 3x2bbl car that was changed to a 4bbl and now back to 3x2bbl. Over the years the linkage was mixed and matched and the car never has downshifted correct. Trying to sort this all out is a PITA as some of the differences in linkage are slight. I also have been dealing with the issue of king pin bushings on the 1949. When I took the car apart, it had bushings top and bottom. I got a king pin set, NOS MOPAR, that had the correct part number on it and it had 4 bushings. I put that in. Some of you may have been reading about the castor or lack of it I have been dealing with. I took off the spindle in August and the top bushing was galling on the outer side. I had line honed it on a Sunnen honing machine. I thought it may have been a too good of a job not letting grease in...so I reamed it and got some bore bushing off. Now, I was going deep into a parts book and noticed int he description of that part number that the Master Parts Book says it should have an upper BEARING. Well, that could make a difference in the castor having more of an effect of the spindle turns with less friction. As I dig through the books it seams that the only the "big" cars got the upper bearing in 1946 to 1948, however, a number of the smaller cars also got them in 1949 to 1954. Another of those little details that can be lost to time. What is interesting is the NOS MOPAR replacement set had all bushings. My point is that the little things that can have a big effect are only now being captured by places like this web site. I for one would like to see, and be willing to pay for, having the archives be made available as a searchable database off line. A DVD or CD that one can keep at the ready should forums like this one go away without notice. In 20 to 40 more years, places like this will be the last respository of that knowledge and some poor guy will need it when we and this forum are all long gone. James

This is more of a philosophical thread than anything else. As I gather all the information I can find on the Powerflite Transmission for the work on the 1947 Desoto over the next couple of years, it has become apparent that we are at the tipping point. That would be the tipping point at which information about a large number of old car things are vanishing. I made some calls and sent some emails to the acknowledged sources for parts and rebuilding of these transmissions. I asked them questions based on my research of reading the Chrysler Service Bulletins and reading the "Service Notes" in the big blue "Motors" manuals. The interesting thing is that the folks who supply parts and rebuild these transmissions were are unaware of the running changes or the design changes over the life of the these transmissions. What I am noting over the last about 10 years is the steady decline in people and places that can support this old car hobby. It is quickly coming to pass that unless you are working on something that was widely produced like a SBC or a Torqueflite transmission or a TH350 or 289 Ford or the like, that even things like the Powerflite which was built for years and a million units that you can find yourself out of luck. I noted some months back that Standard Products has moved is ignition plant from New Jersey to Mexico where they made their "Flagship" Blue Streak products for 50 years. Multiple sets of points I purchased had to go back as they were junk. Old ones I got of ebay were fine. I think over the next 5 or 10 years we are going to see the issues of dealing with old cars quickly go down hill. Maintaining them for use as daily drivers will get to be more and more challenging even to those of us that sort of know what we are doing. James.

Check the distributor vacuum advance. Often these will die and when you put you foot into the throttle hard, it will backfire and die. James.

In my 251 I used ARP AR3.620-1LB I just ordered the amount I needed...

Ii have feelers out to the usual suspects. The big issue is that often the engines come out and the converters with the bell housing with them. Once it is separated from the transmission and the date code...there is no way to tell the 2 stator or the 1 stator ones apart. I am looking for a custom converter maker that will work with me on this. It is more likely that I can modify one to single stator than I will fin done... I have the luxury of time on this as it will be March before I can do much in the garage, even though I feel good enough to get back to it now. James.

I have in my files, and talked about it in another thread, that there is a Chrysler Service Technical Bulletin that states that ,"it is essential..." that a car with a torque converter use the revised bearing. When you couple that with the technical discussion at the SAE conference of the problems with main bearings and torque converters... I posted the above so people could make their own decisions based on the best evidence I could find. I have a "stock" early rear bearing in my parts and the "later" bearing in my parts. The big difference is the later bearing has only a single oil groove down the middle. I suspect, but I do not know, that the "stock" earlier version that has the three oil grooves may crack at that rear groove do to the thrust loads the author alluded to. Since I will be using a PowerFlite with a six, I will use the bearing with one oil groove. Now, if someone can help me find a late 1954 torque converter that is a 12-1/2 incher...that has one stator...I will be good to go! James.

I am starting a new thread so people can have the information I have dug up. In researching the Powerflite Transmission and it use in flathead sixes I found out the following: 1. Chrysler in a Service Bulletin tells us to use a later and different rear main bearing if we are using a torque converter. The engineer in charge of the Powerflite program in a January 1954 presentation to the SAE stated the following: 2. "We have two converters of different diameters: 12½ in. for all De Soto and Chrysler 6- and 8-cyl models, and 11¾ in. for all Dodge models. The smaller converter is also used on Plymouth Hy-Drive." 3. "In these converters, the impeller is attached rigidly to the crankshaft...Early in the torque converter program, it was found that a flexible drive caused excessive engine main bearing rap. The explanation for this lies in the added inertia of the system, which resists crankshaft deflection." [Italics and Underline mine] What item three tells me is that is the reason for the revised rear main bearing. Even with the unit bolted hard to the crankshaft there was a lot of stress on the rear main. Later in the article he goes on to talk about thrust loads on the crankshaft from the converter. What this tells me is that anyone using any kind of torque converter should use the redesigned rear main bearing. He also talked out the stall speeds: 4. Engine stall speed: The engine stall speed was made less than the engine speed for maximum torque, even though the performance is better when the stall speed is higher. The higher stall speed results in increased gasoline consumption, greater coaling needs, and, of course, much more engine noise. Two limits were arbitrarily set up for maximum stall speed: 1400 rpm in 6-cyl models and 1500 rpm in 8-cyl models. He then goes on to talk about the "fluid converter range" [Torque Multiplication] and the "fluid coupling range" [when the unit is coupling and not adding any extra torque]: 5. The use of a torque converter of generous diameter was the most important factor in securing the efficiency in the fluid coupling range. It is also our experience that 3-element converters are the most efficient because there are fewer gaps to bridge in the oil path. As a matter of fact, we are now planning [as of January 1954 article date] to make the change to a single-stator unit in the very near future. This information tells me, I had to pay the SAE $30 for the article, is that there were two sets of torque converters. One for the six and another for the V8. That a torque converter puts a strain on the rear main bearings and the six required a different one to deal with it. It also tells me that the two stator converters (introduction until late 1954) although they have a slightly "longer" RPM range for torque multiplication, that at the "fluid coupling stage" they slip a little more and thus use more gas and loose a little power for high load mountain driving. I will be looking for a late 1954 Powerflite torque converter. If anyone runs across one...drop me a note. To those looking to putting a modern automatic on a flathead, you may wish to go pay for and download the SAE article. In it it shows the converter torque curves which would help you have a modern converter made to match what the engines were doing. Also, the later rear main bearing would not be a bad idea. Best, James

Anyone by chance have a set of 1956 Chrysler Service Bulletins or early 1957? I need a copy of 973-CH. Thanks, James

Second Set

This is how my '49 Desoto CV was wired. First set